Today's Topics:
1. Britain, freedom news: Gallery: New Year celebrations at HMP
Pentonville (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. Britain, anarchistcommunist group ACG: Toxic port stymied
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. Czech, afed.cz: PF 2019 - To all anarchists, anarchists, and
liberal people, we wish all the best to the new year and many
forces in the struggle for a fairer world. [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. France, Alternative Libertaire AL #290 - Popular movement,
Libertarian Communists and Yellow Vests (2) (fr, it, pt)[machine
translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. ozzip WORKERS' INITIATIVE: You will not absolve us all - the
position of the Amazon Employee Initiative [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
6. anarkismo.net: A Green New Deal vs. Revolutionary
Ecosocialism by Wayne Price (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Among the London anarchist events that see out the year are annual noise demos at HMP
Brixton and HMP Pentonville, where pots are rattled, whizzers whizzed and bottle rockets
set off as people walk around the jail reminding prisoners that they're not forgotten.
Freedom was at this year's Pentonville showing, while Base was at Brixton. ---- The best
spot for making noise is on Wheelwright Street, where prisoners can see some of the
fireworks - prisoners could be seen giving a wave back through the bars. ---- Graffiti and
banners festooned the walls and building works opposite Pentonville. ---- The New Year
noise demos don't just take place in London, they are a regular feature of anarchist
solidarity with prisoners all over the world, from Greece to the US.
https://freedomnews.org.uk/gallery-new-year-celebrations-at-hmp-pentonville/
------------------------------
Message: 2
The property developer Morgan Stanley planned on building a terminal for cruise liners at
Enderby Wharf on the North Greenwich Peninsula, opposite Cubitt Town in London. It was
halted after a petition signed by 10,000 objectors. Greenwich Council (see Switch off the
Iron!) had in its usual manner already approved the scheme. If the terminal had been built
it would have meant liners running their diesel engines while anchored, due to lack of
provision of shore to ship electric supply. Fumes would have blown across the river to
Cubitt Town. ---- The No Toxic Port campaign was set up by people from both sides of the
river. Morgan Stanley has now said that a cruise terminal will not be built. This follows
a three year battle to stop the terminal. This shows that victory is possible if enough
people mobilise. ---- https://www.anarchistcommunism.org/2019/01/04/toxic-port-stymied/
------------------------------
Message: 3
It is another year behind us, so we have to balance it. There has been a lot, one might
feel that the pace in which the world is thirsty for capitalist destruction is constantly
accelerating. The year 2018 brought us many challenges, but also opportunities. ----
Support Rojava ---- At the beginning of 2018, the Turkish army attacked, on the
instructions of the dictator Erdogan, to the autonomous region of Rojava, located in
northern Syria, with which a large number of anarchists and many other freely-minded
people solidarize. The Turkish army and Turkey-backed jihadists, recently fighting in the
so-called Islamic state, spoke on the pretext of "fighting terrorism" by canton Afrin, who
was a safe home for the thousands of people fleeing the war before the invasion.
In support of Afrin and Rojava, Prague activists summoned a demonstration that many Kurds
and Kurdek took part in, so we had the opportunity to build new friendships and strategic
alliances. The speech of the Prague Anarchist Federation (AF) group was also heard at the
event. Other actions to support the Kurdish movement, under the distinctive title "Break
the Silence", took place in Prague on 29 March. This time, the criticism was directed
primarily at parliamentary political parties that almost invariably dropped the agenda of
the Turkish invasion from the agenda. The attack on one of the most progressive projects
of today did not want (even if not surprisingly) to entertain the party left-handed and
even the "communist". The issue of the wall paper A3 was published .
On 25 February, on the basis of a Turkish request, Salih Muslim, the co-president of the
United Democratic Party (PYD), detained the police. It is not often that anarchists and
anarchists would act to support politicians. But by reproaching, it is necessary to stand
together, and so, although we do not have to always agree with the Kurdish PYD strategy,
we felt obliged to support Salih Muslim in court. It took place on February 27, with the
numerous participation of the Czech and German Kurds and in front of the Municipal Court
in Prague, where, besides the flags in the Kurdish colors, the black-and-white flag also
ran. The court eventually ended in a partial victory, and Salih Muslim was released for
"freedom" - the extradition to Turkey, where the Kurdish politician would probably have
been threatened with a draconian punishment for "terrorism"
Support to Russian anti-fascists
On February 3, a group of anti-fascists and anti-fascists went to the Russian embassy in
Corunovacní Street, Prague, to condemn the repression and torture of the Russian
anti-fascist and anarchist movement. The situation in the "Czar Putin Empire" has been
followed all year and informed of it.
Other actions to support Russian anarchists and anti-fascists took place on March 18th, in
two places - in Prague, directed by AF-Prague, and in Brno, where the protest was called
Empty Throne, the Association of Colleagues and other individuals. The date was not chosen
at random - in Russia that day, there were "confirmation" choices by which Putin once
again added to his authoritarian regime the aura of "democracy". Before the Prague
Electoral Chamber, discussions were held with information on repression against the
anti-fascist and anarchist movement, and as in Brno, passers-by (voters) discussed
anarchist ideals in general.
Support squating
One of the most successful events in the media this year has undoubtedly become (again)
the occupation of the Šatovka estate in Šárka valley. Squaters and squatters from the
Resurp Crew on the roof of the house lasted for five days, and so in the Czech squatting
chronicle they recorded a new record in so-called "endurance squatting" - congratulations!
Even though the building could not be maintained, we would like to thank all those who
attended the event, or the heroes and heroines on the roof, to cheat the level of domestic
activist waters. Disrupting the premise of the private (or in this case the urban part of
the "managed") property is always meaningful and we are looking forward to other similar
actions.
The Clinic is also fighting for its survival - so far successful. The actions that took
place in this autonomous center would be given a separate article. Dozens of concerts,
lectures, theatrical performances, brigades and ordinary lazy evenings in a circle of
like-minded people - all this was like the previous four years of the Clinic. At the
Christmas time, there was a sad news that the current owner of the facility, the Railway
Infrastructure Administration (SŽDC), decided to proceed to evacuation (although no court
ruled it and negotiations on the fate of a building that had no value for SŽDC, was
hopeful). As a result, the college of the autonomous social center of the Clinic calls a
protest on the morning of January 10, 2019. The clinic of those "ends" has already
survived a lot, so do not pessimism. Pack your sleeping bag and thermos, and on January
10th, we'll see you at the clinic (maybe we'll see "clinic" literally). Many of us have
Zizkov in the four years without this project, and the people around him can not imagine.
Let's do something - anything - to make the Clinic celebrate even the fifth birthday.
Supporting the fight for climate justice
Hope for the next years gave us the second year of Klimakempu, which again took place in
the coal mining district. Several hundred people participated in the direct event and for
a few hours left the Bílina brown coal mine. We made a report from the event and our
members and members took part as well as the last year of the event. This was also noted
by the Interior Ministry, which warned in its quarterly report on extremism about the
interconnection of environmental protests and the anarchist movement. We can promise that
we will become more and more involved in environmental protests and direct actions.
However, it is not opportunism - at a time when we have the last few years to stop the
fatal production of greenhouse gases, which is already collecting its tax, we simply have
no choice. Participation in rescue operations at a time of imminent global environmental
disaster, which - according to the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) - may be responsible for millions of victims, becomes a duty, regardless of
anarchist convictions. It is, of course, true that the format of direct actions that the
ecological movement is increasingly acquiring is sympathetic to us, and we see hope in it
not only for the successful cessation of climate change, but also for the embryo of a
future society or a movement that could lead to it.
In the Hambach Forest, with the participation of members and members of AF, the next
edition of Ende Gelände - a preview of Czech Klimakemp - took place, and it was attended
by several thousand people more than last year. The felling of the Hambach forest was able
to stop, using many different tactics, but together they formed a wide variety of
resistance, which resulted in success. Police and activist Steffen died in a police
intervention against activists after an unfortunate fall in the Hambach Forest, the honor
of his memory.
... and more and more
Of course, the list of events listed above is far from complete. Just look at "quarter"
this year issued two numbers revue Existence. There were many events. So just in a
nutshell: an anarchist book festival was held, AF Publishing House has just published
several new publications on this occasion. A new radical left-wing group, Kolektiv 115,
was formed, which organized two, from our point of view, very successful, the concept of
the unspoiled action here - the camp for the city right # VzpurnaPraha and the concert
against the SPD. In the Turkish attack on the Afrina region, British anarchist Helen
Qerecox (Anna Campbell) - remembering to fight - is our duty to do everything to prevent
it from being unnecessary. At the end of 2018, the Revolutionary Defense Committee of
Rojava was formed, in which the Anarchist Federation is also involved - at one of the
first events members and members of one of the affinity groups fired a smokehouse in the
colors of Rojava before entering the building belonging to the Turkish Embassy in the
Czech Republic. Hopefully,
Shuffle to New Year
And what view do we enter by 2019? Populist and authoritarian tendencies are gaining
momentum all over the world. Whether the parliamentary or non-parliamentary left is unable
to offer a rational and credible alternative. The old political division and protest
culture are in ruins, as shown by the Yellow Vest movement, which broke out at the end of
2018 by France. We will continue to face the worsening ecological crisis. For the
anarchist movement, however, it is an opportunity and a challenge. An opportunity to show
that the model of the self-governing society we are proclaiming is sustainable and
possible. We will have to look for new ways to learn new technologies and communication
methods. Anarchist movement should be the most progressive of progressive - let's prove
that it is. Think strategically and organize ourselves internationally.
To the New Year, the Anarchist Federation wishes all anarchists, anarchists, our friends
and friends from other friendly groups, and all the people free will, all the best, and a
great deal in the struggle for a fairer world.
https://www.afed.cz/text/6925/pf-2019
------------------------------
Message: 4
As last month, a sample of the activity of the AL groups involved in this revolt of the "
peripheral France ". Certainly, far from us the naivety to believe that " everything
that moves is red ": this movement against the dear life is a carrier of many
contradictions. AL carries an anti-capitalist message, or shares his know-how in terms of
self-organization. With contrasting experiences: sometimes disappointing, sometimes
encouraging. ---- ANGERS: SOCIAL CLAIMS ---- Friday, December 7, AG in a room lent by the
town hall, with a hundred people. Atmosphere a little messy. The forum was made up of
administrators of Facebook groups, who consider themselves elected by the " people " of
Internet users ... They and they have thus presented what had been decided on Facebook. In
the debates, a lot of confusing interventions, even conspiracies, remarks about ordinary
sexism, but no racist remarks - a brief allusion to the Marrakech pact on migration was
blown up by the platform, which obviously feared " Infiltration " by the extreme right
and extreme left. In fact, if there was no faf known in the room, but quite a few
activists LO, AL, LFI, ATTAC, SUD, CGT ...
The " citizens ' initiative referendum " claim was brandished for a moment, but quickly
dismantled by OL activists who insisted that power was economic and that the strike had to
be launched. In the end, all the demands adopted by the GA were social. Convergence on
December 8 with the climate demonstration, on the other hand, divided participants, some
of whom did not want to " do politics ".
The demonstration of the next day gathered nearly 1,000 people in the rain ... A great
ride through the ring road, the train station, and the main axes, until a junction with
the manifest climate - finally ! Nice mess in the middle of the Christmas market, with the
flirt well upset and a little outdated, running in all directions with helmets and
shields. Activists will learn later that during this time, people were arrested while
trying to get on the train without a ticket to join the demonstrations in Paris.
TOULOUSE: A STRUCTURING FROM BELOW
AG yellow jackets of Toulouse, December 9: around 400 people (40 % of women) all
generations. Some students, precarious people of all ages, some small bosses and
craftsmen, salaried employees (private and public), pensioners. Presence of the NPA, CGA,
AL, collective Class, CGT.
This was an example of direct democracy rarely seen. The three organizers - including a
former DJ - held this masterfully. The rules were clear: no more than three minutes of
intervention per person, exclusively on the question: " For or against the structuring of
the movement ". Everyone has played the game, with a few digressions, but quickly
reframed, and towards the end a gender parity system has been introduced.
The debate centered on whether or not to have representatives to negotiate with the
government, a majority of interventions rejecting politicians. Result of the vote,
ultramajoritaire: no representative.es, but structuring from below with regular meetings.
Many interventions of a very libertarian tone on the democratic organization and distrust
vis-à-vis the institutions.
The day before, at the demo, 8,000 to 10,000 people were in the street, yellow vests and
Climate manifest having marched together. It is therefore a massification after the 2,000
of the previous week.
From the beginning, the cops, for no apparent reason, tried to split the procession with
tear gas. It took three quarters of an hour to reform the procession and several clashes
took place. The riots clearly brought together several thousand people with a big dominant
" sir / madam everyone " and, as the evening, a dominant " insurrectionalist " more
traditional. There is a popular anger rising impressively.
TOURS: SPEAKERS IN WOMEN-MEN PARITY
The success of November 17 was a big surprise: several dead spots with probably 2,000
people, and a confusing rendezvous in the city center: attempts to occupy the town hall to
hold a GA (failed), parades , blockages of the tram, who leave block elsewhere ... In the
middle of this bazaar, some activists of LO and libertarians - the sticker " general
strike "AL was successful - but no comrades NPA, neither CGT nor Solidaires ... The
extreme right, however, had jumped on the occasion - two thugs have also come to
physically threaten a comrade AL - but their crude attempt to happen, with a van covered
with posters and stickers identity, rather messed up. In the discussions, it quickly
became apparent that the price of gasoline was only one aspect of the movement, with a
very classy discourse (gifts to the rich, taxes that weigh more heavily on the poor).
Saturday, November 24: a level of police violence, and resistance never seen in Tours. The
cops attacked gassing blockades and charges from 4 pm to dusk. Many young people, not
yellow vests, joined the rebels on the barricades. This time, after the demonstration
against violence against women, the revolutionary activists, trade unionists, feminists,
etc. have joined the yellow vests in numbers. It was about the strike issue, which had to
be launched because it was the moment or never.
December 3, on the roundabout that serves as headquarters, visit CGT workers of Sanofi,
very reassembled. One of their comrades, father of three children, was mutilated by a
de-encircling grenade: burnt leg, hand torn off. Decided to join the movement, they were
urged to challenge the UD CGT to call it also. Meeting the same day, the departmental
office of Solidaires, very reluctant at the start, jumped the pace by calling the protest
against the police repression, and more broadly to join the movement.
The following days, at the GA that caused structuring, AL comrades proposed the parity of
the parolate: a man, a woman, otherwise there would be too much " couillus " in national
representation. It went without difficulty and obviously with a good reception on the side
of women. The GA then wanted to enjoin the other departments to do the same, but how ? Who
to join, except Facebook pages ?
On December 8 the number of protesters quadrupled, before a sharp decline on the 15th. On
Monday 17, in a big hall, a real GA finally decided a collective and democratic
functioning, with at least one assembly a week. It also made a return on the initial
demands, overshadowed by the " popular initiative referendum " (RIC): lower taxes and
VAT on essential products, return of the ISF, increase in income ( wages, pensions and
social minima) ...
ISSOIRE: MEETING WITH UNIONS ON THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE
Not always easy convergence yellow vests-red vests, but the best way to relieve distrust
is to meet. On 7 December, a comrade from AL offered yellow jackets to block the
industrial area of Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme) together with the CGT union and employees of
Constellium, a large metallurgical plant in the area where he was working until recently.
General approval, though a little incredulous. Shortly thereafter, the comrade makes the
proposal at a union meeting of the factory. Moderate enthusiasm: Must see ... Must discuss
with other unions at the local union ...
A week passes, and the CGT actually begins to prepare an action on the industrial zone for
December 14, in connection with mandatory annual negotiations (NAO) ... but without making
contact with the yellow vests. For their part, they speak of mounting a block with 200
people from roundabouts around, but questioned strongly: what is the CGT ? What does the
CGT want ?
The comrade of AL is therefore a little forcing for a delegation CGT meets the yellow
vests, otherwise we go to a big failure. It works, but a little late. On the 13th of
December, the day before the action, three cégétistes, including a Federal Metallurgy
Officer, went to the busy roundabout, transformed into a small village - huts, sofas,
kitchen - and were greeted warmly, " as at the house ".
The exchanges are courteous and diplomatic, but without complacency. The local
spokespersons of the yellow vests explain their role, how they were elected, do not hide
the mistrust that exists vis-à-vis the unions, but assure that there is a wish to discuss
and why not to build common actions. The Cégétistes, for their part, assure their kindness
towards a good part of the claims, but underline that they will refuse any questioning of
the social contributions, and that their role it is above all the defense of the employees
in the boxes.
It lasts more than an hour and it's really very interesting, especially when it comes to
discussing action. The CGT, cautious, thinks that only 150 employees on several thousand
in the industrial zone will strike on December 14. Under these conditions, it does not
plan to block, but simply different from leaflets to portals. Disappointed, the yellow
vests ensure that they can bring the world, but only if it is to block. Moment of Flutter
... So, are we blocking or not ? And the cementists concede: OK, but it's the yellow vests
that will lead the dance ; the CGT, it will help logistics (leaflets, barnum ...). It is
very appreciated and it reassures the yellow vests which, behind, began to pester. Market
concluded, we separate with good handshakes.
On the way back, the cementists admit to having been impressed by the self-organization of
yellow vests, with almost no means.
The next day however, the joint action is lame. As expected, the CGT call to the strike
was only modestly heard, by a hundred employees at the portals and distributing leaflets
at the junction of factories. But the crossing, it is not blocked by the yellow vests,
which put their forces on another block. Only a fortnight filter trucks on three tracks
... with a disconcerting support of motorists !
This first joint action, a little messy, however, will have beautiful consequences: red
vests went to lend a hand to the yellow vests against the thorns of a local boss Carrefour
came to threaten the roundabout. In return, the assembly of yellow vests voted to support
the strike of December 18, and the blocking of the industrial zone if the CGT tried the blow.
LORIENT: CONTRASTS AND CONTRADICTIONS OF APOLITISM
In this sub-prefecture of Morbihan, the official " apolitism " and the real
interclassism muddle the claims. On December 6, a general assembly brought together a
hundred people, including a few AL comrades, in a private garage. Rudimentary but
effective device: micro and tires as a pedestal. From the beginning, a yellow waistcoat
reminded that the movement had no leader, but " lecturers " to distribute the word.
These included voting a list of claims. Any proposal receiving less than 25 % of "
against Was considered adopted. Thus were adopted from the policy (dismissal of Macron,
abolition of privileges of elected officials, referendum citizen initiative), the social
(decrease of VAT on essential products, recovery of the ISF, increase of Smic, tax on
luxury products and / or pollutants ...) and antisocial (lower employer contributions for
micro-businesses and indexation of contributions on profits). Universal income has been
massively rejected. Finally, some proposals, which raised the misunderstanding, were
carried over to the next GA, under the heading " to reformulate ": tax on kerosene and
air and sea diesel ; increase in pensions and salaries ; questioning of the CICE and the
flat tax; equal sharing of wealth ; development of renewable energies ; nationalization of
banks, insurance and energy ; respect for the rights of handicapped persons, children and
the homeless ... There was no claim for nor against the migrants.
After this first rather mixed round, the next GA on December 13 brought together about 80
people, without being able to clarify things, except the sudden enthusiasm for the new
Grail, which is the " citizens ' initiative referendum ". The animation of the AG was
more authoritarian, with a lot of anti-union hints, we felt the weight of small traders
and artisans.
The paradox is that on December 8, out of 700 people who walked for the climate, there
were a hundred yellow vests, gladly taking up the slogans launched by AL and linking
social justice and ecology. And that on December 14, yellow vests, red vests and
struggling high school students demonstrated together, before blocking a roundabout
together. The truth is that the yellow vests that we see in action and demonstration are
not really the same as those who go to AG ! In short, a shifting situation, which calls
for a differentiated intervention.
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Communistes-libertaires-et-gilets-jaunes-2
------------------------------
Message: 5
We express indignation at the fact that Ms. Mai Stasko - Adecco employees - did not renew
the temporary agreement after the publication of her critical article on working
conditions at the Amazon logistics plant near Poznan, despite earlier assurances of
continuing employment. We know dozens of other people who also had a similar story:
because they took part in protests, got sick, disagreed with their manager, or refused to
accept a service note alleging that they did not comply with the standards. ---- In the
Amazon logistics plant before Christmas, 9,000 employees were employed. people, half of
them on temporary contracts. This is a huge concentration of employees, which results in
enormous power. It is not easy to discipline the crew, that's why there are no democracies
and freedom of speech behind the gates of the workplace. We are under constant control of
cameras, security, managers, computer systems, scanners that monitor our every move and
discipline in accordance with the "business needs" of companies. The term logistics was
initially associated with the army. In the logistics industry, the achievements and
experience gained during military operations are used for disciplining. Automation,
robotization, digitalization, computerization created a need and gave the possibility of
applying logistic thought also in the economic field. Logic of war, in which the victims
are primarily recruited, it remains unchanged. They must submit to the hierarchy and
forget about their own needs. In our corporation, the military drift is to strengthen the
"Amazon Military" program recruiting former military personnel for the position of
managers. Amazon encourages them to manage the "small army" of employees.
Temporary work agencies and fixed-term contracts are part of the regime used to pacify the
dissatisfied. Most temporary employees are employed in the logistics and warehousing and
production industries. In 2017, about 29 percent. recruited in services, including
logistics, and 69 per cent. in industry, mainly automotive and food - that is, where
employees have a high bargaining power resulting from the workplace. Employers break this
power, dividing us into different groups, often opposing each other. They destroy our
sense of stability, causing some to shake for a new deal, and others are afraid of losing
a better, more reliable job. These practices are to maximally limit the impact of
employees on the organization of work. What's more, agency and time contracts are used to
circumvent trade unions - they have it to themselves,
Temporary and agency employment is also a basic selection tool. The way to a permanent
employment contract at Amazon is a finishing marathon: you can work on monthly agency
contracts for up to six months, then Amazon employs a 3-month trial period (even though
the agency worker is controlled by Amazon managers who know his job), then an annual
contract is offered. This means a total of 21 months of work under stress and constant
results. If an employee does not perform 100% of the standard, he or she will go on even a
short illness or not submit to the discipline and supervisor, his chance for another
contract is crossed out. Such a marathon destroys everyone physically and mentally.
The Employee Initiative under the slogan "Junk contracts - permanent exploitation" for
years has been criticizing agency and temporary employment in the Amazon and other
factories. The union organized pickets in front of Adecco headquarters, in 2015 hundreds
of employees of the agency signed a petition calling for direct employment. In 2016, the
union entered into a collective dispute with labor agencies recruiting for Amazon.
Recently IP distributed leaflets addressed to agency workers, informing about their rights
and postulates (download the leaflet in PDF).
In connection with the above, we demand from Amazon:
1. Cessation of employment by the employment agencies with which Amazon works throughout
the year, not only in the winter season. Today, agency agreements are used to permanently
verify employees. For this purpose, only a three-month trial contract from Amazon should
be used.
2. Withdrawals of temporary contracts. We see no justification for temporary contracts in
a company that has been opening new warehouses and employing new people for more than four
years. Poland is the leader in Europe in the number of people working on temporary
contracts. The expansion of such contracts was made under the guise of a financial crisis.
Today, temporary contracts do not, however, serve to survive in a difficult market
situation, to maintain jobs or to maintain liquidity, but are used to discipline employees
and easier to get rid of people requesting improvement of working conditions. The recent
statutory limitation of time contracts up to 33 months is insufficient.
3. Restoring people dismissed due to criticism of working conditions in the company,
disagreement with subordination, participation in protests, as well as due to absences
caused by diseases that have often been acquired at work, or failure to comply with high
standards. We demand the reinstatement or compensation for Mai and all those who are
currently judging in the Labor Courts in Poznan and Wroclaw, represented by our union:
Lukasz - released after the protest in 2015, Elzbieta - released on charges of failing to
meet the norms for several weeks before it was covered by pre-retirement protection,
Maciej - dismissed despite union protection, Dariusz and Marcin - dismissed for failure to
follow standards, Mikita - dismissed for absence due to illness, Aneta - released without
consulting the trade union, and others.
In spite of the practices used in Amazon, we will support these people, organize and
repeat: you will not let us all go away!
OZZ Employee Initiative at Amazon Fulfillment Poland Sp. zoo
http://ozzip.pl/teksty/informacje/ogolnopolskie/item/2439-wszystkich-nas-nie-zwolnicie-stanowisko-zwiazku-inicjatywa-pracownicza-amazon
------------------------------
Message: 6
Ecosocialism: reformist or revolutionary, statist or libertarian? ---- The idea of a
"Green New Deal" has been raised in response to the threat of climate and ecological
catastrophe. Two such proposals are analyzed here and counterposed to the program of
revolutionary libertarian ecosocialism. ---- According to the climate scientists,
industrial civilization has at most a dozen years until global warming is irreversible.
This will cause (and is already causing) extremes of weather, accelerating extermination
of species, droughts and floods, loss of useable water, vast storms, rising sea levels
which will destroy islands and coastal cities, raging wildfires, loss of crops, and,
overall, environmental conditions in which neither humans nor other organisms evolved to
exist. The economic, political, and social results will be horrifying.
The scientists write that humans have the technological knowledge to avoid the worst
results. But this would take enormous efforts to drastically reduce the output of
heat-trapping greenhouse gasses. The recent UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
writes that this "would require rapid and far-reaching transitions in energy, land, urban,
and infrastructure (including transport and buildings) and industrial
systems...unprecedented in terms of scale." (quoted in Smith 2018) At the least this means
a rapid transition to shutting down fossil-fuel producing industries, leaving most oil,
coal, and natural gas in the ground and rationing what is currently available. It means
replacing them with conservation and renewable energy sources. It means drastic changes in
the carbon-based-fuel using industries, from construction to manufacturing. It means
providing alternate jobs and services for all those put out of work by these changes.
To the scientists' warnings, there have been rumblings of concern from some financial
investors, businesspeople (in non-oil-producing industries), and local politicians. But
overall, the response of conventional politicians has been business-as-usual. The main
proposals for limiting climate change has been to place some sort of taxes on carbon
emissions. From liberals to conservatives, this has been lauded as a"pro-market" reform.
But, as Richard Smith (2018) has explained, these are inadequate, and even fraudulent,
proposals. "If the tax is too light, it fails to suppress fossil fuels enough to help the
climate. But...no government will set a price high enough to spur truly deep reductions in
carbon emissions because they all understand that this would force companies out of
business, throw workers out of work, and possibly precipitate recession or worse."
In the U.S., one of the two major parties outright denies the scientific evidence as a
"hoax." As if declaring, "After us, the deluge," its policies have been to increase as
much as possible the production of greenhouse-gas emissions and other attacks on the
environment. The other party accepts in words the reality of global warming but only
advocates inadequate and limited steps to deal with it. It too has promoted increased
drilling, fracking, and carbon-fuels burning. These Republicans, Democrats, and their
corporate sponsors are enemies of humanity and nature, worse than war criminals.
On the Left, there have been serious efforts to take up the scientists' challenge. Various
ecosocialists and other radicals have advocated a massive effort to change the path of
industrial society. This is sometimes called a "Green New Deal." This approach is modeled
on the U.S.'s New Deal of F. D. Roosevelt in the Great Depression. Its advocates also
usually model their programs on the World War II industrial mobilization which followed
the New Deal. (For examples, see Aronoff 2018; Ocasio-Cortez 2018; Rugh 2018; Simpson
2018; Smith 2018; Wikipedia.)
There does need to be a massive social effort to change our current technological course.
A drastic transformation of industrial civilization is needed if we are (in Richard
Smith's phrase) to "save the humans," as well as our fellow animals and plants. Nothing
less than a revolution is needed. Yet I think that there are serious weaknesses in this
specific approach, not least in modeling itself on the New Deal and the World War II
mobilization-which were not revolutions, however romanticized. The proponents of a Green
New Deal are almost all reformists-by which I do not mean advocates of reforms, but those
who think that a series of reforms will be enough. They are state-socialists who primarily
rely on the state to intervene in the economy and even take it over; in practice this
program creates not socialism but state capitalism.
From the perspective of revolutionary anarchist-socialism, the Green New Deal strategy is
problematic because it means (1) an effort to modify existing capitalism, not to fight it
with the aim of overthrowing it. (2) As often stated, it requires working through the
Democratic Party. (3) It proposes to use the current national state as the instrument of
change. Finally (4), while advocates speak of popular mobilization and democratization,
their overall approach is top-down centralization.
Plans of Ocasio-Cortez and Richard Smith
A member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was just
elected to the House of Representatives as an insurgent Democrat from Queens, NY. With a
group of co-thinkers, she has formally proposed that the House set up a special Select
Committee for a Green New Deal. (Ocasio-Cortez 2018) This Congressional committee would
work out a plan for the transition of the .U.S. to a "green" non-carbonized
economy-although it would not have the power to actually implement any plan. Supposedly
this will be raised in the 2019 Congress.
The committee would develop a "Plan" to achieve such goals as "100% national power from
renewable sources" in ten years, a national "smart" energy grid, upgrading residential and
industrial buildings for conservation of energy, investments in drawing-down greenhouse
gases, and making "green" technology a big U.S. export. Central to its set of goals is
"decarbonizing the manufacturing, agricultural, and other industries." "Decarbonizing,
repairing and improving transportation and other infrastructure." (Ocasio-Cortez 2018)
Supposedly, these goals would be implemented in such a way as to provide good jobs,
services, and prosperity for everyone.
Richard Smith is a knowledgeable and insightful ecosocialist writer (from whom I have
learned much, despite disagreements). He has a generally positive reaction to this
proposal (Smith 2018). Describing himself as "a proud member" of the DSA, he approves
Ocasio-Cortez' idea of a massive governmental program, modeled on the New Deal and World
War II mobilization, to counter the climate crisis. However, he raises some significant
concerns, specially around the key goal of "decarbonization".
"What's not said is that decarbonization has to translate into shutdowns and retrenchments
of actual companies. How does one decarbonize ExxonMobil or Chevron or Peabody Coal? To
decarbonize them is to bankrupt them. Further, the same is true for many downstream
industrial consumers...." What is required, he concludes, is governmental takeover of
these industries with the aim of shutting down or drastically modifying them. "But there
is no mention of shutdowns, retrenchments, buyouts, or nationalization."
Even more than the need to decarbonize industry (in the U.S. and internationally), is the
need to create a balanced, ecologically-sustainable, system of production. "Perhaps the
biggest weakness of the GND Plan is that it's not based on a fundamental understanding
that an infinitely growing economy is no longer possible on a finite planet..., of the
imperative need for economic de-growth of many industries or of the need to abolish entire
unsustainable industries from toxic pesticides to throw-away disposables to arms
manufacturers." (my emphasis)
Unlike his fellow DSA member (and Democratic politician) Ocasio-Cortez, Smith raises a
program which explicitly demands government take-overs of the fossil-fuel producing
companies. (He notes, "Others have also argued for nationalization to phase-out fossil
fuels.") He also calls for the nationalization of industries which are dependent on fossil
fuels: "autos, aviation, petrochemicals, plastics, construction, manufacturing, shipping,
tourism, and so on." These nationalizations would be part of a plan for phasing-out fossil
fuels, phasing-in renewable energy, shutting down fossil-fuel production, shutting down or
modifying industries which rely on fossil fuels, and creating large government employment
programs. This means changing from an economy built on quantitative growth, accumulation,
and profits, to one of "degrowth[and]substantial de-industrialization."
This program may seem revolutionary. "It's difficult to imagine how this could be done
within the framework of any capitalism.... Our climate crisis cries out for something like
an immediate transition to ecosocialism."
Yet Smith contradicts himself; he does not present his perspective as a revolutionary
program. While he proposes socialization (in the form of nationalization) of much of the
corporate economy, he does not call for taking away the wealth and power of these main
sectors of the capitalist class. "We do not call for expropriation. We propose a
government buyout at fair value....The companies might welcome a buyout." There will be
"guaranteed state support for the investors...." Further, "it is perhaps conceivable,
taking FDR's war-emergency industrial reordering as a precedent, that the...plan...for
fossil fuels buyout-nationalization...could be enacted within the framework of capitalism,
though the result would be a largely state-owned economy. Roosevelt
created[a]state-directed capitalism...."
While a revolutionary approach is often derided as absurdly "utopian" and fantastic, this
reformist program is itself a fantasy. It imagines that the capitalist class and its
bought-and-paid-for politicians-who have resisted for decades any efforts to limit global
warming-would not fight tooth-and-claw against this program. They are supposed to accept
the loss of their industries, their mansions, their social status, their private jets,
their media, their political influence, and the rest of their domination over society-for
the sake of the environment! In all probability, to prevent this, they would whip up
racism, sexual hysteria, and nationalism, subsidize fascist gangs, urge a military coup,
distort or try to shut down elections and outlaw oppositions. All of which has been
repeatedly done in the past, and is partially being done right now (if still on a minor
scale-so far).
In the (very) unlikely event that the capitalists accepted this program, they would still
be left with great wealth from the buyout, which they would use to fight to get back their
power. And even in the (extremely unlikely) event that industries could be successfully
decarbonized through buyout-nationalization, there would still be the basic problem (as
Smith had pointed out) of the essential drive of capitalism to expand and accumulate
profits, which must conflict with sustainable life on earth.
There is a whole history of class struggles, of revolutions and counterrevolutions, which
have consistently taught the lesson that there is no peaceful-gradual-electoral
"parliamentary road to socialism," including to ecosocialism. Radicals should have learned
the most recent lesson of the Syriza party in Greece.
Can the State Save Us?
Central to the conception of a Green New Deal is the belief that the state can save the
humans and the biosphere. To Smith, "Saving the world requires the sort of large-scale
economic planning that only governments can do." There is "only one proximate solution:
state intervention...." Similarly, Ocasio-Cortez's proposal states, "We're not saying that
there isn't a role for private sector investments; we're just saying that...the government
is best placed to be the prime driver."
What Smith, specifically, is proposing is a form of state capitalism. He advocates "a
largely state-owned economy" which may be "within the framework of capitalism," building
on but going beyond Roosevelt's "state-directed capitalism." There is a radical tradition
which had also advocated nationalization of big business and creation of public works, but
had always tied statification to a demand for workers' democratic control and management.
For example, Trotsky's Transitional Program states, "Where military industry is
‘nationalized,'...the slogan of workers' control preserves its full strength. The
proletariat has as little confidence in the government of the bourgeoisie as in an
individual capitalist." (Trotsky 1977; 131) Workers' management is not part of Smith's
proposal, nor that of Ocasio-Cortez (and it has dropped out of the program of most
modern-day Trotskyists).
Of course Richard Smith is a sincere socialist democrat and a long-time opponent of
Stalinist totalitarianism. But he calls on this U.S. bourgeois state, the state created
and dominated by U.S. capitalism and imperialism, to take over the economy and run it.
This program is state capitalism. As a result, the economy, even if decarbonized, will
have the capitalist drive to accumulate profits. Just as was the state-capitalist Soviet
Union, it will still be inherently destructive of the human-nature ecological balance,.
State-socialists focus on blaming the market economy for social ills, such as global
warming. They see the state as an outside, neutral, institution, which might intervene in
the economy to solve these problems. "If capitalists won't provide the jobs, then it's the
government's responsibility to do so. We, the voting public,[will]assert our ownership of
the government, not the corporations." (Smith 2018) In other words, the government could
be dominated by the corporations (using their money), or it could be dominated by the
people (using their votes). Supposedly either one is possible, in contradiction to the
experience of two centuries of class struggle.
The state is a centralized bureaucratic-military socially-alienated institution. It has
been created by (and creates) capitalism (and previous systems of exploitation) and serves
to uphold it-and is thoroughly involved in all the evils of industrial capitalism.
"Climate change is another state effect that governments are incapable of solving....The
infrastructure of automotive transportation, industrial agriculture, and electricity
generation, which are responsible for the majority of of greenhouse gas emissions, are
built and regulated by states (...). The industries responsible for destroying the planet
depend on government regulation, police protection, and financing, and form part of an
economic complex that is integrally connected to government...Continuing to trust states
as the potential solvers of climate change and mass extinction...[is to be]complicit with
catastrophe." (Gelderloss 2016; 241-2)
Anarchists and radical Marxists have agreed that the existing state cannot be used to
consistently defend the interests of workers and oppressed people. At times, under
pressure from below, this state may give some benefits. Similarly, the management of a
corporation may raise workers' wages when under the threat of a strike. But neither the
state nor corporate management is "on our side." Certainly revolutionaries may pressure
the state to make reforms in the same way as the workers may strike to force the bosses to
raise their wages. But these efforts, win or lose, do not change the institutional power
of capital, in corporations or in the state.
Therefore, anarchists and radical Marxists have advocated overturning and dismantling the
state and replacing it with alternate institutions. In an introduction to the Communist
Manifesto, Engels modifies their original views by quoting Marx, writing, "One thing
especially was proved by the[1871 Paris]Commune, viz., that ‘the working class cannot
simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery, and wield it for its own purposes'."
(Marx & Engels 1955; 6) Which is exactly what Ocasio-Cortez, Smith, and others propose to do.
Anarchists and other libertarian socialists advocate replacing the state with federations
of workplace councils, neighborhood assemblies, and voluntary associations, defended by an
armed people (militia) so long as is necessary. They advocate socialization of the
economy, not by state ownership, but by replacing capitalism with networks of
democratically self-managed industries, consumer cooperatives, and collectivized
municipalities. They expect productive technology to be modified by the workers, in such a
way as to eliminate the division between mental and manual labor and in order to create an
ecologically sustainable society.
Ocasio-Cortez and other DSAers rely on the Democratic Party to implement their Green New
Deal -a plan which, in Smith's view should lead to the nationalization of much of the
economy. However, the Democrats are committed to managing a traditional,
private-capitalist, economy. "Most Democrats...acknowledge global warming is real, yet
have failed to take meaningful steps to address the apocalyptic scale of the
problem....The Dems have always played seesaw between the interests of their corporate
campaign donors and those of the party's middle- and working-class base... They have more
and more aligned themselves with the jealous interests of their elite backers. Party
leaders have embraced a business-friendly, neoliberal approach to climate change, just as
they have just about everything else." (Rugh 2018) For an account of the Democrats'
climate-destroying actions when in office, see Dansereau (2018).
(Members of the Green Party have also advocated a "Green New Deal" for some
time.[Wikipedia]I am not reviewing their version of the GND at this time. The Greens
reject the Democratic Party, for good reasons, and claim to be for a decentralized
society. But they still accept an electoralist-peaceful-reformist strategy. They hope to
take over the state by getting their party elected, and then to use the power of the
national state to transform capitalism by carrying out a Green New Deal.)
Decentralization and Federalism
Richard Smith is for democracy and democratic planning. He proposes elected "planning
boards at local, regional, national, and international levels." Yet his plan, like that of
Ocasio-Cortez, is clearly a top-down, centralized approach. Other experts in ecological
regeneration (who are not anarchists) have seen things in a more decentralized perspective.
For example, Bill McKibben has long been a leader of the climate justice movement. His
main solution to climate change is decentralization: "more local economies, shorter supply
lines, and reduced growth." (McKibben 2007; 180) "...Development...should look to the
local far more than to the global. It should concentrate on creating and sustaining strong
communities...." (197) "...The increased sense of community and heightened skill at
democratic decision-making that a more local economy implies will not simply increase our
levels of satisfaction with our lives, but will also increase our chances of survival...."
(231)
Naomi Klein declares, "There is a clear and essential role for national plans and
policies....But...the actual implementation of a great many of these plans[should]be as
decentralized as possible. Communities should be given new tools and powers....Worker-run
co-ops have the capacity to play a huge role in an industrial transformation....
Neighborhoods[should be]planned democratically by their residents....Farming...can also
become an expanded sector of decentralized self-sufficiency and poverty reduction."
(Klein, 2014; 133-134)
The (Monthly Review) Marxist Fred Magdoff (a professor of plant and soil science) wrote,
"Each community and region should strive, within reason, to be as self-sufficient as
possible with respect to basic needs such as water, energy, food, and housing. This is not
a call for absolute self-sufficiency but rather for an attempt to...lessen the need for
long distance transport....Energy...[should be]used near where it was produced.... in
smaller farms...to produce high yields per hectare....People will be encouraged to live
near where they work...." (Magdoff, 2014; 30-31) Also, "Workplaces (including farms) will
be controlled and managed by the workers and communities in which they are based." (29)
Compare with the views of anarchist and social ecologist Murray Bookchin: "Civic entities
can ‘municipalize' their industries, utilities, and surrounding land as effectively as any
socialist state....A municipally managed enterprise would be a worker-citizen controlled
enterprise, meant to serve human and ecological needs....[There would be]the replacement
of the nation state by the municipal confederation." (Bookchin 1986; 160) The takeover of
the oil industry could be a national and international matter, managed through
confederation, while use of renewable energy would be primarily implemented by local communes.
In short, the capitalists' wealth and power should be taken away from them (expropriated)
by the self-organization of the working class and its allies. Capitalism should be
replaced by a society which is decentralized and cooperative, producing for use rather
than profit, democratically self-managed in the workplace and the community, and federated
together from the local level to national and international levels. There should be as
much decentralization as is reasonably possible and as little centralization as is
absolutely necessary. There needs to be overall economic coordination on a national,
continental, and world-wide level, by federations of self-governing industries and
communities, but not by bureaucratic-military capitalist states. This is ecoocialism in
the form of eco-anarchism.
But Let's be Realistic....
Endorsers of the Green New Deal see it as a realistic proposal for mobilizing masses of
people and changing the ecology. They regard a program of revolutionary libertarian
ecosocialism as unrealistic, a nonstarter for the brief time there is left to save the
world. We must act quickly, they say, with proposals most people can accept, calling on
the state to take over.
This is itself an example of what C. Wright Mills called "crackpot realism." The idea that
the Democratic Party would endorse a plan for the next session of Congress to develop a
program of remaking U.S. capitalism, perhaps nationalizing much of the economy, and then
get it passed through Congress-is, shall we say, not likely. With all due respect to its
proponents (with whom I share values), they are like the drunk who looks for lost keys
under the street lamp, because that is where there is light, even though the keys are
certain to be elsewhere.
Smith refers to "de-carbonization" as "a self-radicalizing transitional demand". He hopes
that "a vigorous campaign for this Plan will show why capitalism cannot solve the worst
crisis it has ever created and encourage demands for...government planning to suppress
emissions....With a...monumental mobilization around this Green New Deal ...we can derail
the capitalist drive to ecological collapse and build an ecosocialist civilization...."
In other words, he is for building a mass movement for the Green New Deal of Ocasio-Cortez
(which he regards as inadequate as proposed), and/or his more radical plan
(nationalization based on buying out the capitalists). He hopes that people will become
aware of the limits of any pro-capitalism, because the "campaign will show why capitalism
cannot solve the crisis." However, he does not propose to tell the working class and the
rest of the population that a pro-capitalist plain "cannot solve the crisis" Instead he
advocates a plan which is an expansion of Roosevelt's "state-directed capitalism."
Apparently he hopes that the people will come to the conclusion that "capitalism cannot
solve the crisis" by themselves-or perhaps with some help from the reformist,
state-socialist, Democratic Party-supporting, Democratic Socialists of America. An
ecosocialist result is far more likely if there are already radicals telling the truth
about capitalism, from the very beginning, even if it is, so far, unpopular to do so.
Revolutionaries have long argued that even reforms are most likely to be won when the
rulers fear a militant, aggressive, and revolutionary movement, or at least a
revolutionary wing of a broader movement. "Reforms" in this case would be steps to hold
back and mitigate the effects of global warming due to capitalist industry, even by using
the capitalist state. Such reforms cannot be won by an environmental movement which tries
to be "reasonable" and "respectable", especially if it has a radical left which offers to
buy out big businesses and stay within the framework of capitalism.
We cannot say what is reasonable to expect. Today's popular consciousness is not what it
will be tomorrow. The very crises of weather and the environment will change that. The
climate crisis will interact with the looming economic crisis, and with continuing turmoil
over race, immigration, gender, and sexual orientation. Not to mention endless wars. With
such shakeups in the lives of working people and young people, there may be an opening for
a revolutionary anarchist ecosocialist program. Whether this will develop in time cannot
be known. But we must not give up on history.
In conclusion, revolutionary libertarian ecosocialists should support all sincere
struggles for reforms, including those advocating state action, and participate in these
movements. But they should always point out the limitations and dangers of these programs.
they should always raise the goal of a decentralized-federation of self-managed
institutions as the only society capable of ecological harmony and freedom.
The issue is not only whether capitalism is compatible with ecological balance and ending
climate change. The question is also about the nature of the state, and whether the state
is compatible with avoiding ecological catastrophe. These issues should determine our
attitude toward proposals for a Green New Deal.
References
All, Max (2018). "Beyond the Green New Deal." The Brooklyn Rail. (11/1/18).
https://brooklynrail.org/2018/11/field-notes/Beyond-the...-Deal
Aronoff, Kate (2018). "A Mandate for Left Leadership." The Nation (12/31/18). Pp. 18-20, 26.
Bookchin, Murray (1986). The Modern Crisis. Philadelphia PA: New Society Publishers.
Dansereau, Carol (2018). "Climate and the Infernal Blue Wave: Straight Talk About Saving
Humanity." System Change Not Climate Change. (From Counterpunch ll/13/18.)
https://systemchangenotclimatechange.org/article/climat...anity
Gelderloos, Peter (2016). Worshipping Power: An Anarchist View of Early
State Formation. Chico CA: AK Press.
Klein, Naomi (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. NY: Simon &
Schuster.
Magdoff, Fred (Sept. 2014). "Building an Ecologically Sound and Socially Just Society."
Monthly Review (v. 66; no. 4). Pp. 23-34.
Marx, Karl, & Engels, Friedrich (1955). The Communist Manifesto. Northbrook IL: AHM
Publishing.
McKibben, Bill (2007). Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. NY:
Henry Holt/Times Books.
Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria (2018). "Select Committee for a Green New Deal: Draft Text for
Proposed Addendum to House Rules for 116th Congress of the United States"
https://ocasio2018.com/green-new-deal
Rugh, Peter (2018). "Gearing Up for a Green New Deal." The Indypendent. Issue 242.
https://indypendent.org/2018/12/gearing-up-for-a-green-...deal/
Simpson, Adam (2018). "The Green New Deal and the Shift to a New Economy" The Next System
Podcast.
https://thenextsystem.org/learn/stories/green-new-deal-...onomy
Smith, Richard (2018). "An Ecosocialist Path to Limiting Global Temperature Rise to
1.5[degrees]C" System Change Not Climate Change. (An abridged version of a paper to appear
in 3/1/19 Real-World Economics Review.)
https://systemchangenotclimatechange.org/article/ecosoc...se-15°c
Trotsky, Leon (1977). The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution. NY: Pathfinder Press.
Wikipedia, (undated). "Green New Deal."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal
*written for www.Anarkismo.net
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/31250
------------------------------
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten