|
|
People’s Voice October 16-31, 2016
Volume 24 – Number 16 $1
1) UNIFOR SETTLEMENT WITH GM: CONCESSION BARGAINING IN THE AGE
OF NEO-LIBERALISM
2) LIBERALS DISCARD PROMISE TO CONSULT FIRST NATIONS
3) COMMUNIST PARTY CALLS TO “MAKE EVERY VOTE COUNT”
4) ONE YEAR LATER... People’s Voice Editorial
5) MILITARISM IS KILLING US - Editorial
6) STANDING ROCK SIOUX REFUSE TO SURRENDER
7) TRADE DOESN’T SCARE POPULISTS LIKE US, BUT PLUTOCRACY DOES
8) PEACEKEEPING: FICTION VS. REALITY
9) AIDING & ABETTING: THE BRITISH MEDIA AND THE INVASION OF
IRAQ
10) WOMEN’S SOLIDARITY BOAT TO GAZA HIJACKED BY ISRAEL
PEOPLE'S VOICE OCTOBER
16-31, 2016 (pdf)
|
People's Voice deadlines: November 1-15 November 16-30 Send submissions to PV Editorial Office, |
|
|
REDS
ON THE WEB
http://www.communist-party.ca
www.peoplesvoice.ca
www.ycl-ljc.ca
www.solidnet.org
|
People's Voice finds many "Global Class Struggle" reports at the "Labour Start" website, http://www.labourstart.org/. We urge our readers to check it out! |
* * * * * *
Central Committee CPC
290A
Ph: (416) 469-2446
fax: (416) 469-4063 E-mailmailto:info@cpc-pcp.ca
Parti Communiste du Quebec (section du
Parti communiste du
5359 Ave du Parc, Montréal,
B.C.Committee CPC
Tel: (604) 254-9836
Fax: (604) 254-9803
Tel: (780) 465-7893
Fax: (780)463-0209
Unit #1 - 19 Radcliffe Close
Calgary
Tel: (403) 248-6489
Tel: (613) 232-7108
Manitoba Committee
387 Selkirk Ave., Winnipeg, R2W 2M3
Tel/fax: (204) 586-7824
290A
Tel: (416) 469-2446
Tel: (905) 548-9586
Atlantic Region CPC
Box 70 Grand Pré, NS, B0P 1M0
Tel/fax: (902) 542-7981
* * * * * *
News for People, Not for Profits!
Every issue of People's Voice
gives you the latest
on the fightback from coast to coast.
Whether it's the struggle for jobs or peace, resistance to social
cuts,
solidarity with
we've got the news the corporate media won't print.
And we do more than that
- we report and analyze events
from a revolutionary perspective,
helping to build the movements for justice and equality,
and eventually for a socialist
Read the paper that fights for working people
- on every page, in every issue!
People's Voice
$30 for 1 year
$50 for 2 years
Low-income special rate: $15 for 1-year
Outside
Send to: People's Voice,
You can call the editorial office at 604-255-2041
<pvoice@telus.net>
REDS ON THE WEB
www.communist-party.ca
www.peoplesvoice.ca
www.ycl-ljc.ca/
http://solidnet.org/
http://www,rebelyouth-magazine.blogspot.com
(The
following articles are from the October 16-31, 2016, issue of People's
1) UNIFOR SETTLEMENT WITH GM: CONCESSION BARGAINING IN THE
AGE OF NEO-LIBERALISM
Central Trade Union Commission, Communist Party of
Unifor and
General Motors reached a tentative contract settlement on Sept. 19, minutes
before a strike was to begin at GM’s Oshawa and St. Catharine plants, and its
Having
defined the main issue in bargaining as“continued investment in the Oshawa and
St. Catharines plants of GM beyond 2019”, Unifor said the agreement meets this
demand.
President
Jerry Dias claimed that Oshawa will be the only plant in North America with the
ability to produce both cars and trucks, and that the new deal at St.
Catharines will bring production from Mexico back to Canada, reversing the
trend over the last decade.
Just how solid are the
assurances of future production? Estimates say the amount of investment for
GM
told the Toronto Star "we will
be working with government on potential support." Is the production
contingent on government support? No doubt Unifor will actively join in this
lobbying for federal and provincial funds. But many activists fear this as a
ramping up of ‘tripartism’, or even of ‘strategic support’ for Liberal
governments. Some unions already show signs of responding to this siren call.
The Toronto Star also reports that the union negotiated higher wages, a
higher starting wage rates and signing bonuses, and that 700 temporary workers
will now get full-time jobs. But at what cost?
In the
Bargaining Program passed at its second Constitutional Convention in August,
Unifor pledged to “resist ongoing employer attempts at ‘two-tiering’ pension
plans, which inevitably hurts the next generation of worker”.
Yet somehow
“two-tiering” pension plans made it into the tentative agreement. New hires
will have a defined contribution pension rather than the hybrid plan (a mixture
of both defined-benefit and defined contribution) negotiated in the last round
of bargaining.
Dias said, “The only GM
employees worldwide that still had a defined benefit plan was us in
Speaking to
CBC’s Metro Morning, he said, "Was it worth it to get new employees the
opportunity to get jobs at our wages, at our security level and give up the
[defined benefit] plan for new starts? The answer is yes."
He also
said GM's contribution to the new defined contribution plan will be
more than some companies are putting into hybrid plans. "GM is not
getting out of this one easy, I can assure you."
This is at
least consistent with the Unifor Bargaining Program, which says that employer
contributions to a defined contribution plan should include an additional levy
to cover the administration costs and investment risks the employee must take
on.
This was
GM’s third crack at the pension plan, which it claimed was its biggest
liability during the global economic crisis of 2008-9. When the collective
agreement was ordered reopened as part of the
GM was
chosen in 2016 to be the lead set of negotiations with the
The end of
the US-Canada Auto Pact (ordered by the World Trade Organization), and the
ratification by the Liberals of the North American Free Trade Agreement,
increased economic pressures on auto unions to give in on pensions.
But why did
Unifor give it up, and why now? GM made record profits of $10 billion in 2015,
and $4.8 billion so far this year. Going into bargaining, the slogan of
Unifor’s Convention was “It’s Time” to make back the concessions the workers
gave the company to help it survive six years ago.
The CAW was
founded in 1985 because Canadian workers refused to accept the profit-sharing
wages structure negotiated by the United Auto Workers. The CAW demanded and got
its traditional $3 per year with a Cost Of Living Allowance.
Many unions
merged with the CAW in the 1990s because of the union’s prestige in fighting
for its members. When the CAW and the Communications, Energy and Paper Workers
(CEP), created UNIFOR, they promised to go on the offensive.
In a Sept.
21 column in the Toronto Star, Thomas
Walkom declared the Unifor-GM agreement “A Stake in the Heart of Company
Pensions”. He wrote, “…private pension plans fell by the wayside as union after
union agreed under duress to trade them away. Throughout, the Canadian
Autoworkers — or Unifor as the union is now known — was a kind of beacon. It
made strategic retreats. But it never entirely gave up. Now, on the pension
front at least, it has … But if even the autoworkers can’t protect their
defined-benefit company pension plans, who can?”
The
700 temporary workers who got full-time job are considered new employees, and
subject to the defined-contribution pension. That may explain the relatively
low 64% ratification vote, which shows some opposition in the membership over
the settlement. It shows a willingness to struggle for the future members of
the union. Local 707 Unifor at Ford in
Contrast
the GM settlement to a union which has a tradition of class struggle and social
unionism. In negotiations with
CUPW was
also able to address the issue of pay equity for rural members, mostly women,
who make 25% less than the urban
workers, mostly men. The result: a joint committee will implement changes
within 19 months.
CUPW’s
bargaining took place in the context of a federal review of Canada Post, which
could fundamentally change the nature of the business. The Harper-appointed
CUPW’s
successes are a signal that progressive change is possible.
The
potential for mass struggle for a people’s agenda is evident in Canada and
Quebec: the 2012 student strike in Quebec; the CFS-Ontario mobilization for
free education; the Idle No More movement; Black Lives Matter struggles in
Quebec and Ontario; the US-inspired Fight for $15 movement which has spread
across the country.
The labour
movement had pledged full support for Unifor going into its negotiations.
Rather than relying on the good graces of the Trudeau or Wynne Liberals for
“fairness”, the trade union movement can and must become the catalyst to bring
together all sections of the working class into a powerful, fighting united
front. It can reach out to indigenous people, students, racialized workers to
fight for a people’s agenda that will challenge corporate power.
Over the
past couple of decades, workers at dozens of private sector workplaces have
drawn a line in the sand around their defined benefit pensions. There have been
many lengthy and heroic sacrifices to fight off transitional two-tier attacks
against pensions. Many of these struggles – in mining, smelting, manufacturing,
etc – have lasted for months, even years. There have been successes, but
increasingly few and far between. There have been closures and downsizings.
Should we
therefore conclude that “resistance is futile”? That “there is no alternative”?
That to avoid the hardship of strikes and the risk of job losses, by trading
long-term acquiescence at the bargaining table for short-term gains and
assurances, “makes us smart”?
Communists
believe that the struggle for liveable, sustainable pensions is a vital
component of our overall struggle for a decent life for working families. It’s
vital to protect and build upon what previous generations have already won
through bitter struggle. We have to fight smart, but we must fight. This is
particularly important now in the public sector, where governments increasingly
target “over-generous” and “unsustainable” pension plans.
We
recognize that in this era of corporate neo-liberalism, high unemployment and
precarious jobs, to rely on employers for our old age security (as for health
coverage) makes less and less sense, and creates significant inequalities. The
labour movement, and the whole working class community, have to redouble the
pressure for an urgent and radical overhaul of the
For this fight, too, the labour
movement is called upon to mobilize its members for struggle and sacrifice. Another
world is possible!
2) LIBERALS DISCARD PROMISE TO CONSULT FIRST NATIONS
By Kimball Cariou,
A vigorous
debate is underway over what exactly the federal government means by its
various statements and election promises regarding approval of natural resource
projects - in particular whether indigenous peoples have the right to stop
construction of pipelines and related infrastructure on their traditional
territories. This debate shows that while progress has been made towards
overcoming the legacy of colonial genocide in
Leading up to and during the
2015 federal election, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau struck a very different
tone. Unlike the Conservatives, he promised that a Liberal government would
develop a new nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples, based on
mutual respect, full recognition of the International Declaration of the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples (which the Conservatives had considered as only an
"aspirational" document), and fulfillment of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission's 93 recommendations.
On the specific issue of
resource projects and pipelines, the Liberal platform referred to
"community consent" as necessary for final approval. This concept was
widely welcomed in areas such as the BC Lower Mainland, where a solid majority
of the population opposes Kinder Morgan's application to expand its oil pipelines
from
These pledges helped the
Liberals win a big majority in Parliament. Voter turnout was way up on First
Nations reserves and in urban areas like Metro
But as many predicted, the
Liberal government's stance has shifted under pressure from the resource
industry. Even as he pledges further consultation with aboriginal peoples and
environmentalists, the PM also says that "unanimous consent" is not
needed for the government to approve pipeline projects, and that no community
has a veto.
This would appear to
contradict the 2014 Supreme Court decision in the Tsilhqot'in v. BC case, which had wide implications for the
rights of indigenous peoples, particularly in
This court ruling is in accord
with the content of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
(UNDRIP), which everyone interested in these issues should read.
Article 32 of this historic
declaration reads: "1) Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and
develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or
territories and other resources. 2) States shall consult and cooperate in good
faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative
institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the
approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other
resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or
exploitation of mineral, water or other resources. 3)
States shall provide effective mechanisms for just and fair
redress for any such activities, and appropriate measures shall be taken to
mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social, cultural or spiritual
impact."
Not surprisingly, First
Nations leaders and communities saw the Tsilhqot'in ruling (part of a
longer-term trend for the courts to uphold indigenous rights) and the Liberal
campaign promises as major victories. But their optimism was tinged with a
realistic understanding that their struggles are far from over.
Within indigenous peoples and
communities, there are a range of views over development issues. Cheam First
Nation Chief Ernie Crey recently told a Reuters reporter that his community is
not opposed to development, but they want their rights and needs to be treated
with the same gravitas as those of other Canadians. Similarly, the Tsilhqot’in
in central British Columbia have indicated that they would support mutually
beneficial mining and resource projects in some parts of their traditional
territories, but also that areas of special historical and cultural importance
are simply off-limits.
Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of
the
"Nothing has changed on
our side of the equation. The answer is still 'no'," Grand Chief Phillip
told Reuters when asked about Trudeau's latest comments at a news conference in
The PM told the media that his
job is to look out for
Some deadlines are imminent,
such as the federal cabinet’s final decision on Kinder Morgan by late this
year. In the meantime, the old Harper-appointed National Energy Board (NEB) is
still dealing with TransCanada's proposed Energy East pipeline, in the wake of
revelations that TransCanada consultant Jean Charest, the former Liberal PM,
met secretly with NEB panel members to discuss the application.
Similarly, Trudeau’s
government has issued permits to the Site C mega-dam in northern BC, even while First Nations challenge the
project in court, and First Nations near Prince Rupert are preparing legal
action and blockades of Lelu Island just as the Liberal government is preparing
to approve or reject a Malaysian gas terminal.
All this is happening before
the new government acts to carry out its promise of "a full review of
regulatory law, policies, and operational practices” in full partnership and
consultation with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples.
Clearly, the Trudeau
government is backing away from its responsibility to carry out the letter and
spirit of treaties and court rulings, and to implement the UNDRIP and the Truth
and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations. Will it yield to the pressures
of the big energy monopolies which remain determined to expand the extraction
and export fracked gas and unprocessed bitumen from the
The answer came in late
September, when
That argument was rejected by
environmentalists and indigenous groups, who point out that the project would
be one of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters in
The Liberals also admit that the
groundwork for the project was laid by the previous Harper government. In
response, UBC Prof. Sheryl Lightfoot, the
"It just confirms
people's deepest suspicions - that there actually is no change, and that the
processes in place have just continued, and that the status quo of the Harper
government is the underlying agenda of the Trudeau government," she said.
Don Wesley,
also known as Chief Yahaan of the Gitwilgyoots, part of the Tsimshian
Nation, also called the news disappointing.
"We had a feeling this
might come," he told CBC Radio. "[But] my feelings as a First Nations
person were that we were really slapped in the face by the announcement. All
his talk in the past year here, and his campaign promises, you know - at least
he [could] have had the common courtesy out of his office to give us an
indication that this was coming. But there was nothing."
The LNG project may yet
falter, due to low energy prices worldwide, But a year after the federal
election, it appears that the old colonial drive to maximize profits for
resource corporations trumps the PM’s lofty words about genuine reconciliation
and justice for indigenous peoples.
(An earlier version of this
commentary appeared in Radical Desi magazine.)
3) COMMUNIST PARTY CALLS TO “MAKE EVERY VOTE COUNT”
Excerpts from the submission of the Communist Party of
Canada to the Special Parliamentary Committee on Electoral Reform
The
Communist Party of
The Communist Party of
Despite misinformation
campaigns, the Mixed Member Proportional voting system is very clear, involving
one ballot with two votes. With one vote, a local Member of Parliament is
elected, and with the second vote, the people select a party. The Member of
Parliament can be with the party you vote for, or not. Local MPs would be
elected in exactly the same way as they are now. The second vote would go
toward electing a Member of Parliament from a party list...
Today, the reality is
self-evident that the FPP “winner take all” system is undemocratic, entrenching
the big business parties. A vast and costly electoral machine is required to
win ridings. The big business parties raise tens of millions of dollars through
individual donations from bankers and private business. Electoral spending
limits are obscenely high, while limiting donations from trade unions,
democratic organizations that are already financially transparent. The
Conservative Party’s recent “In and Out” scandal further exposed gross
violations of electoral funding rules and the 2014 “Un-fair Elections Act” effectively
limited the franchise, gagged Elections
Elections are therefore widely
recognized as a horse-race largely orchestrated by the corporate media, where
small and progressive parties are marginalized. This is not only true for the
Communist Party; the exclusion of Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party,
from the 2015 federal election debates had a marked impact on their voter
turnout and subsequent vote. This situation is partly created by FPP, which
effectively rejects the idea that every vote counts. Most majority governments
are formed with less that 50 percent of the vote.
We propose: dramatically
cutting spending limits for political parties; banning corporate donations;
permitting donations from trade unions; guaranteeing equal time for all
registered political parties, including in leaders and all candidates debates,
governed by the Elections Act, not the Broadcast Act.
While voting for a party like
the Communist Party can send a powerful message regardless whether it wins or
loses, voters often feel compelled to “vote strategically,” instead of choosing
the party whose policies they support. Strategic voting results from the FPP
system and serves voters very poorly. This choice, as well as the decision not
to vote, are nevertheless understandable. Indeed, among the big parties voters
have little fundamental difference in status quo ideas. For example, voters
seeking to support a peace candidate have no options among the big parties in
...Mixed Member Proportional
representation most accurately reflects majority opinion, while taking into
account geographic differences. In contrast, Ranked Balloting and “Single
Transferable Vote” (STV) systems mean the first or second choices of only half
of the voters are counted, which does not create a parliament that is
proportionally representative of all votes cast in an election.
By making the composition of
the party list a political concern, MMP could also help elect more Indigenous
candidates, people from racialized communities, women and Trans-persons. It will also contribute to the break-up of
the dominance of the big parties by fostering coalitions, which are susceptible
to public opinion and mass pressure.
The institution of MMP should
generally maintain existing Electoral Districts, while being an occasion to
eliminate gerrymandering in riding boundaries, including regressive changes in
the 2012 redistribution by the Harper Conservatives, and possibly create new
ridings. New proportional seats, in equal number to the riding seats, should be
added. We strongly oppose any calculation “threshold” beyond the achievement of
one proportional seat. Thresholds reinforce the big party system, blocking the
entry of small parties and contradicting the principles of proportional representation.
The Communist Party is not in
favour of online voting and mandatory voting. Online voting could threaten the
sanctity of the secret ballot, and not all family homes should be considered
safe spaces like a poll booth. Mandatory voting will not achieve the desired
effect.
Instead, we support making
voting more accessible including reducing ID requirements, restoring the
authority of the Voter Identification Card, and restoring multiple-vouching, to
help transient voters (overwhelmingly working class people including young
workers and students, the poor, single mothers, seniors, the disabled and
people from racialized communities) as well as voters in northern and
Indigenous communities. We call for conducting comprehensive enumeration before
every election, and lowering the voting age to 16.
... For our Party, democracy
is not only about voting, but the people having a decisive sway about the
future. But MMP would be a long overdue and important reform, helping the
working people in their struggle for a fundamentally new direction and for
winning a better society.
(To read the full CPC brief, visit www.communist-party.ca)
People’s Voice Editorial
On October
19, 2015, the most reactionary federal government in decades was defeated, in
a victory for all opponents of the
dangerous Conservative corporate agenda. But while the new balance of forces in
Parliament improved the terrain for popular resistance, we warned that the incoming
Liberal government represented big business, not “real change.” A year later,
the saying that the Liberals campaign from the left and govern from the right
has proven quite correct.
On the plus side, the Liberals
welcomed Syrian refugees, launched the public inquiry into missing and murdered
indigenous women and girls, and reversed the Tory increase in pension
eligibility age.
However, reconciliation and
consultation with indigenous peoples has been abandoned in favour of
rubber-stamping resource extraction projects; the 2016-17 federal budget did
little to fund major infrastructure projects, and even less to improve living
standards and educational opportunities for indigenous peoples; urban home mail
delivery is still under threat; pension reform has been miserably inadequate;
and Justin Trudeau’s promise of electoral reform is just a public relations
exercise for options that would help the Liberals.
Not surprisingly, the Liberals
continue to promote the pro-corporate Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)
agreement, and have not introduced even superficial amendments to the
anti-democratic Bill C-51. On foreign policy, they have eagerly joined NATO’s
Russia-bashing, escalating international tensions.
In this situation, cozying up
to the new PM is not a winning strategy. Nor does it help to dream about a
federal NDP victory in the future. What’s required to block the corporate
steamroller is a conscious effort by
labour and its allies to build united and powerful extra-parliamentary
movements, and an ideological struggle to overcome illusions about the
“progressive” Liberals. Three years from now Canadians will head back to the
polls; the time to fight for a people’s alternative is now, not later.
People’s Voice Editorial
Two new
studies point to clear options facing the human race, as we struggle for
planetary survival.
The Global Commission on the
Economy and Climate reports that a massive overhaul of the world’s buildings,
public transport and energy infrastructure is needed to prevent runaway climate
change. The study points out that $90 trillion will be spent on such
infrastructure over the next 15 years, but also that an urgent shift is needed
to focus on low-carbon, energy-efficient projects, since “the window for making
the right choices is narrow and closing fast.” Over 60% of the world’s
greenhouse gases are associated with ageing power plants, roads, buildings,
sanitation and other structures, and 1,500 coal plants are already in
construction worldwide. This trajectory leads inevitably to increased deaths
from respiratory illnesses and road accidents, degradation of drinking water
and arable lands, and a cooked planet..
Can we afford a radical change
away from this catastrophe? There are real options, such as ending the $550
billion annual subsidies to fossil fuels, greener energy infrastructure
projects, and phasing out coal-fired power grids.
But the most fundamental
change will be an end to the arms race. A new report by the Institute for
Policy Studies says the
The world can slash greenhouse
gas emissions, or pour trillions of dollars into fossil fuels and weapons of
war. But we can’t do both. The choice is stark: human survival or death by
militarism. Unless we choose the first option, our children and grandchildren
will face the terrible consequences.
6) STANDING ROCK SIOUX REFUSE TO SURRENDER
Combined reports from TeleSUR
Despite a
federal court’s ruling, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe says it will continue its
resistance movement.
Twenty-seven protesters were
arrested on Oct. 10 at a Dakota Access pipeline construction site, one day
after a
The two-page ruling from the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling was handed
down about an hour before the Oct. 9 U.S. presidential debate. It denied the
request to grant a permanent injunction to block the behemoth US$3.7 billion
1,170-mile pipeline that, when completed, will transport 470,000 barrels of
crude oil across 4 states. The pipeline would also snake through half a mile of
the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation, which straddles the border between
North and
The court, in essence, refused
to extend a temporary injunction issued in late August, suspending pipeline
construction near the tribe’s main water source. In doing so, the court opened
the door for Energy Transfer Partners — the
Attorneys for Dakota Access,
the coalition of activists battling against the pipeline, says that company
attorneys have made it clear to them that is exactly what they intend to do.
Despite
this setback, the tribe and their supporting allies are determined to continue.
Tribal Chair Dave Archambault
II called the ruling "disappointing," but told NBC News, "We
aren't done with this fight."
Thousands have joined protests
led by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe including 300 other tribes at Cannon Ball,
As such, the three-judge panel
said it "can only hope that the spirit" of the act "may yet
prevail,” adding that the ruling is "not the final word," noting that
the final decision lies with the Corps of Engineers.
Archambault said this notes
that the court is signalling "to not proceed" with the project.
"It seems they are coming
to the same conclusion as the federal government in acknowledging there is
something wrong with the approvals for the pipeline," he said. "We
see this as an encouraging sign.”
Officers from outside states
are on standby to assist the policing of the ongoing protests against the
“There’s a lot of expertise
out there across this nation with the sheriffs, and if they can in somehow
bring their expertise and their resources here to assist the sheriff, that’s
what we need to do,” said Danny Glick, Laramie County Sheriff, Western States
Sheriffs’ Association President in joint press conference on Oct. 6. “When we
get a call from Sheriff Kirchmeier, we will be ready to assist.”
Morton County Sheriff Kyle
Kirchmeier made the request to the National Sheriffs’ Association for
assistance after a request for federal reinforcements was rejected. Kirchmeier
is attempting to take a more direct approach to handling the swelling number of
“water protectors,” who say the pipeline will ruin sacred burial grounds and
pollute local water supplies.
Kirchmeier stated that the new
approach would include more patrols and sending officers to speak to local
farmers fearful of protesters trespassing on their property. Kirchmeier stated
that he would continue blocking roads to construction sites if protesters
intended to halt construction.
The county sheriff estimated
that the Sacred Stone Camp had 2,000 to 2,500 people living on the site, saying
that his force has reached its capacity to be able to control the protests.
“The protest has grown outside
I think of what the intentions of the Standing Rock people wanted to occur.
This was all about the water, and the pipeline, and the easement going to the
core, not a pipeline being put out in the middle of the prairie,” he said.
Nearly a thousand Native
American youth from the Oglala Lakota Sioux Tribe are undertaking a fundraiser
to join their elders in the protests which have been described as the largest
Native American mobilizations in decades.
Police and private security
personnel have been more aggressively cracking down on the peaceful protests.
Earlier in October,
Unleashed attack dogs bit
protesters, including a pregnant woman and child from contracted private
security film Frost Kennels during a nonviolent direct action.
Meanwhile,
it has been reported that Republican Presidential candidate and business mogul
Donald Trump's extensive commercial networks include the Dakota Access
Pipeline.
While Trump has increasingly
been under pressure to release his tax returns – he is the first major party
presidential nominee in modern history who has not done so – his many
investments include companies that are financing the pipeline, according to the
environmental group, Greenpeace.
Greenpeace says that Trump's
financial disclosure forms reveal investments with two corporate stakeholders
in the pipeline. Trump disclosed $US500 million to $US1 billion in investments
going to Energy Transfer Partners, a Texas-based company that is the primary
builder of the pipeline which, when finished, would run from
Trump's disclosure form also
reveals that he had between $US50,000 to $US100,000 in company Phillips 66,
which has purchased an ownership stake in the pipeline that is equal to
one-quarter of its value, once it is completed.
Harold Hamm, Trump's energy
advisor who made millions of dollars through Continental Resources, the biggest
fracking company in the U.S., is also a stakeholder in the pipeline.
While Trump has not made any
public comments about his connection to the pipeline, he has continually
downplayed a number of major environmental concerns. He has previously stated
that he wishes to renegotiate climate change regulations in favour of big oil
industries and even claiming that he would "cancel" the
7) TRADE DOESN’T SCARE POPULISTS LIKE US, BUT PLUTOCRACY
DOES
This October 7th article from the blog of Council
of Canadians trade campaigner Sujata Dey originally appeared in the Huffington
Post
This week,
there were two competing narratives on free trade. While (astonishingly!) both
the IMF and The Economist said there are problems with free trade, others
asserted that free trade is under attack by "populists." Some have
determined that the electorate is under the influence of scaremongers and must
be re-educated to rid them of their fearful, misinformed views.
If you are reading this blog,
you may be a "populist." The economic press and world leaders have
caught on to the obvious fact that there is resistance to free trade
agreements. In response to 320,000 Germans rallying against CETA (the
Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) and strong
sentiment in Austria and Slovakia, Canada's International Trade Minister, Chrystia
Freeland, said there is a very tough mood in Europe on trade deals, "the
rise of sometimes quite ugly, protectionist anti-globalization sentiment in
Europe - we're seeing a lot of those feelings being expressed in the U.S.
election campaign." The Economist this week said the TPP is
"faltering," CETA is "fragile" and the TTIP is
"flailing." It continued: "A nasty brew of opportunistic
politicking and sceptical (and often misinformed) electorates is largely to
blame for this halting progress."
Many have linked openness to
immigration with openness to trade deals, arguing that those who oppose trade
are closed-minded and obviously on the side of bigots. I admit that having a
potential U.S. President Donald Trump as the loudest voice against free trade
hasn't helped: his collection of misogynist, racist and incoherent views is not
something that progressive populists should strive towards. But there is
another word for populism: democracy. The
Freeland herself, before she
was trade minister, knew this well. In a New York Times article, she pitted
populists against plutocrats, arguing, "People might not mind that if the
political economy were delivering for society as a whole. But it is not: wages
for 70 per cent of the work force have stagnated, unemployment is high and many
people with jobs feel insecure about them and about their retirement.
Meanwhile, the plutocrats continue to prosper. And for more and more people,
the plutocrats' technocratic paternalism seems at best weak broth and at worst
an effort to preserve the rules of a game that is rigged in their favour."
So, what are the
"populists" so "unreasonably" afraid of?
Our jobs, for one thing. A new
study from
Rising inequality, for another
thing. The CETA study also shows a rise in inequality, which is already
growing. While productivity gains create higher profits, job creation and
workers' incomes will stagnate. One out of every two additional dollars that
would normally have gone to workers will now go instead to owners and
investors. This amounts to losses of $2,656 per person over seven years, a far
cry from government projections of a $1,000 cheque per person every year.
We are afraid of the sorts of
rules contained within trade agreements that establish more rights for
corporations.
Our public services, on top of
that. Tax income will decrease by 0.12 per cent of GDP. Public spending will
fall by 0.20 per cent of GDP. This is due to the increased competition for
investors under CETA, with countries competing for investment by reducing
corporate taxes.
Maude Barlow, National
Chairperson of the Council of Canadians, speculated on what, if anything,
Canadians would be getting out of the deal. "Here's an independent study
that suggests that there aren't economic gains -- only job losses, inequality
and the erosion of the public sector," she said. "But that's only the
economic part. We haven't begun to quantify the damage to our laws, policies,
and democracies through regulatory harmonization and corporate lawsuits
challenging our environmental and social standards. Not to mention attacks on
farmers and municipalities."
Trade is not something we are
not afraid of. It is not something we oppose. But we are afraid of the sorts of
rules contained within trade agreements that establish more rights for
corporations. This week, the "populists" got an unusual champion, the
International Monetary Fund. A report issued by the IMF regards free trade as
benefiting only the wealthy few and says more needs to be done for workers
displaced by globalization. Their solutions are different from ours, but, when
the IMF says there are problems, perhaps it is because things have come to an
extreme point. Agreements like CETA and the TPP are pushing the world in the
wrong direction.
8)
PEACEKEEPING: FICTION VS. REALITY
By T.J. Petrowski
The word
peacekeeping is like the word terrorism; meaningless on its own and able to be
molded to serve the interests of a political clique. Like Alex P. Schmidt's
description in The Routledge Handbook of
Terrorism Research, peacekeeping "is usually an instrument for the
attempted realization of a political…project that perpetrators lacking mass
support are seeking".
Peacekeepers themselves have
been linked to an increase in violence and human rights abuses, particularly of
a sexual nature. In
Peacekeeping Forces in
Allegations of sexual violence
against peacekeepers dates back to the 1990s. During the 1995-2002 UN mission
in Bosnia, Kathryn Bolkovac, a human rights investigator, found that young
"girls from Romania, Ukraine, Moldova and other Eastern European countries
being brought in to service the UN and military bases as sex-slaves. The cases
involved the officers from many foreign countries, including the
As of 2015 more than 200 women
and girls have been sexually exploited by UN peacekeepers in
Extrajudicial murder, torture,
and mass murder, all war crimes under international law, have also been
committed by peacekeepers. A 14-year-old boy was beaten, tortured, and murdered
by Canadian peacekeepers in
In some countries UN
peacekeepers have behaved more like heavily armed, rampaging militias than
'peacekeepers'. Since the start of the UN mission peacekeepers have committed
numerous human rights violations and massacres in
All exits were cut off. The
community was choked off, surrounded …facing tanks coming from different
angles, and overhead, helicopters with machine guns fired down on the people.
The citizens were under attack from all sides and from the air. It was war on a
community.
Seth Donnelly, a member of the
delegation, who visited the scene within 24 hours, described what the
delegation found: “What we found actually when we went into the community the
day after the operation was widespread evidence that the troops had carried out
a massacre. We found homes, which when we say homes, we are talking basically
shacks of wood and tin, in many cases, riddled with machine gun blasts as well
as tank fire. The holes in a lot of these homes were too large just to be
bullets. They must have been tank-type shells penetrating the homes. We saw a
church and a school completely riddled with machine gun blasts. And then the
community came out.
“Once we had passed through,
and we were — the community understood who we were, women, children, old and
young, came out en masse and started to give us their testimony. They clearly
were not being coerced by (quote/unquote) `gang leaders’ or `gang elements.’
They took us into their homes. They showed us bodies that still remained. They
gave us very emotional testimony. People were hysterical still. And they all
claimed that the U.N. forces had fired into their homes, had fired into their
community, and people were saying at a minimum 20, if not more, people were
killed.”
The target of the attack was
Emmanuel "Dread" Wilme, a prominent community member and supporter of
Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the ousted president who was kidnapped by the
Then again, in December 2014,
UN peacekeepers fired live ammunition and chemical agents on protesters
demanding a new government.
Mass graves of those murdered
by UN peacekeepers have been uncovered in the
Underlying the abject failure
of peacekeeping is the contradiction between the maintenance of peace and a
socio-economic system where the pursuit of surplus value at the expense of
humanity and the planet reigns supreme. Peace is anathema to the ruling class.
There is no "peacekeeping
tradition," as Canadian Foreign Minister Stephane Dion claims, to be found
in the history of
The Canadian state itself was
founded on the violent and brutal exploitation of Aboriginal people and their
land; the enslavement of Chinese and other Asian immigrants for the
construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, in which conditions were so bad
that two Chinese labourers died for every mile of railroad built; the
exploitation of the world's natural resources and people by Canadian finance
capital and by the murderous suppression of the working class within Canada.
Peace cannot be maintained if
powerful Western interests – arms manufacturers, oil and energy companies, big
agribusiness, mining companies, etc. – stand to profit from violence and
exploitation. At the root of many of the world's conflicts is "the role of
interventionary core capitalism in perpetuating poverty through discriminatory
policies that structure the global economy". In
The terms of exchange between
Africa’s natural resources and the West’s capital-and-knowledge intensive
technologies continue to remain the basis for vast seepage of net value out of
Africa and into Europe, the USA and Japan ... Africa’s poverty does not just
‘exist’, it is systematically created. It is created not by any conspiracy. It
is created by the simple operation of the so-called 'law of the market' (Yash Tandon, Root causes of peacelessness
and approaches to peace in
U.S.-NATO alliance foreign and
international economic policy is conducted with the aim of maintaining these
unequal terms of exchange. In Somalia, IMF and World Bank imposed structural
adjustment policies decimated the country's pastoralist economy, leading to the
collapse of the state and a brutal civil war; in East Timor, the U.S., Britain,
Canada, and Australia funded the genocide of 200,000 people to secure the rich
oil and gas deposits beneath the Timor Sea; the democratically elected
governments of Iran and Guatemala were overthrown in 1953 and 1954 respectively
to prevent the nationalization of natural resources; in Haiti, the Aristide
government was overthrown shortly after it nearly doubled the minimum wage; in
the Central African Republic, the government was overthrown for accepting
Chinese investments; in Libya, once the wealthiest African nation, U.S.-NATO
alliance death squads brutally murdered Gaddafi to prevent his gold-backed
African currency from competing with the euro and the dollar; in Afghanistan
and Iraq, hundreds of thousands have been killed to control oil, strategic
pipeline routes, and, in the case of Afghanistan, the drug trade. In many
countries – from
Western corporations have
themselves been complicit in extrajudicial murder, torture, and other human
rights abuses. Thousands of trade unionists in
In an interview with the
Royal Dutch Shell, in another
lawsuit, was charged with complicity in the torture and murder of protesters in
The U.S.-NATO alliance is
reluctant to hold corporations accountable for human rights abuses.
Montreal-based Anvil Mining, for example, transported Congolese troops who
killed 100 people, mostly civilians, in the
The Trudeau Government's
recent commitment of $450 million and 600 troops to UN peacekeeping operations
should be understood for what it is: the will and need to intervene to protect
Western corporate interests and the hegemonic power of the U.S.-NATO alliance,
"by identifying with, and using the language of, the interests of the
international community." (See
Michael Pugh, “Peacekeeping and Critical Theory”.)
(To read more, including sources for this article, visit the author’s
blog, https://tjpetrowski.com.)
9) AIDING & ABETTING: THE BRITISH MEDIA AND THE INVASION
OF
By Pablo Navarette,
While the
recently released Chilcot Report was a damning indictment of the duplicitous
conduct of the Labour government of Tony Blair in the invasion of
On July 6, more than 13 years
after the British government joined the
According to a 2015 report by
Physicians for Social Responsibility, the March 2003 invasion and occupation of
The seven years that it took
for the Chilcot report to materialise were characterised by repeated delays in
its publication and concerted, often successful, moves by the British
government to suppress key information from being included. For example, the
Foreign Office appealed successfully against a judge’s ruling and blocked the
disclosure of extracts of a conversation between US President George W Bush and
Nevertheless, in the end, the
report’s 2.6 million words still contained a damning indictment of the British
government, and Blair in particular. In one passage, Chilcot states, “By early
December [2001], US policy had begun to shift and Mr Blair suggested that the
US and the UK should work on what he described as a ‘clever strategy’ for
regime change in Iraq, which would build over time.”
Media strategy
While the
report’s candid exposition of Blair’s
The government’s media
strategy started with a very revealing sentence: “The process of preparing
media and public opinion for possible action in
The article went on to outline
the extent to which the government went to ensure sympathetic media coverage of
its plan for regime change in Iraq, and cites the sickening headline in the Sun
on the first day of the invasion which read: ‘Show them no pity… they have
stains on their souls.’
Critically, the strategy
letter made the point that beyond merely targeting right-wing outlets such as
the Sun and the Telegraph, the government also deemed newspapers such as the
British Guardian to be key components in its war propaganda efforts.
It is fair to say that the
British government succeeded in its efforts. As media watchdog Media Lens has
outlined after looking at the Guardian’s reporting of Blair’s speech to
parliament prior to the vote that resulted in MPs authorising war on Iraq:
‘When it mattered, the Guardian took Blair seriously, respectfully, offering
not a word of criticism of anything he had actually said. The Guardian could
have joined the millions of people in the
Media Lens also offered a
damning analysis of the BBC’s reporting, citing the following academic study of
its performance: “In 2003, a
And lest we forget, the BBC’s
Andrew Marr’s fawning tribute to Blair on April 9 2003, the day that
Structural bias
It isn’t
surprising that the British media should wish to suppress the extent to which
they parroted government propaganda and helped to soften up public opinion for
the subsequent carnage in
The film began with shocking
images from a 2007
When we look at the corporate
bias in the ownership structure of the British media, it is perhaps naive to
believe that they would act more responsibly when assessing the claims of the
government in matters as serious as waging war on a sovereign country. Until
this structure is democratised and the correlation between the interests of the
political and media elites becomes less pronounced, it will be difficult to see
how official enemies of the British establishment will escape becoming victims
of sustained campaigns of vilification. Closer to home, the British media’s
current treatment of left-wing Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn offers another
instructive case study in how the established political and media class can
savage someone deemed to be a threat to the prevailing order.
In
10) WOMEN’S SOLIDARITY BOAT TO
With files from Electronic Intifada and the Morning Star
Israeli
forces arrested 13 female peace campaigners bringing aid to the besieged Gaza
Strip on Oct. 5, after hijacking their boat in international waters.
The Israeli navy towed the
Dutch-flagged Zaytouna-Oliva into the
They included Northern Irish
1976 Nobel peace laureate Mairead Maguire, Malaysian doctor Fauziah Hasan,
retired
Israeli officials said 11 of
the passengers were being detained for 96 hours and would then be deported. The
two other women, both journalists, were deported immediately.
The International Freedom
Flotilla Coalition which organised the mercy mission lost contact with the
Zaytouna-Oliva on the afternoon of Oct. 5, immediately assuming she had
suffered the same fate as earlier attempts to breach the blockade. The vessel
sailed from the Spanish port city of
Following the loss of contact
with the vessel 45 MEPs from the Nordic Green Left, Social Democratic and
Greens parliamentary groups signed a letter demanding the EU take immediate
action to free the passengers and crew.
It noted the boat was seized
inside the “military exclusion zone,” imposed “unilaterally and illegally by
the Israeli government, in contravention of international law.”
They urged all governments
“and people of conscience” to support the right of free passage, ensure the
wellbeing of all onboard and “support full freedom of movement for all peoples,
in particular the Palestinians of
Nearly two million people have
been trapped in the densely populated enclave since 2007, when
Sondos Ferwana, a spokesperson
for the activists, told a Turkish news agency that the capture of the boat was
“another act of Israeli piracy.”
The group released a
pre-recorded video statement made in case the boat was intercepted.
“If you’re
listening to this, then you will know that myself and all the women who sailed
on the Women’s Boat to Gaza have been arrested and are in detention in Israel,”
Maguire says in the video, adding that Israel’s actions are “totally illegal.”
The all-women boat was also
meant to acknowledge the role of Palestinian women in the struggle, as they
face the effects of occupation and settler-colonialism in specifically gendered
ways. Women also carry the bulk of responsibility for the care of traumatized
children. According to the United Nations, more than 160,000 children in
The all-women flotilla also
encouraged the participation of women who otherwise could feel uncomfortable in
a cramped, confined space with men for days at a time.
Claude Léostic, the president
of the Platform of French NGOs for Palestine, and French spokesperson for the
Freedom Flotilla Coalition, referred to the violence inflicted on previous
flotillas, which are foremost in the minds of the Zaytouna’s passengers.
“We believe it is very
possible that the Israelis will try to attack the boat again, because they did
every single time we sent a boat to break the siege. They attacked it. Hijacked
it. Stole everything on board. Kidnapped people on board. And behaved just like
pirates on the high seas,” Léostic told The Electronic Intifada.
“We hope that with women on
board they [the Israeli navy] will be deterred from being so violent,” she
added. “Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but their image is so important for
them. So if they’re seen attacking a women’s boat, ill-treating them, maybe
beating them as they did for all the others, their image will be catastrophic.
So that could be a deterrent.”
Eight Turkish nationals and a
Last January, four individuals
filed a lawsuit against
Meanwhile, also on Oct. 5,
Israeli forces bombed several areas in the
Pay equity
advocates in
The latest Labour Market
income figures from Statistics NZ showed the pay gap had gone from an all-time
low of 9.1 per cent in 2012 back up to 12 per cent in June this year. The last
time the gap was 12 per cent or more was in 2008.
Minister for Women Louise
Upston said the increase was disappointing after a downward trend in the gap over
the past 17 years. Upston said employers need to act by assessing their own
processes and ensuring there was no pay gap.
"Closing the gender pay
gap requires making conscious, measured and reported efforts to tackle pay
differences between men and women."
However, the Public Service
Association's Assistant National Secretary Kerry Davies said the Government
should step up.
"The Minister for Women
says the equal pay issue needs conscious, measured and reported efforts. We
agree, and we urge the government to walk the talk - by agreeing to fully
implement the Joint Working Group's recommendations. If government officials,
employers and unions can agree on a workable way to deliver equal pay, then
Cabinet should not drag its feet."
That group of government,
business and union representatives reported back to the Government on ways to
achieve pay equity in May but it was yet to announce a response. Its
recommendations include allowing employees to make pay equity claims where
workers are paid less because the workforce was predominantly female.
By Deirdre Uí Bhrógáin, Socialist Voice (
Do you know
those lovely, amusing robots that are trotted out on talk shows and science
programmes to elicit our wonder and awe? Well, behind all the cosy fun and the
evident awe of the presenters lies a devastating threat to the future of
working people on the planet.
It’s not that socialists are
against the development of robots and automated services that can save us from
back-breaking, tedious and repetitious work; but what happens to the people
they replace? And who owns these robots?
My blood went cold when I saw
the widely distributed photographs of a supposed “empathetic” robot holding the
hand of a woman who had just given birth in a hospital in
Worse still is that states are
not deciding what is to be developed and what is good for society. Alex Hudson,
in an article for the BBC in 2013 headed “A robot is my friend: Can machines
care for elderly?” wrote: “With the world’s elderly population growing rapidly,
scientists are suggesting that robots could take on some of the burden of
providing care, support and - most surprisingly - companionship.” He went on to
say that the idea of using robots to care for the elderly is being trialled
everywhere, from
When we have a society that
believes that the elderly are a burden, we must fear for where it is going, and
take action to put the development of automation and robotics within the
control of civil society. The article by
A researcher on a project in
Salford in
Neglect and mistreatment of
the elderly are recurring themes in Japanese culture, a subject treated in such
classic films as
Of course, developing
automation and machines that improve mobility for the elderly, and in other
strenuous tasks involved in their care, is to be welcomed; and, as the
charities dealing with older people say, such advances are fine as long as they
are not seen as replacements for human contact and companionship.
The debate on automation is an
old one. The term “Luddite” is now often used to mean ignorant people who are
opposed to automation and to the forward-looking entrepreneurs and scientists
bravely changing the world for the better. But the picture is far more complex
than that. The Luddite movement of the early nineteenth century was active at a
time when there was no regulation of trade and no rights for workers. By
smashing the machines that replaced them they were attempting to preserve
livelihoods and protect families from starvation and the workhouse.
Similarly, automation today is
taking away livelihoods, despite the fact that our society requires two parents
to be working in order for them to be able to scrape a decent living.
In recent months there has
been chaos at the Ryanair desk at
And of course Ryanair
increases its profits. In cases like this we will be told that the workers will
be employed somewhere else in a company. But look around any supermarket and
see how many workers are on the floor, and how many check-outs have people
behind them.
Only so many people can be
redeployed. Similarly, at railway stations there are often no people employed,
and this of course is because of the requirement that state companies operate
like private companies, instead of being for the well-being of the people.
The policy of precarious
on-call working hours makes it difficult to know how many people are employed
and how many are just not asked to work again, so figures can be trotted out
that answer the negative publicity.
And of course we’re given
positive and admiring news reports telling us about driverless trains, buses,
and trams. But dock workers who have been replaced by robots, where one person
and a computer can load and unload large cargo ships, find themselves in a
lonely world with no colleagues to talk to or mix with socially. Workers in
almost totally automated warehouses and factories talk of the same alienation
and loneliness.
And now we are told that in
Researchers at the World
Economic Forum predict that 7.1 million jobs “could be lost through redundancy,
automation, or disintermediation, while the creation of 2.1 million new jobs,
mainly in more specialised areas, such as computing, maths, architecture, and
engineering, could partially offset some of the losses.” They go on to say that
two-thirds of the job losses will be “concentrated in the Office and
Administrative job family.”
Klaus Schwab, founder of the
World Economic Forum, adds: “Without urgent and targeted action today to manage
the near-term transition . . . governments will have to cope with ever-growing
unemployment and inequality, and businesses with a shrinking consumer base.”
A study by Forrester Research,
which describes itself as an “exclusive network of peers, analysts, and
advisers connecting you with leading practices to accelerate business growth,”
has predicted that within five years artificial intelligence will be so
developed that it will replace workers. “By 2021, a disruptive tidal wave will
begin,” its vice-president, Brian Hopkins, wrote. “Solutions powered by
AI/cognitive technology will displace jobs, with the biggest impact felt in
transportation, logistics, customer service, and consumer services.”
When you see that the
promoters of the new developments include a host of “care companies,” as well
as Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Panasonic, and
Most insidious of all is the
use of robotics in drone warfare, where killing machines are controlled by
whiz-kid operators, many of whom were recruited merely because they were good
at computer games. Now they wreak death and destruction from afar on whole
villages and cities in war-torn countries in Asia and the
It is no accident that most
robotic development is carried out within the military-industrial complex or is
directly or indirectly funded by it. Robots are being made increasingly
intelligent and can now make independent decisions; and, in the hands of
unscrupulous governments and companies, they can destroy people.
We have yet to feel the effect
on society of dealing with automated services on a large scale. Think of when
you get stranded in a large underground train station, or at an airport with
masses of people rushing around, with nobody who has the time to stop for your
question when you are confused by all the options.
All over the world there are
farmers, fishermen and small traders who are pushed out of their livelihoods by
the present form of society, while large corporations are taking over vast areas
in Asia and Latin America, decimating forests, sweeping up the fish in the
oceans with massive trawlers, and farming with automated machinery. People are
committing suicide in large numbers because they cannot support their families,
and yet automation is developing at an accelerating rate.
When large corporations are
allowed to do this now, what of the people when automation increasingly
replaces workers? We will be expendable, just as millions of people are
expendable today in so-called underdeveloped countries.
So what is the answer? The
solution is not easy; but there is only one way in which automation can be a
good thing for society: in a planned socialist economy, where a shift from
traditional work is planned for and in which automation is used where and when
it benefits the society at that moment.
Capitalist greed ensures that
each corporation pursues profits at the expense of the people, and it is a core
principle that innovation by the brightest people will bring about the greatest
advances in society. But look at the world today: we are facing extinction,
with our planet ruined by pollution, and half the existing forms of life on
earth are predicted to be gone by 2050.
It is time for socialists to
reclaim their position as advocates of the system that provides the best
possible way forward, and to move on from constantly having to justify earlier
attempts to establish socialism against ferocious capitalist assault. We should
look to the future and say that any society that wants the good of all its
people is far better suited to reaching a satisfactory conclusion on automation
than one based on the greed of the top 1 per cent, and on the idea that wealth
“trickles down.”
A positive view of the world
is needed to give people hope of change. This world is possible, and we should
not get bogged down in analysing the latest economic stance of the Government,
or in being forced to provide answers despite not having the power to fix the
problems within this system.
Socialists cannot fix this
system: we can only help to mitigate the worst of its problems while fighting
to raise awareness, get our message across, and mobilise at every opportunity
to bring change: by joining unions, fighting public-service cut-backs, being
active in local communities, and opposing big business ruining life wherever it
occurs.
It is important to see
automation in relation to the economic development of each country. Under
capitalism it is not about the well-being of people but about reducing costs
and increasing profits.
Socialism is the solution to
problems of automation. Advances in technology must move in harmony with the
well-being of the people, to allow people more leisure time but with adequate
resources for living comfortably. The existing way is chaos and poverty for
vast numbers of the world’s population.