\[Press Office\]

  • The European Socialist Party - In Europe
    The time has arrived for the people of the European Union to have an alternative choice in their representation in the European Parliament. The ESP has been founded to provide for them a voice that shall not be silenced or over-ridden. It shall represent the aspirations of every member and campaign until the job is done.

    The European Socialist Party is a political group within the European Parliament. It is a Democratic Socialist Party. Its puts forth the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system.

    So how exactly is Socialism a better alternative to a Capitalistic society? To answer this question we first have to look at the differences between the two:

    In definition: Capitalism means an economic system in which the means of production are overwhelmingly privately owned and operated for profit, with privately determined investment of capital, and where production, distribution, and the prices of goods, services, and labor are affected by the forces of supply and demand in a largely free market.

    Capitalism means the complete separation of economy and state. Capitalism is the social system based upon private ownership of the means of production, which entails a completely uncontrolled and unregulated economy where all land is privately owned.

    Capitalism has a main philosophical view. "Capitalism is implicitly based upon a world view which upholds that man?s mind is competent in dealing with reality, that it is morally good for each person to strive for his own happiness, and that the only proper social arrangement for men/women to live under is one in which the initiation of physical force is banished". This is the ideological basis upon which the United States was founded. The importance of recognizing the philosophy upon which capitalism rests upon lies in the fact that no social system can be properly understood or defended apart from its broader philosophical framework.
    However, capitalist systems have shown that they do not improve society. They do, however, extend the rifts between people. Widening the gap between the rich and the poor. Social inequality.

    Socialism aims to liberate the peoples from dependence on a minority which owns or controls the means of production. Socialism is the stage between Capitalism and Communism. It aims to put economic power in the hands of the people as a whole, and to create a community in which people will be paid wages based on several factors (social need, difficulty, amount of education etc.), so **not everyone **will make the same wage - as is often a misinterpretation of Socialism.

    Socialists believe in human evolution. We evolve in accordance to the system we live within. Capitalism has allowed us to evolve out of our feudalistic ways (for the most part), and slavery does not exist in our country (discrimination however....). But Capitalism, which is driven by the need to always increase profits, creates a "dog eat dog" mentality. This is not a sustainable system, either for humankind or for the environment. In the coming years it will be shown as unsustainable. Can you imagine how the capitalist countries of the world will react to the oil running out, or our unsustainable energy needs? The multinational capitalist corporations will take it upon themselves to accquire the resources they need. Americans won't be happy when theres no gas to fill up their jeeps or jets. God only knows. Under Socialism people will evolve to the point where they care about each other regardless of their location or race or whatever. If we are to survive as a species, we need to evolve. That's one of the many reasons why Socialism is the way forward.

  • **European Socialist Party - **In the years past...
    In the 300 years or so of its existence capitalism has transformed the planet over and over again. Rail, electricity, the internal combustion engine, flight, space travel, telephones and electronic computers, the list is endless. The world economy is 17 times the size it was a century ago. In 1900 there were only a few thousand cars worldwide. Now there are 500 million. Engineers built the first electronic computers in the early 1940s. In 1949, Popular Mechanics magazine predicted that: "computers in the future may have only 1,000 tubes and weigh only one and a half tonnes". Quote from Wikipiedia
    Today the smallest laptop can process more data than the most powerful computers in the world 50 years ago.
    Despite this, all the technology developed by capitalism has not provided clean water for 1.2 billion people or food for the 841 million who are seriously malnourished. It has not prevented the Aids epidemic rampaging through Africa. Upwards of 28 million Africans have the HIV virus and only 30,000 of them can get treatment. Capitalism is **capable **of spending billions on developing weaponry that is used to bomb the poor of Afghanistan into the rubble, but it **cannot **solve poverty, hunger or disease.
    Capitalism has enormously developed the productive forces but it is controlled by the unplanned and blind play of those very productive forces. It is a system where the only driving force is the need to maximise profits. Under capitalism it is the blind forces of money-making that are in the driving seat. Governments bow down before the rule of capital unless they are prepared to challenge it. Nowhere is this clearer than on the issue of the environment. Every so often the world?s leaders come together to plan how to ?save the planet?. They come up with targets to limit damage to the environment. The largest and most powerful economy on earth, the USA, always manages to get these targets lowered. Even with these attempts to create a system where the rich countries can buy fictional claims of having done their environmental duty, the US ? which produces one quarter of the world's greenhouse gases ? has refused to sign up. All previous experience shows that even these paltry targets will never be met under capitalism. So there goes the planet!
    Capitalism is **incapable **of fully harnessing the science and technology it has brought into being. It is incapable of providing for the needs of humanity or of protecting our fragile planet. By contrast, a socialist society **would be able **to harness the enormous potential of human talent and technique in order to build a society and economy which could meet the needs of all. That does not mean that every problem could be immediately overcome as a result of a socialist government abolishing the rule of capital. Not at all. Removing the profit motive would only be the beginning of building a new society.

  • Admin

    ooc: For the sake of credibility, I would like to point out some corrections here.

    Since the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Communism has split the International Labour Movement and has set back the realisation of socialism in many countries for decades. Communism falsely claims a share in the Socialist ideal. In fact it has distorted that ideal beyond recognition. It has built up a regid theology which is incompatible with the critical spirit of Marxism. Wherever it has gained power it has destroyed freedom or the chance of gaining freedom, as in the case of China, old Russia, Cuba etc...

    Last time I checked, the Soviet Union was not only still around, but also, with NationStates data, a vastly democratic nation. Additionally it could as well interest you that no real-world 'communist state' ever called itself communist; they all used the term socialist instead.

    Same is here with your description of "Communism" - you could use "Soviet Socialism" or some other term if you still insist on openly attacking my nation's political ideals [I will post my factbook in a short while, by the way].

    As for the use of the term Communism, Communist theory suggests that Communism can be achieved only through Socialism (hence all the countries the west knows as former Communist states called themselves Socialist; after all, Communism is about the abolition of the state, making the term a little bit hypocritical to use.)

  • Admin

    I'm almost positive that Estonea was referring to the real world USSR, and he was not attacking you personally, Soviet Union. Sometimes things can get fuzzy when IC-OOC is not clarified.

  • Admin

    ooc: I am aware of that wink.gif Though this world we roleplay at does not have a "real-world USSR" (not completely at least; I must get to write my history down at some point) nor did I take it personally. But IC speaking, this post is a good attack on my nation and its beliefs (which is fine by me as a player, and look forward to more such! Roleplay element, yarr!)

  • **OOC: ****I was refering to the real life situation. No attack on your national beliefs. However, it is irrelevent whether or not the USSR refered to itself as 'Socialist', (Real-World). What started out as a incredible idea resulted in the neglect of the people and the looking after of the influential. It was a very flawed system.

    Again it was not an attack on your nation. I will edit the post to reflect your nations beliefs. However, the ESP is dead set against the advancedment of communisim. It has been shown not to work in a mixed society of people who want different things. Socialism on the other hand is a perfect balance between Capitalism and Communism. It can accomodate the variance in people's aspirations. This is were communisim failed. This is why Socialim will not.**

  • European Socialist Party - Press Release
    The ESP has put forward its first Bill entitled Anti-Terrorism Act 2006, to the Security Council for consideration and/or any amendments. Given its universal topic of anti-terrorism the ESP solemnly expect no less but to see the Bill pass back into the hands of the Parliament for final voting.

    The ESP call upon all parliamentry parties to support the proposed bill if/when it does come back to parliament for voting. It is a fine piece of legislature that will serve in favour of those who fight against international terrorism.

    Furthermore the ESP urges all member states to cooperate in preventing and suppressing international terrorism and in taking action against such acts.

    Thank you all for your time.

    user posted image
    Annika Bekker MEP,
    European Socialist Party.

  • European Socialist Party - Press Release
    With the submission of the ESP latest piece of proposed legislature to the Security Council, Chemical Weapons Act 2006, I would like to thank all ESP members who had a hand in its creation.

    Although the Legislation has met with negative comments in the Parliament I am hopeful that it will be approved by the Security Council and will be brought to the Parliament for voting.

    However, if it is not, the ESP will not give up in its campaign to rid the threat of Chemical Weapons from the national arsnals of this Union. We will not back down on this issue.

    Thank you for your attention.

    user posted image
    Annika Bekker MEP,
    European Socialist Party.

  • European Socialist Party - Press Release
    I am very proud to say that the ESP legislation, entitled 'Anti-terrorism Act 2006', has been succesfully adopted by the European Union. It is law. I see this as a major victory for the ESP in this regard. As a party we have a strong drive to provide good proposals, and I can see that through the EU's recognition of this Act. I congradulate the party on its efforts.

    user posted image
    Annika Bekker MEP,
    European Socialist Party.