A Very Public Sociologist: CWI

Showing newest posts with label CWI. Show older posts

Friday, 11 June 2010

Introducing Socialist Party Scotland

This nugget of sectariana came to me via the ever-green Leftist Trainspotters list, THE resource for discerning sectarians:

The Scottish section of the Committee for a Workers’ International – the International Socialists - is changing its name to Socialist Party Scotland.

We have chosen to change our name at this time because we believe that it allows us to have a clearer banner that will help attract the increasing numbers of new young people and workers who are looking for a socialist and Marxist alternative to the crisis ridden capitalist system and the new ConDem coalition of cuts.

Our new name also has the distinct advantage of making a direct link with our sister parties in England, Wales and Ireland who are also known as the Socialist Party.

We already work closely with the Socialist Party in England and Wales through our work in the trade unions like the PCS, where we play a leading role, and in Unison and the CWU among others. We will in the coming months ensure that we use our influence in the trade union movement in Scotland to help build mass opposition to the savage cuts planned by the new Tory-Lib Dem government. We also work closely with our comrades throughout Britain in the Youth Fight For Jobs Campaign.

Most recently during the general election we took part in the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition that involved trade union leaders including Bob Crow of the RMT. Four of the ten Scottish TUSC candidates at the general election were members of Socialist Party Scotland. We will be working with other trade unionists and socialists to build on the experience of TUSC in the months ahead.

Tommy Sheridan and Solidarity

In 2006 we were founding members, alongside Tommy Sheridan, of Solidarity – Scotland’s Socialist Movement. Since then we have played a leading role in Solidarity and this will continue. In fact we will, alongside the other socialists within Solidarity, be stepping up our efforts to strengthen Solidarity as we head towards the Scottish parliament elections next year.

Moreover, Socialist Party Scotland would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our 100% backing for Tommy and Gail Sheridan in their forthcoming court battle against the forces of the rich and powerful who are ranged against them. We have and will continue to condemn the scandalous waste of public resources, now totalling at least £2.5 million, squandered by the Crown Office and Lothian and Borders Police in their vendetta against Scotland’s most prominent socialist.

There will be at least one Socialist Party here in Scotland that will be striving to see a defeat for the Murdoch Empire and the enemies of the trade union and socialist movement.

Socialist Party Scotland will continue to be the Scottish section of the Committee for a Workers International, which has parties and groups in 40 countries around the world.

Statement here.

Good luck getting that name registered with the Electoral Commission!

If I was still in the Socialist Party I probably would have supported the rebranding. There may have been a case in the past for Scottish Militant Labour to be formally separate from the rest of the organisation, but from the split in the CWI in 2001 (which left a rump group of loyalists, the International Socialists in Scotland) the logic for maintaining the IS as a separate section of the international became increasingly tenuous; especially as SP branches in England and Wales have a large degree of autonomy anyway.

Then there is the question of positioning -as the statement makes clear in the penultimate sentence's snide sideswipe to the SSP. Presumably the CWI is of the opinion the name is too good to be left in the hand of their erstwhile comrades? Whatever the case it signals the division at the heart of the Scottish far left is still festering quite nicely.

Where does this leave Solidarity? The statement says the CWI remains committed to it - but changing your name to a 'party' doesn't give out the sort of vibes one would expect from a coalition partner. This isn't to say the CWI are looking to dump Solidarity, unlike the SWP. But they are aware if the Sheridans are banged up on perjury charges there seems little point for it to continue in its present form. During the general election for all intents and purposes Solidarity was subsumed by the Scottish TUSC campaign, so this can be viewed as further confirmation that the London-based secretariat view "Scotland's Socialist Movement" as an irrelevance.

Sunday, 10 January 2010

Change You Can Believe In?

It was almost a year ago the world breathed a sigh of relief as possibly the worst presidency in the history of the United States. By way of contrast, going off the hype and global enthusiasm for Barack Obama you could be forgiven for thinking the Second Coming was taking up residence in the Oval Office. In this piece below from the CWI website by Tony Wilsdon of Socialist Alternative in the US, we see Obama has proven to be as much a tool of vested corporate interests as previous incumbents.

One year ago, millions of Americans were in the streets cheering the election of Obama as the end of Republican policies and the start of a new era. How quickly these hopes have been dashed. One year after Obama’s election, it’s hard to identify one positive achievement of his presidency.

Obama’s campaign was filled with lofty speeches, and he repeatedly promised to change who controls politics in Washington. He promised that ordinary Americans “will have as much access and influence over the course and direction of our campaign that has traditionally [been] reserved for the wealthy and the powerful.”

Almost immediately, Obama packed his cabinet full of Wall Street executives and powerful political figures from previous administrations, both Democrat and Republican. This was followed by another huge bailout for the architects of the financial meltdown – the big banks – with few, if any, strings attached.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration refused to support legislation in the Senate which would have allowed judges to force banks to renegotiate mortgage instruments to give desperate homeowners reduced monthly payments to avoid foreclosure or eviction. This follows his decision the previous year, while in the Senate, to vote against a cap on the interest rates on credit cards.

Matt Taibbi wrote in Rolling Stone, “the aid that Obama has provided to real people has been dwarfed in size and scope by the taxpayer money that has been handed over to America’s financial giants” (9 December 2009). This showed the extent to which Obama is beholden to the bankers and financiers who helped fund his election campaign.

This was followed by his decision to offer major concessions to the private hospitals, drug companies, and insurance companies as part of building the framework for his health care reform bill (New York Times, 8 December 2008). For example, Obama stepped in personally to promise drug companies that the government would not use its clout to force down drug prices. This paved the way for the massive handout to private medicine that is at the heart of the Obama-supported health bill recently passed through the House and Senate.

Then came the decision for a 30,000-troop surge in Afghanistan, the failure to support the international treaty to ban land mines and the failure to support the issues dear to the LGBT community. He also failed to address the massive poverty and imprisonment that afflict the African-American community; he refused to enact a powerful jobs program or to seriously fight to protect the environment. And, of course, he put on the backburner promises to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, which would have made it easier for workers to form unions at their workplaces.

Empty Promises
Millions of working-class and poor people are now forced to grapple with the fact that Obama’s promises to be a transformative figure were just that – electoral promises. In the real world, he is the chosen candidate of the Democratic Party. He got there, as every other candidate of the Democratic Party, by proving his loyalty to the big corporate sponsors who fund the party and its candidates. He received more corporate money than any other candidate in 2008.

So what does this tell us about the nature of the Democratic Party? In the Democratic Party, as in the Republican Party, corporate interests consistently trump the concerns of working people and the poor. How else can one explain the policies of the Obama administration on issue after issue? Obama is the current spokesperson for a big business political party.

With the Obama administration stepping back from any progressive promises it made, this alienated its supporters and weakened the powerful majority of Americans who were willing to help push through Obama’s promise to break with the agenda of the Republicans.

This left working-class people disarmed and confused. Into this vacuum stepped the right-wing populist spokespersons of the Republicans, distorting the issues, playing on people’s fears, hammering away at Obama and attempting to block his agenda by any means necessary.

Democratic Party Fails
Instead of exposing this motley crew and mobilizing the public, the Obama administration sat down to negotiate away one progressive element after another from its legislation. For what? With each concession, Republicans have called his policies “socialist” and “un-American” while demanding more. All these concessions resulted in not one Republican vote in the Senate for the health care bill.

We can now expect apologists for the Democratic Party to blame the American people for not being willing to support Obama’s progressive agenda, and to claim that Obama “was forced” to make concessions to the Republicans. The opposite is true. The majority of the public has been consistently to the left of both political parties in the last ten years. They have demanded troops be withdrawn first from Iraq and now Afghanistan, constantly supported a government-run universal health care system, called for fundamental change to protect the environment, and demanded controls be put on Wall Street corruption and hand outs to wealthy CEOs. These are policies neither of the two major parties will touch.

Time and again we have seen the same process. The Republicans get exposed; the Democrats promise change in order to get elected. Once safely in power, they shed promises and reveal their corporate core. Clinton also made promises - and then delivered NAFTA, the WTO, the abolition of welfare, the militarization of the border with Mexico, the bombing of Serbia and inhumane sanctions on the people of Iraq.

Call to Action
It’s time to step up and say “enough is enough.” We will only get the policies we need by building a powerful movement to demand them. This has always been the way progress has been won in the past. This is the way we forced big business to concede social security, the 40-hour workweek, and civil rights for women and African Americans – not by depending on the voluntary votes of Democrats.

This is the best we can get from Democrats. Their corporate character is there for all to see. In this health care debate their priority has been big business’s agenda, making the health care bill “fiscally neutral.” They refused to even discuss a single-payer system, which would have provided quality health care for all by eliminating the wasteful insurance companies. Compare this to Obama’s statement in a primary debate in 2007: “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program. I see no reason why the U.S. cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody.”

There is massive anger at the economic conditions – humiliation and pain from fighting just to keep our heads above water and our bodies from being forced out on to the streets.

That anger will demand change. We need to channel that anger to build a new political party and a socialist program that stands for working people, not corporate America. That is the only way we can achieve real change.

Sunday, 29 November 2009

Split in Russian CWI

Eagle-eyed left watchers will have picked up on the news that the Committee for a Workers' International section in Russia has split. However, while others on the left prefer to pass over splits in silence while hoping no one notices, the CWI has a tradition of publishing relevant documents and commenting on these sorts of setbacks. After all, every difference, every split within the far left is pregnant with lessons for all revolutionary socialists. Below I reproduce the CWI's statement on the split (original here). Normal blogging will resume shortly.

Russia/Georgia War, capitalist crisis and the workers’ movement…
Vital debates for socialists

Statement from the CWI in Russia
For over twenty years, the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI) in Russia and throughout the former Soviet Union has worked to build the forces of genuine socialism, with modest but significant successes - given the huge tasks ahead for socialists - which no other Trotskyist or serious left force has matched. This vital work has been conducted in extremely difficult material and political conditions, as a consequence of the collapse of Stalinism and the disastrous imposition of capitalism and authoritarian rule. The important steps forward we have made were only possible as a result of the CWI’s clear historical analysis of Stalinism and its demise in 1989-91, the maintenance of principled Marxist ideas and methods of work, and by developing clear analysis, perspectives, and socialist policies and programme.

One of the most pernicious legacies of Stalinism is the widespread ideological confusion in Russian society, coupled with an avalanche of capitalism propaganda and reactionary ideas. Inevitably, this ideological confusion finds expression in the developing workers’ movement and even in the ranks of the CWI, in a period when the working class has not yet decisively intervened into the political life of the country. For over 18 months, a sharply polarised debate has taken place inside the CWI in Russia. This culminated, last weekend, in the parting of the ways between the CWI and a grouping based around a three-person so called ‘Executive Committee’ of the Russian organization. This grouping has clearly shown, in words and deeds, that they do not even agree with some of the most basic elements of the CWI programme, methods of work or party democracy. This former opposition grouping has placed itself outside the ranks of the CWI.

The former opposition grouping rushed to publicized their completely disingenuous version of the outcome of last Saturday’s CWI meeting in Moscow, including on the ‘blogosphere’. Of course, they do not mention the real and fundamental political differences between us and try to spread all sorts of ridiculous falsehoods and personal attacks. In the process of building the CWI, we have previously parted ways with similar grouplets representing opportunist and reformist trends, a type of which unfortunately are found all too often in the developing workers’ movement in the former CIS.

We welcome the opportunity to put on public record the opposition groupings’ completely erroneous political positions on key issues, such as the Russia/Georgia War, the political programme required by workers’ today and on party democracy. We believe the workers’ movement in Russia and internationally can learn from this debate and it can help prepare socialists for the tasks ahead, as we enter a stormy period of capitalist crises, conflicts and workers’ struggles.

At a meeting organised by the International Secretariat (IS) of the CWI, held on 21 November 2009, in Moscow, an IS Statement was read out by visiting IS member, Peter Taaffe. This stated that it is now clear that the so-called Russian ‘Executive Committee’ and its supporters had broken from the CWI on crucial political and organisational principles. Peter went on to state that the Russian section of the CWI, with the support of the IS and the whole CWI, will continue to build and develop the forces of genuine Marxism and invited all those comrades who want to be part of this crucial task to get involved. Two thirds of those at the meeting expressed their support for the CWI.

Russia/Georgia War
This brings to an end a period of sharp disagreement within the Russian CWI. Months of growing differences over ideas, programme and methods amongst the leadership of the Russian CWI erupted throughout the entire Russian organisation during the Georgia-Russia War, in August 2008. Articles published on the organisation’s website and in its newspaper failed to put a clear socialist and class alternative to the bloody conflict that broke out between Russian imperialism and Georgia, backed by US imperialism. In fact, the opposition grouping capitulated to Russian chauvinism. Rather than demand the withdrawal of all troops from the region, for the unity of workers to resist the bloodshed and ethnic conflicts, for the overthrow of capitalism in the region and advocate the struggle to establish a free and democratic socialist federation of the Caucasus, these articles preferred to call for “friendship” between peoples and argued that only the Russian army could defend South Ossetia. They wrote: "In this situation the only force capable of defending the population of South Ossetia are the Russian troops". This incorrect position was repeated in articles on the Russian site, in written comments on the CWI members' forum and in discussions. To give just one more example, they claimed: “The Georgian aggression can only be resisted by Russian troops”.

These articles even went as far as praising the role of the reactionary ‘Narodni Opolchentsi’ militia in Abkazia and Ossetia at the beginning of the 1990s, “who succeeded in driving out the Georgian occupants”. In 2008, one of the opposition groupings’ leaders declared that it would be perfectly logical if today people rushed to join these opolchentsi to defend their “brother peoples” in South Ossetia. In the early 1990s, the Narodnii opolchentsi were involved in, and provided cover for, those conducting brutal ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Abkhazia. The ‘volunteers’ who were signed up in 2008 were, according to press reports, mainly from reactionary Cossack bands.

The call to join the ‘opolchentsi’, alone, would have served as grounds for immediate expulsion from the CWI. It was clear, however, that the majority of members of the Russian section were not fully aware of the significance of the arguments and therefore a discussion was opened up inside the Russian CWI on the question of the Russia/Georgia War. This is in line with the proud history of the CWI in Russia and internationally, in allowing full internal democratic debate and discussion. The opposition grouping was given ample opportunity to put forward its ideas to the Russian membership and an international audience. The IS was fully involved in this discussion, including corresponding with the leaders of the opposition grouping and organizing two visits by Niall Mulholland, on behalf of the IS, for meetings and discussions with all comrades in Russia. The IS strenuously opposed the shameful and undemocratic methods used by the opposition against those Russian comrades that supported the political position of the CWI, including the denial of faction rights.

After a period of intense debate in the Russian section, a Russian conference in June 2009 adopted a resolution rejecting the opposition grouping’s serious errors concerning the war and agreed a position on the war completely in line with the principled Marxist approach of the CWI. A new EC was elected by the conference that reflected the decisions of the conference and the position of the CWI.

It was therefore a great shock to many Russian comrades that during a meeting of the organisation’s Russian Committee (RC), in September 2009, the opposition grouping once again resorted to underhand, undemocratic methods to remove the EC elected by the June conference and to impose three supporters of the opposition as the new ‘EC’. This provoked a new period of intense debate inside the Russian organisation. The so-called ‘EC’ soon tried to steer the Russian organisation back to the opposition groupings’ completely wrong political positions. This can seen by a statement drafted by the ‘EC’ on 18/11/2009, which defended and praised the shameful position of the opposition grouping on the Russian-Georgian conflict, during which they capitulated before Russian nationalism. This was a clear rejection of the position adopted by the Russian Conference in 2009.

Consciousness of the working class
During the last year of debate, other political disagreements arose within the Russian organization, revealing how far the opposition grouping had moved from a Marxist position. The most important of these relates to an estimation of the mood and consciousness of the working class and the programme needed for the emerging workers’ movement. The current economic crisis has led to big attacks against the working and living conditions of the working class throughout the world. Although there have been some spectacular protests, and strikes and occupations in different countries, these have not yet taken on a generalized character. Despite the growth of a searing anti-banker and even anti-capitalist mood, this has not yet developed into a generalized socialist consciousness. But it is clear that the effects of the economic crisis will continue to be felt for years to come. There are five countries from the former USSR now in the list of “ten most likely” to default on their debts, with the Ukraine in first place, joined by Lithuania, Latvia, Russia and Kazakhstan. It is inevitable that protests and opposition will grow in the coming period. In some countries, including Russia, there could be dramatic social explosions. The CWI believes that in this situation it is necessary to present a programme that answers the day-to-day needs of the working class, around demands such as “no to job losses and wage cuts”, together with a strategy to fight for these demands. These demands have to be made in the wider context of the need for nationalization of the major parts of industry and the big banks, under workers’ control and management, for an alternative plan of production, and for a planned economy and a socialist government. There have already been examples of workers in Russia who have raised the demand for nationalization, seeing that as the only way to save their factory.

As the discussion inside the Russian CWI organization developed over the course of the last year, supporters of the opposition resisted demands such as our call ‘open the books’ and for nationalization, under workers’ control and management, just as they refused to call for a socialist federation of the Caucuses, during the 2008 war. As a result of the debate, several members were won over to the CWI’s position, and under this pressure the leaders of the opposition grouping grudgingly and disingenuously ‘accepted’ that such demands could be used as “propaganda”. However, their real position quickly resurfaced at the September 2009 meeting of the Russian Committee, when one of the groupings’ leaders spoke in favour of the “optimization of personnel” at the AvtoVaz car plant, i.e. he argued in support of job losses. Other supporters of the opposition began to support these proposals, only attempting to cover them up with left phraseology.

In a recent document produced by the so-called ‘EC’, it described the demand for a democratic planned economy and a workers’ government with a socialist programme as “stupid ultra-left sectarianism”. This is a complete rejection of the transitional approach outlined by Leon Trotsky. Trotsky described how it was necessary to present a programme of immediate demands to answer the direct needs of the working class, while, at the same time, presenting a series of transitional demands, whose aim were to build a bridge between the current consciousness of the working class and the need to for a socialist transformation of society, which entails campaigning to transform workers’ struggle into a fight for socialism.

What type of organisation do we need to build?
Naturally, the last few months’ internal debate also centred on the nature of the organization that we are trying to build. The structure of an organisation should reflect its political programme and tasks. We place a priority on the need to develop political clarity. If the structure does not correspond to the programme, then contradictions within the organisation grow. A Marxist organization operates on the basis of democratic centralism, which sees full and free discussion on perspectives, programme and tactics, to develop a politically unified organization, with a leadership and party structures that both develop and defend a Marxist position and which are capable of implementing tasks.

The rejection of democratic centralism by the former opposition grouping is perfectly in line with their political points of view and reformist trajectory. Their clear opposition to democratic centralism, as practiced by the CWI, was demonstrated by their article, “Democratic centralism, principles and political practice” in which they argued that “…Trotsky did not understand the principles of democratic centralism. Being a first rate personality, who won over the masses by his personal qualities, Trotsky in 1917 remained a lone genius. His unification with the Bolsheviks took place at the very moment when the principles of democratic centralism were already being replaced by administrative principles, which for Trotsky became characteristic of his style of leadership”.

It is clear that the former EC was, in words and deeds, following a non-Marxist, reformist political and organizational route.

The opposition grouping also attempted to hijack the media of the CWI in Russia, by publishing articles, for example, on the war, on ‘civil society’ and the national question that directly contradict the approach and programme of the CWI, while, at the same time, censoring material written by elected leaders of the CWI and refusing to publish the CWI section’s newspaper for months. This situation left the Moscow branch of the CWI with no option but to print its own newspaper, which is in line with the political position of the CWI and the Russian conference in June - a decision that was fully supported by the IS.

The former opposition grouping has chosen to put itself outside the CWI and to join the marsh of opportunism and reformism in Russia. For our part, we are confident to continue our task of building and developing the ideas of genuine socialism, of the CWI, in Russia. Even in the few days since our parting of the ways became public, we have been contacted by people in Russia, who had been watching the evolution of our organization with interest and who expressed their support for our principled political stand.

The world has changed over the past two years. There is now a more favorable situation for building support for socialist ideas. The workers’ movement in Russia may, for the moment, be relatively quiet, but as the masses of workers and youth move into action, which we believe is inevitable in the coming period, they will be looking for answers. We are confident that by developing the ideas and programme of the CWI in Russia, our overwhelmingly youthful and working class organization will grow significantly in the coming period.

Wednesday, 8 July 2009

Xinjiang Erupts

This piece by Vincent Kolo, one of the CWI's China correspondents takes a look at the background and events of the last several days in Xinjiang province.

A peaceful sit-down protest in the capital city Ürümqi by around 300 Uighurs, the Turkic-speaking minority that is the dominant population group in Xinjiang, was transformed by trigger-happy police into perhaps the most serious ethnic clashes seen in decades. Xinjiang, known as East Turkestan to many Uighurs, has seen ethnic tensions rise as a result of Chinese state repression that went into overdrive after “9/11” and the global “war on terror”, discrimination of non-Chinese speakers, and a yawning wealth gap that puts the indigenous population at the bottom.

The anger boiled over on Sunday 5 July as hundreds of riot police waded into what had been a peaceful protest by Uighurs, mostly youth. Xinhua News Agency report that around 1,000 Uighurs rioted, overturning police barriers, attacking bystanders and smashing vehicles. Witnesses quoted in Western media said that up to 3,000 rioters faced around 1,000 police and paramilitary police. Chinese media gave the figure of at least 140 people killed and 816 injured, warning that the death toll could rise. These reports state that 261 motor vehicles and around 200 shops were attacked or burned.

“The casualty toll, if confirmed, would make this the deadliest outbreak of violence in China in many years,” writes the New York Times. Already, this represents the most serious outbreak of violence in Xinjiang since 1997 and threatens to eclipse the horrific death toll in Tibetan areas last year. A total clampdown is now in force in Ürümqi with martial law declared and telephone and internet services cut. Dozens of casualties, from both Han and Uighur communities, have been taken to city hospitals.

China Central Television (CCTV) showed footage of Uighur protesters attacking and kicking people on the ground. Other people sat dazed with blood pouring down their faces. As with the rioting in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, in March 2008, such images will inflame anti-Uighur sentiment among sections of the Han Chinese who make up 92 percent of China’s population. Indeed, this is the intention of China’s ruling elite, who undoubtedly want to seize upon events in Ürümqi to create a welcome popular diversion from the deepening economic crisis and growing discontent that threatens to spoil the ruling ‘communist’ party’s celebration of 60 years in power this October. Typically, the central thrust of official propaganda is that the violence in Xinjiang was fomented from outside by exile groups - the message being that all Chinese should unite behind “their” government to protest against “foreign interference”.

No one should be fooled by this ‘spin’ on the events in Xinjiang. Reports at this stage are fragmentary, but the peaceful character of the initial protest in Ürümqi seems clear. Associated Press report that: “Accounts differed over what happened next in Xinjiang’s capital of Ürümqi, but the violence seemed to have started when a crowd of protesters – who started out peaceful – refused to disperse.” An American eyewitness was quoted by this agency saying that police pushed the protesters back with tear gas, fire hoses and batons, and protesters replied by knocking over police barriers and smashing bus windows. “Every time the police showed some force, the people would jump the barriers and get back on the street. It was like a cat-and-mouse sort of game,” he told AP.

Racist clash at Guangdong factory
The protest was held to demand answers from officialdom over an incident in Guangdong, southern China, on 26 June. A horrendous communal (ethnic) clash between Han Chinese and Uighur migrant workers at a toy factory in the city of Shaoguan resulted in two Uighurs being killed (although there are reports the number could be higher) and 118 injured from both ethnic groups. The incident was started by a Han Chinese worker who had lost his job at Early Light, a private company, that until recently employed over 50,000 workers in southern China. Rather than blaming the boss – Hong Kong’s ‘toy billionaire’ Francis Choi – this worker vented his anger on the 600 Uighur workers brought to the province as cheap labour (even cheaper than Han). This worker, who has since been arrested, circulated a false story on the internet claiming six Uighur men had raped two Han women at the factory. Gangs of Han workers attacked the Uighur dormitories with knives and metal bars and the Uighurs defended themselves with the same means – a bloodbath ensued.

This incident is highly symptomatic of processes in China, as tensions reach breaking point over unemployment (at a post-1949 record), pay cuts (200m migrants have been pitched into a new ‘race to the bottom’ competing for fewer and fewer factory jobs) and official corruption that penetrates almost every sphere of human activity. With all protest channels closed down and workers’ self-organisation outlawed, anger against the state is rising but so too is racism, crime, drug abuse, suicide, and other expressions of hopelessness. As a footnote on the Shaoguan incident, Choi, the billionaire toymaker, is officially worth US$1 billion and boasts a mansion with over 30 sports cars in its car park. The minimum wage set by Shaoguan’s government, which is the norm for most migrant workers, is just 500 yuan a month (approximately US$73). Such are the extremes of the ‘two Chinas’ today: A migrant worker would have to work for 261 years, not spending one fen (cent) of his wage, in order to buy one of Mr Choi’s Ferraris; yet such abysmally low wages are being fought over sometimes with tragic and bloody consequences.

The outbreak of street fighting in Ürümqi represents a ‘feedback loop’ from the clashes in Guangdong. Reports have circulated that police also took part in attacking the Uighur workers in Shaoguan, that several Uighurs despite being victims were among those arrested, and there are rumours that the mobile phones of Uighurs in Shaoguan had been confiscated to prevent them speaking out. Angered by these reports, and suspicious of another official cover up, a crowd of Uighurs went to the streets of Ürümqi to demand answers and protest against what is obvious discriminatory treatment.

State racism
The Shaoguan incident, widely reported on the internet and even in official media, has undoubtedly aroused deep indignation among Uighurs who have seen millions of Han Chinese move into Xinjiang, dominating the growing private sector (the population of Ürümqi, 2.3m, is now 70% Han Chinese), while Uighurs who move to other parts of China face systemic discrimination and racism, are harassed by police and other authorities, and ostracised as ‘untrustworthy’ and ‘prone to violence’ by some layers of the Han Chinese population. Racist ideas in any society can be cultivated by rulers to further their own policy interests. So it was with the rise of antisemitism in Europe, and “white supremacist” ideology against Afro-Americans in the U.S. And so it has been for decades in China with official distrust of the Uighur minority and their stubborn adherence to their own language, culture and religion, which in the bureaucratic-mandarin mindset poses a threat to “national interests”.

These prejudices are much in evidence now in the official version of the Ürümqi events. The claim that exiled Uighur spokeswoman Rebiya Kadeer, based in the U.S., is behind the riot cannot be taken seriously. Xinjiang’s Governor Nuer Baikeli has stated that, “After the [Shaoguan] incident, the three forces [i.e. separatism, militant action, and religious extremism] abroad strived to beat this up and seized it as an opportunity to attack us, inciting street protests.”

This claim is no more plausible than the claims the Dalai Lama orchestrated the rioting in Tibet last year, at a time when he was pleading to be allowed to attend the Beijing Olympics, the target of an attempted boycott campaign by his own supporters. Similarly when Han Chinese and other groups of workers stage strikes and street protests, the regime routinely points to the “black hands” of radical intellectuals, human rights activists, leftists, or falun gong practitioners, who they allege must be behind such actions - as if workers are too stupid to struggle on their own account!

In Xinjiang, while support for independence runs deep among Uighurs and other minorities, this is not yet a universal trend, and in this particular case it does not seem to have been the motor force of the protests. Eyewitnesses report that some Uighur protesters carried the Chinese flag. This is quite logical given that the aim of their action was to secure basic rights and assurances for Uighurs working elsewhere in China, but also in the hope the flag would offer some protection against repression and precisely the sort of propaganda against “separatism” that is now raining down. Having spread from Guangdong to Xinjiang, there is now a very real danger of racist revenge attacks on Uighurs in other parts of China, aggravated by chauvinistic government propaganda to justify the crackdown.

Police fired shots
From what are still sketchy eyewitness accounts it seems the security forces, after issuing several warnings to clear the area, attacked the demonstrators with gas and reportedly also cattle-prods, thus transforming a peaceful if angry protest into the worst violence in more than a decade. Even without a full picture of events (which may never emerge) this scenario seems very plausible. Several witnesses reported hearing gunfire in the evening of 5 July, by which time the riot was in full swing. Why would a several hour-long sit-down protest suddenly and without provocation go on a rampage, especially in a city where Uighurs are the minority, and where police numbers are overwhelming? As The Times (UK) points out: “Ürümqi has for years been one of the most well-controlled cities in Xinjiang because of the high and rapidly growing population of Han and the large presence of security forces.”

Are the security forces capable of turning one of the “most well-controlled cities” into a bloodbath? To answer this question we only need to look at their record elsewhere in China, where heavy-handed policing is a well-known major cause of unrest and rioting. We can point to the Weng’an incident (Guizhou province) one year ago as an example, and the Shishou incident (Hubei province) last month as another. There are too many other examples to list here.

The ruling party’s influential Outlook News Weekly commented as recently as its 15 June issue: “Party officials must pay close attention to mass incidents without making mountains out of molehills and seeing them as colossal ‘political incidents.’ Treating these incidents as anti-government actions and subsequently suppressing them with strong force would be the precise method of exacerbating problems, and would have the direct result of aggravating the opposition between officials and civilians.”

This is not the first time central government organs have urged a sensitive approach, fearing that local protests can easily spin out of control because as the same article explains, “social contradictions have already formed certain foundations of society and the masses, creating a powder keg ready to explode at the first hint of a flame...” Yet despite these wiser counsels, so contradictory and unstable is the octopus of the Chinese state that while the head may urge caution, its tentacles proceed to do the exact opposite, clinging to what they understand best: brute force. This seems to have been the trigger for the latest eruption in Xinjiang.

Socialism and working class unity
A riot by its very nature is a blind and destructive action, an act of desperation. It is not a method for achieving conscious political demands; it does not follow a democratically agreed structure (which is outlawed and therefore very difficult in China), and in conditions like those in Xinjiang this can easily boil over into attacks on innocent civilians targeted for their ethnicity. Socialists in no way support or advocate rioting as a means of political struggle, but neither do we join the chorus – led by the Chinese dictatorship – that puts the blame upon the Uighur protesters for this turn of events. The responsibility for what happened lies with the Beijing regime and its security forces, whose zero tolerance towards public protests and any form of independent action and thought is creating social explosions all over China. This is exactly as socialists warned. One year ago, we warned on chinaworker.info: “Beneath this surface ‘calm’, however, Xinjiang remains a time bomb...” [The National Question in Xinjiang, chinaworker.info, 15 January 2008]

Socialists are completely opposed to the Chinese regime’s policies in Xinjiang and the repression now underway in Ürümqi. The Chinese state acts in Xinjiang in the same way it acts over incidents of unrest elsewhere: to defend the interests of the moneyed elite and the untrammeled rule of the current dictatorship. An independent non-government enquiry should be established to look into the events of 5 July and 26 June, including representatives of the Uighur community chosen by themselves. Working class unity over religious and ethnic lines represents the only way out of this crisis. Full democratic rights, including an end to linguistic and ethnic discrimination at school and work, and the right of self-determination for national minorities, are an indispensable part of this struggle. Building a new socialist labour movement, based upon the bedrock of independent trade unions that organise all workers regardless of nationality, sex, religious beliefs, and hukou status, is the urgent task of our time.

Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Iran: A Socialist View

Preliminary report from the Committee for a Workers' International website.

Mass protests and demonstrations have erupted in Iran in opposition to the apparent rigging of the Presidential elections by the Mahmoud Ahmedinejad regime. According to reports, the largest anti-government demonstration of over one million people took place in the capital Tehran. Reports coming out of Iran claim that over a dozen have been killed in clashes with the police and hated Basij militia. With heavy press censorship, much of the movement has been co-ordinated through the use of Twitter – Iran has the highest number of internet bloggers per head of population. Although the picture is unclear at the time of writing, reports of mass protest in other cities such as Shiraz are also emerging. Tehran University has been surrounded by armed police and brutal repression has been reported of students in their dormitories. Other reports speak of gunfire being heard throughout the capital during the night following the election. Ahmedinejad, who announced victory within a few hours of the polls, has apparently simply left the country and is in Russia attending diplomatic meetings.

These mass demonstrations against the regime in Tehran have taken place despite the threat by the regime to authorise the use of live ammunition against the protestors. Although the situation still remains unclear it appears that big sections of the urban population have lost their fear of the regime and are prepared to take to the streets to protest against it. This represents a crucial turning in the struggle against any dictatorship. BBC video footage of the protests shows protestors refusing to disperse when faced with attacks by the military police. To the forefront of these protests have been the students but clearly with the active support of older sections of the population – especially white-collar workers. There are divisions within the regime about how to deal with this mass movement. This, combined with the mass mobilisation of the middle class and students, clearly indicates that important elements of a pre-revolutionary crisis are developing. At this stage however, the working class has not yet decisively joined the struggle and there is confusion in the political consciousness of those involved reflected in some of the religious slogans which are also being chanted such as “God is great”. However, it should be remembered that the first demonstrations of the Russian revolution in 1905 were led by a priest, Father Gapon.

How this movement will now develop is not yet clear but it has already forced the regime into an abrupt about turn. The Guardian Council, in the face of this mass opposition, has been compelled to overturn its previous decision and allow a recount of contested votes. This is a clear attempt to calm the situation as the regime fears that the protests will erupt further and develop into an uprising against the regime itself.

Fuelled by rising mass unemployment and a yearning for democratic rights, especially amongst the youth – 60% of the Iranian population is under the age of thirty. The urban youth in particular are in revolt against the theocratic repression which they have suffered. An important feature of this movement have been the mobilisations of young women, demanding “equality”. This was reflected in the enormous popularity of Zahra Rahnavard, wife of the main opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, during the campaign. It is unprecedented in Iranian elections for women to play such a leading role. At the same time, while the mass opposition in the cities has rallied to Mousavi, he is no socialist or defender of the working class and the poor. A former Prime Minister, his pro-capitalist programme is limited to reform of the current theocratic state. However, the attempt to rig the election by Ahmedinejad has possibly opened the flood gates to a mass movement that could topple his regime and open a new era in Iran. At the same time there is an apparent division between the rural poor and some sections of the most down trodden and oppressed in some of the cities and urban centres who have tended to support Ahmedinejad because of his right-wing reactionary populist stance against corruption and the rich liberal elite and “anti-western imperialist” stance.

Iran has been transformed in recent years with nearly 70% of the population estimated to be living in the urban areas with a highly educated layer of young people.

The decisive question in the short term is if the working class now moves into action following reports of trade unions discussing calling a general strike which is the main fear of the regime. At the time of writing the opposition has called off a mass protest scheduled to take place in Tehran to avoid clashes with pro-government forces. This illustrates the fear reformist pro-capitalists like Mousavi have of unleashing mass mobilisations which can easily get out of their control and move in a more radical revolutionary direction. It is possible that Mousavi may try and reach a compromise with the existing regime to avoid bringing the masses onto the streets. Alternatively, the regime may be forced to accept Ahmedinejad’s defeat in order to try to maintain control of the situation. Attempts may also be made to wind down the protests for fear of their consequences. Mousavi has already called on protests planned for tomorrow to be cancelled.

However, the genie is now out of the bottle and a decisive new phase of the struggle has been opened in Iran. The struggle for genuine democratic rights, the right to strike, to hold free elections, form free trade unions, political parties and equality for women needs to be fought for by all workers, youth and socialists. The emergence of the working class into this movement can give it the necessary cohesion and power to defeat the regime. The formation of democratically elected committees of struggle from the workplaces and universities linking with the middle class and urban poor can form the basis of a united struggle. The calling of a general strike and forming a defence militia along with a class appeal to the rank and file of the army are steps which are necessary to take the movement forward to overthrow the regime. Such committees could also convene elections to a revolutionary constituent assembly to decide the future of Iran. The guarantee of democratic rights and a solution to the mass poverty and unemployment can only then be assured with the formation of a workers’ and peasants government on a revolutionary socialist programme to transform society in the interests of all working people.

Wednesday, 15 April 2009

The Politics of the Italian Earthquake

While there has been an outpouring of media coverage in this country about last week's earthquake in central Italy, comparatively little has been written on the disaster's political fall out. Silvio Berlusconi was quick to declare a state of emergency but in recent days has reverted to clownish type, declaring survivors should treat their emergency accomodation as if it were a "camping trip", and joking with a doctor that he "wouldn't mind being resuscitated" by her. But this earthquake has done more than highlight Berlusconi's insensitivity to the suffering of others, it has exposed Italian capitalism's inability to properly prepare for disaster. Christine Thomas of the CWI's Italian section, Lotta has translated this piece from Marco Verrugio, a comrade with the Controcorrente platform of Rifondazione Comunista:

The tsunami which razed the coast to the ground like a bulldozer offered building contractors an opportunity they could never have dreamed of, and they moved quickly to grasp it. (Seth Mydans, Times Southeast Asia correspondent)

We have finally managed to clean up public housing in New Orleans. We didn't know how to do it but God did it for us. (Jim Baker, Republican congressman)

These quotes from Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine show clearly what the capitalists think of natural disasters. While all of the politicians in Italy are talking about 'national unity' and avoiding controversy (including Paolo Ferrero, general secretary of Rifondazione Comunista), it would be useful to reflect on what has happened in order to avoid the Abruzzo tragedy becoming once again a tragedy in two acts: the earthquake and the reconstruction.

Today the mood of people hit by the earthquake is despondent, in some cases distrustful of institutions (there are small towns which were only reached three days after the earthquake) and, above all, worried about their future because in Italy there are earthquake victims who are still living in prefabricated wooden houses 20 years on. But this mood could soon turn to one of anger.

Could it Have Been Foreseen?
Immediately after the tragedy a controversy broke out in the press about whether the earthquake could have been predicted. For months, Abruzzo had experienced a series of tremors which led to the mayor of L’Aquila ordering all schools to be closed in the week before that fateful day. But in particular, there was discussion about the fact that a week previously, Giampaolo Giuliani, a technician and researcher at the Laboratori dell’Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare at Gran Sasso, had predicted the catastrophe. He had subsequently been accused of being alarmist and was called “an imbecile who enjoyed spreading false news” by Bertolaso, the head of Civil Protection.

The international scientific community intervened in support of Bertolaso, testifying that it is not possible to accurately predict earthquakes. While I do not feel qualified enough to get into a controversial scientific discussion of this kind, I would like to reflect politically on what a capitalist government in a country like Italy would do if prediction were possible.

L’Aquila has a population of 73,000. Obviously it would not be possible in every case to determine a priori how far the earthquake would spread, so the government would have to clear a much wider area, evacuating hundreds of thousands of people. If, for example, the cost per head of doing so was a minimum of €50 a day, to evacuate 300,000 people, it would mean spending around €15 million a day, probably for several days, because it would be difficult to predict exactly when the earthquake would begin. In addition it would be necessary to have a structure in place capable of carrying out an operation of this size 365 days a year, which would obviously be quite costly.

It would mean increasing public spending instead of cutting it as all governments have done in the last 20 years. We only have to consider the fact that the provision of hospital beds is based on ‘average occupancy’ so as to avoid empty beds, which means that with an ‘extraordinary’ event such as a ‘flu epidemic, heat wave or natural disaster the hospitals are bursting at the seams. (Recently, at the accident and emergency department of the San Martino hospital in Genoa, some patients had to wait to be seen stretched out on the floor of the hospital and similar incidents happen regularly). What is more, the government has recently drastically cut funds for safety, including for earthquakes.

All of that would be necessary without of course being sure that the earthquake tremors would be strong enough to 'justify' such expenditure, and risk being accused of alarmism and wasting public resources. On the other hand, intervening after the event reduces expenditure because only the damage is covered. Or rather, only part of the damage, because in reality finances compensate only some of the damage suffered by ordinary people, the rest goes to the companies which will be involved in the business of reconstruction. In this way, earthquakes and any natural disasters become yet another opportunity to redistribute wealth from below to above. Workers and ordinary people lose out while the banks and building companies in particular win.

So, can earthquakes be predicted? Or rather, if the government had had wind of the danger, would it have had the will or the capability of intervening to prevent it? In reality, from the capitalist point of view, it is not worth having a huge safety apparatus and applying all the safety norms to protect the population. It is more economical and, in some respects, more profitable to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. The same cynicism which oozes from the quotations cited earlier on can be applied to Abruzzo as much as to South East Asia and New Orleans.

The Building Business
In a period in which the building sector is collapsing, an earthquake is one of those classic 'strokes of luck' which can 'relaunch the economy'. In Abruzzo some buildings collapsed while others just a few metres away remained intact. One building company had built 60 buildings in L’Aquila, none of which collapsed. Media interest concentrated on the San Salvatore hospital, a building which was completed in the year 2000 and was almost destroyed in the earthquake. Work on the hospital began in the ‘70s and, over the years, the cost of building it increased tenfold. Impregilo, a company owned by Benetton-Gavio-Ligresti, which is already involved in numerous scandals and had won the tender to build the bridge over the Messina Straits, worked on the hospital from 1991 to 2000. But it maintains that it merely “made it functional” and does not know who was responsible for the hospital’s walls.

Reconnaissance carried out at the ‘crime scene’ (because what happened was a crime) show that many buildings were not only built without complying to anti-earthquake norms, but without respecting the most elementary building rules - using out of date materials, building on unsuitable land and skimping on strengthening the cement. In particular, cement companies, which are usually subcontracted, use out of date material to mix the cement. Using sea sand instead of quarry sand can mean a doubling of profit margins from 30% to 50-60%. But because sea sand is full of salt, after a few years the metal of the reinforced concrete is corroded and becomes useless. If the percentage of sand is increased, compared to the cement and gravel, the costs decline further. Journalists wrote about blocks of concrete amongst the debris which had crumbled like sand. These kinds of irregularities have also been found in the new high-speed train lines in Italy, in some parts of the motorway system in the Veneto region and in the Genoa underground system.

It is well known that in Central and Southern Italy, and now also in many parts of the North, the cement market is controlled by the mafia-like ‘Camorra’. The subcontracting system allows companies at the top of the chain to entrust the dirty work to small companies and then wash their hands of them. It is also known that this system flourishes because of the links between the Mafia and politicians. In High Speed Corruption, ex-judge and ex-president of the anti-Mafia Parliamentary Commission, Ferdinando Imposimato, reveals how, in the 1990s, Romano Prodi, who was then president of the state company IRI, personally guaranteed work for the high-speed rail link in Campania to companies which had a whiff of the Mafia. Some had even been found guilty by the courts. Prodi was brought to trial and acquitted, but the magistrate who had conducted the enquiry was threatened. After the acquittal he transferred to another office before he could contest and appeal against the charge.

Now, having profited by building cardboard houses, these same companies (or other companies controlled by the same people) can see future rich pickings in the rebuilding process in Abruzzo.

As is always the case when there is a big cake to be divided, the employers call for national unity. The political parties have responded docilely and in unison. This includes the left which once again does not understand one of the golden rules of good politics: when you've got nothing intelligent to say it's better to stay quiet! Rifondazione Comunista has organised groups ready to go to Abruzzo to help, even though comrades on the ground say that this is not the main requirement. But it leaves the press to denounce those politically responsible for the massacre. The Pdci (Party of Italian Communists) is silent. Berlusconi on the other hand has said that “there was no malice” and the Italian president, after visiting L’Aquila, decreed that everyone is guilty - those who sold cardboard houses and those who bought them. In other words, everyone is guilty and everyone is innocent. He is sure to be well received at the next reception organised by the association of builders!

A Social and Political Response to the Tragedy
People are anxious about the future. Everyone knows that reconstruction in Italy takes forever. Up until a few years ago in Belice, which was hit by an earthquake in 1968, 400 people were still living in shacks and reconstruction was not complete. The same is true for Irpinia, (hit in 1980), and for Umbria (1997). In Abruzzo, the government recently agreed to requests from builders to further delay any obligation to adopt anti-earthquake measures until 30th June 2010. It has waived payment of electricity and gas bills in the stricken area by way of compensation…but only for two months.

Some community organisations have already started to promote collective discussion and organisation. They have asked Italians to show solidarity with the earthquake victims not by going to Abruzzo but, for the moment, by organising initiatives and the collection of funds throughout Italy and depositing the money in local accounts until the affected community has set up its own representative organisations and projects. At the same time they have underlined the necessity of local control over reconstruction, explicitly banning companies which have previously disregarded building norms.

A left party should reflect on these initiatives, develop them and try to build a political campaign to denounce those responsible for the disaster and to promote a collective response to the needs of those who risk paying the highest price of the catastrophe - workers and small employers in the commercial and craft sector. All expenses should be frozen (bills, mortgages, taxes, charges) and everyone who has lost their house or their job should be guaranteed an income until normality is restored. Reconstruction should be immediately got underway under the control of organisations democratically elected by those who have been hit by the earthquake in order to avoid profiteering.

All building projects should be checked by law before building commences and anyone wanting to start a building company should have to meet specific requirements. At the same time, a more general proposal is needed aimed at finding those responsible for the disaster and avoiding another Abruzzo happening in the future. Large building companies like Impregilo should be nationalised with the aim of creating a large public building company with democratic control over what is built and how it is built.

Maintenance companies which have been privatised should be brought back into local authority control and building companies which have disregarded norms should be forced to pay compensation and be brought into a new public building system. Sub-contracting, which allows infiltration into the public system by small Mafia-controlled companies, should be ended. Illegal working, which in the building sector accounts for up to 40% of work, should be abolished. Workers who are deprived of basic rights are not in a position to denounce irregularities committed by the company they are working for.

A special plan should be launched to check and maintain the country’s buildings, beginning with those in the public sector. In L’Aquila it was not just the hospital and the student halls of residence which collapsed but also the court, the prefecture (from which the civil protection was supposed to have coordinated its assistance), the regional council building and the Land Registry office (where all the important data necessary for monitoring the situation and for reconstruction was housed). In addition it is estimated that around 800 schools in Italy do not meet safety requirements, as was tragically demonstrated a few months ago when the roof of a high school collapsed in a town near Turin killing one pupil.

Looking Back at the Regional Elections
Until a few months ago the Italian Left governed in the Abruzzo region in alliance with the Democratic Party (DP) – known as the ‘cement’ party (or maybe it should now be the ‘sand’ party). Even after the arrest of Ottaviano Del Turco, regional president and DP spokesman, for a scandal linked to the health service, they continued participating in the alliance, covering this decision with the fig leaf of a ‘moral campaign’. On the day of the regional elections themselves the regional secretary of the PD was arrested, accused of corruption. The centre-right won the election in Abruzzo hands down. (Rifondazione Comunista alone lost 40% of its votes compared to the previous regional elections).

If the Left fails to represent the interests of workers and ordinary people when they come into conflict with the interests of the political and business lobbies, it will face self-destruction. In the regional elections in Abruzzo, 50% did not bother to vote. There did not seem to be a ‘clean’ political force. If voting were to take place today perhaps the abstention rate would be as high as 70-80%.

These are the ‘brilliant’ results of a ‘modern’ and ‘reasonable’ Left, without the ‘extremism’ which Controcorrente was accused of when we alone, at a local and national level, were saying that the Left should not ally itself with spokespeople of the ‘committee of builders ’ and a health service based on bribes and when we described the electoral agreement as an “unrealistic attempt at reviving a centre-left buried under its own rubble” (Ali Ghaderi quoted in Il Messagero, 1 November 2008). It remains to be seen whether, in the next few months, those who made that choice will examine their consciences, including at a national level, or whether once again we will be embroiled in another round of electoral alliances in the June local elections with the ‘party of crooks’, only realising the consequences of this when it is too late.

Tuesday, 10 February 2009

The Australian Bushfires

The dramatic and shocking scenes of the Australian bushfires could not fail to have moved anyone watching them on the news. This piece from Anthony Main of the CWI's Australian section, the Socialist Party looks at the politics behind the disaster.

The death toll from Victoria's bushfires, in south eastern Australia, currently stands at 170 and could rise – this is Australia’s worst natural disaster, much worse than the Ash Wednesday fires in 1983 when 47 people died.

The dead include retired Channel 9 newsreader Brian Naylor and his wife. Dozens more people are suffering from serious burns and smoke inhalation. On top of the tragic deaths and injuries, more than 750 homes have been destroyed and at least 330,000 hectares of land has been burnt. Residents have compared the scenes to the aftermath of a nuclear war.

The bushfire disaster has shown some of the best examples of human solidarity coupled with some of the worst examples of the failure of a profit driven system. Heroic stories of ordinary people saving the lives of strangers are just starting to emerge. One off duty nurse has told of having to administer first aid to burns victims in a makeshift shelter because help failed to arrive.

Temperatures across eastern Australia soared into the high 40’s (degrees celsius) over the weekend. The heat was unbearable in the urban centres but it was like hell on earth in rural areas where one resident described it as “raining flames”. At one stage more than 400 fires were blazing in every part of Victoria and almost 60 fires were also burning across New South Wales.

The drought of recent years, and higher temperatures due to climate change, has led to a marked increase in the amount of bush fires. Victoria has recorded its lowest rainfall levels on record which has meant that bush undergrowth is bone dry. While there is no doubt that the drought has contributed to the bushfires, it is also true that much of the devastation could have been prevented.

The State and Federal governments have attempted to lay the blame for the fires on arsonists. While a few of the fires may well have been started by ‘fire bugs’ the vast majority were a result of the extreme conditions. The question is did the State and Federal governments do everything in their power to mitigate the worst effects of the fires?

For years rural communities like those in Gippsland, Kinglake and Bendigo have been hit hard by cuts to services. It has not just been cuts to health, education and transport but fire fighting and emergency services budgets have also been slashed. There is a severe shortage of doctors, nurses and emergency services staff in rural areas and this cost people their lives in a time of crisis.

At a national level government spending on bushfire research is less than $2 million a year. In Victoria the Labor State government only allocates a measly $252 million a year for rural fire prevention. For a country covered with bush and prone to extreme weather this is totally inadequate.

Cuts and Lack of Investment
On top of the cuts and lack of investment in prevention, rural fire fighting relies almost entirely on unpaid volunteers. The Victorian Country Fire Authority (CFA) website states that the “CFA is one of the world’s largest volunteer-based emergency services. There are around 58,000 volunteer members supported by over 400 career fire fighters and officers and more than 700 career support and administrative staff.”

While the work of these volunteers is nothing short of amazing, the idea that less than 2% of those who fight fires in Victoria are full time professionals is a sick joke. There needs to be a massive expansion of full time professional fire fighting staff. These skilled workers need to be paid decent wages to reflect the important work that they do. Those who do the job on a part time or casual basis should also be paid proper wages.

Many of the lives, homes and natural environment that have been lost could have been saved if proper resources were made available. Blaming arsonists is just a diversionary tactic by the government. The main reason that money is not made available is because, at the moment, decisions are being made on the basis of dollars and not sense. A system based on the short term, and geared to profit, is incapable of mitigating the worst effects of bush fires. In fact capitalism has made this disaster far worse than it needed to be.

That is why if we really want to reduce the risk of death and destruction from natural disaster, it is urgent we fight to put an end to the profit driven system of capitalism. We need a system based on human solidarity, co-operation and democracy, the types of qualities that working people have instinctively shown during this disaster.

Monday, 26 January 2009

Iceland Heats Up

This report comes from Per-Åke Westerlund of Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna, the Swedish section of the CWI (at present the CWI does not have an Icelandic affiliate). The BBC and Channel Four reporting of what is happening is nothing short of shameful. You'd be forgiven for thinking that the ruling Independence Party/Social Democrat coalition resigned simply because they felt guilt over their reckless economic policies. In fact, what Per-Åke reports on is a crisis not seen in Western Europe since the late 1960s. With the media chattering this last weekend about 'Reykjavik-on-Thames', could it happen here?

Iceland: Devastated by Global Crisis
A few days of demonstrations, including protesters throwing eggs being met by riot police with teargas, have been enough to force a new election in Iceland. The mass protests in what is, to date, the worst hit country in the global economic crisis, have been referred to as a revolution – a ’fleece’, ’facebook’, or ’saucepan’ revolution. Among those who have come onto the streets, there are discussions about the need for a new political force.

On Monday 26 January, the government handed in its resignation. This was clearly an attempt to defuse the protest movement. So was the proposal from resigning PM Geir Haarde of a "national unity government".

It is only three months ago, in early October, that Iceland went from being the fifth richest country in the world – based on GDP per capita – to experiencing the worst crisis of all countries, so far. The super-indebted Icelandic banks were nationalised in an attempt to limit the crisis. Today, 70 per cent of all companies and 40 per cent of households are technically bankrupt. GDP is expected to drop 10 per cent this year. Unemployment increased from six to nine per cent in December alone, inflation is close to 20 per cent, while interest rates are 18 per cent. The currency, the Icelandic krona, is hardly exchangeable.

Demonstrations of anger bring down government
There is a widespread hatred against the bankers who orchestrated the crisis and their friends, the politicians. While the top bankers seem to have left the country, however, the politicians remained in power. This changed last week.

From Tuesday, 20 January, when parliament restarted after the holidays, daily protests were organised. The main slogan was "incompetent government" and the demand was for new elections. Most people brought cooking pans and other improvised objects to drum on.

Last Wednesday, the protest took place outside a meeting held by the Social Democratic Alliance, a junior partner in the coalition government, demanding that the SDA resign. Later the same night, protesters surrounded the limousine of Prime Minister Geir Haarde, knocking on the car roof and throwing eggs and drink cans. Riot police were used to defend Haarde, who is also leader of the Independence Party. At that stage, he still ruled out any elections before those scheduled for two years’ time in 2011.

In protests late at night on Thursday, stones were thrown at the police, with two policemen injured. The police used teargas and pepper spray and 20 people were arrested in the first major attack on a demonstration since 1949, when Icelanders demonstrated against NATO membership. It has been reported that the government of Iceland, which has only a handful of soldiers, was considering calling in Norwegian forces.

The Icelandic website, Ice News, quoted one of the protesters:

"No one has resigned and no one has been fired. They are hard at work at getting what little is left here back into the hands of those who crashed our economy to begin with.

”The people here are afraid and at the mercy of ruthless criminals that have feathered their nests not only in our government, but also in the businesses and banks. These banks were given to them through a fake privatisation in 2005, they have literally done nothing but spend money since; now it´s all gone, and you want to give them more?".

The protester referred to the demand of the demonstrators that money promised from the IMF and governments should not be paid out to the present government. In total, ten billion US dollars has been promised in "rescue packages". The IMF deal includes severe demands for budget cuts and high interest rates, both measures that will deepen the crisis.

New elections
On Friday, Prime Minister Haarde suddenly declared new elections for 9 May. At the same press conference, he announced his resignation as leader of the Independence Party, revealing that he has cancer. Already, the leader of the Social Democratic Party, Foreign Minister Ingibjorg Solrun Gisladottir, is being treated for cancer. The following day, Minister of Commerce, Bjorgvin Sigurdsson, resigned at the same time as he sacked the boss of the state authority responsible for financial supervision.

These announcements, however, did not break the momentum of the protests. On Saturday, over 6,000 people gathered, demanding the government resign immediately.

"We will not allow more crap. The government must go. We've had enough of them controlling everything, just taking care of themselves and not caring at all for the people", said one of the speakers, Jakobina Olafsdóttir, to great cheers from the crowd. The Swedish daily, Dagens Nyheter, continued its report: "She and others in Iceland want to see a new society, without the cronyism and corruption they believe is prevalent and without the for so long so mighty Independence Party."

The same article continues: "Different protest movements have mushroomed. With the help of Facebook". [Ninety six per cent of 20-29 year-olds are on Facebook.] "They quickly gather thousands of supporters and can easily call meetings. Now, there are discussions between the different movements to form a common manifesto for a new society."

In opinion polls the opposition Left-Green Movement has doubled since the last election two years ago, to 32.6 per cent. The two governing parties have lost a combined 22 per cent. The Independence Party’s ratings have fallen to 22.1 per cent and the Social Democratic Alliance to 19.2 per cent. A previous partner of the Independence Party, the Progressive Party, has also increased in opposition, from 11.7 to 16.8 per cent.

This is a clear indication that people are looking for a more radical alternative. The Left-Greens are seen as the most anti-capitalist party, previously profiling themselves mostly on environmental issues. For example, the party advocates nationalisation of all natural resources. The Left-Greens also stand for re-negotiations on the IMF deal and for Iceland to leave NATO. Opinion in favour of joining the European Union, which surged when the currency collapsed last year, has already started to dwindle. Today, 38 per cent want to join, compared to over 50 per cent in October. Many have understood that foreign aid will not come without strings.

Revolution?
The mass demonstrations in Iceland, like recent protests in other European countries, show the willingness of people to try and take control over their own lives. They no longer trust politicians or capitalists. At the demonstrations in Reykjavik, the boss of the Central Bank, David Oddsson, a previous prime minister, has been compared to Adolf Hitler!

It is clear that the protesters have had enough and that they are representative of the generally-held feelings in Iceland. This has given rise to a lot of discussion about whether what is happening is a revolution.

“The word ‘revolution’ might sound a bit of an overstatement, but given the calm temperament that usually prevails in Icelandic politics, the unfolding events represent, at the very least, a revolution in political activism", Icelander Eirkur Bergmann wrote in the British paper, The Guardian.

Another recent visitor to Iceland, London School of Economics professor Robert Wade, commented, "The situation is very tense and very unstable". He compared the situation with other sometimes-violent street demonstrations in Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and Greece over the last month.

A third commentator, Fredrik Erixon of the Brussels-based European Centre for International Political Economy, said the situation was reminiscent of "the French Revolution of 1789", rather than that of 1968. The anger is certainly there, but capitalist Iceland is far different from feudal France.

The lesson from mass movements in other countries in recent years is that unpopular regimes can be overthrown. But to alter the economic and political conditions in society the working class and its allies need their own party with a programme for socialist change.

In Iceland there will be a concerted campaign from national and global capital to submit to the IMF conditions, including economic blackmail. Any government that is not prepared to challenge the capitalists who have caused the crisis will come under enormous pressure to make huge cuts in living standards for working people. This is the case even if a Left-Green government is established, or a government of "experts", as some of the protesters have proposed.

Workers and youth in Iceland have already drawn important conclusions. New experiences will force them to look hard for alternatives. Transforming the situation in Iceland would need a fully socialist programme of nationalisation of all major parts of the economy, under democratic workers’ control and management. The crisis has shown that bankers, capitalists and today's top politicians are not wanted; democratically elected organisations of workers, youth, pensioners could run society without them. The beginnings of a movement against capitalism in Iceland must be welcomed and encouraged by workers and activists internationally. This is just the first indication of what is to come as more and more countries fall into recession and mass revolt begins to develop.

Flickr images from the protests can be viewed here.

Sunday, 4 January 2009

Gaza and the Fog of War

The global demonstrations against Israel's assault on Gaza have been a magnificent display of solidarity with the Palestinians. I wasn't there but a comrade on the march estimates some 50,000 demonstrated in London yesterday - and that wasn't even a national demonstration (that, according to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign is pencilled in for next Saturday). Thousands also demonstrated in Manchester and Preston, and many more protests were scheduled throughout the country over the weekend. Many, many more made their opposition felt with demonstrations tens of thousands strong across Europe and the Islamic world. The Israeli government knew it could rely on their allies to equivocate or back it, but the numbers on the streets show it's losing the media front.

Truth, as the old adage goes, is the first casualty of war. It's no less true in this case. Since the ground invasion began yesterday, the pro-Hamas English language news source, the Palestinian Information Centre at the time of writing claims to have killed 13 Israeli soldiers, captured two (including a high-ranking officer) and destroyed seven tanks. For its part, the Israeli army army confirms one dead and 30 injured. On top of all this, a group of Norwegian doctors claim to have recovered traces of depleted uranium from the bodies of several Palestinians. How to separate what is true from what is propaganda?

Media organisations aren't helping matters. In the West, they mostly rely on Israeli state sources, and have their own blind spots and ideological biases. The BBC have been doing a fine job of letting the official Israeli narrative go unchallenged - that the blitz and invasion of Gaza is morally justified after Israel has "lost patience" with completely unprovoked rocket attacks by Hamas militants. The main criticism of Israel that does appear is the disproportionality argument, which, of course, does little to challenge the official grounds of the invasion itself. Surprise, surprise, Fox has been the Israeli state's vocal friend in the US media, saying it has the "moral high ground" and that Hamas could easily end the bloodshed ... by surrendering. Other satellite news sources, namely Al-Jazeera and the Iranian-sponsored Press TV offer takes unencumbered by pro-Israel bias, but that isn't to say they do not have their own agendas. Press TV, reflecting Iran's geopolitical strategy, gives Hamas the kind of free-run Israel gets from Western news outlets.

What the media confusion attempts to do is extend the fog of war back before the conflict began. In an excellent post at Lenin's Tomb explains, Hamas is not an organisation committed to permanent war with Israel. It has hinted at peace deals, offered cease fires, observed unilateral cease fires, and so on. And at every stage, Israel have interfered in internal Palestinian affairs, abducted activists, carried out assassinations, and turned Gaza into an open air internment camp. The rockets Hamas have launched against Israel prior to the present war did not happen without reason. There are material reasons for everything, and in this case, it's in the years of low-level warfare Israel has subjected Gaza to. This is why, much to the exasperation of the Israeli state and its apologists, tens of thousand have marched, and millions across the world are turning against it.

Socialist Struggle Movement (Tnu`at Maavak Sotzyalisti/Harakat Nidal Eshteraki – CWI in Israel) statement here.

Socialist Party statement here.