Sweden's social

_ democrats: buying
into capitalism

In March: of this year, the
Democrat, published by the New
Democratic Party in B.C., carried
an article on the Swedish labor
movement by Ron Johnson, federal
NDP candidate for Vancouver Cen-
tre and former staff member of the
B.C. Federation of Labor. The arti-
cle was built around a speech to
Vancouver Centre members of the
NDP by Rudolph Meidner, then the
chief economist of the Swedish
_ Trade Union Confederation (LO).
__ Meidner reported that after 44
years of Social Democratic govern-
ment in Sweden (1932-76) ‘‘the
balance of economic power still re-
mained firmly in a few private
hands.’’ According to Meidner 90
percent of Swedish industry is
privately owned, five percent is
owned cooperatively and five per-
cent is state owned. That is the
Swedish ‘‘socialism’’ some of our
right wing trade union leaders have
been praising to the sky.

Johnson reported that Meidner
proposed to radically change the
balance of economic power in
Sweden by creating employee in-
vestment funds to be owned and ad-
ministered by the trade unions. The
funds would be -obtained through
legislation that would compel the
major companies to pay to the
unions a given percentage of their
income. As the funds grew over a
iod of 30 or 40 years, the unions
would slowly purchase control of

the Swedish economy from the
capitalists. This plan was adopted
in principle at the 1976 convention
of the LO.

Sweden is a highly developed
capitalist country and as such is suf-
fering from the deep going crisis of
world capitalism, although the ef-
fects of the crisis are less obvious
than in some other countries
because of a number of social
welfare programs that tend to
obscure the true picture. Sweden is
experiencing plant closures,
unemployment, increases in prices
and rents, economic and regional
disparities, increased power of
capital, alienation of people and
widening gaps in society. Hence the
search for new ideas and new
policies, accentuated by the fact
that capitalist parties have formed
the government since 1976. A na-
tional election is scheduled for
September.

Early in August, I visited the LO
building in -Stockholm and was
treated generously when I asked for
printed material in English on ma-
jor policy questions. Among the
documents and books I received
was a paper on international ‘in-
dustrial policy by Jan Olsson of the
Swedish Metal Workers Union. I
draw attention to this document
because it was published in the year

following the adoption of the-

Meidner plan by the LO. Qutoa-

Communists support
new Nicaragua gov't

Continued from page 1

In Nicaragua, the provisional
revolutionary government has
_ taken dramatic steps to consolidate
its power through the formation of
a popular army party and by na-
tionalization of banks and over 50
industrial and business: firms
_ previously owned by Somoza.

The new government has the full
support of Nicaraguan Com-
munists, members of the
Nicaraguan Socialists Party (NSP).
The party’s general ‘secretary
Alvaro Ramirez, now deputy
foreign minister of the new govern-
ment, spoke out about his party’s
relationship with the government in
an interview in the GDR paper
Neues Deutschland.

During the struggle against
Somoza, the SPN worked within
the United People’s Movement
(MPU) opposition front, which
united all left forces in the country,
and in the armed liberation strug-
gle, said Ramirez.

The SPN, he emphasized steadily
supported the political and socio-
economic program of the MPU, in-
cluding. the nationalization of
banks, mines, fisheries and forests.

“These demands,’’ he said,
“‘which are completely in keeping
with the program of our party,
were backed by all 19 members of
the MPU, including political par-
_ ties, trade unions, peasants

A At the time of the people’s upris-
ing, he noted, the MPU organized
the working class of Nicaragua into

“Committees of Civil Defence’’
and “‘Committees of Working Peo-
ple’’ in residential areas as well as in
factories. These committees, he ad-
ded, worked directly with the San-
dinist National Liberation Front
(FSLN), and ‘‘our party took part
in the heroic armed struggle under
the command of the FSLN.”’

“Volunteers from the SPN,”’’ he
said, ‘‘led the pitched battles
against the National Guard in the
thickly-settled eastern residential
districts of Managua. Around
200,000 workers live in this area and
our party has a strong influence
there:

“The people’s uprising in these
districts of Managua meant that
Somoza had to concentrate his
troops there and thereby it
facilitated the liberation of such
Strategically important cities as
Esteli and Masaya.

“Our armed forces fought
shoulder-to-shoulder with the
patriots of the FSLN in the suc-
cessful battles for Leon and
Matagalpa, as well as in the San-
dinist commando ‘Benjamin
Zeledon’ on the southern front.’’

In addition, said Dr. Ramirez,
the Nicaraguan Socialist Party has
enthusiastically greeted the creation
of a ‘‘Sandinist Central Union of
Working People, ”» announced by
the FSLN.

“Such a united workers centre,’”’
he stated, ‘‘meets the decades-long
wishes of the absolute majority of
the working people of our
country.””

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—AUGUST 31, 1979—Page 8

tions from the Olsson paper should
help to place the Meidner plan in its

" proper setting.

On page nine, I found a state-
ment which reminded me that the
third road theory, which has been
with us for a long time, bears a
strong resemblance to the super
power theory of Maoism, which is
of more recent vintage. Both are
based on anti-Sovietism.

Olsson wrote: ‘‘Co-operation
within Europe is an important alter-

LABOR —
COMMENT

BY JACK PHILLIPS

native in the direction of a genuine
independence vis-a-vis the great
powers: the U.S.A. and the Soviet
Union. The basis of such in-
dependence would be common in-
dustrial projects and a common
economic policy. It is not possible
for each country to simply go its
own way.’

He goes on to advance the theory

that ‘‘a more independent Europe
could find a path between com-
munism and capitalism,’’ using the
word ‘‘communism’’ to designate
real socialism in the Soviet Union
and other socialist countries.
According to Olsson, future elec-
toral successes for social democracy

in Western Europe should affect

Eastern Europe by creating ‘‘the
pre-requisites for a liberation from
the Soviet Union... and form a
foundation for new relationships
with the developing countries and
for a new economic world order.”’
Although social democracy in
Western Europe has in many
respects played a constructive role
in international affairs in recent
years, it remains ideologically op-
posed to the world socialist com-
munity. Its right wing spokesmen
remain dedicated to the kind of
reactionary policies advanced by
Olsson.

Olsson makes the claim that the

policies he advances are a ‘“‘pre-.

condition* for the realisation of
socialism in any one country, for
example,-Sweden.’’ While we have
every reason to make points against
the author for refusing to accept
real socialism in the Soviet Union
and other socialist countries, we
must commend him for his honesty
in admitting that socialism does not
exist in Sweden. That is more than
some of his Canadian friends are
prepared to admit.

However while Meidner ad-
vocates buying out capitalism with
money set aside for that purpose by
the capitalists, Olsson, in his own
distorted fashion, places the ques-
tion in its proper world setting: the
crisis of world capitalism, the ex-
istence of a powerful community of
socialist countries headed by the
Soviet Union and the increasing
power of the underdeveloped coun-
tries of Africa, Asia and Latin
America.

The concept of class collabora-.

tion is deeply ingrained in the leader
ship of the Swedish Social
Democratic Party and the LO, and
is highly institutionalized through
collective bargaining and legisla-
tion. This was reflected in a state-
ment by the former minister of

An a to Collective
Capital Formation

finance: ‘‘Don’t slaughter the cow
which gives you the milk. The more
you fatten the cow, the more milk
you get.’’ During the period from
the late fifties to the late sixties, fat-
tening the cow meant giving sup-
port to the more powerful sections
of Swedish capitalism. At the same
time, and due to certain favorable
conditions, the social democrats
could truthfully say that wage rates
and social security benefits increas-
ed significantly. However, it is also

true, and this is more significant, .

that the rate of capitalist accumula-
tion and profitability rose sharply.

_ This coincided with the strategic

aim. of monopoly capitalism of
strengthening its position vis-a-vis
the working class. Sweden is a
classical example of state monopoly
capitalism, the close integration of
the state and monopoly in order to
‘enhance profits and to mitigate the
social effects of the capitalist crisis.

Which brings us back to Rudolph
Meidner and the employee invest-
ment funds. Some trade union
members and members of the NDP
who heard him speak in B.C. at the
NDP meeting in Vancouver and at
the Canadian Labor Congress
winter school at Harrison Hot Spr-
ings were greatly impressed. One of
them put it to me this way: ‘‘This is

a very bold and revolutionary con- .

cept — something new. If we can
elect an NDP government federally
we can follow the same road in
Canada.’’

(It is unfortunate that some
honest socialists have never read
Lenin who in many of his works
dealt so profoundly with the im-
possibility of creating socialsim
through the natural outcome of
those reforms.)

I would refer those well inten-
tioned NDP members to a report in
the Vancouver Sun of August 18
dealing with a speech by MLA and
former NDP cabinet member in the
B.C. provincial government, Gary
Lauk, to the 1979 convention of the
B.C. Young New Democrats. Lauk
was quoted as follows:

“Although he rejected na-
tionalization of industry as a cure
all for economic ills, Lauk said
Canadians will need a planned
economy to maintain an acceptable
level of economic activity.

“* J don’t buy that Marxist stuff:
We are not a totalitarian party. I
am in favor of a mixed economy

which Canada has always had.’’

I have quoted Lauk because some
NDP members consider him to be a
right winger within the party and
also believe that the policy ad-
vocated by Meidner represents a
constructive left wing alternative.
But is there any basic difference
between Lauk and Meidner, or is it

‘achievements,

merely a question of degree, of
comodating reformist policy to t
prevailing conditions in each cas
Let us turn to page 122
Meidner’s book Employee Inve:
ment Funds, English editio
published in Great Britain in 19

“The introduction of emplo
funds would mean the emergen
of ‘a new category of ownership
the mixed Swedish economy whi
would then be altered, but
framework of ‘the mixed econon
would not be shattered; privé
ownership would continue
dominate while other forms |
ownership through socially own!
and co-operative enterprise wou
not be affected.

“By virtue of its character, aif
and likely effects, the proposal
establish employee funds is a refo
mist one, involving as it does 0
element in a step by step poli
where no step is taken into t
unknown but each step is taken 0
ly when the ground remains firms

“Tt is a familiar pattern that
reformist proposal such as that ft
employee funds is distrusted 6
social revolutionaries as a defe
of the old class order and by ti
conservatives as a_ soci
revolution.”’

Esentially, Meidner’s philosop
is the same as Lauk’s, allowing f
the more advanced political situ
tion in Sweden as compared wi
Canada.

Internationally, social democra¢
is suffering a deep going ideologi¢
crisis, reflecting the crisis of u
capitalist system in all of —
ramifications. It is this crisis whi
motivates its leaders to search fo
new ideas in order to win more seal
in elections and to form goverl-
ments. This same crisis inevitably
finds its reflection in the ranks 0
the party, causing some to move t0
the left and others to beco
disillusioned.

However it should be noted tha
the search for new policies by :
reformist leaders of soci@
democracy always proceeds from :
reformist point of view, althoug
subject to pressure from U
membership. This. is also true }
regard to reformist trade uni?
leaders.

Real socialsim can be achieé
only if the working class and i
allies are able to unite and inspite
the people to transform VU»
economy and fundamental?
change all social relations.
Meidner plan holds out no
perspective.

I shall return to the Swedish
movement in my next article to ¢
with some of its posit!
achievements
would well afford to emulees
Canada.

PACIFI

RPiBbUNE

City or town
Postal Code

1 am enclosing:
1 year$100 2 years $180 6 months $6 (1
Old New Foreign 1 year $12 0.
Donation $.

Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive, —
Vancouver, B.C. V5L 3X9. Phone 251-1186

Read the paper that fights for labor :
ae
Y
g
7}

oe
oe oboe we be w Sie wit clee eos ©
f of
x Tae eg Sa ek oe Re ge ae A ae a Be Or et Beh ee LN a Saale

ed

ee