Anti-union bill defeated in Missouri

From: PWW

Author: Tony Pecinovsky
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/28/09 13:12

ST. LOUIS -- The fight to pass the Employee Free Choice Act recently won a victory here in Missouri. House Joint Resolution 37, better known as Save Our Secret Ballots, went down in defeat when the Missouri legislature adjourned May 15.

HRJ37 would have amended the Missouri constitution to require secret ballots for all union elections. The Missouri legislation is part of a nation-wide campaign by big business, anti-union forces designed to give the impression that workers are against the Employee Free Choice Act, organized labor's top priority.

According to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, “The Save our Secret Ballot” organization is pushing similar anti-union constitutional amendments in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina and Utah. The group is based in Nevada.

Free Choice will strengthen the rights of workers to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation (often called card-check); it will also place stiffer penalties on employers who violate the law.

Current labor law allows for card check representation or a secret ballot. However, the choice is not made by the workers. It allows the employer to decide which process will be used.

According to a Cornell University study, 92 percent of private-sector employers force employees to attend closed-door, captive audience meetings where they are forced to listen to anti-union propaganda; 80 percent of employers require supervisors to attend training sessions attacking unions; and 78 percent require that supervisors give anti-union messages to workers they oversee.

Employee Free Choice would let workers, not their bosses, decide how they want the union recognized: through card check representation or through an election.

Many see state-level campaigns for bills like Save Our Secret Ballots as dangerous not only because they weaken workers' rights, but also because they help the right-wing and big business build momentum as it tries to stop Free Choice at the federal level.

Senator Robin Wright-Jones, who helped block HJR37, told the World, "HJR37, the so-called Save Our Secret Ballots initiative, would have done nothing to protect workers' rights. It would keep a broken system in place. Big business' unsolicited interest only underscores the fact that the current system by which union elections are held does not meet the needs of today's workers. So why keep it?"

Additionally, Wright-Jones asked, "Why is the Chamber of Commerce concerned about workers' rights? They've never cared about workers before."

Wright-Jones was referring to a spirited Jobs with Justice rally held earlier in May outside of the Clayton, Mo., Chamber of Commerce meeting where Karl Rove, who is staunchly anti-EFCA, was the keynote speaker.

"The Employee Free Choice Act would give workers power in the workplace -- power to fight for and win better wages, working conditions and benefits," Wright-Jones added.

HJR37 failed in Missouri because the MO AFL-CIO and Change To Win affiliates mounted a grassroots campaign that highlighted workers' struggles for a better life, while shedding light on employer misconduct. Labor's mobilization - from phone-banks to legislative visits -- showed right-wing, anti-union forces that Missouri isn't just the Show Me State. It's a union state.
tonypec@cpusa.org

Steelworkers walk out in France

From: PWW

Author: World Combined Sources
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/29/09 13:45

Steelworkers from the Fos-sur-Mer Arcelor Mittal plant demonstrate in Marseille, southern France, May 26. This was the fourth strike in recent months by French workers angry with the Sarkozy government’s handling of the economic crisis and failure to help workers and their families. The banner reads “Steelworkers sacrificed.”

AP photo.

Socialist International calls for closer ties on global issues with China

From: The People's Daily Online

Socialist International (SI) hopes to promote closer relationship with the Communist Party of China (CPC) on both regional and global issues, SI president George A. Papandreou said in Beijing on May 15.

Papandreou is leading a 15-member delegation to Beijing for a sustainable growth seminar jointly sponsored by CPC and SI.

“We plan to establish partnership with China on both regional and global issues of strategic importance, particularly in sustainable development and the exchanges of party practices. SI represents 170 parties in the world, and 50 of them are in government. We also want to draft a recommendation paper to leaders in Copenhagen when they meet at the end of this year on the issue of sustainable development,” Papandreou said in an exclusive interview with People’s Daily Online.

Voices of developing countries need strengthening

Since its establishment in 1951, SI has been strengthening the United Nations (UN). Papandreou said the world is now in a period in which issues are all global. One corner of the world affects the other corner. The rapid globalization process is often accompanied by the negative phenomenon such as conflict and violence, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the current A H1N1 outbreak. “We need to have a stronger UN, which can ensure an equal voice for all, and truly represent the interests of all the regions and countries,” he noted.

According to Papandreou, SI would like to see the voice of the developing countries strengthened, because the world’s major institutions, especially the financial institutions have been dominated by developed countries. Therefore the needs and voices of emerging economies have very often been neglected.

“If you want to combat issues such as poverty, equality and want to have a sense of justice, you need to have a more equitable and representative system at global level within the UN and other global financial institutions,” Papandreou added.

Development of Sino-Greece relations

“This is a very important relation for us. We (Greece and China) are two countries of different size but both rich in cultural heritage,” Papandreou said. The 2008 Olympic Games offered a good opportunity to draw the two countries together. He said Greece is very proud that the Chinese people have hosted a splendid Olympic Games in a magnificent way. It’s very moving for Greeks to see how their tradition was interpreted and given new meaning by another culture.

Papandreou also expressed his sympathy and solidarity for the earthquake China suffered last year. “We have particular sensitivity in that we are a country with frequently earthquakes. I would like to express my solidarity to the Chinese people and their effort in disaster relief and post-quake construction,” he added.

Bilateral relations between the two countries have also experienced tremendous progress. Papandreou said he followed the tradition of his father. “Bilateral relations have been further enhanced following my father’s visit to China in 1986 when he was Greek Prime Minister and during which time he also met with late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in 1986. Recently, I was honored to meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and was able to discuss several issues with him.“ He said he was confident that Greece and China can further enhance trade, tourism and cultural relations, and he looks forward to welcoming further relations between Chinese and Greece.

By People's Daliy Online

Quote of the Week

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

-former Marine Major General (one of the most decorated Marines ever, 2 time Medal of Honor recipient) Smedley Darlington Butler

Also, read about him in the fascist plot to overthrow FDR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

Kucinich on The Ed Show

Workers Face Increasing Abuse in Attempts to Form Unions

From: AFL-CIO Now Blog

by Seth Michaels, May 20, 2009

Today on Capitol Hill, labor law experts and a California worker exposed the ugly truth about corporate abuses of workers trying to exercise their freedom to form unions and bargain for a better life.

At the center of the discussion: Kate Bronfenbrenner’s new report, “No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing,” released by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) and the American Rights at Work Education Fund. The report shows that the problems the Employee Free Choice Act would address are getting worse.

Bronfenbrenner has studied these issues for decades as the director of labor education research at Cornell University’s School of Industrial Relations. This is her fourth survey over 20 years, enabling her to put into historical perspective the obstacles workers face today.

At the Capitol Hill briefing, Bronfenbrenner said weak laws and a hostile environment have emboldened corporations, over the past decade, to step up their abuses against workers trying to form unions.

The research provides a detailed portrait of a system that has failed private-sector workers. Workers have come to understand what our data confirms: Employers are using an arsenal of legal and illegal tactic to interfere with workers trying to organize, and they are doing it with impunity.

The study is the result of an in-depth examination of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) documents, examination of companies, interviews with workers and investigations of unfair labor practice filings, to give a clear picture of what the process of forming a union really looks like. And it’s not pretty:

• 63 percent of companies have supervisors interrogate workers in mandatory one-on-one meetings.
• 57 percent of companies threaten workers with plant closings.
• 47 percent threaten to cut wages and benefits.

What’s more, even if they win representation, a majority of workers still don’t have a first contract after a year.

Angel Warner, a working mom from California, offered a compelling story of these coercive tactics in action. Warner is a Rite Aid warehouse worker who tried to form a union through the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) at a large warehouse with 600 workers. The warehouse was inadequately heated in the winter and cooled in the summer, and the work was difficult and at times unsafe. That’s why Warner and her co-workers hoped to form a union. Wages and benefits were an issue, she said, but not the only issue. Mostly, they were concerned about job security and improving safety on the job, especially after management imposed a quota system that encouraged unsafe behavior.

You walk a fine line of taking a trip to the hospital or a trip to the unemployment line.

We like our jobs, we just want dignity, respect and a voice in our workplace. A person can only take so much—we decided it was time to stand up for ourselves.

Warner said that, as she and her-co-workers tried to form a union, management pulled union supporters aside for threatening meetings and singled out potential supporters for harassment. Pro-union employees were fired, and the workers filed 49 labor law violations against Rite-Aid—but the only repercussion for Rite-Aid is having to re-hire two employees and post fliers saying they would no longer engage in unfair practices.

Warner and her co-workers won the election by only a handful of votes, even after getting two-thirds of the employees to sign up, because of the extended election period and the abuses by management during that time. The election was held two years after starting the process of gathering signatures, Warner said, and even after a year of having won a union, the company still hasn’t offered a contract.

Our labor laws are not working, they’re not protecting the working class. We played by the rules. Even after harassment and threats, we voted for a union, and yet we’re still working without a contract. People are terrified of losing their jobs. It puts such a psychological and emotional pressure on you. It’s hard to function in the workplace because you’re so scared—you walk through the door and you don’t know, is this going to be the day that I walk out with my pink slip?

We have responsibilities to our families, our children. The working class needs help, we’re tired of waiting for justice. I urge Senators and Congresspeople that are on the fence, or have changed their minds, to look at people like me and the people I work with, and the thousands like me, because we’re not unique.

Workers’ rights need to be upheld. We’re ready to stand up for ourselves.

Fred Feinstein, a former NLRB counsel and a University of Maryland professor, agrees that existing labor law isn’t protecting workers. Warner’s story isn’t an exception, Feinstein said—it’s one vivid example of a pervasive failure of labor law:

There’s room for better enforcement and better strategies but fund the law itself is defective.

There’s considerable evidence that over the last decades, new tactics have been developed, weaknesses in the law have been discovered, refined and more successfully exploited, so that conditions on the ground have changed…we need to change the legal framework if we’re going to protect people.

Extended delay is a powerful weapon for employers, Feinstein said, because it ensures years of litigation to prevent remedies for their misbehavior.

And, said EPI President Larry Mishel, that this isn’t just an issue of fairness, it’s an economic issue. We’ve seen a 30-year period of rising inequality that didn’t allow people to have a good paycheck, he notes, which has undermined our economy by cutting back on workers’ purchasing power and security. As we rebuild the economy, we need to make sure it’s on a strong foundation.

One clear foundation is to fix the fundamentally broken labor market system—we have an economy that has been producing higher productivity, but most workers haven’t been able to benefit.

Companies are trying to pre-empt union campaigns, targeting union supporters and interrogating workers to find out how they’re going to vote. (Yes, that’s the reality of the “secret ballot” corporate lobbies are trying to impose.) Corporate tactics are designed to make the process less secret and less secure for workers who hope to join unions. Increasingly, management is working to monitor and punish union activities and force workers to choose sides. Said Bronfenbrenner:

We’ve found a climate of employer opposition that revealed a clear pattern of interrogation and surveillance…followed by threats and harassment to make sure that workers who pursue a union do so at clear personal risk.

Bronfenbrenner said that although she studied many unfair labor practice filings, many abuses aren’t even reported, because a climate of fear, weak remedies and long delays prevent workers from protesting unfair practices.

Warner said the common corporate complaint—that workers could act coercively as they campaigned to get their co-workers to form a union—was laughable and unsupported by facts.

From a worker’s point of view, the harassment and intimidation I’ve seen has come from the company side.

Bronfenbrenner and Feinstein both agreed that decades of research into organizing campaigns show this to be the case across the board. Historically, the number of unfair labor practice filings against unions is extremely low—only 42 cases of misconduct over seven decades—while there are nearly 30,000 unfair labor practices against workers by companies every year. People who say both sides are at fault aren’t to be taken seriously, Bronfenbrenner said:

Unions wouldn’t function if workers were coerced. The whole idea of having a union, of the organizing process, relies on workers feeling they have a democratic process, and believing in their union. Workers can vote their way out of a union at many phases—you don’t get to vote against your boss, and employers have enormous power over workers. They can fire you, they control your schedule, your pay, your working conditions.

Obama budget: A 180 degree turn on how workers will be protected

From: PWW

Author: John Wojcik
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/11/09 12:55

“If we expect our workers to come to work, every day, we have to protect them,” declared Jordan Barab, acting head of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, when he spoke to union nurses at their legislative gathering in Washington D.C. last week.

Talking about his boss, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Barab said, “She is assuming and hoping that most employers want to do the right thing, but those who don’t will be targeted for strong enforcement action.”

If the Obama budget is any indication, the administration seems, on the issue of workplace safety, to be putting its money where its mouth is.

In the budget sent to Congress on May 7, OSHA would get a 10 percent increase in its budget and staff and would close the door on its failed Bush-pushed “voluntary compliance” approach.

The Obama plan to allocate $51 million more to OSHA, raising its funding to $568 million, is, in fact, just one of many pro-worker changes in the budget. It is also proposing major changes in discretionary programs that would help workers.

The number of federal OSHA inspectors, in the fiscal year starting Oct. 1, will rise from 38,600 to 40,900. The number of state inspections would rise from 50,000 to 57,650. Money for federal OSHA enforcement would increase 14.6 percent to $227 million.

During the Bush years the Department of Labor lacked sufficient funding, also, to pursue and prosecute employers who violated minimum wage and overtime laws. The new budget boosts funds for enforcement in this area.

Another area to which increased funding will be devoted is Trade Adjustment Assistance, designed to help workers who lose their jobs to subsidized foreign imports. These funds will double, to $1.8 billion, covering larger numbers of workers. Trade Adjustment Assistance includes extensions of jobless benefits and even subsidies for health insurance coverage to workers who lose their jobs.

In the Obama stimulus bill which Congress passed, Trade Adjustment Assistance was expanded to include service-sector workers and workers at firms who lose jobs because their companies depended upon business from laid off workers at other companies affected by foreign trade. Under this new approach a restaurant worker in Mahwah, N.J., for example, who lost his job when the Ford plant there closed, could be eligible for benefits under Trade Adjustment Assistance. This new eligibility begins May 18.

The Obama budget will actually slash one section of the Department of Labor’s enforcement apparatus – the section created by George Bush to harass and “investigate” unions – the Office of Labor-Management Standards. That office, a favorite of the radical right’s National Right to Work Committee, will be cut by 10 percent to $41 million.

Solis has already killed a recent Bush rule that would have forced union officers and staffers to publicly disclose virtually all of their personal finances, something corporate leaders and staffers are, of course, not required to do.

For the first time, ever, the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division has set a goal to secure for 350,000 or more workers back pay owed to them by their companies.

Additional funding has also been provided to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., which pays out pension plans when employers,, usually due to bankruptcy, dump them. The Department of Labor expects that it will take over plans affecting 692,484 retirees in the year starting Oct. 1, up from 665,000 this year. It expects another 100 corporate pension plans to be dumped this year.

The National Labor Relations Board will get a small increase, up $21 million to $283.4 million. The number of workers employed by the board will increase by 48, to 1,285, still, however, well below levels it had reached during the Clinton Administration.

In a statement, Solis said, “The president’s budget launches new and innovative ways to promote economic recovery and the competitiveness of our nation’s workers.”

Most in the labor movement are hoping that the efforts in the Obama budget to protect people who go to work every day are the beginning of a permanent departure from the way business was done during the Bush years.

Vietnam celebrates Dien Bien Phu anniversary

From: PWW

Author: David Pena
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/11/09 15:28

On May 7 Vietnam celebrated the 55th anniversary of its decisive victory over U.S.–backed French colonialist forces at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu during the First Indochina War. At Dien Bien Phu City in mountainous northwestern Vietnam, solemn ceremonies and military parades, as well as artistic and sporting events, were held to celebrate the anniversary.

The battle was fought between the Viet Minh, led by General Vo Nguyen Giap (now 98 years old) and a 13,000 strong French military force garrisoned in the Muong Thanh Valley, where Dien Bien Phu is located. In an amazing logistical feat, the Viet Minh moved infantry and artillery into the steep mountains surrounding the French garrison. After a 57-day siege lasting from March 13 to May 7, 1954, the Viet Minh charged down from their mountain bases and overran the French.

Widely regarded as one of the most important military engagements of the 20th century, the Viet Minh victory at Dien Bien Phu was the first time that a non-Western national liberation army was able to defeat a modern Western military force. It led to French withdrawal from Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, and eventually to the massive U.S. military intervention in Southeast Asia during the Second Indochina War, known in the U.S. as the Vietnam War, and in Vietnam as the American War. During the battle, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower first put forward the infamous Domino Theory, which articulated the U.S ruling class’ fear of Communist expansion in Southeast Asia.

The immediate aftermath of the French defeat was the signing of the Geneva Accords, intended to temporarily divide Vietnam into a North and a U.S.-controlled South until the country could be unified on the basis of internationally supervised elections scheduled for July 1956. Certain of a Communist electoral victory that would make Ho Chi Minh leader of a unified, socialist Vietnam, the U.S. and South Vietnam refused to hold the elections. South Vietnamese citizens opposed to this treacherous move formed the Communist National Liberation Front, or Viet Cong, which fought a war of national liberation against U.S. occupation forces and the South Vietnamese military. The Viet Cong, with the support of the North Vietnamese Army, defeated the United States, which withdrew its forces in 1973. The South Vietnamese army was defeated and the country unified on April 30, 1975.

In the 55 years since the battle, the people of Dien Bien Phu, along with the entire Vietnamese nation, have worked hard to overcome the legacies of colonialism and war. Today, Dien Bien Phu is a thriving city of approximately 98,000 people, and the capital of Dien Bien Province. Recent decades have seen advancements in local agriculture that have eliminated hunger and improved living standards. One-hundred percent of villages in the province have telephones, schools, and medical clinics. Once entirely dependent on agriculture, the region now boasts a diversified industrial and service-based economy which grew an average of 8 percent annually from 2001 to 2005 and 11 percent annually from 2006 to 2008.

At the victory ceremony, Dien Bien Province was awarded the Order of Ho Chi Minh in recognition of its contributions to economic renewal and the construction of socialism in Vietnam. It was the second time the province has won the award.

New report shows millions lost health coverage during the recession

From: PWW

Author: Lauren McGlothlin
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/10/09 11:22

Original source: civilrights.org

A new report on health care coverage over the last 15 months by the Center for American Progress shows that rapid increases in unemployment have increased the number of uninsured Americans.

Nearly 60 percent of Americans get health care through their employers. However, employers have cut 5.1 million jobs since the recession started and the report estimates that in that time 2.3 million people have lost their health insurance.

The report states that the highest number of losses occurred during the first four months of 2009, with over 1 million workers losing health care coverage – about 42 percent of the total losses since 2007.

These numbers only include those Americans who receive employer-provided insurance and doesn't reflect the number of families that have indirectly lost health coverage due to spouses or parents losing their jobs.

The report calls on the Obama administration to work on comprehensive health care reform now so that every American can have access to quality health care.

Video Review: Capitalism Hits the Fan

From: Political Affairs Online

By Arthur Perlo

---

click here for related stories: capitalism

5-08-09, 8:52 am

Capitalism Hits the Fan
Produced by the Media Education Foundation
2009.

Richard Wolff (Professor of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst) has released a DVD titled Capitalism Hits the Fan. It contains a lecture he gave on November 19, 2008, along with some supporting graphics.

Wolff begins by emphasizing that the economic crisis is severe, that it will not be temporary or short, and it is not simply a financial crisis but rather it comes out of the whole economic system. (These points might seem obvious today, but at the time the lecture was given, the extent and severity of the crisis were not as widely recognized.)

To understand the crisis, Wolff recounts US economic history. From 1820 to 1970, the US was probably unique with steadily rising productivity, and with real wages rising at about the same rate. But beginning in the 1970s, real wages declined, while productivity continued to increase. Plotting these on a graph, the pre-1970 trend lines for wages and productivity overlap, while the post-1970 trend lines diverge dramatically. (This is where Wolff's graphs are really useful).

While much could be said about what was included and what was left out of this history, one feature is striking. There is no mention of class struggle anywhere (in this or in later sections of the talk); no mention of the role of unionization and New Deal programs in raising real wages in 1930s and beyond; no mention of the full scale capitalist counter-offensive – political and economic – against the working class launched in the 1970s. The economic history seems to have taken place in a social and political vacuum.

Wolff then lists four reasons for the divergence between wages and productivity since 1970: 1) computers replaced workers; 2) Growing competition from European and Japanese corporations, leading to large-scale export of jobs by US corporations; 3) increase supply of workers due to large-scale entrance of women in the workforce; 4) increase in immigration.

One could question this analysis on many economic grounds. One example, there are earlier periods of large-scale immigration, as well as waves of internal increases in the workforce from the century-long displacement of farmers. These occurred when, according to Wolff, real wages kept pace with productivity. What's different about the recent period? Wolff does not explain.

But far worse is the lack of any political or historical context for his assertions. Wolff's formulation leads to the conclusion that immigrants and women are to blame for declining real wages. And nowhere in this lecture is anything to correct that impression.

The next section explores the current crisis. The narrative is expressed quite well. Looking at the graph of productivity vs wages since 1970, we see a huge gap – which fed a huge increase in profits and executive pay. Instead of raising workers' wages, the capitalists allowed for rising consumption (and continued sales) by lending to the working class – graphs show the exponential increase in mortgage and credit card debt. Wolff states that credit solved the problem of rising expectations of the working class, which had been conditioned by 150 years of rising living standards. Hours of work increased in order to finance increased consumption. And the credit markets provided an outlet for all the profits that the capitalist class was accumulating. But it all reached a limit: workers are now working as many hours as they can, and can't borrow any more; the system has come crashing down.

The section is presented effectively, and I like the formulation that the money the capitalist class loaned to the working class represents wages that workers should have been getting. But as in the historical section, there is a feeling that these economic events simply happened, without a social or political context. No recognition that social policies (subsidy of suburban housing and highway transportation, moving jobs out of cities, growing segregation, state/local government funding issues, etc.) drove large sections of the working class to depend on and aspire to individual solutions (big suburban home, three cars per family). And again, no mention of class struggle.

What is to be done? Wolff emphasizes that this is not primarily a financial crisis, but a crisis of the system. He lumps together and ridicules both monetary and fiscal measures. (in fairness, the lecture took place last November, before the Obama administration took office and introduced a real stimulus program and budget). Wolff ridicules the idea that regulation will solve the crisis. The same corporate boards that dodged, undermined, and eventually repealed the New Deal regulations will similarly shred any new regulations. Economists, says Wolff, frame the discussion as between "free market" (unregulated) and Keynesian (regulated) models. They don't deal with the fundamental conflict between the people who run the enterprise and the people who work in it. What we need is fundamental change.

Class struggle is implicit in this view, but it is entirely absent from the solution Wolff presents. People who work should own each enterprise, he says. Why should democracy be in politics but not in economics? As an example of what is possible, look at Silicon Valley. A few engineers would leave IBM or Cisco and start a company in someone's garage. They would share the work and the rewards, and one day a week they would devote to meetings to discuss all the technical and administrative aspects of running the company. This, says Wolff, replicates Marx's idea of a Communist enterprise. It is also cited as an ideal by Republican-oriented business publications. All the achievements usually attributed to “capitalist entrepreneurship” are really achievements of communist organization.

Wolff's recognition that this is not primarily a financial crisis, and is in fact a crisis of the capitalist system, is welcome, if hardly unique. But that thesis is mainly supported by assertion. I would agree that Keynesian economics is inadequate either to explain or provide solutions to capitalist crises. But Wolff does not discuss any of the limitations of Keynesianism, aside from asserting that regulation will eventually be undermined.

I find Wolff's utopian vision of an economy based on workers' coops a little silly, and his example of Silicon Valley amongst the worst he could have chosen But Wolff's utopianism is not the main problem with his Solutions section.

What do we take away from this lecture, which was made shortly after the November election completely changed political possibilities in Washington? No mention of the need for working class organizing. No mention of unions. No mentions of the urgent problems facing the people – jobs, foreclosures, health care – all of which were evident at the time of the lecture. No mention of the policies that are necessary to address these needs. Viewing Wolff's lecture, political action appears almost irrelevant. We are left with the impression that the political and social struggles now under way are pointless because they fall short of the fundamental systemic change that is necessary.

But contrary to Wolff, one does not have to be a Keynesian, or accept the idea that capitalism can be “saved” or regulated, to join with progressives in fighting for the positive measures the administration is introducing, and to push beyond them. Wolff, in fact, does damage to the anti-capitalist cause, by painting it as being in contradiction with other progressive currents, and proposing to divert it into a relatively sterile utopian channel that can, at best, be a small part of the range of anti-monopoly and anti-capitalist struggle.

Wolff's lecture contains valuable material and useful formulations. It is important to find ways of using online and video methods of presenting an anti-capitalist economic analysis. If I were conducting a class on the economic crisis, I would not use the whole video for reasons both of form and content, but I might well use parts of it.

The DVD is available at CapitalismHitstheFan.com, and you can watch a low-res version online. If you get the DVD, I suggest going to the /Extras/ menu and selecting the abridged version. I watched the full-length (1-hour) version, and the flourishes and repetition that may have gone down well in person become a bit tedious in your living room.

US Soldiers in Afghanistan Told to "hunt people for Jesus... so we get them into the kingdom"

From: RebelReports.com

Military officials at Bagram are caught on tape urging US soldiers to evangelize in the Muslim country.

By Jeremy Scahill

New video evidence has surfaced showing that US military forces in Afghanistan have been instructed by the military’s top chaplain in the country to “hunt people for Jesus” as they spread Christianity to the overwhelmingly Muslim population. Soldiers also have imported bibles translated into Pashto and Dari, the two dominant languages of Afghanistan. What’s more, the center of this evangelical operation is at the huge US base at Bagram, one of the main sites used by the US military to torture and indefinitely detain prisoners.

In a video obtained by Al Jazeera and broadcast Monday, Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief of the US military chaplains in Afghanistan, is seen telling soldiers that as followers of Jesus Christ, they all have a responsibility “to be witnesses for him.”

“The special forces guys - they hunt men basically. We do the same things as Christians, we hunt people for Jesus. We do, we hunt them down,” he says.

“Get the hound of heaven after them, so we get them into the kingdom. That’s what we do, that’s our business.”

The translated Bibles appear to be the New Testament. According to Al Jazeera, US soldiers “had them specially printed and shipped to Afghanistan.” On the tape, one soldier describes how his church in the US helped raise money for the bibles. Al Jazeera reports that “What these soldiers have been doing may well be in direct violation of the US Constitution, their professional codes and the regulations in place for all forces in Afghanistan.” The US military officially forbids “proselytising of any religion, faith or practice.” But, as Al Jazeera reports:

[T]he chaplains appear to have found a way around the regulation known as General Order Number One.

“Do we know what it means to proselytise?” Captain Emmit Furner, a military chaplain, says to the gathering.

“It is General Order Number One,” an unidentified soldier replies.

But Watt says “you can’t proselytise but you can give gifts.”

Trying to convert Muslims to any other faith is a crime in Afghanistan. The fact that the video footage is being broadcast on Al Jazeera guarantees that it will be seen throughout the Muslim world. It is likely to add more credence to the perception that the US is engaging in a war on Islam with neo-crusader forces invading Muslim lands.

Former Afghan prime minister Ahmed Shah Ahmedzai told Al Jazeera there must be a “serious investigation,” saying, “This is very damaging for diplomatic relations between the two counties.” Sayed Aalam Uddin Asser, of the Islamic Front for Peace and Understanding in Kabul, told the network: “It’s a national security issue … our constitution says nothing can take place in Afghanistan against Islam. If people come and propaganda other religions which have no followers in Afghanistan [then] it creates problems for the people, for peace, for stability.”

A US military spokesperson, Major Jennifer Willis, denied that the US military has allowed its soldiers to attempt to convert Afghans and said comments from sermons filmed at Bagram were taken out of context. She said the bibles were never distributed. “That specific case involved a soldier who brought in a donation of translated bibles that were sent to his personal address by his home church. He showed them to the group and the chaplain explained that he cannot distribute them,” she said. “The translated bibles were never distributed as far as we know, because the soldier understood that if he distributed them he would be in violation of general order 1, and he would be subject to punishment.”

The video footage was shot about a year ago by documentary filmmaker Brian Hughes, who is also a former US soldier. “[US soldiers] weren’t talking about learning how to speak Dari or Pashto, by reading the Bible and using that as the tool for language lessons,” Hughes told Al Jazeera. “The only reason they would have these documents there was to distribute them to the Afghan people. And I knew it was wrong, and I knew that filming it … documenting it would be important.”

The broadcast of this video comes just days after a new poll of White Americans found that, in the US, church going Christians are more likely to support the use of torture than other segments of the population. The Pew Research Center poll found: “White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified — more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.”

This is certainly not the first scandal where US military forces or officials have been caught on tape promoting an evangelical Christian agenda. Perhaps the most high-profile case involved Lieut. Gen. William Boykin, who was a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence under Bush. Boykin was part of Donald Rumsfeld’s inner circle at the Pentagon where he was placed in charge of hunting “high-value targets.” Boykin was one of the key U.S. officials in establishing what critics alleged was death-squad-type activity in Iraq.

In October 2003, Boykin was revealed to have gone on several anti-Muslim rants, in public speeches, many of which he delivered in military uniform. Since January 2002, Boykin had spoken at twenty-three religious-oriented events, wearing his uniform at all but two. Among Boykin’s statements, he said he knew the U.S. would prevail over a Muslim adversary in Somalia because “I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.” Boykin also charged that Islamic radicals want to destroy America “because we’re a Christian nation” that “will never abandon Israel.” Our “spiritual enemy,” Boykin declared, “will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus.”

As for President Bush, Boykin said, “Why is this man in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him. Why is he there? And I tell you this morning that he’s in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this.” In another speech, Boykin said other countries “have lost their morals, lost their values. But America is still a Christian nation.” He told a church group in Oregon that special operations forces were victorious in Iraq because of their faith in God. “Ladies and gentlemen, I want to impress upon you that the battle that we’re in is a spiritual battle,” he said. “Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army.”

May Day in Baghdad

From: PWW

Author: Special to the World
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/02/09 13:54

Original source: http://iraqiletter.blogspot.com/

Iraqi Communists, waving red banners, joined thousands of workers and trade unionists in celebrating International Workers' Day in central Baghdad on Friday, 1st May 2009.

The marchers started off from under Nasb al-Hurriya (Freedom Monument), the national historic landmark in Sahat Al-Tahrir (Liberation Square), moving towards Firdos Square and eventually ended at Andulus Square where a mass rally was held.

The rally, held in front of the headquarters of the Iraqi Communist Party, was addressed by the Secretary of its Central Committee, comrade Hamid Majeed Mousa.

Many democratic organisations joined the march and rally, with banners and slogans calling for working class and national unity, and for defending workers' rights and democratic freedoms.

Greetings to the Workers of Iraq and the World

On the 1st of May .. International Workers' Day

From the Iraqi Communist Party

Hundreds of millions of workers and people around the world and also in Iraq will celebrate International Workers' Day, the1st of May, which has been associated with the revolutionary and democratic movement and the struggle to end all forms of exploitation and subjugation by the classes that control wealth and dominate political power and society. It is an occasion to highlight the pioneering role played the workers, since the dawn of history, as the main force in building human civilization and as the real creators of material wealth.

The 1st of May entered the annals of the history of international class and political struggle after the strike organised by trade unions in Chicago on 1st May 1886, when protesters clashed with the police that were acting on behalf of big business, resulting in large numbers of casualties among the workers, with many arrested and several of them sentenced to death.

Since that day, the1st of May has become a symbol of the struggle against poverty, hunger, unemployment, social injustice and marginalization in all its forms, and to raise the standard of living, improve working conditions, reduce working hours, regulate wages and enjoy social security.

In Iraq, the workers celebrated this glorious day openly for the first time after the 14th July 1958 Revolution, when the 1st of May was declared a national holiday. Baghdad still remembers, to this day, that million-strong demonstration organised by the Iraqi workers and their trade unions, supported and backed by the Iraqi Communist Party, on the 1st of May 1959. That historic event was echoed in towns and provinces all over Iraq with carnivals and celebrations unparalleled in the history of our country.

Before the 14th July 1958, Iraqi workers used to celebrate this occasion, dear to their hearts, in clandestine conditions, away from the eyes of the secret police of the monarchic regime. Since the formation of the first trade union organisations and the birth of the Iraqi Communist Party in 1934, the emerging Iraqi working class led the struggles of the people and their strikes, economic, social, political and class battles and courageous uprisings. These struggles have become shining landmarks in Iraq's contemporary history and a memory that haunts dictatorial rulers, parasitic elements and the enemies of freedom, democracy and social justice. The role played by the Iraqi Communist Party in those demonstrations and uprisings, by coordinating with the patriotic and democratic forces, was instrumental in deepening the content of those battles and giving them a broad national and democratic character.

Under Saddam's dictatorial regime, the Iraqi working class was subjected to various forms of exploitation, political repression and the falsification of its will. Trade unions and professional associations were turned into "yellow" organizations and empty fronts for the ruling Baath party and its security and intelligence organs. In the aftermath of the war and collapse of the dictatorship on 9th April 2003, despite the extremely difficult and complex conditions that existed under occupation, trade union work and other forms of political and social activity began to emerge and develop. But exceptional circumstances, especially the vicious terrorist campaign waged against our country and the presence of occupation forces, curtailed that promising start and prevented the Iraqi working class and people from reaping its fruits on the level of organisation and in the broad arena of labour.

In addition, government interference in the affairs of the General Federation of Iraqi Workers, and other associations and unions, played a negative role that hampered its activities in defense of the rights of workers. For example, successive governments have continued to give a deaf ear to persistent workers' demands for abolishing Decree No. 150 (1987) that was issued by the so-called "Revolution Command Council" under Saddam's dictatorship, which turned state sector workers into government employees, prohibiting them from setting up their own trade unions.

Decree No. 45 (2003), issued by Bremer's occupation authority, which suspended the election activities of trade unions and put them under the mercy of a ministerial committee, is still in force. Furthermore, the government is still insisting, till this day, on its unjust Decree No. 8750 (2005) that called for freezing the movable and immovable assets of the unions, in a blatant manifestation of interference in their affairs that resulted in paralysing unions' work and activities. The position of the government has regrettably remained unchanged in spite of many appeals and several meetings between the representatives of the General Federation of Iraqi Workers and key government officials, and despite the many promises given by these officials to find quick solutions to these outstanding issues.

Iraqi workers and our people in general have been following closely the positive steps witnessed by our country in terms of pursuing the networks of terrorism and acts of sabotage and tightening the noose around criminal elements and outlaws. They are also aware of increased stability, the acceptance of the peaceful political process, and Iraq's expanding regional and international relations. While expressing support for these developments, they also look forward to practical, quick solutions to the problems of unemployment, high prices, health and education, providing protection for national products, restoring the status of industry and agriculture in Iraq, finding solutions to the crisis of housing, transport, water and electricity, developing social welfare programs and the laws of retirement and health insurance, and addressing the disparity between the salaries of senior officials and those of government employees.

In addition, millions of workers are looking forward to bold steps to be taken by the government in order to strike with an iron fist at the corrupt, big and small, who are stealing people's food and wealth, and who are hostile to the aspirations of the poor, the widows and orphans, and the families of martyrs and the "disappeared".

Today, as the spectre of unemployment creeps and the gains made by broad strata of the population in advanced capitalist societies are eroded because of the nature of the capitalist system and its mechanisms, and as a result of the new global financial and economic crisis, the struggle of workers' unions and professional associations in the developed capitalist countries is intensifying. This struggle enjoys broad support and active participation of all the forces that are opposed to savage capitalist globalization and are calling for a truly humanitarian globalization. There is an escalation of struggles to preserve the gains that the workers, those with low income and wage-earners in general, had achieved through struggles for more than a century, particularly the gains made in the areas of reducing working hours, increasing wages, obtaining health and social security and to strive to enrich these achievements in line with the development of society and the requirements of modern life. We have great confidence that the workers and toilers of our country, Iraq, will spare no effort to contribute to these struggles, for a better future for themselves and for all mankind.

We salute, once again, the Iraqi working class people, as well as the workers of the world, on their International Day... the 1st of May.

_______________

** Excerpts from the editorial of "Tareeq Al-Shaab" (People's Path), the central organ of the Iraqi Communist Party .. issued on 27th April 2009.

Obama, reform and the role of the left

From: PWW

Author: Sam Webb
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/01/09 15:54

Sam Webb

After the first, perhaps over analyzed, hundred days of the Obama administration, it is fair to say that President Obama is a reformer and we are entering an era of reforms, possibly radical reforms.

Some on the left (ignoring the right wing talk shows and their fantastic claims about Obama’s socialist pedigree) mockingly dismiss the new president and his reform inclinations, saying that his main mission is merely to save capitalism. Even if that is true, and there is no reason to doubt it, what does it tell us — that he is neither a politician of the left nor an advocate of socialism? Well, we already knew that.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, too, had no aspirations to change the foundations of capitalist society. But he realized that in order to preserve capitalism it had to be modified (and, yes, it can be modified), and he had to respond to the anger and yearnings of millions of Americans caught in the web of a seemingly intractable economic depression.

Given the contemporary economic crisis, Obama appears to be of a similar mind, though he comes to the White House with deeper democratic and reform sensibilities than FDR.

So far, Obama’s presidency has not only broken decisively from the right-wing extremist policies of the Bush administration, but has also taken measures domestically and internationally that go in a progressive direction.

Whether this continues and takes on a consistently progressive, pro-people, radical reform character isn’t a sure bet, however. Much like with the New Deal of the 1930s, it will be the outcome of contested and fluid process stretching over time, taking multiple forms, and pivoting around the expansion of citizenship rights (socialized health care, for example) and the reconfiguration of the role of government to the advantage of working people.

Socialism may be an objective necessity for our country, an appealing idea to many ordinary Americans (a recent Rasmussen poll found that 20 percent favored socialism over capitalism and another 27 percent were unsure which was better), and a vision that we on the left want to vigorously popularize, but it isn’t yet on the immediate political agenda — clearly, neither the current balance of forces nor the thinking of millions of Americans is at that point.

We are still in a democratic, increasingly anti-corporate, phase of struggle. In the course of this, political conditions could mature over time to the point where more advanced solutions – such as military conversion to peacetime and green production, a shorter work week, a “war” on poverty and inequality, public democratic ownership of critical economic sectors, and, depending on the dialectics of struggle, socialism – come to the fore of the people’s agenda.

But that is ahead of us. Currently, the level of mobilization of the diverse coalition that elected Obama doesn’t match what is necessary to win his administration’s immediate legislative and political agenda, let alone more far-reaching reforms.

A favorable alignment of forces exists, to be sure. But political majorities are consequential only to the degree that they are an active and organized element in the political process.

Moreover, the opposition is formidable. Right-wing Republicans experienced a crushing defeat, but no one should write them off; they have consolidated their grip on the Republican Party, are well funded, and are clever at exploiting popular grievances and resentments.

Finance capital will attempt to minimize losses to its balance sheet, rob the public till where it can, and restructure the regulatory environment along lines that favor speculation and a casino economy.

Other powerful sections of big capital – energy, military, health care, pharmaceutical and other giants of corporate America – will also fiercely resist measures that collide with their political and economic interests.

Finally, there are political groupings of considerable influence in the administration and the Democratic Party who, while supporting Obama, will use their influence to cut down on the sweep and anti-corporate character of his initiatives.

Thus, the struggle of the nation’s progressive majority — the working class, the racially oppressed, women, young people and others — is two-sided.

On the one hand, it has to battle stop-at-nothing right-wing extremists and their backers who are intent on defeating Obama and the people’s coalition that supports him.

On the other hand, it has to struggle (but in a constructive, unifying way) within the multi-class coalition that Obama leads, to put their essential pro-working-class and democratic stamp on the reform process and the political direction of the country.

And herein lies the role of the left. Its main task, as it has been throughout our country’s history, is to assist in reassembling, activating, uniting and giving a voice to common demands that unite this broad majority as well as draw in other people who didn’t vote for Obama.

The left's political analysis, solutions to today's pressing crisis and a vision of socialism, rooted in a democratic ethos and practices, and not tied to a universal “model” imported from the 20th century, will receive a fair and favorable hearing from millions of Americans to the degree that left activists are active participants in the main labor and people’s organizations struggling for vital reforms today — jobs, health care, retirement security, quality public education, equality and fairness, immigration reform, a foreign policy of peace and cooperation, and a livable environment and sustainable economy.

Those who narrow down the role of the left to simply being a critic of every move of the Obama administration and/or insist on left demands as the only basis of broad unity limit the left’s capacity to be a part of a much larger coalition that could make America “a more perfect union.”

Sam Webb (swebb@cpusa.org) is national chair of the Communist Party USA, founded in Chicago in 1919. Before being elected to that post, he served as the Communist Party state organizer in Michigan from 1978 to 1988. He received a master’s in economics from the University of Connecticut.

VP Biden affirms Obama admin.'s support for EFCA

From: PWW

Author: Joel Wendland
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 04/29/09 15:25

Rumors of the demise of the Employee Free Choice Act are greatly exaggerated. In a teleconference with reporters April 29th to tout the administration's accomplishments in its first 100 days, Vice President Joe Biden told reporters that the president continues to support and work for the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA).

"We believe the present system is tilted against what was initially intended by the NLRA," Vice President Biden noted. "If you go back and look at the legislation from back in those days it says that one of the purposes is not to guarantee unions but to promote, though, promote the ability of people to organize."

"We think, as my grandfather used to say, it has been stood on its head," Biden added, referencing the current state of federal labor law.

Biden expressed optimism that EFCA will pass. "We're supportive of it, and we will continue to support it," he said.

Biden refused to speculate too much on what Sen. Arlen Specter's defection from the Republican Party would mean for the bill's chances for passage, except to say that Sen. Specter would likely keep an open mind on compromise proposals that may arise in the future.

Specter, a former co-sponsor of the legislation, earlier this month flip-flopped his position on the bill by publicly stating that he would support a Republican filibuster against it. Immediately after his resignation from the GOP April 28th, he reaffirmed that stance on EFCA.

As reported exclusively in the People's Weekly World late yesterday, some union leaders have suggested that a compromise proposal which keeps the basic principles enshrined in the bill but overcomes objections held by Specter and others could be in the offing.

Biden pledged to work with labor, business and Congress to get the legislation passed and to remove "significant inequities" for working Americans.