Politicians target working class to pay war butcher’s bill

EDITORIAL

Posted on March 15, 2025 by Scottish Socialist Voice

by Ken Ferguson

• Whether it was Lenin or John Maclean that said it the truth remains: “A bayonet is a weapon with a worker at both ends.” This stark image tells the brutal truth behind the scurrying of summits aimed at hyping war spending and the saccharin smiles of the likes of Starmer and Macron as they promise to, in that revolting phrase, put “boots on the ground” (not theirs) in a confrontation with Russia.

Such glib mouthings such as “all over by Xmas and a “war to end wars” have many monuments from the 72,337 war dead without a grave named on the brooding Thiepval monument on the Somme to the fresh graves in Ukraine and Russia.

The brazen sales pitch to convince the public who voted Labour less than a year ago for “Change” that this was to allow the Janus faced Starmer to chortle about building thousand of rockets rather than thousands of homes is now in full swing.

Defence spending
Virtually every public figure, politician or pensioned of general now opens their media pitch with, “Of course we must increase defence spending,” as if this policy choice was so self-evident as not to require any discussion, as they gloss over the social costs of such a decision.

However before taking this discussion further Voice readers will, I am sure, support. our editorial view that we will not massage the reality of war by talking about ‘defence’ but will call the horror that it is by its true name, war.

There is no doubt at least of one thing and that is that humanity is at a crossroads facing a crop of economic, environmental, social, health and housing crisis, all with a common aspect — they can’t be bombed and shelled away.

For decades defenders of the UK’s nuclear weapons told us that they guaranteed the peace but not any longer. Now we are told of the need for missiles, tanks, rockets, ships, aircraft all to do what those super expensive bombs supposedly did — deter the Russians.

As we go to press, news is announced of a summit of top European generals to map out a plan for co-ordinating their armed forces as the Trump administration loosens, perhaps cuts it military ties in Europe to re-focus on China

Of course should Trump decree a European pullout he will still demand payback for previous US aid to Ukraine as the so called ‘deal’ on rare earth minerals shows.

Despite all the sunshine talk about new jobs building lethal weapons there should be no doubt about the nature of the stark choice now facing socialists, trade unionists, climate campaigners and the broad progressive movement .

Bread or Bombs
As things stand the supposed Labour government is making no secret of its intention to take the side of war and to slash social spending, benefits and services to the vulnerable to pay the bill.

It is a vital but difficult struggle which pitches the deafening warmongering chorus from the media and politicians for weapons and those demanding climate action, NHS resources, thousands of new homes and a shift of policy away from the profiteers.

This is a battle with high stakes and no middle way and demands tough realism and hard campaigning in the part of those who want change to be a reality rather than a glib debate avoiding slogan.

Clearly the last three years of war in Ukraine has seen divisions on how to respond to the invasion with some including a number of unions backing arms supplies with others calling for talks.

Alternative path
However the choice we now face is whether to support the Starmer line which is — literally — a direct lift from the Reform manifesto and boost war spending paid for by slashing aid to the world’s poor… or take an alternative path.

Sticking with war is likely to further boost Reform as the urgent needs of millions are ignored and this is particularly so for unions who backed weapons supplies to Ukraine and may have members in the arms industry.

It would be a kamikaze path to back arms production at the expense of social and environmental spending and in so doing act against the interests of the millions seeking a functioning NHS, decent social homes, action on poverty, warm homes for pensioners and much more.

It may be a tough choice for some but it isn’t a hard one to back the needs and aspiration of millions rather than the millionaires’ profits earned by death and mutilation.