the Voice of
The Communist League of Revolutionary Workers–Internationalist
“The emancipation of the working class will only be achieved by the working class itself.”
— Karl Marx
the Voice of
The Communist League of Revolutionary Workers–Internationalist
“The emancipation of the working class will only be achieved by the working class itself.”
— Karl Marx
Jun 20, 2005
After the Downing Street memos finally made their way into the American media, Michigan Representative John Conyers organized a forum to discuss their significance. And he delivered petitions to the White House signed by 105 members of Congress, as well as about half a million people–asking that Bush fully answer questions about the memos.
What’s there to answer? The memos only said what was commonly known long before the war started–that the Bush administration searched for pretexts to justify a war it had decided more than a year earlier to carry out. And the Blair government did what it could to provide a genteel cover for Bush.
Given that the memos were for circulation only among the inner circle of the British government, they laid out in more stark fashion than usual how cynically the bourgeois state prepares its population to go to a new war.
The memos are special only because someone from among this small elite circle decided to leak them. It’s a symptom of difficulties British politicians face at home, as the government they support carries out this war.
The fact that 105 members of Congress were ready to bring up the memos in the U.S. testifies to similar difficulties politicians are facing here–difficulties summed up in the most recent poll, showing that 60% of the population think that the troops should be withdrawn.
So it comes as no surprise that four Congressmen, two Republicans and two Democrats, just introduced a motion calling on Bush to announce a plan by the end of this year for withdrawing troops.
Don’t get too excited now! They weren’t calling on Bush to bring the troops home–not now, and not at the end of this year. They just were asking him, and very politely at that, to give them an idea of when he might start to bring them home. If he would, please.
And don’t pin your hopes on this oh-so-polite, mealy-mouthed request.
But the politicians are feeling the heat from a population that is fed up with this war.
We should be. This war has cost the people of Iraq more than 100,000 dead–and that’s only the beginning. The country’s infrastructure is destroyed, its children are denied education, work is non-existent. If the U.S. were to leave today, Iraq would continue to suffer the results of this war for years. Every month the U.S. war continues only makes the situation worse, aggravating ethnic tensions into civil war.
This war has cost the working class of this country also. U.S. soldiers are going through the mill over there and won’t be the same when they come back–even if they don’t come back in a body bag or on a stretcher with their limbs gone. The war has also cost us, through the destruction of this country’s infrastructure–not by bombing, but by draining money from roads, schools, sewers, sanitation, etc. in order to fund the war.
The U.S. went to war in Iraq because the rulers of this country wanted to have a stronger hold over the oil of the whole Middle East. This decision set in motion a human catastrophe, for which no end is yet in sight.
The leaking of memos, the holding of congressional forums, the presenting of petitions to the White House, as well as the motion asking for Bush to plan how to end this war–none of this will stop the war. But all of this testifies to the anger among the force that can stop the war: the U.S. troops themselves, their families, the young people who don’t want to go; the working class that understands how much has been sacrificed on the filthy altar of this war. This anger needs to be expressed, forcefully, in every place we live, work, fight and even where we play.
Jun 20, 2005
On June 6, the Cook County medical examiner ruled the death of 74-year old Antonio Manrique last October in the Chicago suburb of Blue Island was a homicide, the result of his being beaten by two cops. The Cook County State’s Attorney said there was "insufficient evidence to charge in this tragedy." The two cops had responded to a call to investigate gang graffiti. Instead they found a 74-year old man walking away who didn’t respond to their call to stop. They tackled and beat him, resulting in broken ribs, cuts and bruises and a blood clot that traveled to his heart and lungs, killing him. Trying to justify this vile murder, the cops claimed Manrique had dropped a small container on the ground as they approached. Yes, he did–a box of sugar he had just bought at the store.
Following Manrique’s death, there was a protest rally of more than 500 people. The Spanish language media has been widely covering the case, especially on talk radio.
After Manrique’s death, twelve suits about police brutality in Blue Island were filed. Among the cases was one where the police applied a Taser electric shock to the groin of an epileptic man; another man was choked, beaten and had his wrist broken; and a third man had a loaded gun put against his head. In these three cases those attacked by the cops were never charged with a crime.
These cases reflect everyday reality in poor neighborhoods of Cook County–where the prosecutor gives cops a pass even for murdering elderly people.
Jun 20, 2005
Eli Lilly earlier announced plans to build a factory to manufacture insulin in Prince William County, Virginia, close to Washington D.C. The plant was to employ 700 people.
Politicians in Prince William County and the state of Virginia offered the company over seven million dollars in public money–justifying this handout with the usual claim of "creating jobs." But in mid-June the business journals carried Lilly’s decision to cut the size of the plant in half, push back the start date by two years and hire only 350 people.
Did state officials cut their handout to Lilly in half? No, they justified letting Lilly keep it all.
Elected officials in every state, every city and county do exactly the same thing–offer taxpayers’ funds and tax cuts to companies, no matter how few jobs the companies add or even when the companies don’t add any jobs.
The politicians claim they are helping with economic development. Of course, in their book, "economic development" is spelled p-r-o-f-i-t. And let jobs and city services be damned!
Jun 20, 2005
On June 14, boos, jeers and chants from students and faculty alike practically drowned out Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger when he tried to give the commencement address to the graduating class at Santa Monica College, a two-year community college.
Only days before the graduation, Schwarzenegger had ordered a special election in California for this fall to consider several propositions. One proposition would grant the governor the ability to make cuts in spending more easily, especially for social programs and education. Another proposition would delay tenure for teachers from two to five years. A third proposition would make it more difficult for public service unions to raise funds for political or electoral purposes.
Schwarzenegger has been locked in a battle with state workers and nurses over his attempt to impose cuts.
Since the beginning of the year, unions representing nurses, teachers, state workers and fire fighters have been organizing protests against the governor. Schwarzenegger cannot make a public appearance, not just in California but around the country, without having to contend with hundreds or even thousands of picketers and protesters.
But Schwarzenegger is hardly acting alone. On the contrary, he is only a mouthpiece for the very wealthy, who have filled his campaign fund for the special election with a record amount of cash. So these next months are shaping up to be of a kind of war.
But the Democrats propose no alternative. The day after Schwarzenegger announced the special election, the Democrats in the state legislature, who constitute the majority, announced that they would not oppose the budget that Schwarzenegger proposed for next year.
No, the only difference between Schwarzenegger and the Democrats is that one attacks from the front, while the other from the back. State workers, nurses, firemen, and the rest of the population can only count on themselves and other working people to stop these attacks–just as they have up until now.
Jun 20, 2005
When General Growth Properties bought the Columbia, Maryland Rouse Company, it legally assumed the responsibility for 400 Rouse retirees. Eight months later, General Growth announced it was terminating paid health and life insurance for Rouse retirees.
Other companies have used the excuse that they were broke and couldn’t pay the benefits. General Growth didn’t even try. Instead a company spokesman said that chopping off the retirees’ health care was "about equity"–because General Growth’s own employees got no retiree health care, it was not "fair" that Rouse Company retirees got health care.
"Fair"? They want to talk about "fair" after cutting off medical benefits to workers whose decades of labor made Rouse company a going concern?
If they want "fair," then give every employee and retiree medical benefits–whether coming originally from General Growth or from Rouse.
Jun 20, 2005
The state of Mississippi is currently prosecuting Edgar Ray Killen, one of the men involved in the Ku Klux Klan murders of James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Mickey Schwerner in 1964.
This is not the first time Killen was tried. He was tried before in 1967 along with 18 other men. Only seven were convicted. At the time, Killen gloated about the killings, certain that he would be acquitted. In fact, the jury voted 11-1 in favor of conviction. Killen would have been convicted had it not been for one church-going lady who said at the time that she "could never convict a preacher."The media today acts shocked by the fact that Killen was a Baptist preacher in Philadelphia, Mississippi. Yes, he was a preacher, just like thousands of other preachers in little fundamentalist churches throughout the South–and rural Midwest–who openly justified beatings, murders, and terrorism. Many of these preachers used the pulpit to recruit new members to the Klan.
They were the backbone, along with local sheriffs and small businessmen, of the Klan in the South, the ones who called on white people to keep black people "in their place" and to kill those who wouldn’t stay there.
Yes, today the people who once benefitted from this reign of terror in the South may let a few of their murdering THUGS be put on trial. They don’t need them any more.
They have other murderous thugs in their service–like the officials in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who continue to organize the legal lynching of Mumia Abu-Jamal, a militant black writer who exposed the racist violence of northern Philadelphia’s police department.
Jun 20, 2005
Winston Hayes, a 44-year-old resident of Compton near Los Angeles, is facing 25 years in prison. His bail is set at one million dollars, an amount normally imposed on violent criminals.
So what is Hayes’ crime? Surviving a 120-round shooting rampage by 12 sheriff’s deputies!
It’s crazy, but it’s true. And it’s not the first time someone is being punished for being around when cops go berserk. Ask Mitchell Crooks, who videotaped the brutal 2002 beating of a teenager by cops in Inglewood. Within days of the incident, Crooks was arrested for old warrants concerning minor offenses that the D.A.‘s office had long decided not to pursue.
So it’s now Hayes’ turn to pay the price of being caught in an incident which exposed the cops’ brutality. First, the deputies claimed that Hayes was a "shooting suspect." But that story was so baseless that the authorities had to drop it right away. So they dug up a new accusation: "Felony evasion." That is, not stopping when deputies ordered him to.
It’s a felony to run away?
Who can blame a black Compton resident for running away when, just a few months before, cops shot and killed a 13-year-old black joyrider just a few miles from Compton?
If convicted, this will be Hayes’ third conviction, putting him behind bars 25 years under California’s notorious "Third Strike" law. What makes all this even more outrageous is that both of Hayes’ previous convictions were on equally questionable charges.
Compare Hayes’ ordeal with the treatment of the real criminals, the deputies who shot up not just Hayes but the entire neighborhood for no reason. Instead of being charged with attempted murder, they are being "suspended" between two and fifteen days. Their bosses might as well send these murderous cops on a vacation in the Bahamas!
Jun 20, 2005
On June 13, the U.S. Senate voted a resolution to apologize for not voting a law against lynching. Between 1920 and 1964 (when Congress finally passed the Civil Rights Act), legislation had been sponsored several times, which would have made lynchings a crime; white Southerners voted down or filibustered such bills to death each time.
So the Senators have now finally apologized for not passing legislation. But the point is not what they failed to do! It’s what the Senate and others did. By its actions, as well as its attitude, the Senate supported an entire repressive apparatus, made up of federal, state and local officials, of the judicial system and law enforcement agencies–all encouraging or carrying out lynchings and not just the 4742 recorded between 1882 and 1963.
Historians looking at the record say there were actually tens of thousands of lynchings in U.S. history–and not just in the South. They took place in at least 46 out of the 50 states, and created a real reign of terror.
The vast majority of those lynched were black people, but other minorities also faced illegal death from mobs–Jews, Italians, Latinos, Asians and American Indians, or native born white union organizers or anti-segregation activists.
Politicians promoted this decades-long human calamity starting at the end of the U.S. Civil War–and running up way beyond 1963. The constant threat of lynching was aimed at controlling the whole black population. It helped impose lower wages, terrible working conditions and the worst social conditions in the country on that population.
But the fact that the ruling class could impose these conditions on one part of the laboring population meant it could reduce the wages and living conditions of everyone–including those impoverished whites induced to be the torturers and executioners of their fellow workers. And the dehumanizing done to them can be seen still today in the photographs of Southern mobs laughing as lynching victims died. Many bought postcards of these disgusting events to send to others.
The entire situation in the South and parts of the rural Mid-West was reinforced by underfunded schools and by the preachers in their Sunday sermons. Before 1865, white preachers proclaimed from the pulpit that slavery was God’s will. After the war ended, these same Christian ministers defended Jim Crow laws and the torture of black people, the beatings, arrests, false imprisonment and daily humiliations.
The legacy of this history still lies heavily on the black population today. And not just because almost every black family in this country knows of someone who was lynched.
Looking at this whole bloody reign of terror and the resulting human catastrophe, the Senate believes it can offer an apology. An apology?
Jun 20, 2005
Ten years ago this July 9, newspaper unions in Detroit began the DNA (Detroit Newspaper Agency) strike. It was a militant strike that could have been a pivot point in the struggle against the concessions battering the working class. Instead it turned out to foreshadow a decade of continued losses.
The strike was forced on workers by the Detroit Newspaper Agency (DNA), publisher of the two major Detroit newspapers, the Free Press and the News. The DNA demanded that workers accept hundreds of job eliminations and drastic cuts in wages, benefits, and working conditions. The DNA intended to either break the unions or to reduce them to shadows.
From the beginning, the strikers had the advantage of their own militancy, plus the active support of workers from other unions, plus the sympathy of vast numbers of workers in the Detroit area, a traditional union town, home of the United Auto Workers.
The newspaper strikers came out by the hundreds, barricaded News and Free Press plants and offices, stopped newspaper trucks, and at first were so numerous on the picket lines that local police were unable to get the newspapers through. Strikers "got creative" in many ways to stop scab papers, put their strike in front of other workers and show their strike’s vitality. The Detroit area began to recall its fighting union heritage.
But if the workers were mobilized and showing their readiness to fight, the union leaderships were not ready to risk having the strike surge beyond legal bounds. When the inevitable court injunctions ruled against mass picketing, the leaderships advised workers to obey. Instead of continuing the workers’ mobilization in an out-and-out contest of strength, where the workers had their best advantage, the union leaders gradually channeled workers’ hopes into the legal wilderness of courts and NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) rulings–where the workers are at great disadvantage.
Early in the strike, when it was clear that rank and file auto workers felt great support for the strike, perhaps readying themselves to join a battle against concessions, the national UAW leadership called for "support" for the strike only in passive terms. UAW workers were asked to give donations to the newspaper strikers and to cancel their newspaper subscriptions. Workers were seldom even called on to reinforce newspaper picket lines, and the union structures buried any notion of engaging auto workers in a simultaneous struggle against their own concessions.
This strike had the potential to become a general anti-concessions movement. When that didn’t happen, the working class was thrown backward for a decade.
Nonetheless, the newspaper strike brought to the fore a large number of worker militants and gave them a rich experience. A core of these militants sustained a guerrilla fight against the DNA for nearly three years after the unions officially accepted defeat and returned to work under the company’s conditions.
The Detroit newspaper strikers gained a fund of experience which can yet enrich the working class, if it’s put to use in new struggles.
Jun 20, 2005
The Detroit newspaper strike had barely started when Free Press columnist Mitch Albom crossed the picket line.
Albom reportedly claimed at the time that he did it in order to have more influence "from the inside."It’s not clear what influence he used on behalf of the strikers. But when Albom got in some hot water lately for writing a piece of fiction about a couple of athletes’ activities, passing it off as fact, the publisher of the paper didn’t fire him.
"Inside influence?" Or a token of management’s appreciation?
Jun 20, 2005
To mark the 10-year anniversary of the Detroit Newspaper strike, and to show solidarity with the Youngstown Newspaper Strikers, a Fundraiser, sponsored by ACCOSS, will be held on Saturday, July 9, 2005, from 5-10 p.m.
Location for the event will be at UAW Local 909, 5587 Stephens Road in Warren, Michigan. This local is north of 9 mile and west of Mound Road. There will be a $20 Donation; proceeds to benefit the Striking Youngstown Newspaper workers. Dinner will be served.
Jun 20, 2005
General Motors and the UAW have opened Act One of a play calculated to persuade workers to take health care concessions. An advance look at the whole play can be seen in last year’s Caterpillar negotiations.
In Act One, Caterpillar demanded that workers pay health care premiums, despite Cat’s average profits of a billion dollars a year. The UAW seemed to resist. Contract talks dragged on from April to September.
In Act Two, Caterpillar said it had no money left in its retirees’ VEBA fund. VEBAs are special tax-sheltered accounts that companies use for paying employee benefits.
Caterpillar then said it would stop paying for retiree health care. It began charging retirees $270 a month for health insurance.
In Act Three, the UAW leaders told the membership they had no choice but to accept a contract full of concessions–concessions the workers had already voted down twice–in order to protect the retirees. It was a moral pressure on workers to protect Cat’s many retirees–and the workers who were near retirement.
In Act Four, these concessions passed in January 2005, by a vote the UAW said was 59% in favor.
And in Act Five, Caterpillar announced its profits for 2004 had set an all-time company record.
GM workers need not re-enact this whole play, even though GM has already announced it might drain money out of its VEBA fund. They can write a new script, more to their liking!
Jun 20, 2005
Day after day, the media push a steady drumbeat about General Motors–what bad shape it’s in. They even throw out the dreaded possibility of a bankruptcy. And Wall Street has jumped onto the bandwagon, putting GM bonds into its "junk bond" category.
It’s nothing but a propaganda campaign, aimed at getting GM workers to give up medical benefits they carried out hard fights to win in the past.
Nothing but propaganda, and a pack of lies!
General Motors is NOT in bad shape, it is NOT going broke–in fact, it has plenty of money. In ready cash, GM and its subsidiaries have 55 billion dollars. They have full lines of credit with all their major banks. No one has cut them off–despite all the talk about "junk bond" status.
GM pays dividends, every year, $2 a share to other capitalists, like Kerkorian, who just sit on their millions of shares and wait for the money to pour in. GM pays its executives richly, very richly. In the past five years, Bill Wagoner, GM CEO, got 57 million dollars, not to mention the tens of millions more to other executives. If this is a company going broke, they sure have a funny way of showing it.
GM started all this bull about going broke after showing a loss in only one quarter. (Need anyone be reminded that the auto industry is cyclical and that there are always quarters or even full years, when the companies roll up losses?) Last year’s profit for the full four quarters was 3.7 billion dollars. Over the past five years, GM has cleared total profits of at least 20 billion dollars. And this is according to its own figures, not counting all the money it stowed away by "creative" book-keeping.
Here’s another testimonial to GM’s good financial health. Kirk Kerkorian just offered to buy up 28 million shares of GM’s stock, paying out 868 million dollars to do it. Was Kerkorian, who is personally worth around 11 billion dollars, trying to buy into a losing proposition? No–he knows that GM is a good deal, despite all the bad publicity. Such a good deal that 3 days after the UAW said it would help out on health care, the stock jumped and he made 300 million dollars. In just three days.So don’t let them hoodwink us. GM is not a poor company, it’s super-extra rich. And it’s not asking for concessions in workers’ medical coverage because it can’t afford to pay.
It’s demanding concessions because it believes it can get away with it.
Nobody has taken on GM–or other big companies–in a real fight for years.
Leaders of the UAW have argued for years that the workers’ best chance of defending themselves comes not in opposing the company, but by joining in a friendly partnership with it. The end result of this partnership has been that GM has done well, very well, while workers gave up jobs, pay, benefits and rights. So, yes, this greedy company now thinks it can take whatever it wants–even something that workers assumed they would always have, medical coverage.
This is not just a question of GM–it’s the way all the big companies are thinking today, and for the very same reason. The working class has not stepped up to respond when the attacks come down. And the capitalist class has taken full advantage of the workers’ hesitancy.
That’s why the gap in society between the rich and the rest of us is more extreme than at any time since the Great Depression. Profit levels–returns on investments–are higher than any time since just before that same "Great" Depression. There’s a much bigger gap between CEO pay and workers’ pay. Every way you slice it, the ultra-rich have more than ever, because workers have let themselves be suckered into giving up so much.
GM, like all the rest of the bosses, will keep pushing to take more, until workers say "NO!" What’s good for GM and the rest of these monster corporations is NOT good for the working class.
Of course, just saying "NO" won’t stop these greedy monsters, but it at least starts workers going in the right direction.
Jun 20, 2005
GM pretends it can’t compete with the "transplants"–the factories built in this country by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc.–because these much newer factories have no retirees. This is what they mean when they fuss about "legacy costs." Well legacy costs are something every company is supposed to set money aside for as they go, every year for every worker. What did GM do with it? Steal it?
***The media always tell us that auto workers are so much better off than other workers–implying or even saying they need to give up something to make things more equal.
Well, if auto workers are a little better off–and it’s getting littler fast!–it wasn’t because some generous company gave them the wages and benefits we all need. It was because workers who started with nothing organized themselves and became a power and fought the companies to the bitter end. When those fights were won, auto workers not only improved their own situation, their fights helped to bring up other parts of the working class too.
It works both ways. We can be sure if GM takes medical benefits away from its workers, that will be the end of medical benefits for all workers–and not just at Ford and Chrysler.
***Wall Street downgraded GM bonds to junk bond status–that’s supposed to scare the workers.
No, all it means is that Wall Street wants to get in on the scam GM is trying to run on its workers. With junk bond status, GM will have to pay a higher rate of interest to all the big money men who will scarf up these bonds. Higher interest, which GM intends to take out of the hide of its workers.
Jun 20, 2005
For two months, GM has been issuing demands that the union come up with concessions on medical benefits. While GM was taking the offensive, top UAW leaders were bending over backwards to insist they were willing to work with GM on the issue. They even called local union leaders from GM plants to a meeting in Detroit, where the word was given: workers should expect to see increases in their co-payment, deductibles, premiums and/or other out of pocket expenses.
In the middle of all this, UAW leaders issued a bold statement asserting they wouldn’t "reopen the contract."Say what? They’ll give concessions, but they won’t re-open the contract!??!! What they’re really saying is that they won’t give workers the right to vote on the concessions.
This wouldn’t be the first time UAW leaders agreed to let the companies breach the contract in mid-stream, without opening it up for a vote. In fact, they recently bragged that they let GM avoid hiring 6,800 workers it should have hired to fill open jobs under the current contract.
Acting in such a "responsible" way, UAW leaders only encouraged GM to up the ante. And GM rushed to do it. In mid-June, GM execs announced that if they didn’t get all the medical concessions they wanted, they might unilaterally cut off retiree medical benefits.
Right now, GM’s threat is probably like the extortion demands made by street hoodlums–give us your money or we’ll kill you! But they are also gauging the situation to see just how far they can go with this.
The response of UAW leaders could only encourage GM to go very far. Yes, UAW leaders immediately said they wouldn’t stand for touching retiree benefits–just like they claimed they wouldn’t re-open the contract. But what counts is not what they said, but what they are doing–and what they are doing is to continue to negotiate medical benefits cuts with GM.
You don’t stop a bully from attacking your grandmother by giving him your money. He only comes back demanding more. And GM workers won’t stop GM from attacking retirees by giving up some of their own medical benefits. The only way they can protect retirees and themselves is to throw every single one of those demands in GM’s face.
And that’s something the workers are going to have to do for themselves.
Jun 20, 2005
Under the pressure of widespread international publicity, the Pakistani government has lifted the travel ban on Mukhtar Mai. Human rights groups had invited Mukhtar, a gang-rape victim, to the United States for public appearances.
Three years ago, the barbaric crime against Mukhtar gained worldwide publicity and called attention to the oppression of women in Pakistan. Supposedly to punish Mukhtar’s family for her brother’s alleged affair with a married woman, a village council had ordered the young woman to be gang-raped.
As outrageous as it was, this incident is nothing unusual. In Pakistan as well as many other third-world countries, women are often kicked out of their homes, beaten and even killed in the name of "family honor." Governments not only look the other way; they sometimes actively participate in these crimes–by jailing women for "adultery," for example, or for running away from a forced or abusive marriage.
The only difference in Mukhtar’s case was that, unlike most victims, she spoke up against these horrendous crimes women are subjected to. International women’s and human rights organizations helped publicize her cause, to the degree that the Pakistani government saw itself forced to do something about it. Some of the men who were involved in raping Mukhtar were put on trial; 12 of them were sent to prison. With the money she received as compensation, Mukhtar set up schools.
As the publicity began to die out, however, the Pakistani government reversed gears. Mukhtar’s attackers were released from prison, while Mukhtar herself was detained and banned from traveling abroad.
Once again, human rights organizations reacted. The renewed publicity embarrassed not only the Pakistani government but also its ally and sponsor, the U.S. government. So, once again, the Pakistani government saw itself forced to reverse its position and allowed Mukhtar to travel.
George W. Bush and other officials of his administration don’t miss any opportunity to declare themselves champions of freedom, democracy and women’s rights around the globe. But some of the worst offenders of women’s rights in the world, such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, are among the closest allies of the U.S. And the U.S. has always ignored the repression these backward regimes carry out against women.
But why should this surprise anyone? In this country also, thinly veiled under the guise of "pro-life" and "family" values, a broad attack against women’s rights is underway. And, to appease its reactionary religious voter base, none other than George Bush himself has taken the lead in this attack.
Jun 20, 2005
Economic ministers of the seven richest countries in the world announced on June 13 that they would cancel 40 billion dollars of debts owed by 18 poor countries. The British and French ministers called this "historic agreement" a big step down the road in fighting world poverty.
This 40 billion is, however, a drop in the ocean of debt of the poorest countries. They owe 450 billion dollars to international agencies; they owe another 500 billion to the rich countries. And the largest part of their debt–more than one and a half TRILLION dollars–is owed to banks. The banks have no intention of reducing what the poor countries pay them.
This agreement is part of a discussion begun in 1996 to renegotiate part of the debt owed by countries "on the path of development." But their debt will not be reduced unless they agree to strangle themselves: they must pledge 20 to 25% of their national exports to servicing this debt, that is, not to the repayment of the principal but to the repayment of the interest due on the debt. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), these countries must practice "good management," which means repaying debts to the banks no matter how much misery this causes for their populations.
Lending money to these poor countries has been a profitable business for the banks. They have increased their loans to poor countries, collecting $8 for every $1 loaned in 1980. And the companies of the rich countries have benefitted as well as the bankers have. According to Action Aid, 80% of this kind of aid arranged by the U.S. or France goes back to the coffers of American or French companies. The terms of the loans specify that the countries must buy from these companies.
When all the figures are put together, last year poor countries paid 395 billion dollars more to rich countries than they received. This so-called development aid is very well-organized theft!
The IMF says barriers to the "free market" must be removed. But in fact, poor countries must exchange their raw materials and unskilled labor for more advanced technology. They get little in this exchange, so that they become poorer still. The cancellation of 40 billion dollars of debt will make no difference. Even if a larger reduction in debt were agreed to, the poor countries could not develop, for they are strangled by the laws of capitalism. The exchanges are always to the benefit of the capitalists in the big imperialist countries.
Jun 20, 2005
Zambia is one of the 18 countries due to have part of their debt cancelled. This African country of 11 million is a primary source in the world for copper.
When the country became independent in 1964, the copper mines were nationalized. In 1973, the price of copper fell drastically. The Zambian government had to take out loans. But the price of copper has never recovered, so the government has borrowed more and more in a spiral of debt.
Thanks to the pressure of international lenders, the copper mines were put back in private hands, along with other sectors of the economy. Up until recently, education and medicine were free. Now an already poor population must pay for them or do without. The so-called free market ruined Zambia’s new textile industry, throwing some 30,000 out of work.
Zambia has put itself on such a "good path" that the international bankers have reduced part of its debt.
The international lenders call it a "fight against poverty," but in reality, they make the Zambians poorer than ever.
Jun 20, 2005
On June 15, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to discuss the issue of prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay. A few senators, both Republican and Democrat, called for the closure of the prison, on the grounds that it has become an embarrassment for the U.S.
Far from being embarrassed, however, the Bush Administration showed its true intentions concerning Guantanamo by awarding Vice President Cheney’s old company, Halliburton, a 30-million-dollar contract to extend the facility.
Currently, there are more than 550 prisoners at Guantanamo. Most of them have been held there for more than three years, without being formally charged with any crime. The Bush Administration says that international agreements such as the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war don’t apply to Guantanamo–admitting in effect that prisoners there are subject to torture.
Guantanamo is not the only facility where the Bush Administration holds, and tortures, what it calls "terrorists." It is part of an extensive network of prisons around the globe, most of them in secret locations. The U.S. government arrests people all over the world, including in the U.S., and takes them to these prisons. Sometimes the U.S. hands these prisoners over to other governments, in effect "contracting out" the torture job. Some of these incidents have been publicized and documented in detail in the press.
The Bush Administration does not use these prisons to get information. Everyone knows that information gained through torture is completely unreliable.
No, the U.S. uses torture–and then brags about it–to send a message to people around the world that this is what people have to expect if they dare to stand up against the U.S.
At Guantanamo or elsewhere, these prisons are manifestations of the naked terror carried out by the U.S. government against people all over the world. The rest of the "debate" over the issue, just like the whole rhetoric about the "threat of terrorism" and the "war on terror," is nothing but a PR ploy intended for manipulating public opinion in the U.S.
Jun 20, 2005
In 2004, the Catholic church pressured the Italian government to pass a restrictive law regarding fertility problems. Not only were there all kinds of limitations on using scientific methods to help a woman become pregnant, but the law itself had provisions to make it difficult to overturn.
Those opposing the law were able to put a referendum on the ballot in June, but due to the undemocratic methods used for the referendum itself, the law remains on the books. Of those who did vote, more than three quarters wanted to defeat the law.
If the church and government had been able to put the same restrictions on general elections that they put on this referendum about fertility, there would be NO politicians elected in Italy.
In this June vote, the Italian Catholic Church, led by the new pope, called on the faithful to boycott the vote. The turnout was so low that the referendum could not pass to change the law.
The undemocratic defeat of the referendum is a victory for the Catholic church and its reactionary attitudes. Just as the church attempts to prevent the use of contraception and abortion, so too it wants to restrict the harvesting of a woman’s eggs or the use of artificial insemination. Thanks to religious pressures, the procedure is more dangerous and painful and uncertain for those with difficulties in becoming pregnant.
If a woman or a couple has money, they can go to another country to have scientifically proven medical assistance. It is available in wealthy countries where the Catholic Church is not so powerful. Otherwise, Catholics in Italy with fertility problems will jump through hoops that in no way assist their attempts to have children.
The law on the books in Italy, which "protects life" as the Catholic Church defines it, makes an egg from a woman’s ovary equal in law to a human being. In this way, fertility and pregnancy are used to maintain the church’s ban on contraception or abortion.
If the Catholic Church, or Protestant denominations with similar attitudes as in the United States, laid down rules for their own members who let the church dictate to them, others wouldn’t object. Instead these churches want to impose their views on entire populations, including millions who don’t agree.
If this law is to be stricken from the books, it depends on those women and men who continue to fight against laws reflecting religious views they don’t hold.
Jun 20, 2005
On May 29, French voters resoundingly rejected a proposed constitution for the European Union. This vote was widely seen as a vote against the policies of French President Jacques Chirac and his Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, who had carried out numerous attacks on workers.
In response, Chirac got rid of Raffarin and appointed a new Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, who immediately announced more attacks against the working class. The following article from the June 17 issue of Lutte Ouvrière (Workers Struggle), a revolutionary workers organization in France, lays out the situation in front of the French working class.
The new government of Villepin-Sarkozy doesn’t represent any change from that of Raffarin. Its first measures are gifts for the bosses and blows for the workers.
Its "new hiring contract" delivers manpower to the bosses that can be laid off at any time. Businesses can now lay off workers over age 50 without paying a financial penalty. Another measure undercuts the bosses’ obligations to union rights. Employers no longer have to pay their share of Social Security contributions when workers are paid the minimum wage.
These measures, cynically titled "the battle for jobs," make existing jobs more insecure....
After the referendum, some workers said, "they have to take into account the importance of the No vote." But, despite the lies of politicians, the government doesn’t obey the ballot box. It obeys the big bosses....
We had to vote NO for our own dignity. We had to say NO to the Constitution, to Chirac-Raffarin and their policies.... But we can’t expect to get more from this vote than it can give.
The blows of the bosses and government can only be stopped by the determination of workers to fight back. The economy functions only thanks to workers who have the power to stop the profit engine.
The CGT (General Confederation of Labor) calls for a day of mobilization on June 21. The other union federations are refusing to join in. But all workers need to see that this day is really successful. There should be as many work stoppages as possible–strikes and demonstrations to show that we are not resigned to taking yet more blows.
One day of mobilization, even if it is successful, certainly won’t be enough to make the bosses and the government retreat. But it can show there are more and more workers who don’t believe in Santa Claus. It can show workers understand that only our struggles can force the bosses to hire more workers and raise everyone’s wages.
Jun 20, 2005
Hundreds of picketing off-duty Northwest Airlines workers expressed opposition to concessions, taking part in a day long protest at Metro Airport near Detroit, Michigan on June 15.
Some wore t-shirts picturing a cobra that read: "IF PROVOKED, I WILL STRIKE."Signs carried by picketers read: "Management pensions are guaranteed, why not ours." "Don’t Even Mess With My Pension." "Bonus for Executives, Pay Cuts for the Rest" "I AM Under Attack. Help Fight Corporate Terrorism." "How About No Concessions: Join the Revolution."Northwest is negotiating with two unions and says it wants cuts adding up to 800 million dollars a year. Northwest’s outrageous demands include outsourcing so much work that 34% to 92% of workers in some job categories would be eliminated. They want roughly 25% pay cuts from most remaining workers and management proposes to turn all guaranteed pensions into 401(k) type plans.
The loss of jobs and the wage and benefits concessions the company says it wants add up to tens of thousands of dollars per worker per year.
In the company’s immediate cross hairs are workers in two unions - the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA), and the Professional Flight Attendants Association (PFAA). Workers from the Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (AIM) picketed in solidarity. Affected workers include mechanics, customer service agents, baggage handlers, airplane cleaners and dozens of other classifications.
Pickets were organized in both Minneapolis and Detroit, Northwest’s two main hubs.
A one-day informational picket won’t stop these companies, but it shows the readiness of workers to respond to attacks. That willingness to fight can back off Northwest–along with Delta, United and American.
Jun 20, 2005
When United Airlines went bankrupt and decided to dump its pensions into the hands of the government, it suddenly turned out that the funds are short by ten billion dollars. Just two years before, the company attested to having put in as much money as required by law. What happened? A Senate committee says there are loopholes in the law regulating pensions. Yes, loopholes big enough to fly a jumbo jet through.
The law that regulates pensions was finally passed in 1974, as the result of a series of protests by workers who had lost their pensions. The law says when a pension fund doesn’t have enough money to pay the pensions of current and future retirees, a company has to make extra contribution to its funds.
Nonetheless, the government’s General Accounting Office found that half of the top 100 pension plans in the country were underfunded in 2002. This resulted from the fact that over the previous seven years more than 60% of these companies made no cash contributions to their pensions.
This was no "loophole." It was part and parcel of the law aimed at protecting company profits while pretending to protect pensions. In the 31 years the pension law has been in effect, this loophole could have been closed if it was only an oversight. But it wasn’t.
Big companies are endlessly clever in finding ways to avoid providing for their long term workers, who they want to use up and discard. If workers’ pensions are to be protected, it will be in the same way that whatever protections are in the current law got there–because workers organize to force the companies to give them their pensions.