If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.
From: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=27713
by Socialist Worker
The following statement on solidarity with the ordinary people of Greece was issued on 29 February.
The Coordination of the International Socialist Tendency
All Together (South Korea)
En Lucha /En Lluita (Spanish state)
International Socialist Organisation (Zimbabwe)
International Socialists (Canada)
International Socialists (Pakistan)
Internationale Socialisten (Netherlands)
Internationale Socialister /ISU (Denmark)
Internationella Socialister (Sweden)
Keep Left (South Africa)
Linkswende (Austria)
Marks21 (Serbia)
Mlodzi Socjalisci (The Young Socialists, Poland)
Mouvement pour le socialisme/Bewegung für sozialismus (Switzerland)
Pracownicza Demokracja (Workers Democracy, Poland)
Revolutionary Socialist Workers Party (Turkey)
Socialist Aotearoa (New Zealand)
Socialist Workers League (Nigeria)
Socialist Workers Party (Britain)
Socialist Workers Party (Ireland)
Sosialistiko Ergatiko Komma (Greece)
Solidarity (Australia)
Turn Left (Thailand)
Workers Democracy Group (Cyprus)
From: http://www.truth-out.org/ralph-nader-occupy-minimum-wage-and-impact-election/1330439686
by Chris Hedges
The Occupy movement may be able to forge a powerful alliance with millions of working men and women around a national call to raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour. The drive to establish new encampments, while important, is going to be long and difficult. The ongoing efforts to stand up to the foreclosure and mortgage crisis, the marches to hold Wall Street accountable, the protests against stop-and-frisk policies in New York City or police brutality in Oakland, while vital, do not draw the numbers into the streets across the country needed to loosen the grip of the corporate state.
Some 70 percent of the public supports raising the minimum wage. This is an issue that resonates across political, ethnic, religious and cultural lines. It exposes the vast disparities in wealth and the gross inequalities imposed by our corporate oligarchy. The political elite during this election year, which needs to toss a few scraps to the voting public, might be pressured to respond. The two leading Republican candidates, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, say they support the minimum wage (although only Romney has called for indexing the minimum wage). Barack Obama promised during his 2008 election campaign to press to raise the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2011, a promise that, like many others, he has ignored. But the ground is fertile.
“The 24-hour encampments, largely on public property, broke through,” Ralph Nader told me when we spoke of the Occupy movement a few days ago. “These encampments jolted the consciousness of the nation. But people began asking after a number of weeks what’s next. Once the movement lost the encampments, it did not have a second-strike readiness, which should be the raising of the minimum wage to $10 an hour.”
The federal minimum wage of $7.25, adjusted for inflation, is $2.75 lower than it was in 1968 when worker productivity was about half of what it is today. There has been a steady decline in real wages for low-income workers. Meanwhile, corporations such as Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, whose workforce earns the minimum wage or slightly above it, have enjoyed massive profits. Executive salaries, along with prices, have soared even as worker salaries have stagnated or declined. But the call to raise the minimum wage is not only a matter of economic justice. The infusion of tens of billions of dollars into the hands of the working class would increase tax revenue, open up new jobs and lift consumer spending.
There are numerous groups, including the AFL-CIO, whose leaders dutifully pay lip service to raising the minimum wage but have refused to mobilize to fight for it. Rank-and-file workers, once they had a place and a movement willing to agitate on their behalf, would shame union bosses into joining them. There are 535 congressional offices scattered throughout the country. These congressional offices, Nader suggests, could provide the focal point for sustained local protests.
“You could get leading think tanks, like the Economic Policy Institute [4], the AFL-CIO, member unions, especially unions like the California Nurses Association [5], which has been very aggressive on this, and a bevy of academics such as Dean Baker [6]and professor Robert Pollin [7], along with groups such as the NAACP and La Raza, to back this,” Nader said. “There is potential for huge synergy. But it needs the jolt that can only come from the Occupy movement.
“The Occupy movement arose by embracing a rejectionist attitude toward politics, but in the end that is lethal,” Nader said. “It is a form of ideological immolation. If they won’t turn on politics, politics will continue to turn on them. Politics means the power of government—local, state and national—and the ability of corporations to control departments and agencies and turn government against its own people. Not engaging in politics might have been a good preliminary tactic to gain credibility so they could avoid being tagged with some ‘-ism’ or some party, but it has worn out its purpose. The movement needs to become a champion for millions of low-income workers. This does not mean the Occupy movement should support a political party. It means it should go after both parties. It is only by going after the two main political parties that raising the minimum wage will get through Congress.”
Nader believes that the call to raise the minimum wage has the potential to divide the Republican Party, which has not been split on any major issue in Congress since Obama took office. He says that the economic suffering of low-income Americans is so severe that some Republican candidates running for office would be loath to ignore a groundswell in their districts calling for an increase in the minimum wage. But the pressure has to be exerted between now and the November elections. Once the elections are concluded, nothing will be passed that is not orchestrated, funded and authored by corporate lobbyists.
Past campaigns to raise the minimum wage have proved very popular. ACORN, in 2004, organized a statewide referendum in Florida to raise the minimum wage by a dollar. Once the proposal was on the ballot, corporate forces launched a lavishly funded assault against the initiative. The battle to defeat the measure was spearheaded by fast food corporations such as McDonald’s and Burger King as well as chain stores such as Wal-Mart and Kmart. There was no money to fund ads to counter the corporate propaganda or support the proposal. The initiative, despite the public relations onslaught, won by 71 percent. To placate his corporate backers, the Democratic presidential candidate, John Kerry, refused to support the ballot initiative, although he desperately needed Florida to win the election.
“How much political courage does it take to stand up for guys making $7.25 an hour while the head of Wal-Mart is making $11,000 an hour?” Nader asked. “What medieval period had that kind of wealth disparity?
“This campaign, if successful, would make the Occupy movement the chief movement in the country,” Nader said. “It would be a movement that got something done. It could build on this.
“The end of the encampments could be an unintended blessing,” Nader went on. “The movement no longer has to deal with daily housekeeping, sanitation, the occasional fights and bickering and the poor and homeless who were urged to go there by police. It can develop a laser-beam focus on the first stage of the recovery of the American worker.
“To be able to spearhead a coalition that includes the AFL-CIO, minority groups and local community groups will show that the movement can leverage power,” Nader said. “It has not shown this so far. The most accessible bastion of corporate power, the most sensitive of the three branches of government, is the legislature, and not just Congress, but state legislatures. This is a winnable issue. It fulfills the 99 percent motto. And the movement can be very effective because it has developed a unique ability to carry out daily demonstrations. If the movement can get the minimum wage raised, it will gain enormous power. Who has gotten anything on the progressive agenda through Congress in the last few years? A victory would permit the Occupy movement to fill this power vacuum. Once you win a battle in Congress, you produce a penumbra of power. This penumbra stops bad things from happening. It curtails the arrogance of the Republican Party. It empowers new and fresh leadership.”
From: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=106902
by Matthew Cardinale
ATLANTA, Feb 26 (IPS) – A new book shows there are now more U.S. voters who identify as independent than as Democrats or Republicans, despite the fact that the two major parties maintain their virtual stranglehold on U.S. politics and, so far, on the 2012 presidential election process.
In his book the “Apartisan American”, Russell Dalton, a professor of political science at the University of California, Irvine, reviews survey trends like the American National Election Studies (ANES), which show the share of U.S. citizens who consider themselves independent has nearly doubled, from 23 percent in 1952 to 40 percent in 2008.
Most of the shift appears to be among people who considered themselves Democrats to those who now consider themselves independent.
“In the past, Independents used to (attract) people at the margins of politics, less educated, less interested, who wouldn’t vote, people at the periphery,” Dalton told IPS.
“What’s changed from 20 percent to 40 percent is the growth among young, educated, politically engaged people who are turned off by political parties. They are interested in politics, and actually vote. They won’t vote out of loyalty, but out of issues. That’s what injected volatility into the [presidential] campaign,” he said.
“The unpredictability of elections, and the willingness of people to shift parties has increased; that’s the first whammy. The second whammy creates difficulties for candidates. They have their base that wants red meat party rhetoric to get them to vote. If they get their base to vote, they’re still 15 percent short of a majority,” Dalton added.
This trend is not limited to the U.S., but extends to all major Western democracies where long-term polling data is available, even in countries where it is easier for minor political parties to gain representation in the legislative branch.
While it is technically a political party, Dalton points to the rise of the Pirate Party in Germany and Sweden as evidence younger generations of citizens are eschewing uncritical party deference.
There are in fact a multitude of political parties in the U.S. other than the Democratic and Republican parties, although they differ in the level to which they have obtained ballot access in order to run candidates for various offices on the ballots in those states.
The Green Party, for example, is currently in the process of selecting its presidential nominee. Candidates include Roseanne Barr, Kent Mesplay, and Jill Stein.
Barr is a famous populist actress with significant name recognition for her television programme, “Roseanne”, which featured a realistic, as opposed to a picture-perfect, portrayal of a working class family in the 1990s. Yet she entered the race late, does not have an organised campaign, and has not gained ballot access as widely as Mesplay or Stein.
Stein, on the other hand, appears to be the frontrunner for the Green nomination. Her campaign says it has won primary contests in Illinois, Maine, Minnesota and Ohio.
Because the Green Party has not obtained ballot access in every U.S. state, some of its primaries are conducted by other means.
“Illinois had an online Primary. Ohio had a statewide meeting. Maine is having
caucuses around the state,” Scott McLarty, national spokesman for the Green Party, told IPS.
The Green Party was actually founded by Petra Kelly in Germany in the 1980s and first became popular in Europe, especially as an outgrowth of the anti-nuclear movement in Scandinavian countries.
The Green Party currently has gained ballot access in about 20 states and recently gained such access in Arkansas and Tennessee, McLarty said.
“Our goal is to get our nominees on at least 46 (out of 50) of the state ballots,” he said.
With the Democratic Party in the U.S. having moved farther and farther toward the centre – even what in many countries would be considered centre-right – the distinctions between the Green and Democratic parties continue to grow.
“The most dramatic thing is the Democratic Party is addicted to corporate money, the donations from corporate PACs (political action committees),” McLarty said.
“The Green Party is against war in general, and we were very much against the invasion of Iraq and the Afghanistan war, and we often criticised the Democrats for helping [former president George W.] Bush get the U.S. into those wars,” he said.
“Democrats have nuclear power… the (Barack) Obama administration has embraced the idea of clean coal and coal mining and is in favour of offshore drilling. The Green Party opposes those things. We are in favour of Medicare (guaranteed health care) for all,” McLarty said.
While progress is quite slow, the Green Party has seen some gains in recent years. Richmond, California recently elected a Green mayor, Gayle McLaughlin; three
percent of Maine voters are registered as Green; and in the District of Columbia, the nation’s capital, the Green Party is the second-largest party.
Meanwhile, the idea of independent and minor party candidates has become increasingly prominent in the national discourse surrounding the Nov. 6 presidential election.
For example, media pundits continue to speculate that Republican candidate Ron Paul may decide to run as an independent. While technically a Republican, Paul is basically a Libertarian; he opposes most U.S. military activities overseas and opposes the so-called “war on drugs,” but also wants to end most welfare programmes and even many federal agencies.
Paul has denied any interest in running as an independent – and it is too late to get on ballots in many states as such – but has left the door open.
Yet there is another possibility for him or another candidate this year: a mysterious, well-funded group called Americans Elect is working to gain ballot access in all 50 states and is spending about 10 million dollars to do it.
“It’s a bunch of liberal Republicans who won’t abide with the Republican party,” Richard Winger, publisher of Ballot Access News and one of the nation’s leading experts on ballot access, told IPS.
“I think people are afraid the Republican Party is going to nominate someone who is inadequate. They want someone high-quality, thoughtful, and intelligent in the race, other the president (Obama),” Winger said.
Possible Americans Elect candidates might include Jon Huntsman, former governor of Utah; Buddy Roemer, former governor of Louisiana; and Christine Todd Whitman, former governor of New Jersey, all three of whom once considered themselves moderate Republicans. The group plans to hold an online nominating contest.
The Libertarian Party of the U.S. is likely to gain ballot access in all 50 states and to nominate Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico, Winger said.
The Constitution Party of the U.S. is likely to gain ballot access in about 40 states, and former congressman Virgil Goode is seeking the nomination, Winger said.
There are also numerous national minor parties with little or no chance of gaining sufficient ballot access to run a presidential candidate, including five different socialist parties and the dwindling Prohibition Party, Winger said.
In addition, there are some state and local minor parties, such as the Independent Party, the Labor Party, the Peace and Freedom party, and the Working Families Party, which largely cross-endorses Democrats.
Winger says the quality of candidates seeking minor party nominations is increasing, and that the biggest obstacles to their success are the corporate media which will not let them participate in debates.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [+]
The Power Elite is a book written by the sociologist, C. Wright Mills, in 1956. In it Mills calls attention to the interwoven interests of the leaders of the military, corporate, and political elements of society and suggests that the ordinary citizen is a relatively powerless subject of manipulation by those entities.
The structural basis of The Power Elite is that, following World War II, the United States was the leading country in military and economic terms.
The book is something of a counterpart of Mills' 1951 work, White Collar: The American Middle Classes, which examines the growing role of middle managers in American society.
A main inspiration for the book was Franz Leopold Neumanns book Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism in 1942, a study of how Nazism came into a position of power in a democratic state like Germany. Behemoth had a major impact on Mills and he claimed that Behemoth had given him the "tools to grasp and analyse the entire total structure and as a warning of what could happen in a modern capitalist democracy". (C.Wright Mills: Power, Politics and People, (New York, 1963 p.174)). [...]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [+]
White Collar: The American Middle Classes is a study of the American middle class by sociologist C. Wright Mills, first published in 1951. It describes the forming of a "new class": the white-collar workers. It is also a major study of social alienation in the modern industrialized world and cities dominated by "salesmanship mentality". The issues in this book were close to Mills' own background, his father was an insurance agent and he himself, at that time, worked as a white collar research worker in a bureaucratic organization, at Paul Lazarsfeld's Bureau for Social Research at Columbia University. From this point of view, it is probably Mills most private book. The familiarity with the studied object as a lived matter refers with no doubt to Mills himself and his own experiences. [...]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [+]
The Fear of Freedom, as it is known in Britain and elsewhere in the English-speaking world – published in North America as Escape from Freedom – is a book by the Frankfurt-born psychologist and social theorist Erich Fromm. First published in Britain by Routledge and Kegan Paul in 1942, the book explores over a few short chapters humanity's shifting relationship with freedom, with particular regard to the personal consequences of its absence. Its special emphasis is the psychosocial conditions that facilitated the rise of Nazism. [...]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [+]
Civilization and Its Discontents is a book by Sigmund Freud. Written in 1929, and first published in German in 1930 as Das Unbehagen in der Kultur ("The Uneasiness in Culture"), it is considered one of Freud's most important and widely read works. [...]
From: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-02-2012/120622-state_world_children-0/
by Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey
Over one billion children now live in the world’s cities. Many of these do not enjoy the benefits of schooling or healthcare and instead are born into endemic cycles of poverty, harsh living conditions, violence and slums at best or homelessness, at the worst. The latest report from UNICEF, to be released on Tuesday, will focus on the situation of tomorrow’s citizens and will analyse what sort of world we have created for them.
Let us be judged not by what we inherited, but by what we bequeath. And what do we bequeath? An international community of nations ruled by fear of commercial terrorism practised by a clique of former imperialist and colonialist powers which, having grown fat on the back of the Holocaust they practised for centuries – slavery – today continue to divide and rule by arming terrorists to commit massacres. Then when the government forces of the victim state react, they are derided as murderers, in go the cameras to paediatric units in hospitals to try to get a shot of a screaming kid “hit by shrapnel”, having made sure the sign “vaccinations unit” is off camera and without asking any questions as to who or what perpetrated the act anyway.
We were born into a world where common decency and the sense of what was right or wrong governed not only what we did, but also the way we thought and planned. Our generations allowed a clique of elitists, representatives of the invisible lobbies which dictate their business interests and world policy – the lobbies which gravitate around the White House and close ranks behind (or else snarl ominously around) the latest President – to virtually destroy international law and to allow the few to manipulate it, applying what fragments of it they choose over the many.
Our generations have created political systems which are far from democratic – how can a system which allows a single person or political party with a minority of votes, implementing policies over the majority who did not vote for them, be called a “democracy”? Our generations have lost practically all the labour rights won through centuries of hardship and by the efforts of selfless heroes who gave up their lives so that we could benefit and we were not able, collectively, to defend them.
It suffices the word “crisis” for employers and governments to implement draconian measures, sweeping away guarantees and accumulated rights such as laws governing working hours, regulations governing overtime and the rights governing cases of redundancy and dismissal. Respect for the job has been replaced by fear of losing it, as the “system” works carefully into place control freaks with no personal life to glower at the employee who dares to clock out at the contracted hour.
So it comes as no surprise to learn from tomorrow’s UNICEF report “The State of the World’s Children 2012″ that in an increasingly urbanised world, values are being lost, the focus on children’s rights is being lost, there is an increasing number of children living on the streets and born into harsh conditions where they fall victims to homelessness, exploitative labour and gang violence.
This is what we bequeath. What a great job our generations have done.