Wednesday, July 24, 2024

It's Time We Started Talking About how Terrible Zionism is for Jews, Too

Sharing this commentary from Alon Mizrahi's Substack.   Alon is an Arab Jew from Israel and is also on X (formerly Twitter) here: @alon_mizrahi

It is a long piece but really worth reading, a privilege in a way as an account of life in Israel from a former Zionist is not something we will find in the mass media especially in the US. Alon's Substack main page is here

Jul 21, 2024

As a good Zionist Mizrahi working-class kid from a broken Zionist Mizrahi working-class family, I was never introduced to the possibility of deep political skepticism, or rebellion, in my formative years.

The immigration trauma suffered by my Moroccan-born mother was never treated or addressed, as has been the case for the vast majority of Moroccan Jews in white supremacist Israel. My father’s complicated upbringing in late stage British Mandate Palestine and young Israel, was, too, only ever mentioned in passing and in jest.

To this day I think there is a dignity and grace in working-class people’s tendency to bear the burden of life with quiet, wordless reflection, as opposed to the bourgeois’ mindless chatter, and the feigned grooviness of the upper classes.

My fascination with language spelled trouble for me from an early age.

Alon Mizrahi (author. Follow on X)

Absolute conformity with all ideologies and narratives of the Jewish state was expected and easily given where I grew up. We were Zionist Mizrahi Jews; our heroes were brave white Zionist soldiers, intellectuals, bohemians, scientists, and survivors of horrors we could not even fathom. As indoctrinated and expected, we looked upon life with a mix of death-enticing paranoia and death-defying valor, both equally fabricated by Zionist propaganda.

Side note: when this is all over, and the psychological mechanisms that sustained Zionism inside Israel are revealed, the world is going to be in genuine awe of Israel’s brainwashing prowess.

Doubting Zionism, in short, was not part of my upbringing. Its cruelty, denialisms, and contradictions, though, could never fully escape the consciousness, spoken or tacit, of a household led by two psychologically strained yet cultured, curious, and intelligent Zionist Mizrahi working-class parents. 

My father, for instance, would watch with tangible sadness images of Palestinian families whose homes had just been bulldozed to the ground by the IDF, playing on our technological wonder of the first Lebanon war, the color TV.

My soul never forgot the grandmoms and children wailing next to the ruins of their homes. I honestly want you to take a second to imagine your childhood home with all its memories, all its loving moments, all its protection and comforting familiarity, forcefully erased from existence in front of your eyes, and you’ll get Palestine. 

Gaza these days is nothing new, just more of the same on a monstrous scale.

I was taught only Jewish suffering was worthy of recognition simply because a legitimately sad Arab was never introduced to me. And in the cases I was exposed to the suffering of Palestinians, for instance families next to their bulldozed homes, it was always, always juxtaposed and interlaced with their supposed, incorrigible, terrorist actions, thoughts, and emotions.

I was supposed to gloat at their just suffering, just as an Arab kid was to see it as a warning.

It took me many years to realize what Zionism really is. It is what Zionism does. Learn what Zionism did, and you’ll know what it is. 

Zionism, I’d contend at my current, thoroughly disillusioned state, is not a theory, but a practice. And maybe it is a good rule of thumb for all cultures and all political systems, if not all people: judge them by what they do, not what they say.

The US, for instance, just vetoed a ceasefire in Gaza, legally forbade much of the criticism of Israel, stifled speech on US campuses for Israel, and sent Israel more ammunition after Israel killed more than 15,000 civilians in Gaza while claiming to care about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, and to have done more about it than any country in the world. 

Doesn’t this short paragraph tell as good a story as any of what the US is?  

But if Zionism is the subject, and given it is indeed a practice, then I don’t know another practice whose performers demand to be judged not based on what they do, but rather on what they say they believe, and what the people to whom they do what they do supposedly believe about them, or what they believe others believe about them or about the people to whom they do what they do. I have never seen any other group of people granted that bizarre demand, too.

On the propaganda, or discourse front, Israel’s main success has been this ability to keep the discussion always about nebulous things as supposed, perceived, or suspected characters and beliefs, instead of concrete things, say well-documented actions.

What Israel is doing is all that should be discussed when talking about Israel. But we are conditioned and pressured to never have that conversation.  

The dehumanization (and mass killing, ethnic cleansing, and oppression) of the Palestinians has been the real political purpose and consequence of this habit. Misrepresenting the discussion about Israel to actually be about the image or nature of Jews underpins, really, the destruction of the Palestinian people.

And that is because making the discussion about Israel’s actions impossible by painting it as a defamation of Jews translates, politically, into a taboo around the humanity of Palestinians, who are always at the receiving end of Israel’s actions.

But this has gone too far, or rather far enough. In a world flooded with an endless array of dead children’s images and videos from Gaza, it is impossible to suppress the discussion about what Israel is doing, and what it has been doing.

And, having tied both the discussion about Israel’s actions to the image of Jews, and Israel’s fate to a continued success in dehumanizing Palestinians, the Zionist project has reached a point of guaranteed failures on multiple fronts. First, despite all efforts to the contrary, Israel’s actions will be heavily discussed. Second, the Palestinians will be rehumanized. Third, the image of Jews will be tainted but not in an antisemitic way, but simply because of the atrocities we so stupidly, unnecessarily, committed in our Zionist phase.

Zionism is what Zionism does. And what it has been doing, mainly, is constantly pushing to displace Palestinians from both their land and the global conscience.

My fellow Israelis think it is a sign of strength, rather than national suicide, to be able to dominate another people like that, for so long.

Yet the heavier Israel’s investment in Palestinians’ dehumanization, the harder Israel falls out of grace with humanity and with life itself. We can all see it clearly now.

Zionism is a disaster for Jews. And I want to explain to you why.

Monomania

One dire consequence of Zionism has been its dreadful influence on Jewish freedom of thought and joy of experience. Yes, Jewish joy. I can say this because I am a Mizrahi (or Sephardic) Jew.

Before Zionism, saying you’re a Jew could mean almost anything. Jews lived in every corner of the earth, immersed themselves in myriad cultures, and spoke a multitude of languages. From Yemen to Siberia and from Lisbon to Kabul, Jewish communities existed and had tremendous differences between them. They dressed differently and they prayed differently. They had varying political views and they could be a million things.

Although Jewish communities could be, and many times were, severely intolerant of dissent, there was not one way to be Jewish, and being Jewish never meant just one thing. In this sense, the pre-Zionism Jewish Golah had been a blessing: it made Jewish thought complex and varied. The art, literature, and philosophy, developed uniquely by each Jewish community, make a true historical marvel. 

Thanks to Zionism, all this immense, multilayered richness of Jewish life and consciousness has been diminished to a single talking point.

These Zionist days, Jewish identity revolves around but one issue. If you support everything Israel, and in particular its latest wild military undertaking, you’re a good Jew. If you have polite reservations, especially if you’re rich, you’re a tolerable Jew.  And if you oppose anything Israel, especially its latest military onslaught, then you’re a bad, bad Jew, A self-hating Jew.

Verbally, literally, the Zionist state has overtaken, swallowed and become the Jewish self. Which is never a good thing for a political establishment, or a self.

A Jewish identity, today, cannot nourish an individual’s mind and soul. It doesn’t fill you with comfort. It barks orders, demands, and chastisements at you. It doesn’t uplift but smothers you. 

And when we remember that Israel, with tragic shortsightedness, chose to be about the delegitimization and dehumanization of Palestinians, the price of the Zionist monomania gets a lot clearer. It is always a bad idea to be about one thing, but it is a million times worse to be about one thing which is, actually, the violent denial of dignity and humanity of other people.

Was abandoning the histories of a thousand Jewish communities worth tossing into a trash can for merciless nationalistic zeal? 

No.

A conflict endlessly expanding

Isolated as they are, the Palestinians have never been truly alone. They have friends and sympathizers. Muslim populations are on their side, much of the woke are on their side, and so are human rights-minded people and organizations, as well as formally colonized populations.

By systematically pursuing its project of dehumanizing and subjugating the Palestinians, Zionism continually invites more and more people to be its enemies. This may play beautifully into a victim-aggressor mentality, but is utter madness in every respect nonetheless.

The Palestinians, then Arabs, then Muslims, then human rights groups, then liberals, then whoever suffers from and opposes colonialism and imperialism: there is not a soul on earth, so it seems, Zionism gives up on making an enemy of.

The funny bit? It is all made in the name of security and normalcy. Creating a national home for Jews in their historic land while denying another group the same, alongside freedom and human rights, is just the recipe for Jews being accepted as equal on the world stage, we are told. 

I, for the life of me, cannot fathom why I’m supposed to be at war with Indonesian and Malaysian people, and with Egyptians and native peoples from around the world, alongside the UN, human rights groups, and most of the world’s media (to name but a few arch-enemies). My thick skull just won’t let me process why I need to be in eternal war for my own good and safety. 

I, personally, don’t have a quarrel with a single group of people on this planet, nor will I agree to preemptively or vengefully kill masses of people from any group under any circumstances. 

The process in which Israel oppresses the Palestinians without offering any form of relief or alternative vision, all the while making an enemy (or a hater) of much of the rest of the world, should be scarier to a lot more Jews than it currently is.

A closed loop of fear and hate

The Zionist model does not allow for course correction. Spoiled by too much American support, Zionism lives in a fantasy world in which it can do whatever it wants to anyone, forever, with impunity.

Whereas other groups, upon being confronted by great violence or resistance, were forced to update their vision, Zionism never had to internalize a strategic defeat. Every time it hit a wall, America supplied it with a bigger bulldozer, thus relieving Israel of a duty all life-loving entities must uphold, namely to reconsider its actions based on the environment’s reaction to them.

Unchecked, Zionism’s victim-aggressor mentality has become an exclusive peephole through which to look at everything. Every challenge is hatred that must be overcome forcefully. Every reservation testifies to hidden antisemitism. Every Palestinian child is a potential terrorist. Every peace activist is a secret Nazi. Every disaster is proof that we must use more force. Every success is the success of our force. My God, how depressing it is.

Because it is so binary, so rigid and so disconnected from authentic emotions, Zionism forces its believers to choose force over peace, fantasy over reality, and an unending quest for total, cathartic vindication, over simply living.

One fact to consider, before moving on: in 1967, when it was 18 years old, Israel took it upon itself to become an apartheid state by occupying hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. Where does such a young country, fresh from a historic trauma, find the audacity for such an undertaking?

By the 1970′, Israel’s reign in the occupied territories was already a world-class military dictatorship. How could it be justified? How did they think it was going to work? I honestly have no idea. I just know that the brazenness, the total disregard for human suffering, had to be justified and explained in a vision that was deeply rooted already.

Sometimes I think that Israel’s leaders over the years knew full well that what they did would cause shock and pain to Israelis, too. Consciously or unconsciously, they may have gambled that the rigid Zionist model will always guide Israelis towards clinging more desperately to preset conclusions like the need for more force or the incorrigible barbaric nature of Arabs. 

Looking at Israeli society today, I cannot say they miscalculated by much.

Israel was never as hellbent on death, destruction and revenge as it is today, more than two months into the Gaza carnage.

Historical shortsightedness 

A totalitarian, all-consuming approach, on the part of any practice, is a serious warning sign. : Zionism places demands on Jews in at least two major ways: first, it requires their perpetual, eternally renewed trust, no matter the number or severity of blatant absurdities and contradictions they may face in a lifetime of providing this service. 

The second kind of blind trust Zionism demands of Jews, which is connected but not identical to the first, is having no contingency plan for failure.

Zionism, I hope we can all agree, is not a constant of human existence. Looking at Zionism with intellectual and historical integrity, especially from a Jewish point of view, it would be more suitably described as an experiment or even a gamble. 

Even if we embrace most formal Zionist narratives, the fact remains that it was never assured eternal success. And while a softer Zionism may not have been in desperate need of guaranteed eternal success, a Zionism that adheres unwaveringly to an occupation of another ethnic group, in defiance of the views and sensitivities of billions of people, based solely on the support of one country, ever increasingly is. 

Paradoxically and understandably at the same time, the more assurances and guarantees of continued success Zionism needs and gets from that one country, the more dire and desperate its situation becomes, as the grotesqueness of this process gets more visible to more people. 

Having no contingency for failure, while pushing such a hardline counter-humanitarian, counter-egalitarian line, with so little international support, cannot purport to accomplish the safer, more respectable place among the nation that Zionism set out to achieve for Jews, according to its own formal narrative.

What happens if the Zionist calculus, namely that Israel can survive on American backing alone in the face of growing international opposition, fails? What if Zionist lobby groups find no success in their quixotic mission to portray opposition to Zionism as antisemitism, in an age where the occupation is there for the whole world to see and document and watch again and research further? 

If I were a Jewish leader, such questions would keep me up at night. If current Zionist leadership in Israel and the US had an eighth of the historical consciousness they claim to possess, they would realize Jews must have friends (as indeed everybody does, including America). 

If Zionist leaders truly cared about the fate of Jews in the long run, they would not seek to censor criticism of the occupation, or an apartheid, but would put all their weight behind forcing Israel’s hand in stopping it instead. They would understand that Jews, more so than many other ethnic groups, and because of their history, must never be perceived as the oppressor, aggressor and censor. 

We Jews should be the ones calling for unity and love among the nations. But Zionism took that from us. Now we are for more war and more international Darwinism, the likes of which nearly made us extinct. This rich idiocy, in particular, I will never get over.

A self-undoing big bang

It may seem like I’m backtracking on a former claim regarding the occupation of 1967, but the Zionist revolution has been tainted from the very beginning, and its original sin is what will cause its eventual demise. 

That original sin is the dehumanization, or complete dismissal of, Arab Palestinians, as per the Zionist plan. 

I am not backtracking on, or retracting my former claim that Israel’s insistence on adhering to its military occupation in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem will ultimately lead it to terrible failure. I am saying that even though the Zionist plan was flawed and deeply racist from the very beginning, even though the pain of the Nakba was never going away, and even though Arabs would have found it incredibly difficult to accept a Jewish state in Palestine, maybe, just maybe, without the 1967 occupation and all the tragedy that ensued since it took place, there may have been a way to amend things. 

Maybe, just maybe, Jews and Palestinians could heal from their respective formidable wounds. Maybe it is just a dream, but it is a beautiful one, though now lost forever.

Israel did not have to occupy the people it did occupy in June of 1967. And it did not have to enact a military dictatorship over them. And it did not have to keep the military occupation going for so many years. And it did not have to build settlements and shape its image, home and abroad, as an occupier of lesser human beings (surely you don’t think the concept of “human animals” was imagined post October 7th?). 

Israel did not have to do all those things. But in reality, it felt it had to do all those things, and was entitled to do all those things, because of the deeply twisted and flawed logic of Zionism at its core. 

In reality, the minute European Jews convened the First Zionist Congress in Basel in the summer of 1897, the fate of Gaza’s children in the winter of 2023 was doomed. And it is so and has been so, for the very cruel existential fact that once a system is started as racist and exclusive, it is almost impossible to make it otherwise. 

When Israel went into the 1967 war, it had 70 years of formally established Jewish priority, or Jewish supremacy, behind it. The leaders of Israel during the Six Day War of that year, in other words, have been shaped entirely by a culture that saw it not only as legitimate but as justified and righteous, to create a political reality in which only Jews are considered full citizens or full human beings in the eyes of the law, the social norms and the general culture. 

Seeing the occupation of 1967 in this light makes it easier to understand why it was both a choice and inevitable.

In my mind, I keep going back to the First Zionist Congress of 1897. In my mind, I am looking for people who shout “Are you insane? What about the native population? It’s going to be a disaster! A bloodbath!”. In my mind, I am shouting similar things myself.

How blind were they to even imagine it made sense to just land a nation-state of people, almost all of whom were born on other continents, on top of an existing political, cultural, and religious landscape. My guess is, obviously knowing it was not empty, but unable to relinquish a redeeming fantasy, they decided to just act as if it was empty.

And if it’s not empty, it certainly can be made empty. Like much of Gaza these days.

Palestinians are, and forever will be, the foremost victims of Zionism. But for too long we have neglected to look at the terrible price Jews have been paying for it in terms of their humanity, their morality, their freedom and creativity and, tragicomically, their sense of place and belonging among our brothers and sisters of all races and places, including, yes, Palestine.

Tuesday, July 23, 2024

Palestians Cannot Escape Zionist Violence. The UK and the US are Major Partners in This Genocide

Richard Mellor

When I was growing up and the subject of World War Two came up. More often than not, the German people were thought collectively guilty for the rise of Nazism and the concentrations camps that sent some 12 million people to their deaths in gas chambers. Socialists, communists, trade union leaders, gays, religious sects, Roma, and of course, 6 million European Jews.  

 

I think it would be fair to say that as far as the Roma (what we used to call Gypsies) and Jews are concerned, the war against them was genocidal, a conscious attempt to wipe them out as a group.

 

What we have been witnessing, those that choose not to ignore it, is a similar genocide against the indigenous people of Palestine, predominantly Muslims but not exclusively so.

 

The video above is an example of the conscious effort of the Zionists to drive Palestinians from Gaza and ultimately from the region entirely. Those it doesn’t murder that is.  In the video, Gazan’s are yet again being moved from areas that they have been told were safe as the Zionists bomb once again.   The IDF is shooting at them as they flee.

 

By some accounts there are now 40,000 dead and many more under the Rubble. Entire families have been wiped out. Cholera, Polio, and other diseases are now threatening to wipe out more people. Surely there is no person reading this or watching the video that isn’t aware that Israel has been found guilty in the world’s highest judicial body yet continues to murder civilians.

 

The US and its junior partner, the United Kingdom continues to supply the racist regime in Tel Aviv with diplomatic cover, billions in armaments and bombs. Who would have thought that the world’s nations, with a few exceptions,  would stand by and do nothing as an already poverty stricken and occupied people with no air force, no navy, no military as such and no state, and allow this to happen.

 

US workers are loading ships with weaponry and other commodities that are important imports for Israel. Workers throughout the western world are handling goods going in and coming out of Israel.

 

The Houthi’s a Yemeni group, in a country that has also been bombed repeatedly by the US, Britain and Saudi Arabia, has been attacking western and Israeli shipping and Iranian supported factions including Hezbollah in Lebanon has also engaged Israel. We have a situation where Yemeni Houthi’s are sacrificing their lives in order to halt the US, UK and Israeli genocide and they have, as have Iran I believe, stated they will halt their activity if the Zionist aggression against the occupied population of Palestine stops.

 

I never would have dreamed I would witness a genocidal assault like this in my lifetime and that the US and Britain and many other countries would not only not intervene to stop it but would arm and defend it.

Monday, July 22, 2024

Biden Withdrew Because He Was Forced to. It's as Simple as That

 

Makes Neville Chamberlain  Look Pretty Good. At Least He Didn't Hug Hitler

Richard Mellor
Afscme Local 444, retired
HEO/GED
7-22-24


Facing intense pressure from donors and big wigs in the Democratic Party, Joe Biden has finally withdrawn from the U.S. presidential race.
“While it has been my intention to seek re-election,...” he wrote,  “…I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and focus solely on fulfilling my duties as president for the remainder of my term,” The response has been immediate.


Biden’s decision was,
“one of the most stunning acts of patriotism of my lifetime” tweeted Norm Eisen, a former diplomat, while Barack Obama called Biden a, “patriot of the highest order” and his decision a “testament” to “his love of his country” and an, “historic example of a genuine public servant once again putting the interests of the American people ahead of his own…”


Nancy Pelosi, another multi-millionaire like all of them, concurred, “President Biden is a Patriotic American who has always put our country first.” She writes.


“An act of selfless grace”
is the title of David Smith’s, commentary in the UK Guardian today. Smith is the Guardian’s Washington DC bureau Chief. John Stewart, the comedian, tweeted one word, “Legend”. They’re all being dishonest.


The outpourings of praise is nauseating as we witness what is not only a collective sigh of relief, but a cacophony of lies and falsehoods. Joe Biden’s decision was not selfless, courageous, or sacrificing his own interests for three hundred million Americans. That’s not a part of the job description. As of yesterday (7-21-24),
36 congressional Democrats had called on Biden to withdraw while an ABC/Ipsos Poll found that 60% of Democrats felt he should end his campaign and that “Three in four Democrats (76%) would be satisfied with Harris as the party's nominee.” Among those still supporting the sinking Biden ship were Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez who once stated that “only in America would she be in the same party as Biden.


I think it’s fair to say that Biden, who only a day or two earlier was adamant about continuing and claiming he had the ability to lead, had no alternative but to quit; the writing was on the wall.


The whole episode along with the disastrous foreign policy Biden has pursued has revealed the political crisis that has engulfed US society. And not only the Democrats. The Republican Party is equally diseased. We are witnessing the continued decline of the two parties of capital that have dominated US economic and political life for over a century and consequently the influence of US imperialism on the global stage. Ukraine is one foreign policy disaster but Biden’s embrace of the fascist Netanyahu and the unwavering support and arming of the Zionist genocide in Gaza and Palestine in general has done irreparable harm to the U.S. image internationally. Apart from the Apartheid Zionist regime, the US has no ally in the Middle East.


Biden will go down in history as the US president that could have stopped the mass murder of thousands of unarmed civilians, mostly women and children but refused. The picture of him hugging Netanyahu is worse than Neville Chamberlain’s embrace of Hitler and the betrayal of the Czech’s. Chamberlain’s actions never led to “peace in our time” and neither will Biden’s. The truth is that within the framework of the capitalist system, peace is never possible. Never ending wars and conflict are an integral aspect of the capitalist system of production wars and crisis.


I raise these points about Biden not in defence of the serial sexual predator and degenerate Trump, but to point out that these events reflect the decline of a social system, its institutions and political parties, not simply the character flaws of its leading figures. That the best the Democrats could field was Biden is an example of this decline. Trump is a particularly distasteful character but how anyone can refer to Biden as a “moral” or “decent man” and other such complimentary terms is beyond belief given his love affair with the Zionist regime that is committing mass murder and genocide in real time.


Don’t whine to me about Germans not stopping Hitler and the Nazis.


Perhaps the worst of all the deception is the politicians and the mass media covering for Biden knowing he was losing his mental capacity; “For months Biden’s decline had been mostly concealed from the public.”,  Smith writes. Perhaps the worst example is Kamala Harris, the former Oakland prosecutor and quite possibly the next president of the United States who sent many working class, overwhelmingly black youth in to the California prison system euphemistically referred to as “correctional Centers”.


After Biden’s disastrous showing during the debate with Trump,  Harris said that Biden was “clear” in his messaging, had a “slow start” but “thought it was a strong finish.”  “In a real leader, character matters more than style,” she added. Biden was out of it, he was confused, blank. That’s not style. Does Kamala Harris think the public never watched the debate? What an insult.

They know the conclusion the electorate drew from that debate but their goal has been to obscure, it and to sow confusion among the electorate. The competition between two capitalist parties in a bourgeois democracy for which one gets to plunder society for the established period of time is but one long deception. A political party represents sections of society, it is not an empty vessel. Both parties represent big business which means working people must pay for the crisis of the system not them. But they can’t campaign on such a program so they lie.


So attacking Trump on the basis that he is a liar, which he is and he lies without any concern for the truth at all, doesn’t make any headway; they are all liars. 


No matter which party is in the driver’s seat working class people will have to pay for the crisis of capitalism in its end days; our material well being will deteriorate no matter which party is in power. Both parties will defend the system of exploitation and its march toward the abyss one way or another, it’s not a choice in that sense. A looming environmental catastrophe and the end of life as we know it is a serious consequence of this crisis, possibly the prime factor assuming a nuclear conflict is avoided.


I have commented in previous posts that the heads of organized labor bear much of the blame for us arriving at this point. But there are others. Bernie Sanders could have played a different role over the past period. Then we had the election of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez along with Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib. These women have courage. Ilhan Omar has faced repeated threats for her political positions which are left of center. Sanders could have led a left faction toward building a left alternative to the Democratic Party.  Much of his reform program was supported by millions of working class and middle class people.  But Sanders refused to break from the Democrats and supported the hated Hillary Clinton.


At the same time, after Sanders betrayed many of his supporters (not for the first time) and supported Clinton which was no surprise to people like me, thousands of Bernie supporters joined the Democratic Socialists of America, (DSA) a fairly small group in the left wing of the Democratic Party that grew to be the largest socialist organization in the US. Some of the left of center Democrats elected to Congress are DSA members. But they’re “socialist” in name only just like Bernie has been all these years.s


But like Sanders, the DSA leadership refused to take that path. Many of the influential figures in DSA are also Labor Notes officials and staffers. Many of them were or are labor officials in the lower ranks of the labor bureaucracy. Labor Notes while producing decent material at times and being capable of organizing large meetings drawing many rank and file union members, also refuses to launch a real campaign among labor’s rank and file against the concessionary and business oriented policies of the present hierarchy let alone a serious campaign for a labor or workers party.  DSA, Labor Notes, in conjunction with the politicians I mention above could have taken a different road and led a left split from the Democratic Party. This would have inspired million of workers both inside and outside organized labor. Instead, that train has left the station and another opportunity for a break from the status quo was missed.


Now we’re in for some real battles ahead. But sometimes it’s worth reminding ourselves how things actually change, we have won precious little from the ballot box. Our unions weren’t built by voting for the right candidate. Just look at what’s happened in Bangladesh. The Bangladesh Supreme court has just reversed a controversial court decision that gave 30% of government jobs to relatives of those that fought in the war of Independence in 1971. This caused an outcry and masses of youth and there have engaged in mass protests. In response, the Bagladesh Supreme Court just reversed that decision and now 93% of those public sector jobs will be opened to candidates on merit.


Worth taking note of.

Sunday, July 21, 2024

Massive Global Tech Failure: Crowd strikes out

By Michael Roberts

The massive tech failure that caused chaos around the world raises important questions about the ownership and control of our digital world.  The relatively unknown, cyber-security firm CrowdStrike admitted that the problem was caused by an update to its antivirus software, which was designed to protect Microsoft Windows devices from malicious attacks. 

The outage was caused by just a tiny software update from CrowdStrike put into Microsoft programs bringing them down globally  My ‘techie’ programmer friends tell me that it looks like two very basic coding errors that should have been spotted and tested before being ‘forced’ onto Microsoft operating systems. 

CrowdStrike is a US firm based in Austin, Texas, listed on the US stock exchange and employs 8500 people with 24,000 clients.  As a provider of cyber-security services, it tends to get called in to deal with the aftermath of hack attacks.  But it also provides protection from viruses and cyber attacks – but not apparently from its own programs.

The failure hit banking and healthcare services badly with over 8.5 million machines using Microsoft.  Airlines and airport systems failed, leading to 3300 cancelled flights.  Many companies’ payroll systems have been affected, meaning that thousands of employees will not get their monthly wages on time.  The outage could cost billions of dollars worldwide and take weeks to resolve because computers will require a manual reboot in ‘safe mode’, causing a massive headache for IT departments everywhere

What this outage reveals is the massive dominance of both Microsoft and CrowdStrike in computer software and cyber security.  Microsoft Windows has about 72% of the global market share of operating systems, while CrowdStrike’s market share in the ‘endpoint protection’ security category is 24%.  So the world’s information, payments, transport and communications are dependent on the decisions and operations of just a few privately-owned ‘for (massive) profit’ companies.  As one campaigner put it: “Today’s massive global Microsoft outage is the result of a software monopoly that has become a single point of failure for too much of the global economy”.

One problem arising from this is that there is no diversification of operating systems.  Again, my techie friends reckon that Microsoft Windows is a very poor operating system vulnerable to bugs and other coding errors, unlike other systems, including free ‘open source’ ones.  “For decades, Microsoft’s pursuit of a vendor lock-in strategy has prevented the public and private sectors from diversifying their IT capabilities. From airports to hospitals to 911 call centers to financial systems, millions today are feeling the consequences of the greed and ego of one of the most egregious offenders in Big Tech.  When just three companies—Microsoft, Amazon, and Google—dominate the market for cloud computing, one minor incident can have global ramifications.”

What is the answer to this?  The techies say we need more back-up systems, say at least two independent providers for their core operations, or at least ensure that no single provider accounts for more than about two-thirds of their critical IT infrastructure.  Then if one provider has a catastrophic failure, the other can keep things running. But it is one thing to have back-up systems, it is another to diversify into different operating systems that risk being not compatible with each other.  Again, my techie friends reckon that many bugs and outages are due to different systems operating in one company.  That means there is no one ‘beginning to end’ view.  As a result, if things go wrong in one part of the business tech-wise, the tech teams cannot see why from the other end of the business process.  Too many cooks have spoilt the broth.

Is more regulation of the big tech companies the answer? I think not.  Regulation of capitalist ‘for profit’ companies by government regulatory agencies has been a proven failure in just about every sector: finance, utilities, transport, communications etc.  These companies just ride roughshod through regulations, pay their fines if found out,but then carry on ‘business as usual’.

What about breaking up the big tech monopolies?  This is a common cry from some“it is long overdue that Microsoft and other Big Tech monopolies are broken up—for good.  Not only are these monopolies too big to care, they’re too big to manage. And despite being too big to fail, they have failed us. Time and time again. Now, it’s time for a reckoning. We can’t continue to let Microsoft’s executives downplay their role in making all of us more vulnerable.”

But anti-trust measures that break up large companies have done little in the past.  The major economies are even more dominated by large companies than they were one hundred years ago.  Take the US government break-up of Standard Oil in 1911, when it controlled over 90% of the oil sector in the US.  Did that break-up lead to the creation of lots of small ‘manageable’ oil companies globally that worked in the interests of society?  No, because in many industries economies of scale must operate to raise productivity and for capitalist firms to maximise profitability.  Now one hundred years after the Standard Oil break-up, we have even larger multi-national energy companies controlling fossil fuel investment and energy prices.

It’s the same debate with digital banking.  Just the day before the CrowdStrike global outage, the Bank of England reported that its banking transactions service CHAPS had broken down, delaying many time-sensitive payments.  It seems that the international SWIFT cross-border payments system had an outage for several hours.  And indeed, there has been a litany of banking system failures at ATMs and in digital transactions over the last 20 years. 

The major banks worldwide spend huge amounts of money on speculating in the stock and bond markets, but do not spend nearly enough to ensure that basic banking services for the public (both households and small companies) work seamlessly.  This is sometimes called ‘tech debt’. It has led some to argue that we need to stop full digitilisation of money transactions. 

Cash remains a safe fallback when digital payments break down.  The UK’s GMB Union said “cash is a vital part of how our communities operate”. When you take cash out of the system, people have nothing to fall back on, impacting on how they do the everyday basics.”  Cash, it is argued, also provides more control over people’s money.  Martin Quinn, campaign director for the PCA, said using cash allowed for anonymity. “I don’t want my data sold on, and I don’t want banks, credit card companies and even online retailers to know every facet of my life,” he said. Budgeting by using cash is also easier for some”.

And the example of what the Indian government did in 2016 is a lesson on this.  The Indian government abruptly wiped out most of the nation’s paper currency in hopes of ending ‘black money’ and curbing corruption.  But a November 2017 study of 3,000 regulated agricultural markets for 35 major agricultural commodities, conducted during the three months immediately following demonetization, concluded that eliminating the high-currency notes had reduced the value of domestic agricultural trade by more than 15 percent in the short run, settling at 7 percent reduction three months late.  In a largely ‘informal economy’, where the most vulnerable people still have no access to digital payments, this demonetization was a draconian measure that did a lot of damage to the poorest people in India.

But again, it would be wrong to conclude that we must go back to cash.  Cash under the mattress may protect against the prying eyes of the authorities, but it would remain an inefficient method of money transactions and, as we know, an attraction to criminality.  Of course, violent robbery of personal and corporate cash (as we see in action films) has now been replaced by the silent extraction of people’s savings and company accounts by cyber scams.  But that does not mean digitalization of money should be reversed.

The question really centres on who owns and controls our digital world. The high concentration of that digital power is yet another reason for the replacement of capitalist corporations by public companies democratically controlled by popular bodies and the tech workers in them.  We need to bring into public ownership the Magnificent Seven of social media and tech companies currently led and controlled by multi-billionaires who decide what to spend and where.  Then the huge waste of resources on tech projects designed just to make money and not to deliver useful and safe systems beneficial to people’s lives could be reduced dramatically. Human error would not disappear, but the organisation and control of our increasingly digital world could be directed towards social needs not private profit.

 

Saturday, July 20, 2024

Seymour Hersh: A PRESIDENCY’S BITTER END

Biden knows he has to go, but that doesn’t mean he’s happy about it

President Joe Biden and members of the Congressional Black Caucus visit Mario's Westside Market grocery store in Las Vegas on July 16. / Kent Nishimura/AFP via Getty Images.

Donald Trump’s core campaign issue, as he made clear again and again on Thursday night, is still the border and what he calls “unchecked illegal immigration” and the murder and mayhem that he insists, as he did in earlier campaigns, those from the south have brought to America.

But the Democrats have a far more immediate and complicated political issue to address. Scores of published reports have stated that President Joe Biden has come to his political senses—with the help of Representative Nancy Pelosi, the strong-willed and straight-talking former speaker of the House—and concluded that he cannot run for re-election. 

The big issue for Biden has been the disaffection of many of his previously enthusiastic funders. One donor told me that there was much anger among his East Coast group at Biden’s inner circle for their mishandling of the president’s growing disconnection. “Not one of the president’s key aides,” he told me, “ever said one word to the donors” about the extent of Biden's disabilities prior to his revelatory debate with Trump last month. “It was as if the Democratic band was playing ‘Nearer, My God, to Thee’ on the deck of the Titanic.”

Pelosi was the one with the political savvy to tell the president that there will be no second term—something no one in the White House apparently saw fit to do—and her intervention, once publicly known, freed the cowering and mumbling Democratic leaders in the Senate and the House to begin to share their real fears to the White House and Washington press. 

Pelosi’s influence has rescued the Democratic Party—at least in the short run.

Just what Biden will do next is not yet clear. Will he resign immediately and turn the White House over to Vice President Kamala Harris? Or will he follow Lyndon B. Johnson, who on March 31, 1968, told a stunned nationwide television audience that he would not run for re-election in November and would instead, eschewing domestic politics, focus on running the disastrous Vietnam war that he insisted at that late date, in what might charitably be called his own  derangement, could still be won. The notion that Biden is capable of managing the disastrous American involvement in the wars in Ukraine and the Gaza Strip until the inauguration of his successor next January 20 is just as far-fetched.

There are a lot of caveats in the reporting published so far. In fact, no one in the media has heard  directly from Biden in recent days. He is now recovering from a COVID infection and is presumably still in isolation. And no one really knows whether the president has deviated from his delusional line—buttressed by his immediate staff, who will go down in infamy for their self-serving protection of their careers—that he is doing just fine in the polls. One long-time family friend of the Bidens today sent me a message that seemed to contradict the headlines: “Joe’s heels are dug in.”

But those are cosmetic issues compared to the one now haunting many with ties to the upper reaches of the Democratic Party’s funding apparatus. I was told that Vice President Harris wants Biden’s job and has been working hard with many in the media to push the notion that it is time for a woman, especially a woman of color, to serve as president. She has even floated, to the dismay of party managers, the names of three men—Governor Andy Beshear of Kentucky, Governor Joshua Shapiro of Pennsylvania, and Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, a former astronaut—to serve as her vice president and running mate in the campaign that could emerge. (In 2019 Harris had early traction in the primary campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination but performed poorly in the second round of debates and ran into money problems that forced her to drop out of the race in early December.)

None of the political pros I’ve spoken to this week would talk on the record about the extreme concern felt by Democratic Party bigwigs about the prospect of a woman of color and a Jew running for the White House against Trump, whose MAGA followers are predominantly white and resentful of the increasing influence of people of color in America. 

At the debate in June, Trump said that Biden had “become like a Palestinian” and that “they,” the Palestinians, “don’t like him because he’s a very bad Palestinian. He’s a weak one.” His point seemed to be that Biden and his foreign policy team have failed to get the Israeli government and Hamas to agree to a ceasefire that would free the remaining Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners of Israel and give the battered people of Gaza a break from the months-long siege they’ve endured. The Biden administration has continued to be the main supplier of bombs and other arms to Israel. The war has continued, fueled by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s insistence that the Israeli air and ground attacks will not cease until Hamas is destroyed.

Biden has been sharply criticized by Arabs around the world, and also by untold thousands of college and other students in America for continuing to supply weapons to the Israelis. The Biden administration’s efforts to arrange a ceasefire in Gaza have been dismissed out of hand by Netanyahu, who has no intention—as the Biden White House apparently has yet to comprehend—of pausing what has become his war. 

So, what now? 

The top issue, according to those with first-hand information, is to make sure that Biden does not decide immediately to abdicate the office and turn it over to Harris. “We want him to stay in office until January 20, 2025, when the new president is sworn in.” There would inevitably be a political downside to that strategy, I was told, because the Republicans would rightly “make hay” with the notion “that Biden is not fit to run for the presidency but still fit to be president” until the inauguration. 

And the question confronting the political planners, I was told, is: “Does Biden has the strength to stay to the end?”

Another problem with keeping the ailing Biden in office for the next six months, as a political expert told me, is that “Kamala thinks she’s a solid candidate.” There is a lot of evidence that she may not be. On June 6, a Politico/Morning Consult poll found that “only a third of voters think it is likely Harris would win an election were she to become the Democratic nominee, and just three of five Democrats believe she would prevail. A quarter of independents think she would win.” The poll also showed that Harris shares the same poor ratings as Biden. Both are well under water: Biden at 43 percent favorable and 54 percent unfavorable; Harris is at 42 percent favorable and 52 percent unfavorable.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are also facing immediate and murderous foreign policy crises in both Ukraine and Gaza. Biden and his stunningly incompetent foreign policy team, who share a visceral contempt for President Vladimir Putin of Russia, have boxed themselves in with their continuing support, including billions in military and social aid, for the government of President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. The war is going badly and Putin has what he wants in terms of captured Ukrainian territory. 

The only rational solution is diplomatic talks and so far the Biden administration has refused to engage in negotiations. 

In stricken Gaza, where the Biden team continues to be involved in indirect talks with Hamas and others, there has been no progress in obtaining a much-needed ceasefire that would, at a minimum, provide the release of Israeli hostages in return for the release of Palestinian prisoners.  

The sticking point has been Netanyahu’s refusal to engage seriously with the back and forth of the talks, despite occasional hints that an opening might be possible. His goal, as he has said again and again, is to kill as many Hamas leaders and cadres as possible. Israeli bombings and attacks continue apace in Gaza, with horrid scenes of civilian deaths without any significant complaints from Biden or his foreign policy team.  

It is a shabby performance that will be made worse when Netanhayu comes to Washington next Wednesday at the invitation of Republicans in Congress. The unyielding Israeli leader is scheduled to give a speech to a joint session of Congress and also have public and private meetings with Biden, if he is cleared of COVID, and with Harris.

Oh, to be a note taker at that meeting . . . if it comes off.

 

Dockworkers : ILWU Leadership Blocks Action Against Israeli Genocide in Gaza

Oakland, 2021 ILWU Local 10 members refuse to cross picket line and block Israeli ship from unloading cargo
 

 

ILWU's Right Turn-Supporting War Criminal Biden and Loading Military Cargo for the Genocidal War in Gaza

Jack Heyman
ILWU Local 10 Retired, Book #8780

 

My Fellow Dockworkers Internationally, 

 

The ILWU Convention was held in Vancouver, Canada from June 17-21. ILWU Local 10 brought a resolution to the convention, which had been unanimously approved at the Local’s membership meeting on May 1, the international workers day, calling for dockworkers to refuse to handle military cargo to Israel. The resolution denounced the genocidal war being waged against the Palestinian people with U.S.-supplied bombs, dropped from U.S.-built planes. It was a hard-hitting motion calling on the labor movement to take action, unlike many recent solidarity statements that basically call for a ceasefire but don’t commit the unions to doing anything. Local 10 answered the call of the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) in Gaza and the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) for transport workers to take action now, to stop the flow of arms to the Israeli military that is laying waste to Gaza.

 

But I have to report that our motion failed. The ILWU leadership did not oppose it in the Resolutions Committee. On the first day of the Convention International Transport Workers Federation’s Stephen Cotton was warmly received when he spoke against the war and in defense of the Palestinians. Chris Cain both of the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) spoke, calling for dockworkers to refuse to handle military cargo for Israel and got a standing ovation. In stark contrast, ILWU International Officers did not say a word about the Gaza War or Local 10’s resolution. They laid back and quietly mobilized some of the major longshore locals, including those that move military cargo, along with Hawaii Local 142, which organizes hotel workers, to vote overwhelmingly, by a 2-to-1 margin against the Local 10 resolution. It was the labor bureaucracy at work.

 

As the Local 10 motion spelled out, the ILWU has a long history of supporting the struggle of the Palestinian people. Local 10 has respected pickets of Israeli ZIM line ships so many times that the company has stopped sending ships to the Bay Area. Had the motion been passed, it would have been a beacon for dockworkers unions around the world to follow. We could actually have mobilized to stop the shipping of war cargo to Israel from the West Coast U.S. and Canadian ports. This could have triggered a response by labor internationally, as many unions are waiting for someone to take the lead. But the titled officers of the ILWU did not address the moral crisis of our time, the genocidal U.S./Israel war against the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank. Why? Because in reality they support the war criminal U.S. president Biden.

 

Furthermore, they wouldn’t even play Angela Davis’ video highlighting the Local 10 resolution for the Convention until Local 10 President Trent Willis insisted it be played, and they finally relented. (Angela is an honorary member of Local 10.) On the following day, Willis asked that the video of Irvin Jim, the General Secretary of the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa, the largest union in South Africa, be shown, which powerfully supported the Local 10 resolution and called for transport workers to stop war cargo to Israel. He was told they’d let him know later. Near the end of the Convention the Local 10 president was informed that NUMSA’s 3-minute video couldn’t be shown because of time constraints! How many times we have seen this before, keeping members in the dark.

 

This censorship goes so far that two weeks before the Convention, ILWU International president Willie Adams had an article for our union newspaper, The Dispatcher, suppressed reporting on our Local 10’s Labor Forum to Stop the Gaza War. They refused to run it altogether, and today, after nine months of ethnic cleansing, The Dispatcher, once an award-winning union newspaper, shamefully has not published anything about this war. It reminded me of when Bill Morris, General Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union in Britain, not only reversed a membership vote backingthe sacked Liverpool dockers but censored any information supporting their struggle as they appealed for international labor solidarity.

 

But a luta continua, the struggle goes on. Every year on July 5 the ILWU commemorates the six martyrs of the 1934 maritime strike by shutting down all U.S. West Coast ports. Our featured speaker at Local 10’s event this year was Chris Silvera, secretary treasurer of a Teamsters local in New York City representing suburban train workers. Speaking about the three major strikes in 1934 – the West Coast longshoremen, the Minneapolis Teamsters and the Toledo autoworkers – he made the fundamental political point that workers need to build their own independent workers party. I’ve always run for office on that program for a class-struggle workers party that supports striking workers, immigrant workers and opposes imperialist and Zionist wars.

 

Politics in the U.S. is moving increasingly to the right, with both Democrats and Republicans lined up in support of the genocidal U.S./Israel war against Gaza and outrageously denouncing pro-Palestinian protests as “antisemitic.” In Britain, the Labour Party under Keir Starmer took office after purging leftists and anyone critical of Israel. But in Italy, the “rank-and-file” unions (S.I. Cobas, USB and others) have carried out strikes in solidarity with the people of Gaza and on Junew 25 shut down the port of Genoa calling for no war cargo to Israel. And in the U.S., the Local 10 resolution not only calls to on dock workers to refuse to handle Israeli cargo, especially war cargo, it also pledges to “honor picket lines protesting the war on Gaza, as we have done repeatedly in the past.”

 

The history of dockworkers unions in the UK, France, South Africa, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Australia, Canada and the U.S. is filled with examples of organizing international solidarity actions to support workers in struggle and to oppose imperialist wars. Coordinated labor solidarity actions answering the call of the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions would strike a powerful blow and could be a decisive factor in stopping this obscene genocidal slaughter. As the PGFTU poignantly said, it’s time to move from mere declarations to take collective action. Dockworkers like no others have the power to bring the wheels of international commerce to a screeching halt. It’s up to us to act. Our own history demands it.

 

In solidarity and struggle,

 

Jack Heyman
ILWU Local 10 Retired, Book #8780

 

Below are ILWU Local 10’s resolution and the videos of Irvin Jim of NUMSA and Angela Davis.

 

Angela Davis video

Click to Download

video2739470130.mp4 92.4 MB

NUMSA video by Irvin Jim

 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hVexe-uiX8CQ3vlyU07nR2Lg4jmUVoXo/view?usp=sharing



Thursday, July 18, 2024

Teamster President's Fake Attack on Democrats and Republicans

Teamster Pres Sean O'Brien at the Republican Convention. Source

 

 

Brian Tierney from a Facebook post.

“I'd like to clarify that I agree with Sean O’Brien and the Teamsters in denying Biden an endorsement. I know in our binary political culture that my recent posts against the Teamsters' flirtations with Trump and the far right could be read as my own endorsement of "the most pro-union president of our lifetimes," Joe Biden.

In fact, I have long believed the Teamsters should endorse no one. And that's not because of my views related to Biden's genocide in Gaza. It's because Sean O’Brien is 100-percent correct that it's time to end the abusive relationship between labor and the Democratic Party. It's long passed time that unions stop bowing to a political party that campaigns (in part) on labor issues only to legislate and govern as insatiable corporatists who don't give a goddamn about the working class. And the Teamsters could have dramatically made that case, using the power of withholding an endorsement, all without propping up the fascistic Trumpian agenda of the Republican Party. Without kissing the ring of an elitist billionaire conman. Without giving the GOP a tacit, undeserved stamp of labor approval while that same party remains overwhelmingly hellbent on wiping out the labor movement and every means by which workers collectively take action and wrest from the greedy hands of the ruling class what is owed to them.


The Teamsters could have done that under Sean O’Brien, roundly condemning both parties for their corporate allegiance. Instead, in a bid for a seat at the table on both sides of the aisle, the union has offered itself as prop to two ruling political factions that couldn't care less about workers - two parties that remain loyal, in varying degrees, to a bipartisan agenda of restraining worker power in the United States.”

 


 

Richard Mellor

Afscme Local 444, retired
HEO/GED

7-18-24

I am in general agreement with the author’s comments above, but Teamster President Sean O'Brien’s fake attack on both parties is not the first time an opportunity for an alternative to the twin parties of capital has been passed over. The mood for an alternative has been present for a long time, and union officials like O’Brien have known it for a long time; it is a terrifying thought for them.

 

There are too many opportunities to name them all. In 2016 almost 100 million opted out of the electoral process and this has been a long process. This abstention from electoral politics is not due to apathy or becasue, as some liberals argue, ”Americans are selfish and don’t care”.

 

After all, voting is not an exercise in civics. People participate in the process in order to improve their material conditions, the same reason they are willing to pay union dues. But when the activity produces no results, or living standards continue to decline, people either quit the game or look for anything but the status quo. A similar situation exists in the UK as, Nineteen million people didn’t bother to vote, more than twice the number that voted for the Labor Party.

The rise of the degenerate Trump and the right and fascist elements in the Republican Party in particular, is due to people like Sean O’Brien and the entire leadership of organized labor refusing to break from their deathly embrace of the Democrats and offer US workers an independent political party.

 

An exception to this was Anthony Mazzochi, the former official from the Oil Chemical and Atomic Workers who travelled the country in the 1980’s and early 90’s raising the need for a labor party based on the trade unions. He pointed out that capital has two parties and we (labor) not one and had some success raising the issue. This effort ended with a whimper as I thought it would, but could have led to a genuine movement for independent political action on the part of the working class.

 

I introduced numerous resolutions for a labor party in my own local, Afscme Local 444 and also in the wider union bodies. In his opening address to the 20th biennial convention of the California State Labor Federation in 1994, then Executive Secretary Jack Henning, in part due to a resolution I introduced from Afscme Local 444, said:

 

"The two party system can't give relief because capitalism in large finances both parties…….We may say it finances the Republican Party more.  But have you ever known Democrats en masse to turn down the enticements of capitalism?


"We were never meant to be beggars at the table of wealth.  We were never meant to be the apostles of labor cannibalism on the world stage.  We were meant for a higher destiny.  We were never meant to be the lieutenants of capitalism.  We were never meant to be the pall bearers of the workers of the world."

 

Fighting words from Henning that went nowhere.

 

But the main point is that the disgust with the two capitalist parties that have dominated the political and economic life of the United States for over 100 years has been there for a long time.

 

Organized labor has the structure, the numbers, some 14 million members, and occupies a crucial role in the production of goods and services in US society that economic activity, therefore profits, comes to a halt if we stop work. In addition, the exercise of this power or any aspect of it, would inspire millions of workers outside of organized labor, the low waged, the poor, immigrant labor and other marginalized sections of the working class and draw them in to a movement that could counter the capitalist offensive. It would undermine the right wing elements that are opportunistically filling the vacuum.

 

It is the prospect of such a movement developing that terrifies the class collaborationist, business oriented heads of organized labor, Sean O’Brien included. They have the same world view as the capitalist class; the market is the answer to all things and profits are sacrosanct. There is no alternative to capitalism (TINA as Thatcher put it) so when capitalism goes in to crisis they move to rescue it, bail it out at the expense of their own members’ living standards and the working class as a whole.. This is the basis of the Team Concept philosophy as applied on the job through labor/management cooperation, Quality of Life Circles, Interest Based Bargaining and so on.

 

For them, mobilizing working people to act in our own interests, independent of the politicians of big business and their parties, can only lead to chaos; it threatens the union hierarchy’s existence atop organized labor and the relationship they have built with the bosses and the Democratic Party based on labor peace. Sean O’Brien and the entire labor bureaucracy simply wants to put a little pressure on big business to be a little less aggressive, share a bit more of the pie but that train has left the station.

 

Unorganized workers don’t vote against unionization because they are ideologically against unions, they do it because they know the employer will retaliate with a vengeance and the union leadership, people like O’Brien, will back off; the bosses aren’t afraid of the trade union hierarchy. They rely on them to block any movement from below that threatens this relationship they have with capital and the Democratic Party and still push their members to vote for a party that most have abandoned long ago. It’s been a disaster.

 

Look what Biden did last year to the rail workers. He joined forces with Republicans and introduced emergency legislation to deny workers the right to strike. Do we think this inspires workers to take job actions, or to vote for Biden, the most pro union president ever according to union officials that support him. With friends like this who needs enemies.

 

Under these conditions, many people will turn to a strong figure, someone who can “kick ass” can put food on the table and bring stability to society. This is nothing new and it’s looking increasingly likely we will have one of these figures in the White House this time next year.

 

Whether Biden or Trump sits in the oval office, the assault on US workers and our hard fought for gains that took great sacrifice to win will continue. Our backs will be against the wall but sometimes that’s what it takes to force people to take action. I’m not saying it’s going to be easy, there will be periods of reaction and steps backwards, but history teaches me that when workers move in to struggle there is a strong tendency to seek allies, to seek to unite our class and reject the capitalist strategies that divide us, racism, nationalism, gender and religious oppression and at all times the war on women.

 

We have nothing to lose but victory.