PROGRAMME OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC LABOUR PARTY :

(Summer 1917 : Between the Bourgeois Revolution & the October Socialist Revolution) :

The development of exchange has established such close Lies between all the nations of the civilised world that the great movement of the proletariat towards emancipation was bound to become—and has long since become—international.

Russian Social-Democracy regards itself as a detachment of the world army of the proletariat, and is working towards the same ultimate goal as the Social-Democrats of all other countries. This ultimate goal is determined by the character of modern bourgeois society and by the trend of its development. The principal specific feature of this society is commodity production based on capitalist production relations, under which the most important and major part of the means of production and exchange of commodities belongs to a numerically small class of persons while the vast majority of the population is made up of proletarians and semi-proletarians,   who, owing to their economic position, are compelled permanently or periodically to sell their labour-power, i.e., to hire themselves out to the capitalists and to create by their labour the incomes of the upper classes of society.

The ascendancy of capitalist production relations extends its area more and more with the steady improvement of technology, which, by enhancing the economic importance of the large enterprises, tends to eliminate the small independent producers, converting some of them into proletarians and narrowing the role of others in the social and economic sphere, and in some places making them more or less completely, more or less obviously, more or less painfully dependent on capital.

Moreover, this technical progress enables the employers to make growing use of female and child labour in the process of production and exchange of commodities. And since, on the other hand, it causes a relative decrease in the employers’ demand for human labour-power, the demand for labour-power necessarily lags behind its supply, as a result of which the dependence of wage-labour on capital is increased and exploitation of labour rises to a higher level.

This state of affairs in the bourgeois countries and the steadily growing competition among them in the world market make it more and more difficult for them to sell the goods which are produced in ever increasing quantities. Over-production, manifesting itself in more or less acute industrial crises followed by more or less protracted periods of industrial stagnation, is an inevitable consequence of the development of the productive forces in bourgeois society. Crises and periods of industrial stagnation, in their turn, still further ruin the small producers, still further increase the dependence of wage-labour on capital, and lead still more rapidly to the relative and sometimes to the absolute deterioration of the condition of the working class.

Thus, improvement in technology, signifying increased labour productivity and greater social wealth, becomes in bourgeois society the cause of greater social inequality, of widening gulfs between the rich and poor, of greater insecurity, unemployment, and various hardships of the mass of the working people.

However, in proportion as all these contradictions, which are inherent in bourgeois society, grow and develop, so also does the discontent of the toiling and exploited masses with the existing order of things grow; the numerical strength and solidarity of the proletarians increase and their struggle against their exploiters is sharpened. At the same time, by concentrating the means of production and exchange and socialising the process of labour in capitalist enterprises, the improvement in technology more and more rapidly creates the material possibility of capitalist production relations being superseded by socialist relations, i.e., the possibility of bringing about the social revolution, which is the ultimate aim of all the activities of international Social-Democracy as the conscious exponent of the class movement.

By introducing social in place of private ownership of the means of production and exchange, by introducing planned organisation of social production to ensure the well-being and many-sided development of all the members of society, the proletarian social revolution will do away with the division of society into classes and thereby emancipate the whole of oppressed humanity, for it will put an end to all forms of exploitation of one section of society by another.

A necessary condition for this social revolution is the dictatorship of the proletariat, i.e., the conquest by the proletariat of such political power as will enable it to suppress all resistance on the part of the exploiters. Aiming at making the proletariat capable of fulfilling its great historic mission, international Social-Democracy organises the proletariat in an independent political party opposed to all the bourgeois parties, guides all the manifestations of its class struggle, reveals to it the irreconcilable antagonism between the interests of the exploiters and those of the exploited, and explains to the proletariat the historical significance of and the necessary conditions for the impending social revolution. At the same time it reveals to all the other toiling and exploited masses the hopelessness of their position in capitalist society and the need for a social revolution if they are to free themselves from the yoke of capital. The Social-Democratic Party, the party of the working class, calls upon all section of the toiling and exploited population to join its ranks insofar as they adopt the standpoint of the proletariat.

World capitalism has at the present time, i.e., about the beginning of the twentieth century, reached the stage of imperialism. Imperialism, or the epoch of finance capital, is a high stage of development of the capitalist economic system, one in which monopolist associations of capitalists—syndicates, cartels, and trusts—have assumed decisive importance; in which enormously concentrated banking capital has fused with industrial capital; in which the ex port of capital to foreign countries has assumed vast dimensions; in which the whole world has been divided up territorially among the richer countries, and the economic carve-up of the world among international trusts has begun.

Imperialist wars, i.e., wars for world domination, for markets for banking capital and for the subjugation of small and weaker nations, are inevitable under such a state of affairs. The first great imperialist war, the war of 1914–17, is precisely such a war.

The extremely high level of development which world capitalism in general has attained, the replacement of free competition by monopoly capitalism, the fact that the banks and the capitalist associations have prepared the machinery for the social regulation of the process of production and distribution of products, the rise in the cost of living and increased oppression of the working class by the syndicates due to the growth of capitalist monopolies, the tremendous obstacles standing in the way of the proletariat’s economic and political struggle, the horrors, misery, ruin, and brutalisation caused by the imperialist war—all these factors transform the present stage of capitalist development into an era of proletarian socialist revolution.

That era has dawned.

Only a proletarian socialist revolution can lead humanity out of the impasse which imperialism and imperialist wars have created. Whatever difficulties the revolution may have to encounter, whatever possible temporary setbacks or waves of counter-revolution it may have to contend with, the final victory of the proletariat is inevitable.

Objective conditions make it the urgent task of the day to prepare the proletariat in every way for the conquest   of political power in order to carry out the economic and political measures which are the sum and substance of the socialist revolution.

The fulfilment of this task, which calls for the fullest trust, the closest fraternal ties, and direct unity of revolutionary action on the part of the working class in all the advanced countries, is impossible without an immediate break in principle with the bourgeois perversion of socialism, which has gained the upper hand among the leadership of the great majority of the official Social-Democratic parties. Such a perversion is, on the one hand, the social-chauvinist trend, socialism in word and chauvinism in deed, the defence of the predatory interests of “one’s own” national bourgeoisie under the guise of “defence of the fatherland”; and, on the other hand, the equally wide international trend of the so-called “Centre”, which stands for unity with the social-chauvinists and for the preservation or correction of the bankrupt Second International, and which vacillates between social-chauvinism and the internationalist revolutionary struggle of the proletariat for the achievement of a socialist system.

In Russia at the present moment, when the Provisional Government, which is part and parcel of the capitalist class and enjoys the confidence—necessarily unstable—of the broad mass of the petty-bourgeois population, has undertaken to convene a Constituent Assembly, the immediate duty of the party of the proletariat is to fight for a political system which will best guarantee economic progress and the rights of the people in general, and make possible the least painful transition to socialism in particular.

The party of the proletariat cannot rest content with a bourgeois parliamentary democratic republic, which throughout the world preserves and strives to perpetuate the monarchist instruments for the oppression of the masses, namely, the police, the standing army, and the privileged bureaucracy.

The party fights for a more democratic workers’ and peasants’ republic, in which the police and the standing army will be abolished and replaced by the universally armed people, by a people’s militia; all officials will be not only elective, but also subject to recall at any time upon the demand of a majority of the electors; all officials, without exception, will be paid at a rate not exceeding the average wage of a competent worker; parliamentary representative institutions will be gradually replaced by Soviets of people’s representatives (from various classes and professions, or from various localities), functioning as both legislative and executive bodies.

The constitution of the Russian democratic republic must ensure:

1) The sovereignty of the people; supreme power in the state must be vested entirely in the people’s representatives, who shall be elected by the people and be subject   to recall at any time, and who shall constitute a single popular assembly, a single chamber.

2) Universal, equal, and direct suffrage for all citizens, men and women, who have reached the age of twenty, in the elections to the legislative assembly and to the various bodies of local self-government; secret ballot; the right of every voter to be elected to any representative institution; biennial parliaments; salaries to be paid to the people’s representatives; proportional representation at all elections; all delegates and elected officials, without exception, to be subject to recall at any time upon the decision of a majority of their electors.

3) Local self-government on a broad scale; regional self- government in localities where the composition of the population and living and social conditions are of a specific nature; the abolition of all state-appointed local and regional authorities.

4) Inviolability of person and domicile.

5) Unrestricted freedom of conscience, speech, the press, assembly, strikes, and association.

6) Freedom of movement and occupation.

7) Abolition of the social estates; equal rights for all citizens irrespective of sex, creed, race, or nationality.

The right of the population to receive instruction in their native tongue in schools to be established for the purpose at the expense of the state and local organs of self-government; the right of every citizen to use his native language at meetings; the native language to be used on a level with the official language in all local public and state institutions; the obligatory official language to be abolished.

9) The right of all member nations of the state to freely secede and form independent states. The republic of the Russian nation must attract other nations or nationalities not by force, but exclusively by voluntary agreement on the question of forming a common state. The unity and   fraternal alliance of the workers of all countries are incompatible with the use of force, direct or indirect, against other nationalities.

10) The right of all persons to sue any official in the regular way before a jury.

11) Judges and other officials, both civil and military, to be elected by the people with the right to recall any of them at any time by decision of a majority of their electors.

12) The police and standing army to be replaced by the universally armed people; workers and other employees to receive regular wages from the capitalists for the time devoted to public service in the people’s militia.

13) Separation of the church from the state, and schools from the church; schools to be absolutely secular.

14) Free and compulsory general and polytechnical education (familiarising the student with the theoretical and practical aspects of the most important fields of production) for all children of both sexes up to the age of sixteen; training of children to be closely integrated with socially productive work.

15) All students to be provided with food, clothing, and school supplies at the cost of the state.

16) Public education to be administered by democratically elected organs of local self-government; the central government not to be allowed to interfere with the arrangement of the school curriculum, or with the selection of the teaching staffs; teachers to be elected directly by the population with the right of the latter to remove undesirable teachers.

As a basic condition for the democratisation of our country’s national economy, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party demands the abolition of all indirect taxes and the establishment of a progressive tax on incomes and inheritances.

The high level of development of capitalism already achieved in banking and in the trustified branches of industry, on the one hand, and the economic disruption caused by the imperialist war, everywhere evoking a demand for state and public control of the production and distribution of all staple products, on the other, induce the Party to demand the nationalisation of the banks, syndicates (trusts), etc.

To safeguard the working class from physical and moral deterioration, and develop its ability to carry on the struggle for emancipation, the Party demands:

1) An eight-hour working day for all wage-workers, including a break of not less than one hour for meals where work is continuous. In dangerous and unhealthy industries the working day to be reduced to from four to six hours.

2) A statutory weekly uninterrupted rest period of not less than forty-two hours for all wage-workers of both sexes in all branches of the national economy.

3) Complete prohibition of overtime work.

4) Prohibition of night-work (from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m.)in all branches of the national economy except in cases where it is absolutely necessary for technical reasons endorsed by the labour organisations—provided, however, that night-work does not exceed four hours.

5) Prohibition of the employment of children of school age (under sixteen), restriction of the working day of adolescents (from sixteen to twenty) to four hours, and prohibition of the employment of adolescents on night-work in unhealthy industries and mines.

6) Prohibition of female labour in all branches of industry injurious to women’s health; prohibition of night work for women; women to be released from work eight weeks before and eight weeks after child-birth without loss of pay and with free medical and medicinal aid.

7) Establishment of nurseries for infants and young children and rooms for nursing mothers at all factories and other enterprises where women are employed; nursing mothers to be allowed recesses of at least half-hour duration at intervals of not more than three hours; such mothers to receive nursing benefit and their working day to be reduced to six hours.

Full social insurance of workers:

a) for all forms of wage-labour;

b) for all forms of disablement, namely, sickness, injury, infirmity, old age, occupational disease, child-birth, widowhood, orphanhood, and also unemployment, etc.

c) all insurance institutions to be administered entirely by the insured themselves;

d) the cost of insurance to be borne by the capitalists;

e) free medical and medicinal aid under the control of self-governing sick benefit societies, the management bodies of which are to be elected by the workers.

9) The establishment of a labour inspectorate elected by the workers’ organisations and covering all enterprises employing hired labour, as well as domestic servants; women inspectors to be appointed in enterprises where female labour is employed.

10) Sanitary laws to be enacted for improving hygienic conditions and protecting the life and health of workers in all enterprises where hired labour is employed; questions of hygiene to be handled by the sanitary inspectorate elected by the workers’ organisations.

11) Housing laws to be enacted and a housing inspectorate elected by the workers’ organisations to be instituted for the purpose of sanitary inspection of dwelling houses. However, only by abolishing private property in land and building cheap and hygienic dwellings can the housing problem be solved.

12) Industrial courts to be established in all branches of the national economy.

13) Labour exchanges to be established for the proper organisation of work-finding facilities. These labour ex changes must be proletarian class organisations (organised on a non-parity basis), and must be closely associated with the trade unions and other working-class organisations and financed by the communal self-governing bodies.

In order to do away with the relics of serfdom, which are a heavy yoke on the necks of the peasants, and to enable the class struggle to develop freely in the countryside, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party :

1) Fights with all its strength for the immediate and complete confiscation of all landed estates in Russia (and also crown lands, church lands, etc.).

2) Stands for the immediate transfer of all land to the peasantry organised in Soviets of Peasants’ Deputies or in other organs of local self-government elected on a truly democratic basis and completely independent of the landowners and bureaucrats.

3) Demands the nationalisation of all lands in the country; nationalisation implies that all property rights in land are vested in the state, while the right of disposal of the land is vested in the local democratic institutions.

4) Encourages the initiative of those peasant committees which, in various localities of Russia, are turning over the landowners’ livestock and agricultural implements to the peasants organised in these committees for the purpose of their socially regulated utilisation in the cultivation of the land.

5) Advises the rural proletarians and semi-proletarians to strive towards turning every landed estate into a sufficiently large model farm, to be conducted on a communal basis by the local Soviet of Agricultural Labourers’ Deputies under the direction of agricultural experts and with the aid of the least technical appliances.

The Party under all circumstances, and whatever the conditions of democratic agrarian reform may be, will unswervingly work for the independent class organisation of the rural proletariat, will explain to the latter the irreconcilable antagonisms that exist between it and the peasant bourgeoisie, will warn it against the false attraction of the system of petty farming, which, while commodity production exists, can never do away with the poverty of the masses, and, finally, will urge the need for a complete socialist revolution as the only means of abolishing poverty and exploitation.

([old text]In the endeavour to achieve its immediate aims, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party supports every oppositional and revolutionary movement directed against the existing social and political set-up in Russia, but at the same time emphatically rejects all reformist projects involving any   expansion or consolidation of the guardianship of the police and bureaucracy over the labouring masses.

For its part, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party is firmly convinced that the full, consistent, and firm realisation of all these political and social reforms can be achieved only by the overthrow of the autocracy and by the convocation of a Constituent Assembly freely elected by the entire people.).

 

 

“Defending Hungarian activism on the ESF list” :

( FoE Sweden - Prague Spring II Network ) :

Two letters on this list, both with Hungarian actors as alone or together

with others as undersigned,

have caused negative reactions. One addressed poverty, the welfare state

and capitalism, the other the

terror attack in Norway against social democratic youth and governmental

buildings. Below I have

copied the conversion to make it easier to follow the discussion.

The content in the negative reactions on both these statements are

worrisome for the state of affairs in

the ESF process and the necessary alliance building to confront the present

crisis.

Attac Norway claims that there is only one ”proper” response to the terror

attack which they chose to

label killings: increased democracy, increased tolerance and increased

humanity. A clear statement

against the letter from the ESF network against right wing extremism is

made by saying that the analisis

is not shared, instead Attac Norway fully support the analisis made by

their government.

Francine Mestrum was strongly critical in a first letter seeing a video on

poverty to be shown at the

Attac summer university ENA and a letter from one of the two Hungarian

Social Forums in April on the

present crisis in Europe as sign of attempts to split the movement  ”We

need to join forces, not to

divide”. Still after having recieved a response, she insist in that the

letter in April had a ”rather unhappy

wording”.

In both cases actors in Western Europe tell the Hungarians that their

analysis is not correct, they are not

well informed and that it is necessary to state clearly that there are

differences of opinion. In the case of

Mestrum the possibility of a split is even mentioned.

The bottom line is that there is a need for unity and in our case that

unity preferably should be based

on some kind of interpretation of the WSF declaration as this is the basis

for the ESF process. One can

have different views on how unity is achieved. Some stress ideological

unity, others claim unity is

created by sharing knowledge. I believe in unity in practice. It is my

experience that in the real struggle

you will find new friends, many times across ideological divisions.

This means that it is good if there are differences in ideological views on

the present crisis. Rather than

claiming that the Hungarian April letter had rather unhappy wording I see

it as a much needed

contribution to the ESF process. Lets face the facts. Almost no

contributions are made to the common

discussion that creates some responses. Very few have some hopes for the

ESF process while at the

same time there is not much discussion between different movements at the

European level in other

places either. In times of crisis organizations tend to stick to the

closest allies and are less open for

broader and challenging discussions, at least if it implicates action. The

Italians set an interesting

example with the mass mobilization during the refendum on privatization of

water, nuclear power and

impunity for Berlusconi followed by the Genua+10 European wide initiative.

But it has so far caused no

debate on this list.

So the problems are not the Hungarians, the question is how to respond in a

manner that will bring us

further. I am an environmentalist which tend to give other perspectives for

god and bad than what the

left have. We  are often more vague which is bad but tend less to split in

reformists versus

revolutionaries which can be good and bad and finally we tend to have

visions about the future which

necessarily includes a material dimension which is good.

I do not share the views of the Hungarian April letter on one specific

point, I do not see the pratical nor

political point in starting anticapitalist action day in October. We will

win the struggle because we are

for something, not because we have a clever anlysisis enabling us to put a

name on the present

economic system and want everybody to join us using our words.

But when it comes to the core of the letter ”to restore the welfare state

is an illusion.” - I cannot see this

as in anyway less valuable than lets say the Genua+10 demands or what Attac

or Friends of the Earth

states. Certainly I would not call it unhappy wording. Rather I would call

what one of the leading

campaigners wrote recently on the official Friends of the Earth blog in

England as wrong and causing

severe problems when stating we have to ”live happily with capitalism”. As

Friends of the Earth England

does very good political work that rather could be interpreted as

questioning the present development

model including capitalism this was a rather unhappy wording, the Hungarian

statement is not.

There are at the present conjuncture a number of proposals put forward on

different issues to solve the

social and ecological crisis. Reformist proposals are mass produced by

different think tanks red and

green, sometimes also by organizations and indivduals. There is also the

Peoples assemblies to change

everything by struggle from below organizing horizontally. Common is also

to claim that now is the

time to declare anticapitalism as the essential message. How these small or

big struggles can be

combined is not a simple task. It is worrisome if the Western Europeans

with their better funding can

claim they have the ”positive message and a forward-looking concrete

proposal”. But if the conditions

are so grim in many CEE countries that being positive is not the most

urgent message you have, should

they keep their mouths shut?

It is maybe time to look the other way for positive examples. Repression

against popular movements is

growing in all parts of Europe, whether organized non-parliamentary as at

the workplaces all over

Europe were the employers brutalize the working conditions and try to make

it harder to organize trade

unions and labor struggles or in the form of right wing extremist attacks

on the workers movements

and immigrants. Or state repression during social conflicts of different

kinds or as at the climate

summit in Copenhagen. Here Russia have set an example by uniting

antifascists with their roots in the

punk scene, envrionmentalists, left wingers, journalists and liberals

against the repression during the

omgoing Khimki forest battle. Groups ideologically far from, each other

have been able to unite in a

way that sets an example for the rest of Europe and been able to shake the

government and lowered

the level of repression.

When it comes to right wing extremism CEE countries are also most severely

hit. According to the

Europol statistics most  right wing terrorist attacs in recent years before

Oslo and Utøya have been

made in Hungary. It is my feeling that we in Western Europe do not take the

ongoing crisis severe

enough. Every decline in the ecosystems, the welfare state or when we face

growing repression of both

hard and more invisible milder forms are met in the same way. The problems

are seen separate from

each other and hopes for some at least partly positive solution are quickly

promoted by politicians and

media. I CEE countries this possibility do not always exist. It is not only

a question of economy. When I

went on tour to prepare ESF in Malmö I came and visited the two different

Hungarian Social Forum as

well as the environmental movements and the Greens. The young activists in

the network that wrote the

letter in April told me when I asked them about their daily life. Phone

calls were made to them with the

message, we will kill you twice – first because you are a communist, then

because you are a jew.

Furthermore it was also an issue of strength, being left was seen in

general as being weak among the

youth, being right wing or right extremist was seen as the one who is

strong.

Is there any reason at all for Norwegians, or for that matter people in any

other Western European

countries to take the conclusions made by networks based on such extreme

circumstances as of

importance in their country, or for that matter at European level? I mean

are not their circumstance and

their conclusions a stage we have passed in the West? Or is it not? As I

claimed already in the example

of the Khimki battle Russian activists are far more advanced than what

Danish and Swedish activists

were in their response to state repression at the Summit in Copenhagen 2009

and Gothenburg 2001.

Furthermore both state repressions took great steps backwards for popular

movements right to

organize meeting and demonstrate. The roll back of the welfare state in

Sweden goes more quickly than

in most other countries, the difference is due to that the level at the

beginning was quite better in

terms of equality which now evaporates due to the neoliberal politics

carried out by both left and right

governments. Things do not only go forward in Western Europe either and

sooner than we wish we

might need some of the experiences in CEE countries to understand what is

going on.

There are two worrisome aspects of what Mestrum and Attac Norway writes.

Lets take Attac Norway first.

To split economy (or for that matter ecology) from politics is at the core

of the state ideology in all

Nordic countries today. The Norwegian terrorist that murdered so many saw

marxism as a main enemy

together with Islam embodied in the social democratic  youth of Norway. We

can say this is not coherent

ideologically, but so was nazism neither. The point is that his political

vision includes also an economic

dimension.

The government of Norway and Attac excludes the economic aspects and calls

only for democracy,

tolerance and humanism. The Prague Spring II network against right wing

extremism puts the attack

also in the context of being against socialism and marxism as well as

claiming to defend Christian

values. Now one can have different opinions about the specific wording, but

it is not an odd idea that

the attack is not a general attack against democracy and tolerance but a

more specific attack also with a

economical aspect directed against the workers movement, socialism and

marxism. From the point of

view of the WSF declaration combining economy (as well as ecology) with

politics is at the core of the

content. Attac is also an organization focusing on economy. So the position

of Attac Norway is

somewhat puzzling.

I can follow the discussion in Norway somewhat and also of course in

Sweden. The Norwegians better

speak for themselves. But firstly the attack cannot be seen only as a

Norwegian phenomena, it is also an

international, primarily European phenomena. Both due to the fact the right

wing extremism and

populism is on the rise in many countries, but also due how the Utøya

terror attack is used in different

contexts (as well as international, e.g. this mailing list). In Sweden

there is of course much sorrow, as

many states, Norway is the country most like our own. Our prime minister

have recieved strong criticism

for not expressing our sorrow strong enough. On the other hand he does not

express strong concern at

other occasions either very much, as when an islamist made a suicide

terroist attack in the middle of

Stockholm last year and by chance the bomb only killed himself. The general

message in Sweden is the

same as Attac and government in Norway, democcracy, tolerance, humanism.

At first I fought this was an understandable way to focus on the most

important human aspects directly

after the attack. It was also often stated that the political analysis must

come later. The general

statements about protecting an open society, democracy and tolerance was

somewhat presented en

passant, some general words to say until a real political discussion could

start later. Now it seems on

both Attacs letter and the general debate that this after never comes. We

are stuck with the general

remarks made at the moment but presented in a more concrete way. In Sweden

this means that

extremism in general is the problem which Swedish state ideology for saying

that all political ideologies

except the state sponsored liberalism are extremist and are the cause for

terrorism. A general shift in

society towards understanding politics separate from economics means also

that acknowledging

conflicts means to create conflict, and especially ideologies saying there

is an conflict are the cause of

terrorism and violence in society.

Sweden have gone so far that a spoecial governmental institution is set up

to disseminate ideas about

how nazism and communist regimes causes crimes against humanity and

genocide. This official

governmental information material to teachers claims that the root of

Soviet union terror and genocide

stems from Marx as he commented upon the Paris commune that next time more

terror is needed. The

fact that the massive terror was used against the communards and the Paris

Commune demands for

democracy is excluded from this governmental propaganda. In general when

influential people in

Sweden use such word as Attac Norway uses in the follow-up on the terror

attack on Utøya they make it

specific – left wing and right wing extremism are equally bad, undemocratic

and intolerant, this time it

happened to be a right wing extremist. It has even gone so far that

Birgitta Olsson, a progressive

leading politician in the liberal party have compared the Gothenburg riots

at the EU-summit in 2001,

claimed to be the result of left wing extremism with the terror against the

social democratic youth in

Norway. Left and right are equally bad, only liberals are without guilt.

Thus at least in Sweden, when the

Attac Norway kind of analysis is the reference, the actual outcome is main

stream liberalism which is

becoming more and more repressive against all other ideological currents

claiming total hegemony. If

this liberal position on rioght wing terrorism against the workers

movementsd is also the opinion

carried by other Attac organizations in Europe in a time when also

according to experts right wing

extremism is on the rise and next time it can be anywhere else ENA will not

become a very positive

experience.

Mestrum points at something very important. We are in ”dire need of

concrete alternatives which can

bring hope and trust to peoples. We have our analysis and we know what is

wrong in this world. If we

want to stop the desperate and dangerous running-off to the xenophobic

extreme right, we need an

attractive and hopeful discourse which can convince broad groups of

people.” But then comes the

problem ”In all circumstances, in all countries, people need protection.”

This is in my understanding not at all a concrete alternative linked to

some hope, this is a defensive

measure of exactly the kind that brings the left backwards defending and

defending themselves instead

of creating hope by starting to also have an agenda for a transition

towards another society built on

social justice and ecological awareness. Of course the defensive struggle

is what we have to use most of

our time to, but without the salt, the concrete alternatives that changes

power relations and production

and consumtion in our society ideas of how to establish social protection

will be only illusions. For the

time being lucky countries can create some possibilites for themselves but

in the long run can we only

defend our rights and the planet we live on with struggle for another way

to organize production and

consumption. Here maybe the peasant and environmental movement have

something to offer which the

trade unions and the left seams to have forgotten sometimes. But maybe not

without excepting that

those claiming that while struggling for social rights and environmental

concerns also claim that restore

the welfare state is an illusion. Or that without opposing the liberal

ideology in the struggle against

right wing and other repression the repression will grow worse – European

right wing terrrorism is not

primarily the result of extremist ideologies but due to growing tensions in

society created by liberal

economic politics. Or stopping capitalism by making all movements into

anticapitalist movements is an

illusion.

The left must come out of its polarizing struggle between reformists and

revolutionaries and try as the

WSF declaration clearly states, treat critique of capitalism and

imperialism on equal terms as the

relationship between human beings and nature. The environmental movement

needs alliance with

movements primarily concerned with social justice and the distribution of

wealth. We already do work

closely with peasant movements, it would be positive with an alliance for

both defence and concrete

alternatives with other movements, built with open eyes for ideological

differencs but hopefully with a

bopt less illusions.

Yours

Tord Björk

Active in Friends of the Earth Sweden and Prague spring II network

UNESCO CYMRU-WALES

is pleased to announce the 2010 Wales World Press Freedom Day Lecture will be delivered by:

Martin Shipton, Chief Reporter, Western Mail

on the theme of

NEW THREATS TO PRESS FREEDOM

at the Welsh Centre for International Affairs, Temple of Peace and Health, Cathays Park, Cardiff, CF10 3AP (by kind permission of the WCIA trustees)

on Friday 9 April 2010 at 6.45pm

The lecture will be preceded by refreshments commencing at 6.00pm

All Welcome.  Admission Free.  RSVP to pslb@mac.com 

UKNC’s UNESCO Cymru-Wales Committee is the link between civil society in Wales and UNESCO’s work in contributing to peace, human development and sustainability through education, the sciences, culture and communication.

UNESCO Cymru-Wales yw’r ddolen rhwng cymdeithas sifil yng Nghymru a chyfraniad UNESCO at

heddwch, datblygiad dynol a chynaliadwyedd drwy addysg, y gwyddorau, diwylliant a chyfathrebu.

Welsh Centre for International Affairs

Temple of Peace, Cathays Park, Cardiff, CF10 3AP

Tel: 029 2022 8549 / Fax: 029 2064 0333 / e-mail: suecoles@wcia.org.uk

Web: www.wcia.org.uk

Registered Charity No. 259701

The Welsh Centre for International Affairs is a national forum for the exchange of ideas on international issues. It promotes world peace, human rights and international understanding, and serves as a key point of contact in Wales for European institutions, the United Nations and the Commonwealth.

Kyiv/Kiev: WW II Memorial :…………………

Conference „The Alternative

to the Right-Wing Extremism in the Time of Social and Ecological Crisis“

                                                                                                                                            Prague, 27^th and 28^th March 2010

Final Declaration

Approximately 100 participants from 19 Eastern, Central and Western-European countries representing a great variety of social movements, human rights and ecological organizations and trade unions got together in Prague on March 27^th and 28^th, 2010 to take a part in a conference on alternatives to right-wing extremism in a time of social and ecological crisis, held in the framework of the European Social Forum.

Analyzing the rise of right-wing extremism in different European countries in the global context of social and ecological crisis we considered it to be a very serious danger to civil and social rights and for the future of our countries. In numerous discussions we discovered a great diversity of reasons for this threat to the democracies in the Eastern, Central and Western European countries, a threat which is deeply rooted in the history of fascism and the growing social inequalities and unemployment in the present.

We detected a whole spectrum of extreme-right organizations going form autonomous, militant and militaristic neo-fascists like in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Russia and Germany to right-wing tendencies embedded in nationalist parties like in Austria, Hungary, France and Czechia. In Romania and Ukraine extreme right-wing policies are promoted not only by the well-established and known right political parties but also by those pretending to be from radical left. There is also a new tendency of youth mobilizations drawing from globalization critical and antifascist movements their ways of dressing in black and disguising themselves as autonomists whereas on the other side, in Turkey right-wing extremism is integrated in the State apparatus where a right-wing religious party promotes the neo-liberal restructuring of the State and taking advantage of being in the government to present itself as democratic.

The participants of the conference agree on the fact that it is neoliberal global capitalism and neo-conservatism which has incremented and enhanced conditions for the rise of both, populist right parties and right-wing extremist organizations. Following this analysis, the participants concluded that there is an urgent need for a new kind of joint international and transnational solidarity. In order to fulfill this need for resistance, celebration of togetherness and the promotion of alternatives, we decided to form an All-European Network against Right-Wing Extremism.

Inspired by each other, the participants call for support of mobilizations (like the one in Dresden) against right-wing extremist manifestations. We also propose joint action days initiated by existing human rights networks like UNITED for Intercultural Action and the Climate Justice Network in order to strengthen the base for the integration of the movements on a larger scale. That is why we will issue a call for simultaneous common actions in different countries of Europe on specific dates like e.g. 8^th-9^th of May, the days of commemoration of the defeat of fascism in order to promote simultaneously the establishment of social and ecological rights as an indivisible claim of all people on the Earth. For the purpose of enlarging our network we also call to assist to the 6^th European Social Forum (Istanbul, 1 – 4 July, 2010) where we propose a joint seminar with other networks for alternatives to the present social and ecological crisis with the purpose of integrating as many people as possible. Considering this as an ongoing process the participants decided to organize a next conference in autumn 2010, either in Budapest or in Vilnius.

Prague, March 28^th, 2010 The participants of the Conference

 

CZECH SOCIAL FORUM :

All-European mobilizing Conference „The Alternative

to the Right-Wing Extremism in the Time of Social and Ecological Crisis“

Prague, 27^th and 28^th March 2010

Venue: Klub „Lávka“, Praha 1, Novotného lávka 1 (next to the Charles Bridge)

10 March 2010

Organized by: All-European Mobilizing Committee of the European Social Forum together with the Czech Social Forum

Aim: - getting social and environmental movements, especially those from Central and Eastern Europe, involved in seeking for alternative solutions of the crises

- focusing on interdepent issues of the highes importance

- better co-operation and visibility of the alter-globalization stakeholders

- mobilizing human and financial resources for a better balanced participation in the 6^th European Social Forum (ESF, Istanbul, 1^st to 4^th of July 2010)

Languages: Russian, English

Programme:

Friday, 26 March

17:30 – 20:00 meeting of the Open organizing group

Saturday, 27 March

08:30 – 09:00 Registration of participants

09:00 – 09:30 Welcome and organisational remarks (Mirek)

09:30 – 10:30 Panel debate (1), activists from World Social Forum and ESF – East and West

S: Leo Gabriel (WSF), Gökhan Biçici (TR), Louis Weber (F), Alexander Buzgalin (RU), Facilitator (F): Mátyás Benyik (HU) 10:30 – 10:45 coffee break

10:45 – 12:15 Social and Environmental Crises (2), problems and their existing solutions by governments and NGOs

S: Tord Björk (S), Ganja Gadimaliyev (AZ), Walter Baier (A), Artur Saudinš (LV), F: Ewa Zio?kowska (PL)

12:15 – 13:15 lunch break

13:15 – 14:45 Right-Wing Extremism and Racism (3), problems and their existing solutions by governments and NGOs

S: Viktor Shapinov (UA), Dmitry Kostenko (RU), Fritz Burschel (D), Vince Guibert (F), Jan Gebert (PL), F: Mir.Prokeš (CZ)

14:45 – 15:00 coffee break

15:00 – 17:00 Social and Ecological Alternatives (4), general debate

S: Sanda-Daniela Alexeiciuc (MD), Leyla Amirova (AZ), Hermann Dworczak (A), F: Marek Hrubec (CZ)

18:00 – 20:00 meeting of the All-European Mobilizing Committee

19:00 – 22:00 cultural programme (Guma Guar Group + videos):

V1 (RU): Alexander Buzgalin: Alterglobalism Today (video or slideshow 20-30min)

+ V from Russia (Murder of Markelov and Baburova 10 min)

V2 (EN): Silvia Puscasu: Youth entered in the Presidency of Republic of Moldova (up to 15 min)

Sanda-Daniela Alexeiciuc: Seeking for alternative solutions for building a better world (15 min)

V3 Leo Gabriel (EN): Situation of the Russian population in Estonia

V4 Video on the mobilisation at the Alternative Summit in Copenhagen

Sunday, 28^th March

09:30 – 11:00 discussion on a declaration on the Alternative to the Right-Wing Extremism

S: Peter Damo (RO) + redaction group, F: Jan Májí?ek (CZ)

11:00 – 11:15 coffee break

11:15 – 12:45 general debate on the ESF process

S: Yunus Erdurun (TR), Judith Dellheim (D), F: Leo Gabriel (WSF)

13:00 – 14:00 lunch for foreign participants

14:00 – 17:00 facultative „alternative“ sightseeing of Prague

Participants: ca 100 activists from social and environmental movements,

i.e. ca 30 local ones, ca 50 from CEEC, ca 20 from West + Turkey

Preferred means of travel: train or bus (under 800 km obligatory)

The organizers will pay for a cheap accommodation on 26 – 28 March and reimburse 70 to 80 % of the travel costs on the following base for those who applied in February

Near countries (SK, PL, H, SI): max. 100 EUR

Other new EU-member and candidate states (EE, LT, LV, RO, BG, HR, TR): max. 200 EUR

„Far east of Europe“ (UA, RUS, MD, GE, AR, AZ): max. 250 EUR

 

WHO OWNS THE LAND, THE SURROUNDING SEA-BED AND OTHER NATURAL

RESOURCES TODAY IN WALES AND THE ‘UK’ ??

Answer : Elizabeth II : of The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha :

A FAMILY OF GERMAN IMMIGRANTS :

History of The Monarchy : English Monarchs :

http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/KingsandQueensofEngland.aspx

The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Changed Name To Windsor) :

(Who Took Over From The House of Hanover – Also German Immigrants) :

http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensoftheUnitedKingdom/Saxe-Coburg-Gotha/Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.aspx

WHO ‘OWNED’ THE LAND ETC,. IN PRYDAIN (BRITTANIA)PRIOR TO THE

ANGLO-SAXON, NORMAN MIGRANT INVASIONS ??

THE NATIVE BRYTHONIC PEOPLE (COLLECTIVELY) :

1.So This is still a very Contemporary Issue in Wales and the ‘UK’, No ?

2.’Immigration’ in the Corporate English ‘Press’ (and TV (including the BBC),Radio

Internet ect,. )has the stench of Colonialist/Imperialist (Primarily) English Chauvinist

Nationalism and Racism about it, No ?

3.’The shared identity of The ‘Nation State’: Many State Institutions in the ‘UK’ State

call themselves ‘National’, even though we recognise 4 nations – apart from Indo-Welsh,

Arab-Welsh, African-Welsh etc,.Isn’t this an example of an English

Colonial Chauvinistic, hegemonic concept ? Of social control ?

4.The ‘British’ in your ‘British Colonialism’ historically referred to The uniting of THE

CROWNS of England and Scotland – nothing to do with the people of these islands

and certainly not to the native Welsh/Brithonic – Cymru/Wales is not even on their flag !

‘Imperialism’ : ‘Monopoly Finance Capitalism’ only Clearly developed towards the end of

the 19^th Century : Lenin : Imperialism : The Highest Stage of Capitalism :

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/index.htm

5.Who were the Welsh Slavers and Plantation Owners ?

6.”The Industrial Revolution affected the culture of Wales to such a point that

we can almost consider anything before it as mere peamble.”

So why, up to quite recently, did most people in Wales speak Brithonic/Welsh ?

And a significant number still speak it ? By the way most migrants to the coal

field and industrial north and south Wales came from rural Wales – hence the persistance

of the language !

7.The ‘First UK’ ‘Aliens Act’ : The Anglo-Norman Invasion set up Colonial

‘Englishries’ and ‘Welshry’ Concentration Camps ! :

RR Davies : Wales : The Age of Conquest :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0198208782/ref=sib_dp_ptu#reader-link

8.Border Controls act as clumsy attempts to avoid payback of Colonial Conquest :

Hadrian’s Wall, Offa’s Dyke, 6 Counties Border Ireland.

9.INTER-NATIONALISM OBVIOUSLY REFERS TO EQUAL RELATIONS

BETWEEN NATIONS (Even Though we speak different languages and have different

complexions).WORKERS AND OPPRESSED PEOPLE OF THE WORLD UNITE !

WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT OUR CHAINS !!

Was The Slogan of The Communist International in The Age of Imperialism :

http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/1st-congress/platform.htm

CONFEDERAZIONE DEI COMITATI DI BASE :

CONFEDERATION OF COMMITTEES OF THE BASE :

March 12th public education strike and demostration

Teachers, school workers, students and parents against the distruction of public education

On March 12th , on the day of general strike and national demonstration in Rome called by COBAS, the “people of public school” will be back in the streets again, for a big national event in defence of public education.

The Governament is imposing a distructive High school reform not based upon a didactic project, but only upon budget cuts. The same project, brutal and suicide for education and for cultural and economic development of our society , started with the “maestra unica”- only one teacher per class- and with the “weakening” of full time classes in Primary schools .

The state coffers have been looted by bankers, financier and industrialists on the effort to save triky or “dead” companies and in the meanwhile a chain of scandals are showing huge amounts stolen from the common goods by powerful criminal organizations, by nepotism and groups well introduced in the state body.

At the same time, the governament claims to save money with the closure of public schools, cutting teaching hours and important study subjects, cutting an average of 4 hours a week of fundamental teaching subjects, cutting laboratories and practical training and therefore not hiring tens of thousand casual teachers and school workers .All this is hitting a sector, public education, already impoverished by all the goverments of the last twenty years ; the ongoing school budget reduction is dramatically weakening the school organization and, to face the lack of many fundamental didactic tools, families are frequently asked for growing contributions. This is becoming a real – and illegal- school fee. Moreover ,casual teachers are no more hired , students are gathered all toghether in small classes and private courses are spreading.

Protests and mobilizations against this progressive dismantling of public education are growing and will culminate on March 12th in a general strike of education called by COBAS and in a big national demonstration in Rome for the withdrawal of the High school “reform”, against the cut of thousands work places , against  cuts of schools and  school subjects, against  the Brunetta and Aprea bills, against   hierarchization of labor,   against the lowering to 15 of  leaving age in compulsory education , for the employment of casual school workers, for capital expenditures in school, for union democracy in the education sector and for the restitution of assembly rights. At the head of the demo casual school workers, after months of struggle for the defence of public education, for the quality of teaching and for their own work : together with teachers, parents, students and other school workers they will permanently besiege the Education Ministry.

 

Piero Bernocchi

National speaker of COBAS

 

 

 

 

SUPREME ADMINISTRATION OF GREEK CIVIL SERVANTS TRADE UNIONS (ADEDY)

 

 

We, the civil servants, the juridical persons of the public law, and the local government that participate in ADEDY’s strike and are gathered here today at the Clafthmonos square, feel that once more due to the financial problems of the Greek economy, the government and the E.U are trying to pass the buck on the workers and the society instead of blaming the real culprits of this crisis which are the banks and the wealthy who take advantage of the crisis to maintain or grow their profits.

The measures included in the stability and development plan are unfair and antisocial and will have negative effects on our salary, and our working and security rights instead of leading us out of the crisis.

The civil servants and the public services are again on the eye of the cyclone as they are to blame for the situation of the economy and the deficit.

The wealthy who got rich by exploiting the public sector, who built their companies and established their banks by exploiting the people and the security funds, and their followers  have found the culprits, that’s us, and want to sacrifice us for their own gain.

They are trying to convince the society that the cause of the crisis is the 1300 euros average salary that the civil servants receive, our pensions, and the public services and not the billions lost through tax evasion and the grey economy, the bank profits, the benefits of the elit, the sell-out of the public property and the scandals.

They are trying to freeze or even reduce our salaries.

For the fisrt time after the change-over our salary is threatened not only to be frozen but even to be reduced by more than 20%.

-The frugality will continue to exist not only in 2010 but also in the years to come. In 2009 our salaries stayed the same and this will continue in 2010.

 

 â€“Our field allowance is reduced by 10%. The thing is however, that the field allowance is 50% or even 60% of our total salary.

-The reduction of the salary for many categories of civil servants will continue through the abolition of the tax-exempt sums and the single tax bracket.

 

 -Increasing the indirect taxes and the new tax laws will decrease our salaries further.

-At the same time however, expensiveness and profiteering are a plague for the market.

Our security rights are put on Procruste’s bed

 

The social debate about security rights is aiming at changing its model from social to capitalistic. This way, the state and the employers are trying to escape their accountability for stealing the social funds.

-The situation at the Provident Society for Civil Servants is going from bad to worse. Its debt is more than 700 million euros. Because of that, the gratuity will take 3 to 4 years to be given.

-The Participial Fund and the other Funds are facing similar problems.

-Our medicaid is degraded even more. A lot of money is owed to chemists and doctors. The pharmaceutical organisation of Athens has already asked for a termination of contract with the public sector from 1/2/2010.

-There’s been a leak that the decision of the European Parliament will be accepted and thus, women will work more years.

Decreasing the number of employees at the public sector will have negative effects on the civil services and the working people.

The government, in order to reduce expenditure, have announced a decrease in the number of civil servants. At the same time, a new law has passed which will lead to many lay-offs of tens of thousands of employees.

Reducing the number of civil servants will have negative effects on the effectiveness of the public services and it will lead to the degradation and privatization of the public sector and the dialysis of the security funds.

Similar problems will arise due to privatization and the expenditure cuts of the civil services which will affect negatively the citizens and the workers.

The measures proposed will degrade our standard of living and won’t solve anything. On the contrary, recession, social injustice, unemployment and poverty rates will increase.

 

The civil servants respond to all this as one and are ready to fight.

 

We demand:

- Immediate state financing for the Provident Society for Civil Servants.

- Realistic salary raise, no salary or pension cuts.

- A new salary policy which will integrate allowances.

- A fair tax system-social justice.

- Cancellation of the decision taken by the E.U concerning the equalization of the working years for men and women.

- Abolition of all the anti-security laws.

 

-          Permanent employment for civil servants so as to cover all the needs.

WE STATE that:

We will not pay for their crisis.

The ones who should pay are the wealthy, the banks, the multinational companies, and the tax-defaulters.

WE DEMAND

 

by the government and the E.U to abandon this policy that subjects the working class and our society to the interests of  profiteers and the market.

WE DECLARE that:

 

We are determined to continue and escalate our struggle.

 

Tomorrow, we’ll recommend to ADEDY’s instruments realising a new 24hour strike on February 24^th.

 

By ADEDY

 

http://www.solidar.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=22838&la=1&langue=EN

Global Europe and Decent Work:

Program

Date: 18-19 November, 2009

Venue: European Parliament, Altiero Spinelli Building, Room A3G2

Interpretation: English, Spanish, French

Time	Session	Speakers
10:00-10:30	Press conference Chair: Conny Reuter, Secretary General, SOLIDAR	Victor Baez, Secretary General, Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) - TBC Kwasi Adu-Amamkwah, Secretary General, ITUC-Africa Kader Arif , MEP, S&D France Yannick Jadot, MEP, Greens/EFA, France
9.00-11.00	Registration and Coffee
11.00-11.30	Welcome	Welcome: Kader Arif , MEP, S&D France Conny Reuter, SOLIDAR
11:30-13:00	Global Europe and its impact on decent work Chair: Andrea Maksimovic, SOLIDAR	Global Europe: Non-tariff barriers – the new frontier?: David O’Sullivan, Director General, DG Trade, European Commission The bilateral agenda and regional integration: Victor Baez, Secretary General, TUCA/CSA Bolkenstein for the World: repercussions for European Workers: John Monks, Secretary General, European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) TBC The EU-India FTA and impact on informal economy workers: Namrata Bali, Self-Employed Women’s Association Q&A and discussion
13:00-14:30	Lunch break
14:30-16:00	Trade union responses to the FTA frenzy Chair: Juan Carlos Vargas, Director, PLADES, Peru	The Scramble for Africa: trade unions and Economic Partnership Agreements - Kwasi Adu-Amamkwah, Secretary General, ITUC-Africa The Colombia FTA: are human rights and trade mutually exclusive?: Guillermo Correa, Research Director - Escuela Nacional Sindical, Colombia The EU-ASEAN agreement and regional integration: Edwin Bustillos, Alliance of Progressive Labor Deputy Secretary-General. Q&A and discussion
16:00-17.30	The state of play at the WTO: What’s at stake for Decent Work and development Chair: Saliem Patel, Director, Labour Research Service	Developing countries and their interests: keeping the G77 together: Martin Khor, Executive Director, South Center - TBC The EU’s commitment to decent work and trade – Gabriel Zimmer, MEP, GUE, Germany NAMA and its impact on employment – Tony Salvador, Labour Education and Research Network, Philippines. Q&A and discussion
17:30-19.30	Fair trade reception	Hosted by Yannick Jadot, MEP, Greens/EFA, France
DAY 2
9.00-10.15	Labour chapters in trade agreements: what’s in it for the workers? Chair: Keith Sonnet, Deputy Secretary General, Unison, UK and Co-chair , Global Network	Citizen’s Trade Act, Lori Wallach, Director, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, US - TBC An assessment of the Sustainability Chapters in EU-Andean and Central American negotiations : Astrid Valencia, Directora Ejecutiva, Grupo de Monitoreo Independiente de El Salvador (GMIES) The EU trade mandate – enabling decent work? - Mr Alfredo BONET BAIGET, Secretary General for External Trade at the State Secretariat for Tourism, Spain, C133 Committee Q&A and discussion
10.15-11.45	Panel debate: Global Europe in a time of crisis – perspectives Chair: Paul Mason, Economics Editor, Newsnight, BBC	Jomo Kwame Sundaram, UN Assistant Secretary General for Economic and Social Affairs - TBC Catherine Ashton, Commissioner for Trade, EC - TBC Guy Ryder, Secretary General, International Trade Union Confederation Vital Moreira, MEP, S&D – Chairman – European Parliament International Trade Committee Marco Aurelio Garcia, Special Advisor on Foreign Relations to President Lula, Brazil - TBC Q&A and discussion
11.45 – 12.00	Closing remarks	Conny Reuter, Secretary General, SOLIDAR Sahra Ryklief, Secretary General, IFWEA

This event is organized with the assistance of the European Union under the project Globalising Decent Work. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the publisher and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.