Site icon Workers' Voice/La Voz de los Trabajadores

Home

  • April 9 webinar: ‘Wars on the People’ — Repression and resistance at home and abroad

    April 9 webinar: ‘Wars on the People’ — Repression and resistance at home and abroad

    The UNITED LEFT PLATFORM, an alliance of revolutionary socialist organizations, invites you to an April 9 webinar with an activist panel on confronting and anti-immigrant terror and attacks on democratic rights at home, and U.S. imperial crimes around the world.

    This roundtable discussion will represent some of the important experiences of the rising movements resisting the domestic and global rampages of U.S. imperialism under the Trump administration, with perspectives on how these struggles can become powerful, unified, and politically independent. From beating back ICE terror in Minneapolis to opposing the U.S.-Israeli wars on Palestine, Iran, and Lebanon, and the U.S. threats to Cuba and Latin America, we see the critical necessity of bringing the struggles together for the common purpose of collective liberation.

    The speakers will discuss how the concrete experiences of May Day organizing can connect domestic resistance to MAGA authoritarianism to opposition to U.S. wars and imperialism as a whole. The panelists will give brief initial responses to focused strategic questions, followed by open discussion. JOIN US!

    Thursday, April 9, 8 p.m. Eastern; 5 p.m. Pacific

    SPEAKERS:

       • Kip Hedges – school bus driver and longtime union activist in Minneapolis

       • Avery Wear – Tempest, San Diego Socialists, LSAN

       • Omid Rezaian – IMHO

       • Dan Piper – Workers’ Voice, CT Civil Liberties Coalition

       • Meg C – Speak Out Socialists

       • Ashley Smith – VT Tempest Collective

    CHAIR: Blanca Missé, Workers’ Voice

    REGISTRATION INFORMATION:

    https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_R702vOe8QluM7Mha7LVF5g

    https://www.unitedleftplatform.net/wars-on-the-people/

  • Workers’ Voice newspaper: March-April edition

    The U.S.-Israel war on Iran is a major escalation in the Middle East that has dangerous implications for working people everywhere. The brutality of the imperialist assault internationally is paired with the attack on civil liberties by the Trump regime inside the U.S. This includes the continued operations of ICE and Border Patrol, the threats to the 2026 mid-term elections, environmental rollbacks that deeply impact the Black community, and unchecked police brutality.

    Our editorial in this issue warns us: “There is a great danger of underestimating the determination of the U.S. corporate elite to drive through this effort. We cannot rely on court rulings or upcoming elections to save us. We must organize now, not only for mass demonstrations and community networks against ICE violence, but to find our way to building a new working-class party through which we can organize our political defense on every plane and on every day.”

    In this issue we also have articles on the Epstein files and the ruling class, the San Francisco teachers’ strike, and a review of the new album by U2.

    The March–April 2026 edition of our newspaper is available in print and online as a pdf. Read the latest issue of our newspaper today with a free pdf download! As always, we appreciate any donations to help with the cost of printing.

    Click on the image to read the paper or message us to get a hard copy:

  • No U.S. War on Iran!

    A STATEMENT BY LA VOZ DE LOS TRABAJADORES/WORKERS’ VOICETHE REVOLUTIONARY SOCIALIST NETWORK,  AND SOCIALIST RESURGENCE

    Evidence has come to light (NBC news) that President Trump first authorized the assassination of Iranian military leader Qassim Soleimani last June. This effectively undercuts Trump’s story that he ordered the Jan. 3 strike that killed Soleimani to foil an impending Iranian attack on U.S. embassies.

    In fact, U.S. aggression against Iran can be traced back to 1953, when President Mohammed Mossadegh was overthrown in a U.S.-abetted coup. That brought in the Shah, the major U.S. policeman in the region. In the 1980s, the U.S. fanned the flames of the Iran-Iraq war, which killed over one million people. In 1988, the U.S. shot down an Iranian airliner, killing 290 Iranian civilians. Beginning in 1984, the U.S. has imposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy and impoverished its people.

    Since the Trump White House re-imposed economic sanctions on Iran in 2018, the threat of outright warfare has been bubbling under the surface. Following its unilateral exit from the “Iran Deal,” the U.S. attempted to force a wedge between the Iranian and world economies in an effort to drive Iranian capitalism into a crisis it hoped to exploit to gain back influence lost after the 1979 Iranian Revolution. At least 14,000 U.S. troops have been moved into countries bordering Iran. However, despite spending over $5 trillion on military activity in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan since 2001, the ability of U.S. companies to decide how the region’s resources are used has declined.

    During the scramble for influence between imperialist and regional powers, working people have rebelled throughout the Middle East. In Iraq, working people built mass demonstrations that called for an overturn of the corruption-plagued regime and an end to the sectarian-based governmental system. Demands were raised that both the U.S. and Iran withdraw their military forces from the country. Protests in Iran were ignited by plans to raise fuel prices against the background of falling living standards that have been exacerbated by U.S. sanctions. Over 1500 protesters were reported killed by government repression.

    It is likely that the U.S. saw Iran’s weakness in confronting the protests as a factor in its decision to escalate tensions at this time. The U.S. hopes that carrying out demoralizing military actions in addition to its program of sanctions will force Iran to acquiesce to its economic and political terms. And now the major European powers, with a nod to Trump, have voted to strengthen their sanctions against Iran.

    U.S. military intervention makes it more difficult for people in Iran to struggle against their government in order to gain a more just and equitable society. And indeed, for some days, it appeared that the Jan. 3 assassination would have the effect of insulating the Iranian regime against the anger of working people. But following Iran’s blatant cover-up of its Jan. 9 missile attack on a civilian airliner, which killed 176, Iranian protesters quickly returned to the streets in fury.

    In the United States, some Democratic Party politicians have tried to use the Soleimani assassination as a ploy to embarrass Trump. And yet, the Democrats are complicit in approving funds for U.S. wars and bases in the Middle East. A more effective deterrent to U.S. warmaking appeared immediately after the assassination, when emergency antiwar protests were organized in dozens of cities throughout the United States. The antiwar movement will take another significant step on Saturday, Jan. 25, when coordinated nationwide demonstrations are planned. What is needed next is the construction of broad inclusionary coalitions oriented to working people and their organizations, especially anchored by unions, community organizations, organizations of oppressed nationalities, and student groups who wish to build united mass-action antiwar demonstrations that are independent of the Democratic Party.

    No U.S. attacks on Iran! 

    End the sanctions! 

    U.S. out of the Middle East!

     

  • For MLK Day: How free Black people resisted exile in the 19th century

    A drawing of the interior of Bethel African Methodist Church in the early 19th century. The church was founded in a former blacksmith’s shop by Richard Allen.

    By MICHAEL SCHREIBER

    Marches that raise the demands of Black people for full economic and social rights used to take place in a number of U.S. cities. Now, aside from a few locations, the marches have been supplanted by a volunteer “Day of Service.” While the “Service” activities (picking up trash, etc.) are certainly not useless, they tend to ignore the sharp anti-racist demands that the marchers put forward in earlier years.

    At the same time, the life and legacy of Martin Luther King himself have been largely reduced to that of an optimistic “dreamer.” His contributions as a leader in the struggle against racism and war, and as a strong critic of the unequal and discriminatory economic system in the United States, are often downplayed or forgotten.

    Martin Luther King: Not just a dreamer.

    “America has been comfortable with Dr. King the dreamer as opposed to Dr. King who articulates the American nightmare,” the Rev. Mark Kelly Tyler, pastor of the historic Mother Bethel AME Church, told The Philadelphia Inquirer.

    Solomon Jones, a host for Philadelphia radio station WURD and a columnist for The Inquirer, stated in the same article that King’s ideas were sanitized to prevent them from growing into a larger movement. “‘I Have a Dream’ allows for the status quo to remain,” Jones said. “It doesn’t allow his dream to say, ‘We want equal opportunity in jobs, in housing, and in every aspect of society that King spoke out for.’”

    Philadelphia is one city where sizable political marches have been organized on Martin Luther King Day—though not for several years. On Jan. 16, 2017, for example, over 5000 people marched to a street rally outside Philadelphia’s Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church. The march was sponsored by a broad coalition of groups under the aegis of the MLK Day of Action and Resistance (MLK-DARE), which presented to the public its comprehensive declaration of principles as “a vision for a more equal and just America.”

    The reason that the marchers assembled outside historic Mother Bethel was to mark a special occasion—the 200th anniversary of another rally at the same site. Michael Schreiber wrote an article concerning the historical background of the occasion, which was published in Socialist Action newspaper. We reprint a slightly expanded version of the article below:

    *****

    In January 1817, some 3000 people had gathered at Bethel AME Church in Philadelphia to speak against efforts to expel free Black people from the United States and send them into exile in Africa.

    In early 1816, Charles Fenton Mercer, a Federalist legislator in Virginia, initiated a campaign to convince the federal government to colonize Black people into a new state on the west coast of Africa. Mercer believed that Black people in this country, once they had been freed from slavery, would remain pauperized and discontented, and thus act as a constant destabilizing force in U.S. society.

    It was an idea that some well-intentioned whites had raised before: Why not give American Blacks a fresh opportunity in Africa? In that way, they could develop their skills unhindered by white prejudices, and at the same time bring Christianity and civilized values to the “untamed” continent (while aiding the penetration of Africa by U.S. commercial interests in the bargain).

    Historian Gary B. Nash (“Forging Freedom”) sums up the motivations of Mercer and other white “reformers” who were attracted to the goals of the colonization movement: “White racial prejudice was permanently relegating free blacks to a degraded position, which was a contradiction of the entire credo of the republican ideology emanating from the American Revolution. Caught in such an impasse, white reformers chose to remove the object of white racism rather than combat racism itself.”

    Mercer soon caught the ear of Robert Finley, a Presbyterian clergyman and director of the Princeton Theological Society. Finley developed a plan to establish the American Colonization Society (ACS), headquartered in the city of Washington, a location chosen to facilitate the task of lobbying members of Congress.

    A meeting of the American Colonization Society.

    It was not long before a number of Southern slave-owning planters and politicians joined the ACS—and indeed, they became its principal leaders and proselytizers. This was evident at the founding conference of the society, on Dec. 21, 1816, in Washington City, where sessions were chaired by Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, a slaveholder. The newly elected president of the society was Bushrod Washington, nephew of the former president, and a slaveholder at the Mount Vernon estate.

    Although the language of the ACS convention spoke of “ameliorating the condition of the free people of colour in the United States,” less glowing opinions were voiced by many delegates. This was seen in the positions of Robert Goodloe Harper, from Maryland, who wrote in 1817 that the growing number of free Blacks in his region were a “nuisance and burden,” “a degraded, idle, and vicious population.”

    Southern planters saw free Black people as worse than a nuisance; their very existence as “free” labor served as a constant threat to the institution of slavery. “King Cotton” was becoming supreme as an export crop, and slavery was being extended to new U.S. territories in the Mississippi Valley and even further westward.

    It had become evident to Black people at the time that, as the abolition movement steadily lost ground, white hostility to Blacks was rising in the North. What few rights they could count on, even elementary rights such as the right to congregate in public parks on holidays, were often removed.

    Accordingly, many Black leaders were initially attracted to the goals of the Colonization Society. The image of a haven in a free Black-ruled republic (like Haiti) had great attraction. One strong supporter of the idea was Paul Cuffee, a New England merchant, ship owner, and sea captain of African and Native American parentage. As a political organizer, Cuffee used his ability to sail from port to port along the Eastern seaboard to spread the vision of “returning” to Africa.

    Sea captain Paul Cuffee.

    At first, Philadelphia Black leader James Forten was drawn to Cuffee’s ideas. But the meeting at Mother Bethel Church—which he chaired—helped to steer him away from support to colonization after he observed one speaker after another denounce it.

    Most Black families in the United States had lived here for generations and had no memory of the Africa of their ancestors. Most felt that they should have full rights in the very country that they had helped to build.

    Soon, the role of white Southern slave owners in the American Colonization Society became clear to all. Moreover, not just a few Black Americans who had emigrated to western Africa (Sierra Leone and Liberia) found themselves in conflict with local peoples. And whole families died from diseases to which they had no immunity.

    But as racism grew in the United States throughout the early 19th century, the idea of exiling the free Black population to a distant country continued to come to the surface. In 1859, the U.S. Senate even debated a plan to colonize Central America with Black people shipped in from the United States.

    Abraham Lincoln was always a strong supporter of the American Colonization Society. After signing the Emancipation Proclamation, he once again considered the idea of exile for Black people who had been freed from slavery—with a focus particularly on Central America.

    Historian Dr. Philip Magness, in his book “Colonization After Emancipation: Lincoln and the Movement for Black Resettlement,” reveals that Lincoln signed a contract with the owner of a small island off the coast of Haiti, which he felt could be the site of a new African American colony. A few hundred free Blacks were transported there, but an outbreak of smallpox, plus the refusal of the U.S. government to adequately provide sustenance and housing, led to abandonment of the island by 1863.

    As efforts for colonization continued, Frederick Douglass was outraged, calling the president an “itinerant colonization preacher” who had made himself look “ridiculous.” Douglass pointed out that Black people had an historical presence in this country as long as any American of European descent—so there should be no reason to banish them from the land of their birth. Ultimately, resistance among the great majority of the Black population to the plan for resettlement abroad put an end to the colonization movement.

     

     

  • Workers in India stage massive general strike

    By RUWAN MUNASINGHE

    On Jan. 8, around 250 million workers in India took to the streets in a strike against the anti-worker policies of the far-right BJP government. The strike was planned and executed under the leadership of the 10 Central Trade Unions (CPU’s). Two CPUs—the National Front of Indian Trade Unions (affiliated with the BJP) and Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (affiliated with the BJP’s semi-fascist parent organization, the RSS)—refused to participate.

    This strike came at a time when various sections of Indian society are already protesting against the Modi government. Although the strike only lasted for 24 hours, it demonstrated that the masses of India are discontented and are moving in the direction of greater solidarity with each other across social and geographic lines.

    The Modi government has been waging a quiet war on the working class of India. The strike is a response. The Indian central government under the Congress Party (INC) openly turned to a neoliberal plan of economic development through the market reforms of the 1990s. Despite the nationalism of the Hindutva BJP (which finally broke the dynastic rule of the INC and the Gandhi family in 2014), the economic policies of Modi are essentially neoliberal. They are characterized by cuts in public-sector jobs, austerity, privatization, and openness to investment from major capitalist powers. Corporate profits grew by over 22% between 2018 and 2019. Simply put, the Modi government is a government of and for the bosses.

    This must be put into further context: India has about as many people living in poverty as the entire continent of Africa. At the same time, the country has more billionaires (131 total) than any other in the world excluding the U.S. and China. The past several years have seen the highest unemployment levels in about half a century, while there have been no substantial increases in wages and the cost of necessities and consumer goods are ever increasing (https://www.epw.in/journal/2019/50/commentary/rising-unemployment-india.html).

    Working conditions in factories are often abysmal. Exactly a month before the strike, 43 workers were killed and 56 were injured in a factory fire in the Anaj Mandi area of Delhi. The factory was used to make luggage, shoes, and handbags. According to an investigation by the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU)—also one of the organizers of the strike—most of the casualties were migrant workers from Bihar and some were children. Many of those killed were sleeping inside the factory when the fire broke out. The report determined that the number of violations apparent in the factory amount to the shop being entirely illegal (http://www.citucentre.org/journals/working-class/595-2020-january).

    It is in this context that the CTUs have expressed vexation at the state of the working class and voiced a number of grievances. A primary concern is the changes in the labor code that will truncate 44 labor laws into four labor codes. This effectively ends protections for an eight-hour workday and dilutes minimum wage laws.

    The CTUs are also protesting against the privatization of rail and major PSUs, such as AirIndia. This would put hundreds of thousands of workers out of jobs. Rail workers in particular have, since last year, been protesting against privatization whilst making the argument that public rail is not only their source of employment as workers but also an important public service for the working class.

    India is also moving to corporatize its defense production in order to compete with the likes of Lockheed Martin. Other demands and grievances include the need for a hike in minimum wage, calls to abolish the CAA, and protests against the merger of banks.

    Here is the complete list of demands submitted by the CTU’s:

    1) Urgent measures for containing price-rise through universalisation of public distribution system and banning speculative trade in commodity market.

    2) Containing unemployment through concrete measures for employment generation.

    3) Strict enforcement of all basic labor laws without any exception or exemption and stringent punitive measures for violation of labor laws.

    4) Universal social security covers for all workers.

    5) Minimum wages of not less than Rs 15,000 per month, with provisions of indexation.

    6) Assured enhanced pension not less than Rs 3,000 per month for the entire working population.

    7) Stoppage of disinvestment in Central/State PSUs.

    8) Stoppage of contractorisation in permanent perennial work and payment of same wage and benefits for contract workers as regular workers for same and similar work.

    9) Removal of all ceilings on payment and eligibility of bonus, provident fund; increase the quantum of gratuity.

    10) Compulsory registration of trade unions within a period of 45 days from the date of submitting application; and immediate ratification of ILO Conventions C 87 and C 98.

    11) Stoppage of pro-employer labor law amendments.

    12) Stoppage of FDI in railways, insurance, and defense.

    A record number of people participated in the strike action. At 250 million strong, the action was probably the largest in the history of the country and the world. Indeed, the amount of striking workers in India that Wednesday was probably more than the total amount of people living on the planet at the time the Communist Manifesto was written.

    In many areas, roads and railways were blocked by workers. However, the scale of the action should not be overemphasized. It was merely a 24-hour strike. Due to police pressure, many cities of striking workers were sectioned off and rendered less impactful. The economic leverage of the strike was not nearly as heavy as it could have been. Planning for the strike began in September of 2019, and local governments made arrangements for certain services like transportation to continue through Jan. 8.

    This strike alone will certainly not bring Indian workers out of the current situation. Nonetheless, it is an invaluable step towards creating a political and social movement of working people to challenge the far-right apparatus of the BJP. Moreover, there are signs that this action is paving the way for more protracted mass strikes in the near future. A.R Sindhu, national Secretary of Centre of Indian Trade Unions, has said that if the central government continues with its anti-worker policies, there will be an indefinite strike.

    A key factor of the efficacy of the further strike actions would take place if workers deepen connections with and continue to organize alongside rural Indians and students. Despite rapid urbanization, the labor movement must actively cultivate relationships and solidarity with rural people.

    India is a mostly agrarian country. Farmers are perhaps most acutely affected by the negative effects of Modi’s economic policies. Across India, farmers are suffering from bad markets, crippling debt, the effects of climate change (particularly drought and floods), and the high price of necessities. Many have simply no way to repay loans from banks and landlords. India has seen an epidemic of farmer suicides—which amount for a tenth of all suicides in the country. Farmers were conspicuously active in the strike, especially in agriculture-heavy states such as Punjab.

    The labor movement of India must also solidarize with other highly exploited rural workers, such as tea pickers of Darjeeling, fishermen of Tamil Nadu, and countless other examples of interests that did not participate in the strike.

    Rural Indians suffer from poverty and often are the first to be targeted by Modi. For instance, millions of forest dwelling rural Adivasis are facing eviction (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/22/millions-of-forest-dwelling-indigenous-people-in-india-to-be-evicted). In recent months, thousands of Adavasis have protested in the capital (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/fearing-eviction-thousands-forest-dwellers-protest-india-191121155026100.html). Likewise, the National Register of Citizens in Assam, which has forced the mostly rural people of Assam to prove documentation of their citizenship prior to 1971(this date not accident coincides with the war for Bangladeshi liberation which displaced people in this area), has put millions in the position to potentially be deported (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/aug/30/nightmarish-mess-millions-assam-brace-for-loss-of-citizenship-india).

    Many students and student groups openly and actively expressed solidarity with the strike. The current labor movement in India has a natural ally in the students and vice versa. Students, of course, have been at the forefront of efforts to combat Modi and the BJP. Students were at the forefront of protests in defense of Kashmir, protests against fee hikes, and now protests against the CAA and NRC. Historic popular mobilizations against the CAA and NRC are currently underway at dozens of colleges and universities (http://www.marxistreview.asia/india-anti-caanrc-protests-masses-reject-religious-divide/).

    For students to support organized labor at this moment would be to support mobilizations against a central government that they have already been mobilizing against for months and years. Conversely, for labor to support students would be to gain momentum from the most dynamic popular movements against the policies of a government that they have already been suffering under.

    The recent attacks on students at JNU by far-right gangs underline something that has already been demonstrated consistently: students are literally bearing the brunt of the BJP apparatus’s attacks against popular opposition (https://peoplesdispatch.org/2020/01/05/right-wing-goons-attack-students-faculty-at-indias-jawaharlal-nehru-university/). But youth have been bearing the brunt of the BJP in more ways than tear gas and lathis. It is the youth that suffer the highest levels of unemployment. It is the youth who face the worst effects of an economy with no attractive opportunities for new graduates. Indeed, it is the youth who are most explicit in the fight for socialism—placing no faith in capitalism to rid India of its woes.

    Revolutionary socialists should be inherently skeptical at the ability of CPUs to lead the working class—as many of them are tied to the major capitalist parties (namely the INC and BJP) and the Stalinized CPIs. Nevertheless, the Jan. 8 strike is a step in the right direction to create united-front-type unity against the far-right BJP government and its apparatus. The combination of this strike with the political demands being chanted on the streets from already present popular mobilizations is raising the consciousness of workers. The developments in India in the past several months have raised India to be one of the most important examples of popular protests in the world alongside Haiti, Iraq, Chile, and France.

    Photo: Ajay Verma / Reuters

     

     

  • Housing is a human right!

    Moms 4 Housing members Sharena Thomas, left, Dominique Walker, second from left, Misty Cross, and Tolani King, right, take part in a press conference at the Hall of Justice on Dec. 30, 2019, in Hayward, Calif. Members of the group Moms 4 Housing attended a court hearing after occupying a vacant home in Oakland since November. (Aric Crabb / Bay Area News Group)

    By ERWIN FREED

    In the early morning of Jan. 14 in Oakland, angry men with guns and tanks approached the home of a group of women and children trying to get some sleep for their next day of work and school. The mothers are part of a housing justice group, Moms 4 Housing, which declares that housing is a human right and acts that way.

    In November, Dominique Walker, a founding member of Moms 4 Housing, occupied the vacant house at 2928 Magnolia Street. Two days later, real estate speculators Wedgewood Properties bought the deed and attempted to evict Walker and the growing group of homeless families living in the home.

    Moms 4 Housing filed a counterclaim to the property, arguing that housing is a human right. On their website, they point out that there are “four times as many empty homes in Oakland as there are people without homes.” M4H has found a large amount of community support, with regular rallies to defend their right to secure housing.

    The Democratic leadership in Oakland has exposed itself once again by their inability to protect even the very popular cause of housing for homeless mothers. While Mayor Libby Schaaf voiced support for the mothers, she did nothing to stop their eviction, which included at least four arrests.

    The housing crisis in the United States has only deepened since the great recession. While the economy has largely recovered for the biggest capitalists, eviction notices are served about every four minutes. As sociologists and political economists like Matthew Desmond and “Capital Cities” author Sam Stein have shown, “Incomes have remained flat for many Americans over the last two decades, but housing costs have soared.”

    Precarious housing and precarious labor mean life for working people in the United States is a perpetual state of anxiety and dread. The “real estate state” is attempting to stop community responses to the problem through police force. Simply Google “homeless encampment” and the search will be filled with stories of programs to “clear” and “stop” the communities that have emerged in Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Seattle, and all around the country.

    Tent cities are not the answer. The United States is somewhat unique in that its “slums” are almost completely without public resources. As a quick example, in Syria before the civil war, most informal housing had state-provided plumbing and electricity. A couple of extra amenities for people forced to live on the street is not a solution either.

    What is needed is for working people to take up the demand in their unions and movement organizations for public ownership and workers’ control of all housing and land development. Only in this way will there be a path forward to not only rationally use the current housing stock that exists to house the homeless but also to change the entire design of our cities and towns to be ecologically sound.

    The eviction of Dominique Walker and the other Moms 4 Housing members shows that the capitalist state will not be capable of even minimal housing justice. Working people need to achieve that by their own power.

    Socialist Resurgence stands in solidarity with all of the evictees and demands that all charges be dropped against Misty Cross, Tolani King, and Jesse Turner.

  • A Study on the Chinese Working Class

    The main objective of this material is to analyze what happened with the great wave of strikes that swept through China between 2014 and 2016, the current situation of the class struggle in that country, and the course followed by activists and independent trade unions who drove that wave. However, in the process of researching this I included data on the salary and employment situation as well as some characteristics of that working class.
    Alejandro Iturbe – Brasil
    It is necessary to clarify that this is a work carried out on the basis of reading specialized reports and journalistic news, without any possibility of contrasting this data (and the conclusions by the authors) with information or direct contacts. For that reason, it is necessary to take very carefully the hypotheses indicated in this material and see them as a step in a process of elaboration and monitoring that must be continued.
    The Chinese proletariat
    The first element is the colossal dimension of the Chinese working class and, within it, of the gigantic industrial proletariat. China has a population of just under 1.4 billion people. It was a country of essentially agrarian composition: even in 1980, only 20% of the population was urban. But the accelerated process of industrialization and urbanization of the last decades caused half of the population to live in cities in 2010[1]. Today is slightly more. Within that framework, in 2013 the Statistics Department of the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MOHRSS) estimated a “workforce of 937 million people”[2] . Unemployment was estimated at 4.1% (just over 38 million people), which means a net balance close to 900 million.
    That amount includes both employees and farmers who work the land. A 2015 report indicates that slightly more than 28% of the active population worked in primary activities (agriculture, livestock and fisheries, most of them self-employed). That is, just over 250 million people[3]. Other material refers to “300 million farmers”[4]. We will take the first figure, which is from official statistics. The same study cited initially reports 19.3% are “urban owners” (encompassing bourgeois and smallholders). That is, just under 174 million people.
    In China, then, there are about 500 million employees. Within that total, the study reports that 29.3% of the total workforce works in “industry, construction and energy.” This means that we speak of an industrial proletariat of more than 260 million people (it includes private industry and national, provincial and municipal state companies with industrial, construction and energy production activities). That amount has even more impact if we consider that in 2008 the group of OECD countries had 131 million, and Brazil (with more recent data) around 20 million. The rest of the wage earners (between 230 and 240 million) belong to the different branches of the services sector (public and private “civil servants and employees”). We are talking about the largest working class and the largest industrial proletariat on the planet.
    Geographic location
    It is evident that a working class and an industrial proletariat of this size cannot be homogeneous and have deep inequalities in their characteristics of age, salary income and educational level, consumption trends, levels of organization and struggle, etc.
    The largest sector of the industrial proletariat and service workers live and work in the large cities of the coastal areas. However there are also significant numbers of workers in the smaller inland cities – in some cases employed in provincial and municipal companies and in other cases employed in private industrial companies which have begun to move inland in the search for lower wages. As we will see, the mandatory minimum wage varies greatly according to the regions and inland areas have a proletariat that is more “docile” than the one in the big cities. It was the case of the Foxconn which moved part of its production to the interior after the suicide of several workers, and also Yantai Hangzhi International (led lamp factory)[5]. This relocation process has been encouraged by the government itself since 2000, but has accelerated since 2010.
    Here it is necessary to briefly refer to the houkou (the internal passport required to move from the interior to the cities of the coast and which determines access to housing, health and education). In this sense, changes begin to be seen: “Before the workers did not have many options, except for migration. They did it out of necessity but were very discriminated against both in relation to housing, as well as to the health and education of their children […] Migration is still very large, but now many people prefer to stay in their place of origin, where factories pay less but have more social benefits, ”says Shueji Yao, a Chinese academic based in Britain[6]. Because of the combination between provincial and municipal companies, and new private company filings, even in smaller inner cities there are thousands of industrial workers.
    Elements of differentiation
    A first element of differentiation to consider is that the mandatory minimum wage is differentiated not only according to the provinces but also in the cities and regions of a province. A range of 1,150 yuan* in Anhui Province ($ 166.40) to 2,120 in Beijing and 2,420 in Shanghai ($ 306.80 and $ 350.20, respectively)[7].
    A second element is that of the migration from the interior to the large cities of the coast and the houkou required for it. It is estimated that this process involved about 250 million people who, as we saw, suffer discrimination not only in the areas of housing, health and education but also in the quality of employment they get, since many municipalities privilege in their hiring for the “ Good jobs ”to young local residents, and“ stimulate ”for large companies to do the same.
    In a study focused on five terminal plants of the automotive industry, it is reported:
    They [migrant workers] feel discriminated against because they do the same job as other workers but      receive less pay and less benefits, and because they are denied the same training and training opportunities, with lower chances of career advancement and of achieving job   stability ”[8].
    This same study points to another element of differentiation: the increasing use of workers from employment agencies agency, by several large companies (most of which are migrants with houkou); On the basis of other studies, the authors estimate 60 million Chinese workers in these contractual conditions. Specifically, in the automotive plants where the work is focused, the calculation was 50% of “regular” workers and 50% of workers per agency. The latter earned an average of 80% of the regular’s salary, had shorter-term employment contracts, and it was almost impossible for them to enter into an indefinite contract. In addition, they could not belong to the same official union organization as the “regulars” but to a union of the “agency workers”, with a much lower membership level. The study concludes that, by the level of association and collaboration, employment agencies were in fact subsidiaries of the companies that hired them[9].
    Consider also the gender issue: women represent 50% of the Chinese workforce. In addition to its traditional presence in branches such as education, health and other services, its presence is mostly in industries that require precision work in small sizes, such as cell phone and computer assembly (for example, Foxconn). In a global consideration, there is an unfavorable “gender gap” calculated in 2018 at 0.673 (0 is the best score, 1 is the worst). This index measures the size of gender inequality in participation in the economy and the skilled labor world, in access to education, etc. China ranks 103rd out of 143 countries studied[10].
    If we refer specifically to the “wage gap,” a 2012 study indicated that women earned on average 67.3% of men’s wages in cities, and 56% in rural areas. While women’s salaries have tended to increase in absolute values, they do so at a lower rate than men’s, and the gap is now worse than 20 years ago[11]. The writer LijiaZang, focusing on stories of the world of work and feminine reality, said:
    The capitalist reforms introduced by China in 1978, which brought enormous economic growth to the country, led to an expansion of inequality for women[12].
    Another element to consider is the increasing employment (especially in the cities inland) of students of technical schools (subject to special labor regimes and with lower salaries). For example, 3% of Foxconn workers come from this system, and also the 19,000 workers of the new Yantai Hangzhi plant inside. In 2017, according to the Chinese Ministry of Education, “the total number of students working as interns is around eight million.”
    Salary levels
    The mandatory minimum wage (determined by the central government, the provincials and the municipal ones) is the clear reference of a “salary floor” for Chinese workers and workers. As we saw, that salary ranges between 1,150 yuan ($ 166.40) in some municipalities in Anhui Province, and 2,420 (350.20) in Shanghai. In many state-owned companies and large private companies, it is accompanied by other benefits (in money or in services), but for many workers in state-owned enterprises in the poorest provinces or in many medium or small factories, it is “the salary”,no additional or other benefits.

    In nominal values, the minimum wage has been steadily increasing, since the different “five-year plans” implemented by the government have determined annual increases ranging between 6 and 10% (or more, in the 2011-2015 plan). In almost all cases, these were above inflation (1 or 2% per year, with peaks of 6% in 2008 and 2011; 3.5% in 2017; 2.5% in 2018, estimated at 3% for 2019). However, inflation was much higher in food, which represents 46% of the expenses of low-income urban families (with peaks of 10% in 2004, 13% in 2007, 14% in 2008 and 12% in 2011 ).
    Therefore, in the last 15 years the nominal minimum wage has doubled but the real increase in the purchasing power of workers has been considerably lower, especially for those workers who only receive that income. In any case, both the minimum wage and the average salary of Chinese workers have been increasing almost constantly, measured in dollars. Some information speaks of a national average salary of $ 880. I think that, in reality, it is not about the average (sum of wages divided by total workers) but about an average (one sample per category, divided by the number of samples).
    Let’s look at a more specific analysis. In a 2017 study, the average salary of urban workers of state-owned enterprises was $ 11,670 per year ($ 972.50 per month); that of the technological industries: 11,054.20 (921.18); industries with lower added value: 9,121, 20 (760.10); financial services: 8,208.60 (684.05); Other services: 7,183.80 (598.65). It is interesting to note that while the nominal salary of workers of state-owned enterprises had grown 10% over that of 2016, that of service workers had only grown 6.8%[13]. Some sectors, such as port crane operators, can reach a monthly salary of $ 1,258 (with many extra hours).
    This increase in the dollar value of the wages of Chinese workers has caused the country to lose “competitiveness” compared to other countries in Asia, and that some very low-tech industries (such as textiles, clothing or footwear) moved their investments to countries of lower wages. In a comparative analysis, today Chinese industrial work is more expensive than that of Bangladesh ($ 38), Pakistan (98), Vietnam (112) and even Malaysia (234). It has also meant that the average industrial wage of Chinese workers has exceeded that of countries such as Brazil, Mexico or Argentina[14].
    Automotive terminals
    Let us now return to the study on the five automotive terminals that we have already mentioned, carried out in the following plants: Guangzhou Toyota (GZ-TY), Shanghai General Motors (SH-GM), Shanghai Volkswagen (SH-VW), Tianjin Toyota (TJ- TY) and Yantai General Motors (YT-GM)[15]. Chinese law is about joint venture (50/50) between foreign companies and Chinese manufacturers. Foreign partners are responsible for technology and production, and Chinese administration and staff. They are modern factories, with between 3,000 and 5,000 workers. About 500 interviews were conducted in total (outside the factories), half to “regular” staff and half to agency staff. The net salary of these workers consists of two parts: the basic salary (which, on average, doubled the legal minimum but included the payment of overtime) and a series of fixed additional benefits. In total, regular workers received monthly wage from 3,648 yuan ($ 547) in Toyota to 6,144 ($ 921) in GM Yantai. Agency workers ranged from 2,851 ($ 428) in Toyota to 4,854 ($ 728) in GM-YT. To this must be added a bonus (which is not mandatory but defined by the company) that is related to the profits of the plant (can be paid annually or divided into installments): on average they ranged between 3 and 4 basic salaries per year (varies between companies and between regular and agency workers).
    Workday and working conditions
    To try to order the large number of types of working hours and working conditions, in 2007 the People’s Congress approved the Labor Contract Law, and in 2008 the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MOHRSS) was created, under the Council of State, as “responsible for the management of the workforce and labor relations”.
    This law establishes three types of time systems for full-time workers:

    • Standard working hours system. It is the most used, it establishes a base day of eight hours and a base week of 40 hours. On this basis, up to 2 extra hours per day and an additional day of work can be incorporated, and the minimum of one day of weekly rest must be guaranteed. Overtime must be paid at 150% on weekdays, 200% on the additional day, and 300% on holidays. This determines, in practice, that, even in factories with greater privileges (such as the aforementioned automakers), there is in realitya day of 10 hours and a week of 60 hours to achieve a better net salary. The law also determines mandatory internal breaks for food (1/2 hour) and between periods of 2 or 3 hours (10 minutes).

    The only exception I found in my research was that of the main production center of Huawei in Shenzhen: a journalistic note based on a report from the company talks about 8-hour days and monthly salaries of 6,000 yuan ($ 900)[16]. On the contrary, Foxconn (whose giant main plant is also in Shenzen), was denounced for demanding 12-hour days and for subjecting many migrant workers to an “internal dormitory” system, where they sleep in overcrowded conditions, dirty, unhygienic and dilapidated accommodation. In 2010, there were explosions due to the accumulation of aluminum dust, with 4 dead and 77 injured. In this context, the total monthly salary did not reach $ 500 and such conditions caused about 20 workers to commit suicide. This generated an international scandal and an investigation by Apple which forced Foxconn to increase wages and improve working conditions a bit. At the same time Foxconn began to transfer some of its production lines to inner cities[17].
    This Foxconn situation is reproduced in factories in the supply chain or manufacturers of products with lower added value (in many cases, overtime is not even paid as such).
    In an interview conducted at the end of 2018, Pak Kin Wan, a member of the NGO Labor Service and Education Network (LESN), based in Hong Kong (which is dedicated to monitoring the working conditions of large factories in China), says that conditions have improved in multinationals but not in factories owned by Chinese bourgeois:
    Especially in companies that are in the technology and electronic sector, actual working hours can easily reach 12 hours a day, six days a week. It is very hard […] One of the abuses that has had more echo in the media is unpaid overtime”[18].
    It is no accident that the term “12.6” has become popular in China as a criterion and work system.

    • Work hours system calculated exhaustively. It is a kind of “hour bank”, in which the hours worked are calculated during a period of time (month, quarter or year) and are averaged by day and week (not being able to exceed 8 hours a day and 40 hours weekly hours). This system eliminates overtime in practice (I could not find out which companies use it).
    • Flexible working hours system. It is applied in transport, fishing, marine oil exploitation, etc. It implies periods of intensive and extended work, and then longer breaks (similar to that applied by Petrobras in the offshore sectors). The law states that “the employer must obtain authorization from the competent authorities before adopting the flexible system of working hours”.
    • There is also a part-time work contract: no more than 4 hours a day and 24 hours a week average. Finally, as we saw, there is the work of the technical school student sector to which we have referred, but both the working day and the remuneration are not defined by this law but by provisions of the Ministry of Education. 

    The proletariat of state-owned industries
    In an article published in 2015, I cited information that about 70 million workers were employed in the State and centralized state enterprises, and about 100 million in provincial and municipal companies[19]. An important part of these workers are industrial workers in areas such as steel, mining (especially coal), civil and railway construction, oil, and petrochemicals. Some of these industrial activities (such as the production of steel, coal and petrochemicals) began to develop during the “Great Leap Forward” of the late 1950s and early 1960s, through small productive units in the municipalities and provinces, of low productivity and of inferior quality. Then it went to medium units (also of low productivity), and finally to the largest and most efficient, but that first sector continued to exist and produce.
    For more than a decade, the Chinese government has undertaken a restructuring plan for these industries (especially steel and coal), closing the lowest productivity plants and concentrating on the most efficient ones, and improving their technology. A part of this plan is in an accelerated process of implementation and involved the dismissal of 1,800,000 workers[20]. The objective was to improve the overall productivity of these branches and the balance sheets of companies. The first information would indicate that the Chinese government is making progress on this path[21]. Let’s take a closer look at some of those sectors.

    • Iron and steel industry. China is today the world’s leading steel producer, with about 700 million tons; Six of the top ten steel companies in the world are in China. Production is divided amongst large steel mills in Anshang, Benxi, Beijing, Baotou, Taiyuan, Wuhan, Ma’anshan, Panzhihua, Chongqing, Shanghai and Tianjin. Depending on internal needs and even some exports, there is overproduction. Within that framework, the Chinese government developed a plan to eliminate the production of 50 million tons of “unproductive” steel (about 7% of total production) to concentrate on the large plants of the coast. This meant the dismissal of 300,000 direct workers – about 15% of the total[22] of about 2,000,000 steel workers.
    • Coal. Coal is the main component of the Chinese energy matrix (68% in 2003, 62% in 2018). The different state coal companies are coordinated by a large central corporation. In 2004, production exceeded 2.2 billion tons and continued to increase significantly. Therefore, linked to the increase in steelmaking productivity and the closing of steel mills, the plan was to reduce coal production by 250 million tons, through the closure of thousands of mines and the dismissal of 1,500,000 workers. The whole of Chinese mining employed just under 1% of the workforce and has continued to expand in other areas outside coal. Even considering that reduction, we can calculate about 8,000,000 mining workers.
    • Building. In this sector the majority are State companies, focused centrally on the construction of public works, such as the CSCEC (Chinese State Corporation for Engineering and Construction, the largest company in the sector), and infrastructure, such as the China Railway Construction Corporation and the China National Coal Industry Construction Corporation. There are also large private companies that predominate in the area of ​​new residential buildings, such as the CCCC (China Communications Construction Co.) and those that operate in other areas, such as the CRG (China Railway Group) that have expanded from the railway sector to large infrastructure works (such as ports and airports) and project advice. A large part of these companies (state or private) also develop projects abroad.
    • In the case of state-owned companies, it is necessary to consider other important sectors, such as oil production (concentrated in large companies such as the CNPC, CNOOC and SINOPEC); petrochemicals, which combine many small nitrogen fertilizer factories (which use a production technique developed in the country), with larger and more modern plants processing synthetic fibers, plastics and pharmaceutical products, in Beijing, Shanghai, Lanzhou, Shengli, Yueyang, Anqing and Canton.There is a growing trend towards joint venture companies with capital from Taiwan, Japan and other countries); the aluminum industry (centralized by the state-owned Aluminum Corporation of China Limited), which ranges from bauxite mining to the final production of products for construction, electricity, electronics, transportation and packaging; the naval industry, a branch in which China is the world’s leading producer of ships. Naval activity is centralized by the CSSC (China State Shipbuilding Corporation)[23].
    • A rapidly expanding public sector is that of passenger and freight rail transport, centralized by the China Railway Corporation, and that of subways in large cities (currently 27 cities in the country have this), with companies that depend on respective municipalities. This growth is supported by a solid railway industry of its own. Finally there are the port and transport workers in general, an activity that is centralized by the Ministry of Transportation of the People’s Republic of China, in which not only several State companies but also private companies and self-employed truck drivers participate. It is interesting to add that China has already surpassed the United States as the world’s leading maritime nation[24].

    A more detailed study of the number of workers in each sector of the State is pending. As a global data, a study carried out between 2003 and 2004 estimated that there were “approximately 350,000 state-owned companies… that represent 28% of Chinese production compared to 75% at the end of the 1970s, but they employ 44% of workers in urban areas ”[25].
    Some general considerations
    We speak, then, of an immense working class and a gigantic industrial proletariat, divided by two broad lines. One is between workers of state-owned companies and those of private companies. The former reflect a “old” proletariat, in a double sense.
    On the one hand, they maintain some conquests: better salaries, greater respect for labor laws, more job stability, and more possibilities for access to retirement. On the other hand, they have an average age almost 10 years higher than that of private sector workers. Therefore, the “job turnover rate” is 10%, in many cases to get better opportunities in other state-owned companies or as supervisors in private industry. The latter are a new proletariat, also in several ways: they arise from the industrial development of recent years, have lower wages, work longer hours, have less stability, and lower possibilities of access to retirement. In this case, the turnover rate is 22%.
    Private sector workers are younger, especially in high tech industries. For example, in the case of the aforementioned automotive terminals, the average age of workers is 24 years (40 in the main western countries). Older employees are in state enterprises and hold supervisory positions. This profile of young workers is repeated in companies that manufacture cell phones and computers, which refuse to take employees over 30 years and even fire those who exceed that age if they do not hold supervisory positions, with legal coverage to do so “under the argument that this person does not contribute anything to the company […] Those under 30 have no commitments, are cheaper, more ‘exploitable’ and more profitable in the medium and long term ”so analyzes an article on this subject[26].
    Another important element that emerges from the report on automakers is that all workers have at least 12 years of studies [completed high school] and many have two additional years of technical studies. Taken together, the Chinese working class has a growing educational level: in 2016, a national average illiteracy rate of 5.42% was estimated. Indices worsen, of course, in more isolated regions, such as Tibet, or in the rural economy, but decrease in the provinces and cities of the coast. In addition, in higher value-added industries, secondary education is a requirement to enter; There are currently about 90 million people with a university degree and many others with other types of tertiary education (teachers or professional training). The total gives us more than 13% of Chinese with higher education[27].
    This corroborates what we noted in the 2015 article:
    It is important to understand that an important part of the industrial working class has changed its character. It is no longer about the newly arrived generation of the countryside but about their children, already raised in big cities, with better educational levels and        greater social aspirations.
    An aspect that is going to be important both in the analysis of the wave of strikes and in the perspectives of the current situation
    For their part, older workers with lower educational levels, who are not in state-owned companies or do not have access to supervisory positions in the private sector, are increasingly condemned to jobs with lower wages and worse conditions labor, such as those in the clothing, kitchen or jewelry industries. In the case of the automotive industry, in auto parts producers, whose salary and labor conditions are lower than those of the terminals.
    Within the private industry, another great dividing line continues to be the houkou, which we have already analyzed.
    Standard of living and consumption trends
    It can be seen that the rise in real wages of Chinese workers (even at the expense of strenuous days) has been increasing their purchasing power. This has been expressed in an increase in consumption levels in absolute values, as indicated by the following table of consumption by family.

    Years 1995 2000 2005 2010 2014
    Rural Zone 1.344 1.917 2.784 4.941 8.744
    Urban Zone 4.769 6.999 9.832 17.104 25.449

    (Note: the amounts are given in renminbis without indication of its equivalent in dollars in each year.
    However, they show the increase to which we have referred)[28].
    But this increase in absolute quantities is transformed into a curve of inverse dynamics when the consumption is compared as a percentage of7 the Chinese GDP of each year.
     

    Years 1995 2000 2005 2010 2014
    Household consumption 45.8 47.0 40.1 36.6 37.9

     
    That is, the greater possibilities offered by the salary improvement are not reflected in a proportional increase in the consumption of the working class. On the one hand, this expresses a tendency to increase inequality in the distribution of wealth: “While in 1993, income from the labor factor represented 50% of GDP, in 2007 it was 43%”.
    On the other hand, for some sectors, in reality there was no such increase in consumption possibilities because the nominal increase has been devoured by inflation in food, housing, health and, as we will see, help for old parents. In other cases where it does exist, workers choose to save that money and not spend it: the percentage of monthly income dedicated to saving went from 24% in 2004 to 30% in 2014. According to the work already mentioned, this reflects “a persistent lack of trust in the social security network ”, both in terms of sickness coverage, as well as dismissals or retirement.
    This leads us to analyze the Chinese retirement system and its limited coverage. Currently, the official pension system only covers 40% of the population (contributors), with a majority participation of state employees. The coverage for the private sector is very weak. Therefore, workers in this sector “prefer to deprive themselves of assets that would improve their living conditions to have a higher level of tranquility and security.” The Chinese government has a plan to extend the coverage of the retirement system, but this is, for now, “music of the future”.
    This majority trend is combined with another minority of sectors of the population that do increase their consumption of durable goods and, quite possibly, already include some higher and privileged layers of the working class. A 2012 report indicated that more than 300 million Chinese people belonged to the “middle class,” defined not with Marxist criteria but as “those families with an annual income between $ 10,000 and $ 60,000”[29].
    In 2012, that number of people represented almost 24% of the country’s population and about 48% of the urban population (although not all were in the cities). We have seen that a part of the members of this income sector choose to consume less and save more. But another part does begin to turn to consumption, especially the youngest, in issues such as electronic products, health and beauty care, gyms and travel.
    It was also expressed in an increase in car sales. In 2010, 18 million vehicles were sold in the country[30]. The figure continued to grow until 2017 when it reached 29 million (of that total, about 90% were cars). In 2018, there was a decrease of 11.41% (as a result of the economic slowdown) and the sale fell to less than 26 million[31].
    Even with this fall, China is today the world’s leading car market. But it is necessary to locate the real dimension of these figures: in the year of higher sales, that represented 22 cars sold per 1,000 inhabitants. This ratio is just above that of Brazil in 2012 (peak sales year of 18 per 1,000), while China is a country with a smaller number of vehicles. There is a sector that has varied its consumption habits, but the majority of the Chinese working class continues to travel by rail, subway, buses, motorcycles (in 2016, 17 million were sold) and even the traditional bicycle.
    Then, a first factor that pushed the wave of strikes from previous years was summed up by Pak Kin Wan: “Many factory employees in China do not see that their life has a future beyond the assembly line”[32] . A second factor that we have also referred to is the closure of less productive steel and coal companies.
    Official unions
    Before analyzing the wave of strikes and conflicts, their claims and the role of the new independent unions in them, it is important to take a look at the official Chinese unions.
    The only legal union organization in China is the National Federation of Chinese Trade Unions (ACTFU). The legislation prohibits the existence of other organizations. In 2006, it had 134 million members in 1,713,000 trade unions, 31 provincial federations, 10 national industrial unions (covering different giant companies) and two specific federations for employees of the PC and the central state apparatus[33]. It is the largest trade union federation in the world. However, it covers only 27% of the Chinese working class. Its presence is greater in state enterprises than in the private sector.
    Within private industrial companies, it acts more in joint ventures with imperialism than in those of Chinese bourgeois. For example, in the automotive terminals 64% of regular workers were affiliated to the union (in the case of agency workers, it dropped to 24%). In these companies, in addition to being responsible for the signing of the collective agreement, they act, on the one hand, as an “integral part of the management team of the Chinese partners” and, on the other, “their function is very similar to the unions of the state companies, whose major responsibilities involve organizing social activities, providing welfare services and addressing personal problems.” The first aspect (collusion with management) is also presented by Pak Kin Wan:
                    There is only one federation that is allowed, the ACFTU, and is controlled by the Government, which  also controls its electoral processes, in which supervisors and executives win.
    Its presence is much smaller (almost disappearing) in the factories exclusively owned by Chinese bourgeois like the Huawei (as we saw with better wage and labor conditions) or in the Foxconn. In the latter case, after the scandals that caused fires and suicides,
     Guo Jun, director of the legal department of the National Federation of Trade Unions of China, made Foxconn, with multiple factories in the Asian giant, a target of his criticism of those companies that force their employees to work beyond 40 weekly hours marked by Chinese labor legislation.
    The Taiwanese company responded to these criticisms:         
    Mr. Guo Jun has never come to any of our factories, making it difficult to convince anyone by throwing these conclusions […] Like other companies [the Foxconn] continually faces the desire of employees to work overtime to increase their income (wages)[34].
    The wave of strikes and conflicts
    It is necessary to understand that, in addition to the prohibition of the organization of independent unions, strikes and collective protests, in practice they are also prohibited in China.             
    In case of protest, no law protects you from being fired or even arrested for altering ‘social harmony’. Therefore, many accept the conditions and do not dare to raise their voices (Pak Kin Wan).
    That is, the strike and other forms of collective struggles appear as a last resort, high risk not only labor but also personal, only applicable in extreme cases.
    Even in these conditions, since 2007 there has been a constant increase in the number of strikes and conflicts, a process that accelerated between 2014 and 2016 (coinciding with the first obvious signs of a brake or crisis in the Chinese economy). In those three years, according to a report by the China Labor Bulletin (https://clb.org.hk/) there were 6,700 strikes and protests in different parts of the country, an exponential growth on the start level.
    What were the causes of these strikes and conflicts? In many cases in private companies it was due to delays in the payment of wages, payment of overtime according to the law, improvements in working conditions, and inclusion in the system of retirement and sickness coverage. Other conflicts in the private sector were the payment of compensation from companies that relocated to another area or even another country. While Chinese law provides for payment in these cases, many companies take advantage of the situation to avoid paying. The vast majority of these conflicts did not occur in large factories but in small and medium-sized factories (according to “Chinese figures” small and medium sized companies can employ up to 1,000 workers)[35].  An exception, in 2014, was the strike of the Yue Yuen Industrial, manufacturer of footwear, supplier of major global brands, in which 40,000 of the 200,000 workers of the different plants of this company went on strike for non-payment of social security fees[36].
    Another source of strikes and conflicts was due to the restructuring and closure plansin the steel and coal mining sector which we have already analyzed. This is combined with the poor response to industrial accidents and poor work safety conditions, especially in coal mines.
    An example, in 2016, was the conflict between the workers of the state-owned mining company Longmay who were protesting for several months at the delay in the payment of their salaries. The state then announced the laying off of 100,000 workers, 40% of the total workforce of the company.
    Another example was in the state steel industry Angang Lianzong, located in the capital of Guandong Province, where hundreds of workers went on strike against a plan to reduce up to 50% of wages and increase the mandatory daily workday to 12 hours, in some sectors[37]. A more complete picture of this wave of strikes can be found on a special page of the China Labor Bulletin[38].
    In this conflict process, the role of official unions was of course very negative. In many cases by absence, in others by playing openly on the side of the employers or companies of the State. In the case of the Yue Yuen, a few days after it started, the Trade Union Federation and several ministries went into action to end the strike. The Social Security Department acknowledged that the company owed it money and the Yue Yuen responded, in clear agreement with the FSNC, that Yue Yuen:
                    … would pay the overdue social security fees if the workers paid the part of them “[sic] andthat” those     who did not return to work three days after the communiqué would have their work contract             cancelled for abandonment of work […] The strike ended with the reluctant acceptance of the      agreement, but legal actions have been filed against the company, which was forced to pay about $ 31   million to the social security institution, with a loss of approximately $ 58 million, for the strike ”[39].
    A rare exception was the case of the Walmart store branch in Changde (with 135 workers), which closed due to the company’s restructuring plan in the country. The striking thing is that the conflict was led by Huang Xingguo (leader of the FSNC local section in that store). The activity included pickets of more than 70 workers, despite the pressures of the local leaders of the PC to maintain the conflict within the framework of “legality”[40].
    The independent trade union organization
    As we have pointed out, the independent trade union organization is banned in China. The existence of permanent cores within the factories is clandestine and, therefore, presents great difficulties in accessing accurate information.
    Yes, there are several NGOs that operate in the country, which try to “monitor” wage and labor conditions, support claims and give them some coverage. As Pak Kin Wan says, when referring to independent unions:
    Some of its functions have been assumed by NGOs, which serve as support for workers to put them in contact with labor lawyers or directly to file complaints.
    The vast majority of these NGOs are based in Hong Kong, are linked by the China Labor Bulletin publishing group, which, in turn, is linked to the ICFTU (now integrated in the ITUC) and to unions in the imperialist countries. That is, they are a kind of “union pole” outside companies and factories and, in certain cases, some of their members act in the style of the “external organizers” of US unions.
    When a collective conflict erupts, “strikes are always led by commissions of elected workers in each mobilization, who are invariably dismissed and, in many cases, arrested for their action in the strike”[41].
    Under these conditions, the existence of an independent union organization within factories or companies is almost impossible.
    A very important sector of those who led and participated in the struggles of the private sector were the workers with houkou.
    Since 2007, the undisputed vanguard is internal immigrants, when strikes were concentrated in Guangdong Province, southeast China. Since then, its economic situation has not had any significant change, but it has increased its firepower, mainly due to the experience acquired in these years and by social and demographic factors[42].
    A similar conclusion was beginning to draw the study on the automotive industry, especially in the auto parts sector:
    The new generation of temporary workers in the Chinese car industry has begun to show the ability and potential to act collectively and fight for positive changes.
    The repression hardens and, at the same time, some concessions are given
    Faced with this rising wave of conflicts and strikes, the Chinese government combined a hardening of repression against leaders and activists, which also extended to members of some of the NGOs that supported them or were more combative. This increase in repression became more evident since December 2015[43], when a national dismissal and detention operation was launched.
                   
                    … After severe repression, in December 2015, independent labor NGOs have been severely affected and their workers have run out of organizational resources[44].
     
    Currently, China Labor Bulletin reports that there are about 50 people under different forms of detention (among workers and members of NGOs), and also refers to missing activists.
    The symbol of those who suffered repression is Liu Shaoming (61 years old), an activist for trade union and democratic rights, who had participated in the mobilization of Tiananmen Square (where he joined the disappeared Autonomous Federation of Workers) and helped organize the Yue Yuen strike and other movements. Liu has already been imprisoned for four years for “inciting the subversion of state power”[45].
    This repression even became “preventive”. In May 2018 a group of workers from Shenzhen Jasic Technology Co (Jasic) began trying to organize a company union. They did this within the legal frameworks and requested to enter the local branch of the FNSC. They were confronted not only by the company but also by the government and the FSNC. The workers’ campaign gained support from NGOs, nearby factory workers, and students. The dismissals began and, as the movement continued, on July 27, 32 people were violently arrested, including Jasic workers, members of an NGO, and workers and students who had taken solidarity. Some are still detained, and others are missing[46].
    This central policy was combined with some concessions from the government, such as the permanent salary increases foreseen in the five-year plans, and the plans to expand the social security and retirement system.
    Also by companies, many of which granted the claim for which the conflict had started or sought decompression mechanisms for explosive situations, such as the Foxconn case. Preventively, some concessions were granted in large joint ventures with foreign companies.
    As Pak Kin Wan put it:
                    Some have learned the lesson and have seen that they cannot abuse the rights of their employees because it takes a toll on their worldwide image. In their factories conditions are no longer as bad as in      others.
    The actual situation
    Government policy seems to have been to prevent the wave of struggles from spreading and deepening in the large industrial cities of the coast and, especially, to the heavy battalions of private industry. This goal seems to have been achieved.
    The 2018 CLB strike map refers to “1,701 incidents” (at the peak of the process it exceeded 2,000), of which 73.3% affected local private companies, 11.6% state companies, and only 2.9% to foreign companies or joint venture[47].
    In addition to the aforementioned struggle of the workers of the Jasic, which had national repercussions, I want to refer to two others of great significance, which also occurred in 2018. The first was the crane tower operators of the large storage yards , a key piece in the process of production and transfer of goods, and of the construction industry. They get a good monthly salary out of pocket but with many extra hours in jobs of extreme tension and permanent demands. For example, in the most obsolete areas of technology, 130 accidents were reported in 2013 alone, with 15 dead and 12 injured.
    In May 2018, they went on strike for higher wages and improvements in working conditions. The strike had a great impact on the press but did not attain its aims[48].
    The strike also affected the self-employed sector: independent truck drivers, predominant in this type of transport, about 30 million of them.
    The strike took place during a weekend in July centred on a line about 1,500 km long that connects the cities of Chengdu to the west, with Jinhua in the east, affecting at least 12 transport nodes. With some features similar to the strike of truck drivers in Brazil, it was launched through social networks in protest of the price of fuel, low freight payment, and the fact that an app that connects truckers with those who They need transportation not only adds a cost but pushes freight prices down. Therefore, their net income has been reduced significantly[49].
    Some conclusions
    The repression and some concessions managed to curb the expansive dynamics of the wave of strikes and push it back a bit. But they failed to crush it and even other social sectors are incorporated.
    The objective bases that generated it remain intact and now begin to combine with other elements. For example, the impact that the commercial war with the United States will have on the country and its economy. Or the deep contradictions that the “only child” policy (applied since 1979), although it has been repealed, exerts on the aging of the population and the size of the labor force.
    The regime and the Chinese bourgeoisie are still sitting on the gunpowder barrel of the world’s largest working class and industrial proletariat.
    As the 2015 article said:
                    The gigantic Chinese working class and its industrial proletariat are waking up and starting to  act. If   this process continues, it can acquire proportions never before seen in any country in the world and collide not only with the economic model of the country but also with the dictatorial regime controlled      by the Communist Party.
                    The big problem for the regime and the bourgeoisie of China is that there are no mediation  mechanisms in the country that allow them today to dampen or divert these possible shocks, or channel those aspirations. The only political organization is the CCP and there is no democratic freedom for the masses or the middle sectors. The official unions and their leaders are, in reality, state agencies and officials, who remain on the basis of fear and repression, hated by the base. And the bourgeoisie (and the new small bourgeoisie on which it can rely) are weak in size compared to the immense working class and the poor peasantry. That is, it would be a confrontation that can occur‘raw’.
                    It is true that the Chinese regime and the bourgeoisie have been extremely pragmatic and could drive an ‘opening’. But so far they have not been willing to do so, and it may happen that, later, it is late (or overwhelmed by the ascent process). They have, of course, the alternative of trying repressive crushing as they did with the Tiananmen movement. They have very powerful tools for this: armed forces with 3,500,000 troops and police forces with 1,600,000, and with a powerful armament that is increasingly         modernized, as well as an effective secret service. But ,in addition to the fact that 80% of the armed forces are conscripts and reservists (therefore, a base with many communicating vessels with the masses)…
    But, the social reality of the country is today very different from that of the Tiananmen era: unlike 1989, it will have to face a young working class with colossal dimensions.
    It is impossible to anticipate the ups and downs that this process will have nor its rhythms, but it is, to a large extent, inevitable.
    In that way, the point of the union organization and the right to both the existence of independent unions and the realization of strikes as a first step in organizing and learning to fight, become fundamentally valuable slogans.
    Translation: With the special help of Ashley Fataar
    Notes:
    [1] https://www.historiasdechina.com/2017/02/19/la-sociedad-china-en-datos/
    [2] https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias/2013/01/130129_china_trabajadores_mj
    [3] https://www.historiasdechina.com/2017/02/19/la-sociedad-china-en-datos/
    [4] https://datos.bancomundial.org/indicador/sl.agr.empl.zs
    [5] https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias/2013/01/130129_china_trabajadores_mj
    [6] Idem.
    [7] https://www.china-briefing.com/news/salarios-minimos-en-china-2018-19/
    * Note: we will use the name yuan for the currency, although the renminbi is used internally,
    of equivalent value but not convertible.
    [8] CHEN, Vincent; CHAN, Anita; Regular and Agency Workers: Attitudes and Resistance in Chinese Auto Joint Ventures; Revista China Quarterly 224 (marzo, 2018) en: https://www.researchgate.
    net/publication/322520102_Yiu_Por_Vincent_Chen_and_Anita_Chan_Regular_and_Agency_Workers_Attitudes_and_Resistance_in_Chinese_Auto_Joint_Ventures_China_Quarterly_March_2018_no_224.
    [9] Idem.
    [10] https://datosmacro.expansion.com/demografia/indice-brecha-genero-global/china
    [11] http://www.chinoesfera.com/inxianzai.php?id=65
    [12] https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/05/27/mujeres/1558971805_964715.html
    [13] http://spanish.peopledaily.com.cn/n3/2018/0517/c31620-9461115.html
    [14] https://www.cronista.com/financialtimes/Los-salarios-en-China-superan-a-los-de-Brasil-Argentina-y-Mexico-20170228-0016.html
    [15] See the note 8
    [16] https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/tech/100-celulares-por-hora-y-mejor-salario-que-en-mexico
    [17] https://www.lainformacion.com/mundo/foxconn-la-fabrica-de-apple-en-la-que-los-trabajadores-se-suicidan_oidt8CTkyBlc0HDAhTYL15/
    [18] https://www.eldiario.es/catalunya/China-mucha-forzada-trabajar-salario_0_830467858.html
    [19] https://litci.org/en/certainties-and-questions-raised-by-chinas-economic-crisis-part-1/”
    [20] https://litci.org/en/chinese-government-plans-to-fire-2-million-workers
    [21] http://www.finanzas.com/noticias/economia/20180416/ganancias-estatales-chinas-aumentan-3823058.htm
    [22] https://www.lesechos.fr/2016/08/la-chine-intensifie-sa-lutte-contre-les-surcapacites-213616
    [23] https://www.mundomaritimo.cl/noticias/china-lidera-la-industria-de-astilleros-superandoa-corea-del-sur
    [24] https://www.naval.com.br/blog/2018/09/07/china-ultrapassa-eua-como-principal-nacao-maritima-do-mundo/
    [25] GILES, John; PARK, Albert; FANG Cai. How has Economic Restructuring Affected China’s
    UrbanWorkers?, published de The China Quarterly, November de 2004. http://www.albertfpark.com/uploads/8/1/8/2/81828236/restructure.pdf
    [26] https://www.xataka.com.co/otros/en-china-si-tienes-mas-de-30-anos-no-puedes-trabajar-enempresas-tecnologicas-cuando-la-discriminacion-por-edad-es-legal
    [27] https://www.historiasdechina.com/2017/02/19/la-sociedad-china-en-datos/
    [28] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301703616300360
    [29] https://money.cnn.com/2012/04/25/news/economy/china-middle-class/
    [30] https://carros.ig.com.br/noticias/china-ultrapassa-18-milhoes-de-veiculos-vendidos/2281.html/
    [31] http://www.asianews.it/noticias-es/Beijing,-cae-la-venta-de-autom%C3%B3viles-por-primera-vez-en-20-a%C3%B1os-45929.html y https://datosmacro.expansion.com/negocios/produccion-vehiculos/china
    [32] https://www.eldiario.es/catalunya/China-mucha-forzada-trabajar-salario_0_830467858.html
    [33] http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Nov/48588.htm
    [34] https://www.lavanguardia.com/tecnologia/20150208/54425948752/sindicato-oficial-chinocarga-contra-foxconn.html
    [35] To see a sample of what we say, see the report “China: las huelgas y protestas obreras continúan a pesar de la caída de la producción industrial” (2012) en: https://www.cetri.be/IMG/pdf/China_las_huelgas_y_protestas_obreras_continuan-1.pdf
    [36] https://litci.org/es/menu/mundo/asia/china/brazos-cruzados-maquinas-paradas/
    [37] https://litci.org/en/chinese-government-plans-to-fire-2-million-workers
    [38] http://maps.clb.org.hk/strikes/en
    [39] https://litci.org/es/menu/mundo/asia/china/brazos-cruzados-maquinas-paradas/
    [40] Idem.
    [41] Idem.
    [42] Idem.
    [43] https://clb.org.hk/content/china%E2%80%99s-workers%E2%80%99-movement-will-continue-despite-crackdown-labour-activists
    [44] https://www.elsaltodiario.com/china/xi-jinping-visita-espana-china-32-obreros-arrestadosincomunicados-desaparecidos-jasic
    [45] https://clb.org.hk/content/labour-activist-liu-shaoming-marks-four-years-jail-crackdowncontinues
    [46] https://www.elsaltodiario.com/china/xi-jinping-visita-espana-china-32-obreros-arrestadosincomunicados-
    desaparecidos-jasic
    [47] https://clb.org.hk/content/state-labour-relations-china-2018
    [48] https://clb.org.hk/content/one-year-after-nationwide-strike-china%E2%80%99s-crane-operators-are-still-risking-their-lives-just
    [49] http://www.diarionorte.com/article/167386/china-huelga-de-camioneros-por-el-alto-preciode-los-combustibles- y

  • Right-left alliances: A cancer within the antiwar movement

    White nationalist and fascist Richard Spencer (center) and his supporters fight with cops at the “Unite the Right” action in Charlottesville, Va., on Aug. 12, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

    By ERWIN FREED

    On Jan. 3, Richard Spencer, an avowed white nationalist and American Nazi supporter, retweeted the locations for national antiwar actions organized by the ANSWER coalition against U.S. aggression in Iraq and Iran. What might appear to be a minor confluence of interests is in fact part of an ongoing attempt by the far right to blur the lines between themselves and the left. Since that date, Spencer has changed his Twitter profile to include an Iranian flag in his profile name and a “STOP WAR WITH IRAN” cover photo.

    Spencer is one of many individuals who have attempted to both recruit to fascism and weaken the political left through a strategic orientation known casually as National Bolshevism or NatBol/NazBol. At the vanguard of this global perspective is Aleksandr Dugin, whom Spencer has published in his periodical as well as in the traditional press. Dugin’s decades-long project is spreading the ideology of “Eurasianism,” a crypto-fascist movement that uses the language of support to self-determination and anti-imperialism to hide its reactionary and pro-imperialist agenda.

    Spencer, Trump, and right-wing vanguardism

    Fascism comes to power as a mass movement led by sections of the middle classes won over to a false right-wing populism, which is countered against the self-organization of the working class. In times of normal class struggle, the fascists remain a minority tendency, with some connections to the bourgeois state but mostly alone in their small sects. It is only in times of severe crisis and when the working class is awakened that the fascists have a serious chance at winning enough support from the capitalist class to put themselves in power.

    Representatives of American fascism like Richard Spencer tended to view Trump solely as an individual, while ignoring the economic conditions of U.S. capitalism as a whole, and deduced that he could become the strong leader of a real fascist movement in this country. Interestingly, the approach of the far right largely mirrored that of the liberal establishment in its analysis. In fact, U.S. capitalism is currently in a period of relative stability, even “recovery,” for the handful of companies that are actually positioned to benefit from record-breaking highs in the stock markets.

    At present, no section of the U.S. ruling class is ready to openly back fascist bands to bust up union meetings, militarily confront mobilizations of immigrant workers, and move to smash every independent action of the proletariat. Of course, the nucleus for such a movement exists in the border control guards, both state and vigilante; the largest prison system in the world, which attracts whole classes of new recruits willing to publicly throw up Nazi salutes; and the white supremacist terrorists, organized and unorganized, carrying out killings throughout the country.

    Just the other day, on Jan. 13, a team of police armed to the teeth evicted a group of homeless mothers and their children from the house in which they were living in Oakland, Calif. Still, the decisive factor of ruling-class support and funding to the currently molecular groups and terrorist activities on a mass scale has yet to come into being.

    Trump’s fascist ex-supporters saw in his presidential win a potential shift of ruling-class opinion towards their methods of operation. But with their wishes not sufficiently granted, open white supremacists have begun to move past Trump in an attempt to gain relevance and distance themselves from conservative “normalcy.”

    Richard Spencer and David Duke are taking up the mantle of decrying Trump as a stooge of “Zionism” while displaying their “antiwar,” populist “credentials.” The narrative they are putting forward is that Jewish conspirators forced a weak Donald Trump to carry out an attack on Iranian and Iraqi military leaders, an act that was not in “American” but rather in “Israeli” interests. Spencer buttresses the claim with pictures of Trump and Jewish billionaire George Soros standing next to each other. In the real world, however, Israel is totally constrained by its position of subservience to the United States. The illegitimacy of Israel as a state and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine are not the nefarious acts of a secret cabal of “world Jewry”; instead, Israel serves as a stronghold of U.S. imperialist policy in the Middle East.

    Dugin, Eurasianism, and the far right’s “left turn”

    Eurasianism is an inconsistent and highly idealistic philosophy whose main theorist is Aleksandr Dugin. Dugin began his ideological life as a disaffected youth in the Soviet Union who was enamored with mysticism. Eurasianism pits “land powers” against “sea powers,” a world in which the former are embodied in former Warsaw Bloc countries—especially Russia, Japan, and others—and the latter include the U.S., Britain, and other “Atlanticist” countries.

    In the words of one academic, “In Dugin’s vision, the ‘Atlanticist’ powers are animated by a mercantile, individualistic, materialist, and cosmopolitan outlook, whereas “Eurasia” stands for spirituality, ideocracy, collectivism, authority, hierarchy, and tradition” (“Russian Fascism: Traditions, Tendencies, Movements,” by Stephen Shenfield, page 196). Dugin sees these groupings as being part of a metaphysical “dialectical triad” based around “the third Reich, the Third International, and the third Rome.”

    Dugin started his political career proper as a close associate of Gennady Zyuganov, current first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. After the fall of the USSR, Dugin and the bohemian poet Eduard Limonov formed the National Bolshevik Party as part of the larger red-brown umbrella group called the National Salvation Front.

    In the early 2000s, Dugin amicably split from the National Bolshevik Party to form his own Eurasianist organizations. He has taken a broader approach and distanced himself from identifying as a fascist outright. Instead, Dugin is positioning himself as anti-U.S. empire and anti-imperialist. He shifted to a language of “geopolitics” as opposed to more metaphysical sounding concepts.

    Dugin speaks seven different languages and has decades of deep learning in history and different theories. He is consciously taking up the language of the left in order to permeate leftist organizations and causes with what in actuality are anti-working-class politics. Here is one example from his Facebook page:

    There are different tendencies in the new generation of revolutionary, non-conformist movements in Europe (on the Right as well as the Left), and some of them have been successful in attaining high political positions in their respective countries. The crisis of the West will grow broader and deeper every day, so we should expect an increase in the power and influence of our own Eurasianist resistance movement against the present global order, which is a dictatorship by the worst elements of the Western societies.

    Those from either the Right or the Left who refuse American hegemony, ultra-liberalism, strategic Atlanticism, the domination of oligarchic and cosmopolitan financial elites, individualistic anthropology and the ideology of human rights, as well as typically Western racism in all spheres—economic, cultural, ethical, moral, biological and so on—and who are ready to cooperate with Eurasian forces in defending multipolarity, socio-economic pluralism, and a dialogue among civilizations, we consider to be allies and friends.

    He has made overtures towards Syriza and had a friendly relationship with Dimitri Konstantakopoulos when the latter was in the leading ranks of the Syriza government. Regardless of his apparent hatred of “cosmopolitan financial elites” and love of “collectivism,” Dugin has deep connections with various capitalists and politicians all over the world. He is also making an overture towards pan-Africanists.

    The red-brown “antiwar” movement

    In 2018, the right-left Molotov Club held a conference in Moscow that brought together politicians, think-tank members, and activists from left-wing groups like UNAC and right-wing groups like Euro-Rus. This conference is just one example of a constant strategy to bring together the right and left in a common cause. The strategy gives everything to the right and confuses and weakens the left.

    The Eurasianist movement actively plays a balancing game with its neo-fascist ideology. The Euro-Rus think tank, on the other hand, does not. From their own website, they espouse conspiracy theories and talk about the threat of the “downfall” due to “demographic tendencies” of Indo-Europeans, i.e. “Aryans.” They also position themselves as an “anti-American lobby” and make overtures against Israel and for democratic and civil rights. Seeing as Euro-Rus was one of the main sponsors of the Moscow conference, the character of the event ought to have been apparent, yet the language of both the conference and Euro-Rus contains enough buzzwords that an unsuspecting leftist might give them the benefit of the doubt.

    Another NatBol organization was Students and Youth for a New America, represented by Donald Coulter and connected with former Workers World Party member Caleb Maupin. SYNA purports to embrace a type of “socialism” based in “American patriotism.” While the organization says that one of its goals is to “fight fascism,” Maupin has spoken favorably about Dugin’s “Fourth Political Theory,” which claims to combine and surpass liberalism, socialism, and fascism. Speaking on a panel with Dugin himself, Maupin upheld the legacy of Huey Long, the anti-worker populist governor of Louisiana in the 1930s, as someone for the “left” to emulate. These fake representatives of socialism have deep connections to Russian imperialism. Coulter and Maupin both work for RT News.

    Similarly, the New Horizons annual conference in Iran brings together authors like Norman Finkelstein; fringe petit bourgeois politicians like Cynthia Mckinney, Art Olivier, Louis Farrakhan, and Mike Gravel; artists like Brother Ali; and a range of open anti-Semites, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, and paleo-conservatives. The conference is truly international, bringing in far-right thinkers from France, Britain, the U.S., and throughout Europe and the Middle East. Dugin and his Eurasianist comrades have been put up as keynote speakers at these conferences, where they are able to spread their message to U.S. antiwar groups such as Code Pink.

    Continuing the tendency to muddle the fightback against national oppression with class collaboration, the conference is billed as covering: “World and regional matters, Geopolitics (In both Middle East and Eurasia), Muslims in Europe, Islamophobia, Iranophobia, Discriminations, US State hostility towards Afro-Americans, Zionist Lobby, 911, Israeli-Western decision makers centers (political, military, economic & cultural ones), US domestic & Foreign Policy, South-South cooperation, etc.”

    Summarizing the trend

    The far right wing sees every miss-step the left makes. They pounce on it. Any cracks, any confusion, they seek to exacerbate. They are unprincipled. Limonov illustratively said of Dugin that he is “capable of holding ten opinions at once.” They are more than willing to be open opportunists, to confuse workers about everything, especially their own power.

    They are tied by a million threads to capital. As capitalist crises intensify and the ruling class is forced towards militarist adventures, a section of the far right will continue to try to use the antiwar movement to recruit to fascism. Using the language of “non-intervention” and “anti-Zionism,” the Richard Spencers will continue to come out of the woodwork, doing everything from backing Democratic Party candidates to using the language of “socialism” to try to draw in the radicalizing layers of our society. In fact, David Duke, former leader of the KKK, is the most straightforward when he says that his reason for opposing wars is that they “damage average Americans and 99% of American business!”

    Just like the Heritage Foundation is willing to put up a “pro-woman” and “pro-LGB” facade to split and confuse the fight against gender oppression (Trans Bulletin page 10), so too are the fascists willing to voice opposition to this or that act of aggression by American capitalism. To truly fight against U.S. imperialism, both its economic roots and its military strategies, the global working class and its real allies must reject the false friends of the right wing and build their own independent fightback organizations and parties.

     

  • U.S. drone strike kills over 60 in Afghanistan

    By RUWAN MUNASINGHE

    Dozens of civilians were killed by a drone strike on the city of Herat in Western Afghanistan carried out by the United States on Jan. 8. Local residents reported to Afghan news sources that 60 civilians were killed. The strike apparently targeted Mullah Nangyalai, a member of a group called the High Council of Afghanistan Islamic Emirate, which broke away from the leadership of the Taliban. This airstrike is a nefarious act of militarism and must be condemned in the harshest terms.

    This drone strike comes only months after a bloody U.S. drone airstrike in September 2019 that attacked nearly 150 farm workers harvesting pine nuts in Eastern Afghanistan (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/afghanistan-dozens-civilians-killed-drone-attack-190919072728303.html). Another U.S drone strike in Southeastern Afghanistan on Dec. 1 completely annihilated a car carrying a 25-year-old mother who had given birth earlier that day and four others, including three of her relatives.

    The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan is nearly 20 years old. According to Pentagon data, the U.S. military dropped more bombs during the first quarter of 2018 (the latest available data) than all of the years that the Pentagon has data for the war in Afghanistan (https://www.foxnews.com/world/air-force-bombs-afghanistan-dropped). According to Brown University’s Costs of War project, an estimated 157,000 people have died as a direct result of the US-led war in Afghanistan since it began in October 2001, including more than 43,000 Afghan civilians.

    According to the UN, the third quarter of 2019 saw the highest level of civilian casualties in the history of the war (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/world/asia/afghanistan-civilian-casualties-un.html). Prior to 2019, civilian casualties in Afghanistan were highest during 2017 to 2018 than any other period in the past decade of the war.

    There are currently 12,000 troops in Afghanistan. As recently as Jan. 11, two U.S. soldiers were killed in Kandahar Province by a roadside bomb (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/11/world/asia/afghanistan-american-casualties.html). Punctuated talks between the Taliban and the United States have been developing under the Trump administration.

    In early December, the Washington Post published internal documents that revealed the extent to which the U.S. had hidden the truth of the state of the war in Afghanistan from the public (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/). In short, the papers give a sense of the frustrations of those in power orchestrating the war and how much was wasted in the war.

    The Jan. 8 strike occurred at a time when many on the left are focusing on the issue of U.S imperialism following the assassination of Qasem Soleimani and the ensuing military tensions. The U.S. military has no role in benefiting the lives of working people anywhere in the world.

    The U.S. must get out of Asia. However, this will require building a strong antiwar movement in the United States, comprised of working people in solidarity with the victims of U.S. imperialism across the world. The money that Washington spends on militarism could drastically improve the condition of the U.S. working class. This can only happen with a movement directly contesting the power of the U.S. government and the capitalists it serves.

    Photo: Parwiz / Reuters

     

  • Free health care for all!

    Health care clinic in Cuba (Photo: Gail Reed)

    By SOCIALIST RESURGENCE

    Below we reprint a section from the U.S. Political Resolution approved at the Dec. 14-15 Socialist Resurgence founding convention. The full resolution can be read in the DOCUMENTS section of this website.

    There is a huge public health-care crisis in the United States. Lack of affordable and adequate coverage remains a persistent problem. Some 27.7 million Americans are still without any health-care coverage, despite the Affordable Care Act, aka. “Obamacare.” Initially, the rate of uninsured non-elderly Americans went down from 46.5 million, with the enactment of the ACA in 2010, to just below 27 million in 2016. However, for the first time in 2017 to 2018, the number of uninsured increased by half a million to 27. 7 million.

    The rising cost of health insurance premiums, high copays, and deductibles are all reasons cited for workers to be unable to afford health insurance. Many of these insurance plans have inadequate coverage, and do not include dental care. Low-wage workers, particularly non-documented workers, are hit especially hard because of their socioeconomic status. People of color are at higher risk of being uninsured than non-Hispanic Whites (Kaiser Family Foundation, Dec, 13,2019).

    As unemployment and underemployment grows, as wages and hours of workers are cut, many find they can no longer afford basic medications. The price of insulin has skyrocketed—the average price of insulin has increased by 64% since January 2014. Some patients have to make choices between medication and eating or heating their homes, or even rationing doses of insulin, a potentially life threatening practice (Medical Economics, April 3, 2019).

    The U.S. health-care crisis isn’t limited to patient care. Health-care workers are under siege by employers. Hospitals and clinics are cutting wages and benefits while nurses and doctors are forced to see more patients, despite evidence that doing so increases errors with disastrous effects. Experienced nurses and doctors are being fired and replaced by fresh out of school nurses and doctors—they’re paid less. Experienced staff not fired are leaving the profession due to ever increasing on the job stress. Suicide rates of nurses and doctors are on the rise.

    The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), is a failure. Pitched by Democrats as an alternative to universal care or a single-payer system, the ACA is not affordable for working and poor families. Insurance rates and co-pays are too costly.

    The largest cause of bankruptcy in America is medical costs. Social Democrats and many progressives advocate Medicare for All. This will fall short in addressing the health-care crisis. Medicare is an 80/20 model (patients are still responsible for 20% of the cost) and is too expensive for workers and the poor.

    An example from Cuba

    In Cuba, the health-care system is publicly owned, with several layers. There are community clinics, with doctor-nurse teams who live in the neighborhoods that they serve, local hospitals, and larger medical institutes. All health care is free, with exceptions for some medicines and procedures for higher income people, and quality of life indices are impressive. Cuba enjoys one of the highest life expectancy rates in the hemisphere, with the average life expectancy at 78.05 years old, compared to the U.S. at 78.62 years.

    In 2005, Cuba had 627 doctors and 94 dentists per 100,000 population. That same year, there were 225 physicians and 54 dentists per 100,000 population in the U.S. All medical and nursing education in Cuba is free. Cuba has innovated in the realm of vaccines and cancer treatment. Unlike the U.S., which sends weapons around the world, Cuba sends doctors and nurses to disaster areas and semi-colonial countries.

    Fight for a national health-care system!

    Doctors, nurses and organized labor should be natural allies in the fight for a national healthcare system. Additionally, nurses, physician’s assistants, and doctors should have the right to unionize. We need more doctors and nurses with lower patient loads. As with all education, medical and nursing school should be free. All debt for education must be abolished. The health-care and pharmaceutical industries must be nationalized under workers control. Out-of-control medicine costs must be immediately brought under control. Society should provide more community-based clinics, visiting nurses and doctors, and preventative care.

    Nationalizing urgent-care facilities would be a step in the direction of community health clinics. Humane and affordable community-based elder care must become a standard. Currently, elderly people with resources and money can afford expensive assisted-living facilities and nursing homes, while working-class families struggle to care for older relatives. We need elder care that allows people to live at home in their communities and with the proper support from medical professionals.

    Winning free health care for all will require an independent class-struggle approach. Our movements cannot depend on lobbying the Democrats to win. We must mobilize in our unions and communities to fight for health care for all.

    Health care is a human right. This must include dental, vision care, and humane, non-punitive, and non-stigmatizing approaches to mental health care. No one should have to go bankrupt because of medical costs or decide whether one eats or gets medicine. Get the insurance companies out of the equation. Free quality and universal public health care now!

  • Puerto Rico: A victim of U.S. capitalism

    Damage from recent earthquakes off Puerto Rico’s coast. (Ricardo Arguengo / Getty)

    By RUWAN MUNASINGHE

    Since Dec. 31, Puerto Rico has been struck by a series of devastating earthquakes and aftershocks, which have demolished many buildings on the southern portion of the island and driven thousands from their homes. Half a million Puerto Ricans were without power, an over 250,000 without water service. In some areas, the effects of the earthquakes were worse than those caused by Hurricane Maria in 2017. The infrastructure of the island and thousands of homes have still not been fully repaired from Maria.

    For background, we are printing a speech that Ruwan Munasinghe presented as part of a panel discussion, sponsored by the Young Socialist Alliance, at the University of Connecticut in September 2019.

    Puerto Rico is an island that in many ways illustrates the crisis of capitalism that we are seeing in our contemporary world. Colonialism, financial imperialism, debt, austerity, migration, environmental crisis, and race—all are fundamental aspects of an understanding of the current crisis we see in Puerto Rico today.

    Through the panel, I would encourage you all to think about such things as Puerto Rican citizenship. Do Puerto Ricans—as it is said—“enjoy” their citizenship and have the same access to social programs as many native mainlanders? How is the current crisis influenced by history? How is this state—Connecticut—an important part of the struggle? And, very importantly, why independence?

    The most recent major development—a development that many of us have been paying close attention to or directly involving ourselves in—has been the mass demonstrations that rose to a crescendo in July against Ricardo Rosello. We will talk a lot more of the particular details of these mass mobilizations but we should not see the demonstrations as mere reactions to the telegraph leaks or anything the governor, as an individual, has done. Rather we must put it into context as the culmination of many different happenings.

    The explosive demonstrations of July 2019 were the culmination of a short history of mass mobilizations. There was a general strike in 2009, there have been teachers’ mobilizations together with students to stop privatizations and school closures, and the past few May Days have been portentous of the militancy of protesters and responding police repression.

    Very critical to understanding the developments in July of 2019 is the protest movement in 2000 to shut down the use of Vieques island (a U.S. Navy bombing and testing ground) near the east coast of Puerto Rico. In October in the year 2000, the population took to the streets to demand the withdrawal of the U.S. Navy from the Puerto Rican island of Vieques, after a local security guard had been killed by a stray bullet. Some noted that the spirit of the Vieques rebellion could be felt in the recent demonstration.

    Overall, one of the biggest events in recent years has been the devastation of Hurricane maria. The death toll from this hurricane is estimated to be something like over 3,000 dead. It is difficult to even understand or describe the sort of trauma seen on the Island in the aftermath of Maria. A people already struggling were dealt an unimaginable blow.

    Climate change, driven by human activity, is creating favorable conditions for stronger hurricanes, with recent research finding that storms are intensifying more rapidly than they were 30 years ago. From this, we can see how Maria is an example of how industrial capitalism—itself an economic mode of production that was made possible through slavery and colonialism in the third world—is now affecting the third world.

    However, Puerto Rico is a particular case in which we see the devastation being so acutely deepened by its current position within the system of imperialism and colonialism. Puerto Rico is a colony of the United States—one of only a handful of remaining direct colonies today. Today, the forces of colonialism and imperialism are exerted upon the island through a variety of ways, but notably through the near dictatorship of the financial capitalists and their ruling-class associates.

    In 2016, the U.S. Congress passed PROMESA, which put Puerto Rico’s finances under the control of a newly created Financial Oversight and Management Board. This body of U.S.-appointed members oversees debt restructuring and essentially operates to enforce austerity upon the island. This means heavy cuts to social spending and massive privatization. In collaboration with the financial imperialists of the Fiscal Control Board, former-Governor Rossello personally forwarded efforts to privatize the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA).

    Indeed, Rosello’s post-hurricane plan for the island set forward an ambitious austerity program of closing hundreds of schools (in favor of privatized charter schools) and other government entities. Between 2010 and 2017, roughly 340 public schools have been closed down, and the board has overseen a massive slashing of University of Puerto Rico’s budget. It is no wonder that we have been seeing massive mobilizations of students in recent years.

    It is very important to note that the massive debt of Puerto Rico did not appear out of thin air. It came, very consciously, from predatory financial instruments. Puerto Rico is a plain example of the way in which, to quote Lenin in his work “Imperalism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism,” “[the] export of finance capital plays in creating the international network of dependence and ties of finance capital.”

    And in this context, we can see that the problems that face Puerto Rico are the problems that face all of the third world under capitalism today—debt, austerity, hunger, climate change, financial imperialism, colonialism, racism. We see in Puerto Rico all of the important problems of capitalism that plague the entire world. The same capitalist destruction of the environment that is affecting the Amazon as we speak is ravaging Puerto Rico; the debt and IMF crisis affecting Argentina is similar to that of Puerto Rico; the economic and environmental consequences of colonialism and neocolonialism impact Puerto Rico as it does in every subjugated nation.

    And, as we see across the world, Puerto Rico’s working class throughout history is exploited by an imperial power under the dictates of that power’s economic interest—in some cases, Puerto Rico has literally been testing grounds for corporations and the U.S. government.

    Lets just focus for one moment on an issue as basic as food and hunger. Following Maria, access to food was a major cause of strife. The destruction of the hurricane elucidated for the world just how precarious lack of food sovereignty can be. Roughly 85% of food that Puerto Ricans eat to sustain themselves is imported from abroad. And this is on an island with abundant soils that can grow a variety of foods.

    This is a recurring issue across the third world. Here I evoke the words of the Burkina Faso revolutionary, Thomas Sankara, who once asked an audience rhetorically, “Where is imperialism?” “Just look into your plates when you eat,” he said. “You see the imported corn, rice or millet: this is imperialism.”

    Lets consume what we can control and break from imperialist dependence. The precarious position that massive food imports places Boricuas in terms of food sovereignty and susceptibility to natural disaster is not the fault of the island’s masses! Years of colonialism have dictated what Puerto Rican land is used for. That is, the capitalist class has ruled over the Puerto Rican people in deciding what Puerto Rican land, as well as labor and capita,l are used for. These decisions over production are not in the interests of Puerto Ricans (to feed themselves properly) but rather in the interests of the capitalists in maximizing profit—which means a topography of monoculture: the mark of a colonized land and ecological vulnerability.

    Speaking in the context of Africa, the Caribbean socialist Walter Rodney once said that “there was nothing natural about monoculture. It was a consequence of imperialist requirements and machinations, extending into areas that were politically independent [only] in name. Monoculture was a characteristic of regions falling under imperialist domination.” In the case of Puerto Rico, the arable land (and I would include the stomachs of the people of Puerto Rico) has historically fallen to the dictates of the bosses of U.S. sugar and coffee interests and the financial oligarchs at large—as has been the case with all natural resources, capital, productive forces on the island. The effects of this historical fact are still felt today.

    Similarly, we must firmly situate the issue of debt upon the historical reality that the third world faces today. From Pakistan to Jamaica, from Argentina to Egypt, the neoliberal financial wisdom of the so-called “Washington consensus” (overseen usually by the IMF, World Bank, etc.) has historically perpetuated the maintenance of a debt to the first world, which in turn results in less and less money for the beholden country to spend. Pakistan, for instance, recently passed an austerity budget; and this is in a country where most people don’t have access to two meals a day.

    Debt is used as a means to perpetuate the status of the colonial semi-colonial world. As my friend Richmond Apore says, the way the system works is as if you have a broken arm and in order to get a replacement arm you have to cut off your leg; and to replace your leg you must cut of your hand, and so on and so on.

    Like many colonies with a large population, agriculture did not remain the dominant part of the economy forever. Today, manufacturing makes up a significant part of Puerto Rico’s export value. The program “Operation Bootstrap” in the middle of the 20th century was an attempt (in conjunction with U.S. interests) to utilize the Island’s labor force. In the mid 1960s, manufacturing overtook agriculture in the economy. This is something we are seeing increasingly today: manufacturing in the third world is rising up in areas that previously perpetuated colonial-influenced agriculture and cash-crop-based economies.

    For example, Sri Lanka (where I am from) now has an economy where manufacturing—particularly garment and clothing manufacturing—is now the most important part of the economy in terms of total value of exports, thus breaking with an over 100-year-old history of a plantation-based economy. This is a relatively new development of semi-colonial areas under capitalism that we have to reckon with and study as scientific revolutionary socialists and even more importantly as activists.

    Relatedly, we must understand the need of the United States to exploit Puerto Rican labor. This is actually what drove the first major wave of Puerto Ricans to the mainland United States. In Connecticut it was initially things like tobacco farm work that recruited the unemployed on the island and brought them to places like Windsor Locks and Hartford to work harvesting shade tobacco under horrendous conditions. The point was for companies to increase profit. As Ruth Glasser writes, “By using island labor to sort Connecticut grown leaves and roll cigars, companies could pay less than minimum wage and avoid income tax.”

    These were really the trailblazers of the Puerto Rican community in Connecticut—a state with one of the highest percentages of Puerto Ricans in the nation. Later, migrants worked in factories such as the textile factories of Willimantic. In places like Hartford, the community formed around each other. Formal and informal groups of “diasporicans” sprung up to help community members in both political and non-political ways. I was recently thrilled to come across a picture of the Young Lords demonstrating against police brutality on the steps of city council in Hartford (in the 1970s). And the Young Lords have mobilized significantly in Bridgeport too.

    I hope you can see how Puerto Rico is immediately pressing here in Connecticut. Climate change alone has brought hundreds of Puerto Ricans to this state in places like Hartford, where climate migrants were housed in the Red Room Inn—but only temporarily and still suffer with hardships like access to proper housing and childcare.

    As I mentioned before, diasporicans in Connecticut made their presence felt by participating in the Ricky Renuncia protests. I would even say that I think Connecticut has a unique part in the struggle, and Puerto Rico is pertinent for all people in Connecticut.

    What are some solutions that we can work toward? The first logical thing to do would be to continue mass mobilizations and press forward with demands that Wanda Vasquez resign. One of the things I’m still trying to consider is whether or not to advocate for a constituent assembly—which has been voiced from many leftists on the island. Would it be a positive development, as such a body could work to solve the problems of governance (like who should be the next governor) and also the issue of U.S. control? Of course, a longer-term goal would be the break with U.S. control.

    It is good to reflect on the fact that we have seen many mass mobilizations in the past month. In addition to Puerto Rico, Algeria (where YSA members have been making contact with student leaders) and Sudan come to mind. All of these movements have been inspiring, but we must realize that none of them had a radical leadership that could have led the movement away from mistakes and concessions to the bourgeoisie (both national and foreign) and towards a complete revolution.

    Above all, it is important to reflect on the fact that we have seen many third world socialist liberation struggles. Angola, Mozambique, South Africa, Chile, Algeria, Nicaragua, and so on—but the only one to successfully break with capitalism is Cuba. This is the only one that decisively broke from collaborating with their respective national bourgeoisies.

    That brave act allowed them to enact a monopoly of foreign trade and prevent foreign capital from wrecking every reform effort from behind the scenes. It allowed them to use their natural wealth and working-class creativity not for private profit but for building one of the best medical systems in Latin America. It allowed them to make education available to all. It allowed them to use the land in the interests of small farmers and food sovereignty.

    It inspired much of the world and showed that a country could build itself on the basis of human need without the deformations that the bureaucracy imposed on the Soviet Union. Socialists in the struggle for Puerto Rican independence need to study the Cuban experiment and figure out what it might mean for Puerto Rico and the semi-colonial world around the globe. But these are just my views and I offer them as part of the broader discussion we are holding here tonight.

     

     

  • We Reject the US Attack and the Assassination of the Iranian General

    The Pentagon confirmed that the US Army, by order of President Donald Trump, is responsible for a drone attack at Baghdad airport that killed General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the elite Al Quds force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, in charge of the operations of that country abroad.
    By IWL-FI, 1/4/2020
    Soleimani is one of the strong men of the Ayatollah regime’s power core. It has been said that Soleimani fulfilled the role as architect of the Iranian armed forces and intelligence apparatus over the last two decades. Some analysts even consider him the most powerful person in the country after the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. His death is a blow to Tehran.
    Trump’s military action is an unacceptable provocation. It will have unpredictable consequences in the economic, political and possibly military fields. For now, Ali Khamenei, assured a “severe revenge.” The US announced the deployment of 3,500 more troops to the region, to reinforce the nearly 5,200 troops regularly stationed in Iraq. The price of crude oil shot up more than 4% in the markets in anticipation of an escalation of war. The world is on red alert.
    The IWL-FI strongly condemns this new imperialist attack that threatens the sovereignty of Iran and Iraq. The world hegemonic power shows, once again, its oppressive character in the Middle East, a region particularly drenched with the blood of entire peoples massacred through wars of conquest; of military coups sponsored by US capital; and, as if this were not enough, through Washington’s firm support for genocidal theocratic dictators for decades, beginning with the Zionist state of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
    If the imperialist plunder is insatiable, which has already claimed countless lives in the Middle East, it is possible that Trump’s motives, in ordering this action, are even more petty. At the domestic level, there are enough reasons to associate, at least partially, this unexpected attack with electoral calculations of the current White House inhabitant, eager to galvanize the most conservative and warmongering sectors of the electorate.  Perhaps it was to divert attention from the impeachment process that Trump recently suffered in the House of Representatives. It might even reflect a possible intention to indirectly help his strategic ally in the region, the genocidal State of Israel, whose government is going through a major political crisis and will also go through a complicated electoral process. Israel, faced with the possible Iranian response, did not delay in declaring maximum alert.
    In a hypocritical way, Trump justified the attack by claiming that Soleimani was a bloodthirsty commander inside and outside his country that “should have died many years ago.” Certainly, Soleimani was not only a key piece in the Iranian dictatorial-theocratic regime, but also made up its most repressive and warmongering wing. It is estimated that the brutal repression of recent protests in Iran caused between 200 and 400 deaths.
    In addition, his hands are covered with blood following his participation, commanding Iranian death squads, in Syria and Iraq. As is known, in Syria the Iranian regime – together with Russia, Hezbollah and China – is responsible for its bloody repression of the popular revolution and for maintaining the murderous dictator Bashar Al-Assad in power. In Iraq, the general was responsible for the murder of thousands of demonstrators in the ongoing revolution. It is not difficult to understand why many Iraqi protesters – who have spent months confronting the government leaving more than 400 dead – have celebrated his death.
    But nobody can fool themselves with the supposed humanitarian motives of US imperialism. The attack that killed Soleimani can only be understood in the context of permanent US hostility to Iranian sovereignty, particularly its nuclear weapons development project. After a progressive disarmament agreement reached by the Obama administration – which represented a huge capitulation by the Ayatollahs -, President Trump broke that pact in 2018 and resumed economic sanctions. The murder of the main military figure in Iran opens a serious escalation in this conflict in an explosive context.
    For example, on December 31, thousands of protesters surrounded the US Embassy in Baghdad in retaliation for an American attack on the border of Iraq with Syria that left 25 dead. There were shouts of ‘Death to America.’
    Without granting any political support to the dictatorial Ayatollah regime, we stand with the Iranian people against any imperialist aggression. It is time to express, in the streets, a complete repudiation of Trump’s attack on Iran and Iraq.
    At the same time, in all of our countries we must express support for the uprisings that continue to shake the region;  mainly in Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran itself.
    US Imperialists – Hands off Iran, Iraq and the Middle East!

Exit mobile version