By Kirk Leonard, Socialist Party

Insult is added to injury when the banks charge exorbitant fees for things that effectively cost them nothing – like ATM transactions. At the same time ordinary borrowers are suffering badly from mortgage stress and rising cost of living pressures.

Since the beginning of the world economic crisis in 2008 the four major banks have increased their pre-tax profits by almost 50% – up from around $22.6 billion to $33 billion in 2012. Compare this to the 2% or 3% yearly wage increases being offered by most governments and employers!

In the aftermath of the economic crisis the Reserve Bank began cutting interest rates with the aim of giving the economy a boost. The idea was to make people’s loans cheaper, therefore freeing up more of their wages to be spent on goods and services.

At the time the banks said they couldn’t afford to pass on the full amount of the cuts as they were paying more to borrow money from overseas. Studies have since revealed that the complete opposite is true. In many instances international borrowing costs have become cheaper in recent years.

A UBS analyst remarked recently that Australian banks are now making more money from granting mortgages than ever before. Via refusing to pass on interest rate cuts the banks have managed to engineer an extra layer of financial ‘super exploitation’ on top of the regular profits that they make from holding onto other people’s money. Is it any wonder that the banks are one of the most hated institutions in society!

The majority of people are rightly angry at that blatant profiteering carried out by the big banks. The bankers are more than happy for us to yell at the TV screen or to complain amongst our friends but what they fear the most is people fighting for an alternative to the private, for-profit, banking sector.

At the moment if you want to put a roof over your head you either have to run the gauntlet in the expensive private rental market or save a deposit and then beg one of the banks for a loan. The wait for public housing can be years and even then there are strict criteria for applicants. If you do manage to get a home loan you are then at the beck and call of the bank for up to 30 years. This is a mad situation.

Rather than the big banks exercising such control over our lives, and our housing situation, we need to fight for a situation whereby banks are there to assist people rather than being a weight around their neck.

A single publicly owned bank that was democratically run, not for profits but for need, would be a huge turn around from what we have today. Not only could such a bank offer cheap or free loans to ordinary people and small businesses but it could use its capital to invest in socially useful projects.

Side by side with other publicly owned industries it could assist in the development of a sustainable plan of production that would help improve everyone’s living standards. Rather than super profits for a tiny minority at the expense of ordinary people this is the type of banking sector we need to be fighting for.

Wiluna elder, Glen Cooke, said “Uranium should stay in the ground. It can hurt our Country, the environment, our people, our children, our children’s children”.

By Socialist Party reporters Perth

Toro Energy has plans afoot for two open-cut mines at Centipede and Lake Way producing at least 780 tonnes of uranium oxide a year for at least 14 years. Uranium can provide the raw material for nuclear reactors as well as for nuclear weapons. Every month three trucks will carry concentrated powered ore 2,700 km to the port of Adelaide.

Uranium mining has been responsible for the largest collective exposure of workers to radiation. One estimate puts the number of workers who have died of lung cancer and silicosis due to mining at 20,000. Low level radiation is also implicated in birth defects, high infant mortality and chronic lung, eye, skin and reproductive illnesses.

There are two main problems with the uranium mining and the nuclear Industry. Firstly there is the danger of monumental disasters. Secondly there is the unresolved issue of how to safely store nuclear waste.

In less than 60 years of nuclear power generation there have been four major nuclear incidents – Windscale (now Sellafield in the UK), Three Mile Island in the US, Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union, and Fukushima in Japan. These have been caused by a combination of human error and technical failure. There is no reason to think others can not happen again in the future.

Twenty-seven years after the Chernobyl disaster the local community is still suffering with health problems. Children are required to have health checks twice a year and scientists are predicting thousands of new cases of post-Chernobyl cancer in the next 5 years.

Far from digging up dangerous minerals like uranium we need to be looking at developing energy supplies that are both clean and safe. It is now technically possible for renewables to play a central role in energy production.

Investment in renewable energy would help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and create thousands of skilled jobs. It is estimated that a solar industry in Australia could create 31,000 jobs by 2020. Compare this to the measly 170 jobs in operation and 350 jobs during the construction phase that Toro claim they will create.

The truth is that approval for this project has nothing to do with jobs or benefits for local communities. The ALP have ticked off this project so that their rich mates in the mining sector can profit at the expense of workers, the environment and community safety.

We must note that approval for this project does not mean that the deal is done and dusted. Activists should take inspiration from the recent campaign at James Price Point which saw Woodside forced to shelve its plans for a gas hub there. In that case an organised community campaign pushed the big business interests back.

A campaign to stop Toro would be a wonderful opportunity for the environmental movement, Indigenous communities and trade unions to work together to fight for an alternative to the dangerous uranium industry.

Side by side with fighting to end uranium mining we need to fight for a system that democratically plans energy production and distribution. This could be done on the basis bringing the mining, oil, gas and transport industries into public ownership under the democratic control of workers and the community.

Only in that way could our needs be met while protecting the planet and providing jobs, homes and services to all.

Last month federal Tertiary Education Minister Craig Emerson announced a further $2.8 billion in cuts to funding for higher education. This is on top of over $2 billion of cuts to tertiary education funding over the last six months. University staff and students will be directly affected by this latest round of cuts with increased class sizes, staff lay-offs and more expensive degrees.

By Socialist Party reporters

$900 million will be taken out of universities over the next two years through so-called ‘efficiency dividends’. Student Start-up Scholarships will be turned into loans, adding over $6,000 to student debt for a 3 year undergraduate degree. The discount for paying course fees upfront will also be abolished.

The average public investment in tertiary education in advanced countries is 1% of GDP. In Australia only 0.7% of GDP goes towards higher education, with the majority of money coming from private sources like student fees, rather than public spending. This places Australia 25th on the list of 29 advanced countries, with investment 30% lower than the average. The tertiary education sector is in desperate need more public funding, not less.

The latest cuts are part of the ongoing agenda to turn education into a for-profit, user-pays industry run on a business model. The Labor government has tried to justify the tertiary cuts by claiming the savings will pay for the Gonski reforms to school education. These reforms are themselves a step towards the further privatisation of public education, cementing public funding for private schools. Under the Gonski reforms private schools are set to receive a further $2.5 billion in public funding, despite remaining exclusive for students from wealthier backgrounds.

We need to reject the idea that different levels of education need to compete against each other for funding, whilst also rejecting the push towards privatised education. If the biggest profiteers in the country – the mining bosses, the big banks and the casinos – had their super-profits taxed at a higher rate there would be more than enough public money available to fund free, quality public education for all. The mining bosses alone receive around $4 billion per year in taxpayer subsidies – more than the recent government cuts to tertiary education.

A number of ‘stakeholders’ in the education sector – University administrators, staff unions and students unions – have stated that cutting university funding to fund schools ‘doesn’t make sense’. Unfortunately, it makes perfect sense to a government hell-bent on furthering the marketisation of tertiary education. The goal of both major political parties is to facilitate the growth of a profitable, market based tertiary education sector funded on a user-pays basis. The accessibility, diversity and quality of education will inevitability continue to fall by the wayside as business competitiveness is prioritised.

If students and staff are to defeat the plans of both major parties to treat education as a commodity, rather than a right, collective action is required. Joint strike action from the NTEU (National Tertiary Education Union), NUS (National Union of Students) and the AEU (Australian Education Union), inclusive of high school students, would show both Gillard and Abbott that we are serious about our right to quality public education from pre-school to university or TAFE.

While we desperately need to build a movement of students and staff against education cuts, we also need to fight for a political alternative to the pro-business policies of the major political parties. Only a democratically planned socialist economy based on human need – not private profit – would prioritise the provision of free, quality education across the board.

Attend the national student strike activities on budget day – May 14

By Socialist Party reporters

The disaster led to spontaneous protests by thousands of low-paid garment factory workers throughout the city who demanded justice for the dead and injured. Police attacked demonstrators using tear gas and rubber bullets.

The opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), a capitalist Islamist party, opportunistically called for a national strike on May 2. When in power previously it did nothing to advance workers’ rights.

According to media reports, the day before the disaster inspection teams had found huge cracks in the building’s structure. But while shops and a bank on the lower floor immediately closed the owners of the garment factory above told employees to continue working, despite the obvious safety risks.

There are an estimated 5,000 factories in Bangladesh paying around 3.2 million workers as little as $36 a month to make clothes for western-based companies such as Primark, Matalan, Wal-Mart, Benetton, etc.

This is not the first time such a catastrophe has happened at a garment factory in the area. A similar collapse occurred in 2005. And only last November, a fire at another garment factory in Dhaka left 112 dead.

Despite repeated assurances from brand importers and local authorities that they would ensure the safety of workers and eradicate substandard buildings, it’s clear from this latest disaster that nothing has changed.

The building’s owner, arrested along with six others, is reportedly well connected to the ruling Awami League and the BNP.

It is clear that the bosses both globally and locally will not protect workers when there are vast profits to be made; neither will the Bangladesh government as the garment industry accounts for 80% of the country’s export earnings.

Trade unions should pressure clothing companies into binding agreements on health and safety for workers in ex-colonial countries. Only strong union organisation can fight to improve workplace health and safety and drive up wages to acceptable levels.

The building of effective trade unions won’t, however, be easily achieved. Last year trade union activist Aminul Islam was murdered and the police have not solved the case.

I decided to join the Socialist Party because I wanted to become more politically active amongst like-minded people. My view is that Australia’s liberal democracy has failed in all aspects of life – environmentally, socially and economically.

It is clear that none of the major parties are offering a viable alternative to the destructive capitalist system in which we are embedded.

It’s apparent to me that the promise of a better life and a decent future for all comes with fine-print conditions of class and colour. At the same time the interests of corporations, and a miniscule elite, are forwarded every opportunity by a compliant, fawning press.

Far from delivering anything of value to ordinary people, I think this broken system is marching us headlong into catastrophe. I want to do what I can to change it.

My main focus is on modern queer politics, having become increasingly frustrated with the assimilationist stance of the leaders of the gay community, who seem more and more to represent the needs of a small group of white, successful, middle-class gays and lesbians only.

I don’t want to assimilate into a broken, elitist, white patriarchal system in exchange for some limited rights that should already be afforded to all. To do this would be to neglect the pressing issues of discrimination and violence experienced by working class queer people and queer people of colour.

The Socialist Party, with a class outlook, can play a role in developing the type of political representation that queer people deserve.

By Chris Dite, Socialist Party

Embarrassingly for the ALP even countries and politicians traditionally considered socially conservative are voicing support for or legalising same sex marriage. Prominent US politicians like Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton and even the conservative leaders like David Cameron have all publicly supported same sex marriage. Last month New Zealand, under the conservative leader John Key, passed same sex marriage laws. In fact the American military is in some ways more progressive than Julia Gillard and the ALP on this question!

Importantly, ordinary people around the world are standing up to say that they won’t accept inequality any longer. People in Maine and Washington in the US voted to support same sex marriage in November. Voters in Minnesota rejected a ban on gay marriage at the same time. Polls across the US suggest that support for same sex marriage rights is rising. These polls put those politicians’ long overdue support for same sex marriage into context. The truth is politicians like Obama and Cameron have been pressured to change their position in line with community expectations.

In February French politicians backed same sex marriage and adoption by same sex couples. This came off the back of huge demonstrations in Paris and other cities. Fierce street clashes saw some women activists bashed by right-wing religious extremists. Yet hundreds of thousands of people marched for equality and against discrimination, demonstrating that a majority of people oppose homophobia, sexism and right-wing violence.

Reforms like equal marriage rights have been won in other countries by movements of people and signed into law only when politicians have been put under pressure. This shows that the focus of the campaign here needs to be on movement building with progressive parliamentarians playing a mere supporting role. Unfortunately this approach has not always been the thrust of the campaign in Australia.

The Greens have previously suggested that voting for them would be enough to win equal marriage rights. Far from winning anything the campaign has diminished under their influence. They have tried to divert the developing movement off the streets and into the ballot box. The results have been a dismal failure.

The focus of the campaign for same sex marriage needs to be on building a movement in our communities, in the workplaces, the schools, on university campuses and on the streets. As well as struggling for equal marriage rights we also need to recognise that this is only one aspect of the struggle for LGBTIQ rights.

Many of the people who have participated in the movement in the past do not in fact want to get married. They see the issue as one of discrimination – just like the other types of institutionalised discrimination that they face everyday.

LGBTIQ people are doubly oppressed in the sense that they are exploited in the workplace and suffer from all of the other issues that working people face. At the same time they are oppressed because their sexual orientation, identity or gender is seen as unacceptable by the capitalist system.

As well as not having the right to marry, LGBTIQ people lack adoption rights, are often subject to extreme bullying and in some cases it is legal for employers to discriminate against them. Often issues like cuts to health services impact on LGBTIQ people disproportionately.

The lack of affordable housing is also something that disproportionately affects LGBTIQ people. Queer youth are often forced out of their homes or out of school because of bullying and discrimination. With tens of thousands of people on public housing waiting lists they are often forced to live rough and are put in situations where they can be exposed to violence.

In addition to the sometimes daily homophobia and street violence facing LGBTIQ people there is also the problem of police violence. This was demonstrated recently at the Mardi Gras in Sydney. In the now infamous video of a young man being brutalised by a policeman, a witness questions what the police are willing to do in private if this is what they think is acceptable in front of thousands of people.

When the capitalist system itself portrays LGBTIQ people as something abnormal, it is no surprise that homophobic ideas flourish in the ranks of the police – the enforcers of capitalist ideology. Police raids on gay nightclubs are not uncommon. Because of this LGBTIQ people are often too afraid to go to the police about homophobic violence.

The mobilisation of several thousand people against homophobic police violence after the Mardi Gras incident in Sydney was a good indication that people are prepared to struggle about issues much wider than marriage rights alone.

So with the dangers facing the LGBTIQ community seemingly endless, how should we fight against these problems and direct this struggle?

Broadening the demands of the campaign to include issues like police violence, bullying and discrimination would help to draw more people into the movement – especially those not interested in marriage. But side by side with fighting against discrimination and for equal rights we need to recognise that it is the system itself that creates these conditions.

Capitalism is a system that prioritises profits before all else. The majority of people have very little say over how society is run. It is a system that thrives off inequality and exploitation the world over. Those who own and control the wealth use every trick in the book to divide and rule ordinary people to ensure that they do not fight together for a bigger share of the pie.

Only by having real democratic control of our day-to-day lives, and by sharing out society’s wealth, could the basis for divisions be undermined and truly equal society be built.

With this in mind the struggle for LGBTIQ rights in general needs to be a struggle that is linked to the fight for a different type of world – a socialist world.

The fight for same sex marriage is winnable. Appealing to capitalist parties to merely change the laws however will not be enough. Only the mobilisation of ordinary people will force through reforms but only the transformation of society along socialist lines will lock in these reforms once and for all.

By Jesse Lessinger, New York

On November 29, 2012, workers at dozens of fast food restaurants in New York City walked off the job, formed pickets outside, and raised demands for higher wages, better hours, and union rights as part of the Fast Food Forward campaign. It was a truly inspiring moment to see workers who suffer silently in the margins come forward to speak up for themselves.

These heroic workers are taking a stand, and we, as socialists, give them our unconditional support. Fast Food Forward, backed by New York Communities for Change (NYCC), UnitedNY.org, the Black Institute, and SEIU, is the biggest attempt ever to organize fast food workers, and this is only the beginning in New York.

One of their demands is for $15 per hour in pay. This is significant, as many low-wage battles have called for much more modest pay increases. By asking for $15 they’re going beyond saying they want a little more. The message is: “we deserve a living wage.” In truth, $15 per hour in New York City is not enough to live on for some, especially those with families, but it’s an enormous step in that direction.

Fast food workers are not the only ones taking bold measures to fight for better conditions. On November 23, 2012, Black Friday, there were actions at upwards of 1,000 Walmarts across the country, with workers demanding no retaliation for speaking up, better hours, and $13 per hour in pay. These actions were not just one-off events, but are part of an on-going campaign of Walmart workers.

Fast food companies were expected to bring in $200 billion in revenue in 2012. Walmart’s revenues in 2011 totaled $477 billion with $15.7 billion of that being pure profit. The Walton family alone now owns more wealth than the entire bottom 42 percent of families in the U.S. This obscene wealth is not created by smart business people making smart business decisions; it comes off the backs of their highly exploited workers, who are rewarded for their hard work with poverty wages.

The Fast Food Forward campaign is a step in the right direction. A dynamic strategy is needed to organize highly coordinated actions on a truly massive scale if we’re going to bring these corporations to heel. We’ll need strikes and walkouts at hundreds of fast food stores, with visible pickets outside every one, backed up by thousands of Occupy and trade union activists and other supporters.

As we go to press this month the Coalition continues to hold an election-winning lead over Labor in the polls. In the lead up to the budget in mid May, there is much talk about the state of the nation’s finances and how to plug the budget deficit.

Regardless of who wins the election in September they will inherit a budget black hole in the midst of a worsening economic situation globally. Some economists are predicting that if Australia continues on its current path it could face a decade of budget deficits – with the annual total set to pass $60 billion in 2023.

Most capitalist commentators are urging the major parties to make some ‘tough decisions’. This is code for placing the burden on the bulk of ordinary people who work for a living. Measures such as increasing the GST, increasing income taxes on low and middle income earners and tightening the criteria for welfare payments are among some of the ‘solutions’ put forward by the big business press.

Socialists reject these measures and argue that it is those who profit at the expense of ordinary people – big businesses – that should be forced to pay. All the relevant figures show that they can more than afford it.

For a long time now the trend in Australia, and across most of the developed world, has been that the rich are getting richer while the rest of us are struggling to make ends meet. Wages as a share of national income is currently 52.6% – it’s lowest since September 1964. Profits as a share of national income on the other hand are near record highs.

Company tax rates have consistently trended downwards since the 1980s in Australia. From 46% in 1980 to 30% now this process has led to an increasing gap between rich and poor. Income inequality in Australia is actually amongst the fastest growing in the developed world. The top 10% of income earners make nearly 10 times as much as the bottom 10%.

Mining giants like BHP Billiton booked profits in the order of $15 billion last year while the mining tax brought in a paltry $126 million in its first six months. At the same time the mining moguls share in $13.8 billion in taxpayer funded fossil fuel subsidies. The situation is a total farce.

It is estimated that if the mining tax was increased to 40% of forecast profits in excess of $100 billion could be raised over the next decade. If the big banks and the gambling industry had their super-profits similarly taxed hundreds of billions more could be raised to both plug the budget deficit but also to invest in the areas of health and education.

Far from having to undermine the wages or the purchasing power of ordinary people there are vast amounts of wealth in Australia that are currently untapped.

While socialists support increasing taxes on big business as a basic reform we would go further by calling for the major sectors of the economy to be brought into public ownership. That way the entirety of the wealth produced by these enterprises could be shared out more equally, in a democratic and planned way amongst the population.

As we approach September we shouldn’t let either of the major parties tell us that ‘tough decisions’ or ‘hard cuts’ are required. Those who created the crisis should be forced to pay. We need to defend our living standards and fight to reverse the trend towards wealth inequality.

In order to be able to do this effectively we will have to build a new political vehicle – a party that unlike the Liberals and Labor unashamedly represents the interests of the majority and is prepared to take on big business greed. That will be our task regardless of who wins the next federal election.

Several recent events have elevated the issue of racism in New Zealand. In one case a nationalist MP belonging to the Danish People’s Party made headlines when she made racist comments about a traditional Maori welcome.

By Jared Phillips, New Zealand

Also Susan Devoy, who is unsympathetic to Maori political issues, was appointed as the new Race Relations Commissioner. At the same time National Party Prime Minister John Key has tried to stoke fears about South Asian refugee boats coming to New Zealand. This is despite no boats arriving so far.

To top things off a bunch of neo-Nazis staged a so-called ‘white pride’ march in Christchurch. These events vary in significance but taken together they have created increased controversy and more discussion in society about ethnicity and issues of racism.

New race relations appointment

The appointment of former champion squash player, Susan Devoy, to the position of Race Relations Commissioner is seen by many as a right-wing provocation. Prior to her appointment Devoy had become an outspoken conservative. In particular she had criticised the wearing of burqas and had chastised Maori for raising political issues on Waitangi Day.

Waitangi Day is a national holiday which marks the anniversary of a Treaty of Waitangi signing ceremony in 1840. For decades the Waitangi day anniversary has been used by Maori as an occasion for forums and symbolic peaceful protests to address Maori issues.

In reality the treaty was a tool of annexation but it contained important promises to Maori, including self-governance through chieftainship. With such promises not being adhered to the Treaty is seen as a rallying point of Maori resistance. Maori call for such aspects of the treaty to be honoured.

Criticism quickly followed Devoy’s appointment especially because she is completely unqualified. She responded by saying that she is a “quick learner” with “a good moral compass”.

Devoy’s view is that Waitangi day should not be used by Maori for political “shenanigans”. The truth is that it’s precisely that type of outlook – a refusal to recognise deep historical injustices – that qualified Devoy for the position in the eyes of the government.

Even some of the conservative press think that her appointment is a step too far with one editorial commenting that: “She is politically and perhaps culturally naive… which does not fit well with someone who will be expected to mediate in complex matters involving racial discrimination and human rights.”

Devoy has ignored requests for interviews. This led to the farcical incident where her associate told a TV crew that she was asleep in her house and couldn’t be interviewed. Soon after the TV crew then captured footage of her driving past!

Even when asked, Devoy didn’t feel that the ‘white pride’ march in Christchurch warranted her comment. When the nationalist Danish People’s Party MP said about the Maori welcome: “To me it looked grotesque, it looked very strange with a man who is half naked and in a grass skirt and who poked his tongue out and was shouting” Devoy didn’t think that warranted her comment either.

It was also exposed in The Listener magazine that Devoy’s 1993 autobiography contained passages where she complained about not being able to enter lucrative sports contracts in apartheid South Africa. She wrote up a list of pros and cons when deciding whether she would tour there. Far from considering human rights of black South Africans, the list merely weighed up the financial benefits of touring.

Devoy’s appointment has triggered a heightened discussion about racism. So much so that the prime time current affairs show ‘Campbell Live’ ran a segment on the everyday racism experienced by Maori. An experiment was conducted whereby a Caucasian male and a Maori male with the same appearance (same clothes, same car, etc) visited a range of petrol stations asking to fill up before paying.

The Caucasian male was allowed to fill-up before paying at the outlets of five different petrol brands. The Maori male was required to pre-pay for the petrol at the outlets of four of the five brands. This was despite his overly-polite approaches at the counters. The exercise gave an insight into everyday discrimination experienced by Maori and the failures of institutions like the Human rights Commission to do anything to undermine racism in New Zealand.

Human rights institutions

The Race Relations Commissioner in New Zealand is a functionary of the Human Rights Commission. The Commission is supposed to advocate for human rights, consult with groups concerned with protecting human rights, inquire into matters which infringe on human rights, develop a national plan to promote and protect human rights and take part in court proceedings relating to human rights. It reports to the Prime Minister.

Despite the presence of human rights bodies in most advanced countries human rights are routinely abused both at home and abroad. In the main this is because adhering to human rights often runs counter to the needs of capitalism – a system based on production for private profit rather than the general needs of all people.

Under capitalism human rights are seen as subordinate to the rights of capitalists to make profits. Because of this racism is a by-product of the profit system. As Malcolm X once said “you can’t have capitalism without racism”. This explains why when capitalist governments set up human rights institutions they are generally toothless tigers.

While socialists have no confidence in these institutions we are open to using their existence, in conjunction with mass movements and campaigns, to assist in winning reforms for oppressed people. For example an appeal to human rights bodies can be useful when someone is facing discrimination in the workplace and there is not sufficient strength to defeat the employer by industrial means.

Human rights, like all rights, are not just granted to people by the capitalist class. Historically rights have been fought for, and won, through struggle. When society slides into crisis we often see that the capitalists try and wind democratic freedoms and rights back. This is seen in many pieces of anti-democratic legislation put forward in recent years. As the economic crisis gets worse we will increasingly need to defend both our living standards and our rights.

The need for class unity

Against the backdrop of recession, and a deepening world economic crisis, the ruling class will increasingly try to divide the working class in order to weaken it. From their point of view it is much easier to make ordinary people pay for the economic crisis via cuts and austerity measures if people are divided along racial and ethnic lines.

What the ruling class fears the most is the entire working class uniting and acting together to oppose their attacks on our living standards. We must not let the likes of Susan Devoy or John Key use the public discourse to drive wedges between groups of people who are all under attack.

Working people, the unemployed, students and all those in society who are oppressed have an interest in working together to ensure we are not made to pay for an economic crisis that was created by the capitalists. We have more in common with each other than we do with those who exploit us. Through our trade unions, community groups and parties like Mana we need to fight for jobs, homes and services for all.

By campaigning together around class issues, secondary differences like race can be pushed into the background. Our living standards can be both defended and extended thereby laying the basis for a new type of society which is based on human need and not profit. This type of society would use the wealth created to provide for all and make discrimination and oppression a thing of the past. Genuine human rights would be a top priority. This is the type of world that socialists fight for.