The west should stop using the liberalisation of Muslim women to justify its strategy of dominance writes Soumaya Ghannoushi in the Guardian
It seems that Muslim women - particularly those living in western capitals- are destined to remain besieged by two debilitating discourses, which though different in appearance, are one in essence.
The first of these is conservative and exclusionist, sentencing Muslim women to a life of childbearing and rearing, lived out in the narrow confines of their homes at the mercy of fathers, brothers, and husbands. Revolving around notions of sexual purity and family honour, it appeals to religion for justification and legitimisation.
The other is a "liberation" discourse that vows to break Muslim woman's bondage and free her of the oppressive yoke of an aggressive, patriarchical, and backward society. She is a mass of powerlessness and enslavement; the embodiment of seclusion, silence, and invisibility. Her only hope of deliverance from the cave of veiling and isolation lies in the benevolent intervention of this force of emancipation. It will save her from her hellishly miserable and bleak existence, to the promised heaven of enlightenment and progress.
It is a game of binaries that pits one stereotype against another: the wretched caged female Muslim victim and her ruthless jailer society against an idealised "west" that is the epitome of enlightenment, rationalism, and freedom. Those escapees who leave the herd are held up as living testimonies to the arduousness of transition from the twilights of tribe, religion and tradition, to the dawn of reason, individualism, and liberation. There is no denying the manifold injustices that cripple the lives of many Muslim women and stunt their potential. But these appear in this condescending liberation narrative as representative of the condition of the millions of Muslim women around the world and exclusive to them. There are no colours, tones, or shades here. There are no living real women, urban or rural, educated or illiterate, affluent or poor, Turkish, Malaysian, or Egyptian - differences so crucial in defining women's life chances and shaping their situations. All we know about this ghostly creature is her Muslim identity, as though she was entirely shaped and affected by religion and theology irrespective of social background, economic circumstances, political reality, or regional and local cultural traditions. Important as it is, legal and theological reform will on its own do little to improve the lot of impoverished, uneducated, or insecure women in Somalia, Iraq, or rural Bangladesh. The narrative revolves around a dehistoricised, universal "Muslim woman"; a crushing model that oppresses flesh and blood Muslim women, denies them subjectivity and singularity, and claims to sum up their lives with all their vicissitudes and details from cradle to coffin. It reserves for itself the right to speak for them exclusively, whether they like it or not.Representations of the Muslim woman serve a dual legitimising function, at once confirming and justifying the west's narrative of itself, and of the Muslim other. The victimised Muslim woman is the lens through which Islam and Muslim society are seen. In medieval times she was cast as an intimidating powerful queen or termagant (like Bramimonde in the Chanson de Roland, or Belacane in Parzival) reflecting an intimidating powerful Muslim civilisation. And when the power balance began to shift in Europe's favour in the 17th and 18th centuries, she was made to mirror her society's fallen fortunes. She turned into a harem slave, leading little more than a dumb animal existence, subjugated, inert, abject, powerless, and invisible. She is the quintessential embodiment of a despotic, deformed, and backward Islam.
It is Europe, later the west, that must penetrate her iron cage and break her shackles. It must save the victim and civilise her oppressors. The more victimised "the Muslim woman", the greater the need for the liberated west to liberate her. The noble intervention is for her and in her interest, not for the west, or its interests. It was indeed no coincidence that a great many colonial officers and archivists devotedly recorded instances of barbarity among the colonised, practices like sati, the ban on widow marriage, or the practice of child marriage in India, or slavery and genital mutilation in Africa. Although these atrocities were not inventions, their chronicling had and still has a purpose: It provides the moral framework for intervention.As a couplet by Torquato Tasso puts it,And when her city and her state was lost,Then her person lov'd and honor'd most.But "love" and "honour" haven't exactly been the experience of Iraqi women when their cities fell under American occupation. Rights which took decades to secure have crumbled away in the space of months. From doctors, scientists, engineers or businesswomen, today they find themselves incarcerated in their homes unable to move around for fear of being kidnapped, raped, or assassinated. Those who escape the bombs and bullets of the occupying army, die at the hands of the Iraqi security forces and out of control extremist and sectarian militias which flourished since 2003, as Maggie O'Kane demonstrated in her moving piece on Cif yesterday. In the past three months 45 innocent women were murdered in cold blood in Basra. The truth is that just as there is a military machine of hegemony, there is a discursive machine of hegemony. When armies move on the ground to conquer and subjugate, they need moral and ideological cover. It is this that gives the dominant narrative of the "Muslim woman" its raison d'etre. No wonder then that the "Muslim woman" liberation warriors, the likes of Nick Cohen, Christopher Hitchens, and Pascal Bruckner, were the same people who cheered American/ British troops as they blasted their way through Kabul and Baghdad, and who will no doubt cheer and dance once more should Iran or Syria be bombed next. Soldiers shoot with their guns; they with their pens. They are hegemony's apologists. Without them the emperor stands naked.
Tuesday, 18 December 2007
Thursday, 13 December 2007
Unite Challenges M&S on Migrant Workers
This organisation and defence of migrant workers is a great example of progressive leadership, taclking racism and pushing forward labour organisation. - Ed.
· Retailer investigating conditions at meat plant
· Unite says Poles given 'zero hours' contracts
News Story by Matthew Taylor, Thursday December 13, The Guardian
Migrant workers at a factory which supplies meat to Marks & Spencer are suffering exploitation in a drive to maximise profits, a union report claims today.
M&S, which yesterday announced that sales of its organic turkeys are likely to top the £1m mark this Christmas, is considered to be one of the most ethical of leading high street retailers. However, a study published by the union Unite says that Polish staff at a factory in south Wales which supplies M&S with red meat are employed on a "zero hours" contract with no guaranteed number of hours, and suffer "harsh and divisive" conditions.Last night, an M&S spokeswoman said it had launched an investigation and was taking the allegations seriously.
The report, which focuses on the Dawn Pac meat factory near Llanelli, says staff employed by a local agency claimed that shifts were regularly abandoned at short notice, leaving workers stranded at the factory, sometimes in the middle of the night, because transport was only provided at the normal end of a shift. Some workers had to walk up to 15 miles to get home after being told by supervisors they were no longer needed halfway through a shift. In addition, those who opted out of agency accommodation and transport had their hours cut, it was claimed.
"We are creating a situation in local communities where work has become so insecure and casualised it evokes images of the casualisation of the docks before they were unionised," said Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Unite. "M&S prides itself on its image as an ethical retailer. We want them to practise what they preach."
When the Guardian visited the south Wales site, five Polish workers said they had turned up that day and had been told they were not needed after an hour's work. "I came to work at 8am this morning and I was sent home at 9am," said Maria. "There was no car, no transport back, so I was stuck there and I have now been told that I have three days off this week."
Staff, who receive £5.52 an hour, said their hours were cut when they stopped using agency accommodation or the minibus to and from the factory, which costs £7 a day. Jeff Hopkins, chair of the Welsh-Polish Association in Llanelli, said that when workers stopped using the full range of services laid on by local employment agency CSA Recruitment they became "less productive economic units...so they knock their hours down". According to Unite, CSA Recruitment charges around £250 to bring Poles to the UK. They sign a zero-hours deal when they arrive in the UK after a 36-hour coach journey.
Woodley said: "This is not just about one site or one agency. Our campaign is about the prevalence of agency working, and the consequences for workers and communities." Yesterday both Dawn Pac and CSA Recruitment declined to comment on the report's allegations.
· Retailer investigating conditions at meat plant
· Unite says Poles given 'zero hours' contracts
News Story by Matthew Taylor, Thursday December 13, The Guardian
Migrant workers at a factory which supplies meat to Marks & Spencer are suffering exploitation in a drive to maximise profits, a union report claims today.
M&S, which yesterday announced that sales of its organic turkeys are likely to top the £1m mark this Christmas, is considered to be one of the most ethical of leading high street retailers. However, a study published by the union Unite says that Polish staff at a factory in south Wales which supplies M&S with red meat are employed on a "zero hours" contract with no guaranteed number of hours, and suffer "harsh and divisive" conditions.Last night, an M&S spokeswoman said it had launched an investigation and was taking the allegations seriously.
The report, which focuses on the Dawn Pac meat factory near Llanelli, says staff employed by a local agency claimed that shifts were regularly abandoned at short notice, leaving workers stranded at the factory, sometimes in the middle of the night, because transport was only provided at the normal end of a shift. Some workers had to walk up to 15 miles to get home after being told by supervisors they were no longer needed halfway through a shift. In addition, those who opted out of agency accommodation and transport had their hours cut, it was claimed.
"We are creating a situation in local communities where work has become so insecure and casualised it evokes images of the casualisation of the docks before they were unionised," said Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Unite. "M&S prides itself on its image as an ethical retailer. We want them to practise what they preach."
When the Guardian visited the south Wales site, five Polish workers said they had turned up that day and had been told they were not needed after an hour's work. "I came to work at 8am this morning and I was sent home at 9am," said Maria. "There was no car, no transport back, so I was stuck there and I have now been told that I have three days off this week."
Staff, who receive £5.52 an hour, said their hours were cut when they stopped using agency accommodation or the minibus to and from the factory, which costs £7 a day. Jeff Hopkins, chair of the Welsh-Polish Association in Llanelli, said that when workers stopped using the full range of services laid on by local employment agency CSA Recruitment they became "less productive economic units...so they knock their hours down". According to Unite, CSA Recruitment charges around £250 to bring Poles to the UK. They sign a zero-hours deal when they arrive in the UK after a 36-hour coach journey.
Woodley said: "This is not just about one site or one agency. Our campaign is about the prevalence of agency working, and the consequences for workers and communities." Yesterday both Dawn Pac and CSA Recruitment declined to comment on the report's allegations.
This crisis spells the end of the free market consensus - S.Milne
The credit squeeze is set to trigger the end of the boom that has shaped our times. Politics is going to change with it, writes Seumas Milne (Thursday December 13, The Guardian.)
New Labour has led a charmed economic life for the past decade. Britain's ejection from the European exchange rate mechanism in the early 1990s and a unique set of international conditions helped deliver a record that earlier generations of British politicians could only have fantasised about. Whatever other disasters and scandals they could be held responsible for, the economy was always Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's secret weapon: the "longest period of sustained economic growth since records began", low inflation, rapid job creation and a strong boost to public spending, all at the same time. The fact that it has also been a story of rising inequality, stubborn unemployment and ballooning levels of debt - and has depended on the international financial system's toleration of a huge trade deficit to sustain it - has until now barely shifted the perception of economic success. That has been the crucial backdrop to the me-too politics of recent years and the free market consensus that underpins it. It is also, of course, the record that finally propelled Brown into 10 Downing Street.
But there can now be no doubt that such halcyon days are coming to an end. What kicked off in the US earlier this year, in the shape of the sub-prime mortgage lending crisis, has now spread like gangrene across a deregulated global financial system, imposing a vice-like squeeze on the very credit cushion that has hitherto kept the US and British economies afloat. In Britain, it has already led to the collapse of Northern Rock and the first run on a British bank since the Victorian era. But the impact will certainly go much further, particularly in an economy so lop-sidedly dominated by the financial sector. Already, the house price collapse and prospect of mass repossessions is tipping the US economy towards full-blown recession. In Britain, which now has the highest level of personal debt of any industrial country - at £1.4 trillion, larger than national income - the expectation must be that the economy is heading in the same direction. As the full impact of the credit crunch makes itself felt, the house price bubble is bound to deflate further. That in turn will cut demand, bringing with it a painful economic slowdown at the very least.
The central banks have, of course, been busy cutting interest rates and pumping cash into the system to try to achieve the kind of soft landing that saw them through earlier international financial crises, in 1998 and 2001. Yesterday's coordinated announcement of billions in new loans to banks shows both how ineffective those earlier interventions have been and how serious the situation has become. But there are good reasons to believe that even this latest move is likely to prove too little, too late, to turn back the incoming tide. And for the first time since the 1970s, there is a growing risk of stagflation - the combination of recession and rising inflation - which makes sharp interest rate cuts particularly risky from the point of view of neoliberal orthodoxy. International oil, commodity and food prices are all currently on the rise, just at the point when the credit squeeze and emerging first-world debt crisis show all the signs of bringing the boom of the past 15 years to a juddering halt.
That long boom was made possible by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of China (and to a lesser extent India) in the 1990s. The effect was to bring hundreds of millions of educated and low-waged workers into the framework of the international capitalist market - who, as the former US Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan put it, have "restrained the rise of unit labour costs in much of the world". Along with the wider weakening of organised labour, the deregulated expansion of international finance and a flood of cheap imports into the rest of the world, the result has been a corporate profits bonanza and power grab which has shaped the economic and political temper of our times.
The signs are, however, that some of these conditions are reaching their limits. Global growth is starting to press on natural resources, forcing up prices, most obviously in the case of oil. The evidence is growing that China's downward pressure on global prices may be coming to an end, as its economy overheats and inflation builds. Add to that the dizzying overreach of the credit-fuelled casino that is the global financial system and the "corrections of imbalances" - as sharp falls in living standards and unemployment spikes are classified in the financial institutions and ministries - are likely to be very damaging indeed.
What is certain is that the end of the long boom will have a profound ideological impact. So long as market fundamentalists appeared to be delivering the goods - however unequally and insecurely - their political dominance was assured. That is now clearly no longer the case. As Martin Wolf, conservative doyen of British economic commentators, wrote in yesterday's Financial Times: "What is happening in credit markets today is a huge blow to the credibility of the Anglo-Saxon model of transactions-orientated financial capitalism." If the credit squeeze does indeed trigger a wider economic meltdown, that will certainly mean the end of the neoliberal consensus that has dominated politics for almost a generation.
But politicians have yet to wake up to the sea-change that is already under way. It's a measure of how tight the ideological straitjacket on British politics remains that it has been left to the acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable, to press the commonsense case for the nationalisation of Northern Rock, while Labour ministers take any amount of punishment over the scandal to avoid so much as a hint that they might believe a private solution to be anything other than preferable in all circumstances, even in such a classic case of market failure. If, as now seems increasingly likely, the government is in fact forced to nationalise the bank to secure its own loans, that will at least help break the ludicrous ideological spell against public ownership.
For Brown, the man who promised the end of boom and bust, the growing economic dangers pose an unavoidable challenge. For someone so closely associated with the neoliberal agenda, it may be too late to change direction. But unless he and his already damaged government are prepared to adopt a more interventionist and radical approach to deal with the crisis head-on, the political backwash is likely to sink them all.
s.milne@guardian.co.uk
New Labour has led a charmed economic life for the past decade. Britain's ejection from the European exchange rate mechanism in the early 1990s and a unique set of international conditions helped deliver a record that earlier generations of British politicians could only have fantasised about. Whatever other disasters and scandals they could be held responsible for, the economy was always Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's secret weapon: the "longest period of sustained economic growth since records began", low inflation, rapid job creation and a strong boost to public spending, all at the same time. The fact that it has also been a story of rising inequality, stubborn unemployment and ballooning levels of debt - and has depended on the international financial system's toleration of a huge trade deficit to sustain it - has until now barely shifted the perception of economic success. That has been the crucial backdrop to the me-too politics of recent years and the free market consensus that underpins it. It is also, of course, the record that finally propelled Brown into 10 Downing Street.
But there can now be no doubt that such halcyon days are coming to an end. What kicked off in the US earlier this year, in the shape of the sub-prime mortgage lending crisis, has now spread like gangrene across a deregulated global financial system, imposing a vice-like squeeze on the very credit cushion that has hitherto kept the US and British economies afloat. In Britain, it has already led to the collapse of Northern Rock and the first run on a British bank since the Victorian era. But the impact will certainly go much further, particularly in an economy so lop-sidedly dominated by the financial sector. Already, the house price collapse and prospect of mass repossessions is tipping the US economy towards full-blown recession. In Britain, which now has the highest level of personal debt of any industrial country - at £1.4 trillion, larger than national income - the expectation must be that the economy is heading in the same direction. As the full impact of the credit crunch makes itself felt, the house price bubble is bound to deflate further. That in turn will cut demand, bringing with it a painful economic slowdown at the very least.
The central banks have, of course, been busy cutting interest rates and pumping cash into the system to try to achieve the kind of soft landing that saw them through earlier international financial crises, in 1998 and 2001. Yesterday's coordinated announcement of billions in new loans to banks shows both how ineffective those earlier interventions have been and how serious the situation has become. But there are good reasons to believe that even this latest move is likely to prove too little, too late, to turn back the incoming tide. And for the first time since the 1970s, there is a growing risk of stagflation - the combination of recession and rising inflation - which makes sharp interest rate cuts particularly risky from the point of view of neoliberal orthodoxy. International oil, commodity and food prices are all currently on the rise, just at the point when the credit squeeze and emerging first-world debt crisis show all the signs of bringing the boom of the past 15 years to a juddering halt.
That long boom was made possible by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of China (and to a lesser extent India) in the 1990s. The effect was to bring hundreds of millions of educated and low-waged workers into the framework of the international capitalist market - who, as the former US Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan put it, have "restrained the rise of unit labour costs in much of the world". Along with the wider weakening of organised labour, the deregulated expansion of international finance and a flood of cheap imports into the rest of the world, the result has been a corporate profits bonanza and power grab which has shaped the economic and political temper of our times.
The signs are, however, that some of these conditions are reaching their limits. Global growth is starting to press on natural resources, forcing up prices, most obviously in the case of oil. The evidence is growing that China's downward pressure on global prices may be coming to an end, as its economy overheats and inflation builds. Add to that the dizzying overreach of the credit-fuelled casino that is the global financial system and the "corrections of imbalances" - as sharp falls in living standards and unemployment spikes are classified in the financial institutions and ministries - are likely to be very damaging indeed.
What is certain is that the end of the long boom will have a profound ideological impact. So long as market fundamentalists appeared to be delivering the goods - however unequally and insecurely - their political dominance was assured. That is now clearly no longer the case. As Martin Wolf, conservative doyen of British economic commentators, wrote in yesterday's Financial Times: "What is happening in credit markets today is a huge blow to the credibility of the Anglo-Saxon model of transactions-orientated financial capitalism." If the credit squeeze does indeed trigger a wider economic meltdown, that will certainly mean the end of the neoliberal consensus that has dominated politics for almost a generation.
But politicians have yet to wake up to the sea-change that is already under way. It's a measure of how tight the ideological straitjacket on British politics remains that it has been left to the acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable, to press the commonsense case for the nationalisation of Northern Rock, while Labour ministers take any amount of punishment over the scandal to avoid so much as a hint that they might believe a private solution to be anything other than preferable in all circumstances, even in such a classic case of market failure. If, as now seems increasingly likely, the government is in fact forced to nationalise the bank to secure its own loans, that will at least help break the ludicrous ideological spell against public ownership.
For Brown, the man who promised the end of boom and bust, the growing economic dangers pose an unavoidable challenge. For someone so closely associated with the neoliberal agenda, it may be too late to change direction. But unless he and his already damaged government are prepared to adopt a more interventionist and radical approach to deal with the crisis head-on, the political backwash is likely to sink them all.
s.milne@guardian.co.uk
Ecuador Assembly Enters New Stage
Montecristi, Ecuador, Dec 12 (Prensa Latina)
The Ecuadorian Constituent Assembly enters a new phase Wednesday with the creation of ten Assembly tables, now that its internal regulations have been approved, Assembly Vice President Fernando Cordero highlighted.
He indicated the statutes endorsed Tuesday confirm the entity's full powers, which, he clarified, will not be used as an open check.
Regarding that, Cordero defended the Assembly's faculty to discuss governmental laws and reforms, which would enter into force once approved by the majority of the 130 members.
This Constituent Assembly is not a replica of the previous one in 1998, and the set of rules is highly democratic, because it includes the possibility of appealing to the Assembly presidency, and was debated article by article in six extensive sessions.
The document, whose official version has not been published, does not limit conduct, expressions, or attitudes, and it is unifying mechanism, Cordero asserted.
The Ecuadorian Constituent Assembly enters a new phase Wednesday with the creation of ten Assembly tables, now that its internal regulations have been approved, Assembly Vice President Fernando Cordero highlighted.
He indicated the statutes endorsed Tuesday confirm the entity's full powers, which, he clarified, will not be used as an open check.
Regarding that, Cordero defended the Assembly's faculty to discuss governmental laws and reforms, which would enter into force once approved by the majority of the 130 members.
This Constituent Assembly is not a replica of the previous one in 1998, and the set of rules is highly democratic, because it includes the possibility of appealing to the Assembly presidency, and was debated article by article in six extensive sessions.
The document, whose official version has not been published, does not limit conduct, expressions, or attitudes, and it is unifying mechanism, Cordero asserted.
Fate of Bolivia Uncertain
La Paz, Dec 12 (Prensa Latina)
Bolivia"s governing party and opposition are once again measuring their strength Wednesday, leading the nation to a dangerous path with an uncertain ending.
On the one hand, the government defends its democratic process of social change, and on the other, traditional parties cling to their inherited privileges, and act with violence and despair.
A popular celebration for the recently approved constitutional proposal, and the implementation of de facto autonomies in several departments have been scheduled for the weekend..
In views of imminent confrontations and the spiral of violence pounding the country for weeks, President Evo Morales has repeatedly called for dialogue to solve national problems.
ó I call for authorities and legally elected departmental leaders to work together in regards with the new Constitution, the autonomy law, and autonomic statute, ó Morales said in a message to the nation.
The constitutional text is rejected by mayors Ruben Costas (Santa Cruz), Mario Cossio (Tarija), Leopoldo Fernandez (Pando), Ernesto Suarez (Beni), and Manfred Reyes (Cochabamba), who announced the implementation of de facto autonomies.
The president announced such actions attempt against national unity, are unlawful, unconstitutional, and separatist, and rejected them, but recognized the right of some sectors to protest.
But opposition groups refuse to solve the differences and continue with force and other measures including an eight-day hunger strike widely covered by the media but hardly recognized by the people.
Bolivia"s governing party and opposition are once again measuring their strength Wednesday, leading the nation to a dangerous path with an uncertain ending.
On the one hand, the government defends its democratic process of social change, and on the other, traditional parties cling to their inherited privileges, and act with violence and despair.
A popular celebration for the recently approved constitutional proposal, and the implementation of de facto autonomies in several departments have been scheduled for the weekend..
In views of imminent confrontations and the spiral of violence pounding the country for weeks, President Evo Morales has repeatedly called for dialogue to solve national problems.
ó I call for authorities and legally elected departmental leaders to work together in regards with the new Constitution, the autonomy law, and autonomic statute, ó Morales said in a message to the nation.
The constitutional text is rejected by mayors Ruben Costas (Santa Cruz), Mario Cossio (Tarija), Leopoldo Fernandez (Pando), Ernesto Suarez (Beni), and Manfred Reyes (Cochabamba), who announced the implementation of de facto autonomies.
The president announced such actions attempt against national unity, are unlawful, unconstitutional, and separatist, and rejected them, but recognized the right of some sectors to protest.
But opposition groups refuse to solve the differences and continue with force and other measures including an eight-day hunger strike widely covered by the media but hardly recognized by the people.
Tuesday, 11 December 2007
Green Left Weekly - Stalemate to be resolved in Bolivia?
By Rachel Evans, December 8, 2007 - reproduced here for information.
Bolivia’s indigenous, left-wing President Evo Morales has announced plans to hold a referendum on whether or not he will continue in office, according to a December 5 New York Times article. The aim is to overcome the stalemate the country has faced between the right-wing elite — opposed to the process of change pushed by Morales — and the poor and indigenous majority that put Morales in power. The vice president and nine state governors will also a vote on continuing in office.
The reasons for this move are easy to understand. Bolivia is in upheaval. Events that began on November 19, with violent right-wing protests in Sucre, could mark a decisive step in the countries battle for justice for the indigenous majority and for social-justice orientated industrialisation to overcome poverty and the crippling effects of underdevelopment. It was to achieve these aims that Morales was elected in December 2005. He has since implemented the demand of Bolivia’s powerful social movements for a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution according to these principles.On November 24 it was decided to move the assembly, meeting in Sucre, to military barracks on the outskirts of the city in an attempt to escape the wave of violence already washing over the city — which saw the brutal eviction of 300 campesinos (peasants), who had arrived in Sucre to help physically defend the assembly, from their sleeping quarters. The move sparked further violent protests.In an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the assembly, right-wing opposition delegates had already walked out, declaring the process had become “illegal”. On November 23 — free of the stalling tactics of the opposition that has seen the assembly miss its one-year deadline for a new constitution in August — 139 of the 255 assembly delegates approved the broad outlines for a new draft constitution. The assembly is yet to adopt the specific clauses and content of the constitution. Once completed, the proposed constitution will be put to voters in a referendum.The fight to pass constitutional changes has been an important step in Bolivia’s indigenous-led struggle against the devastating affects of neoliberalism on the country.Bolivia’s struggle to rise up against decades of subservience to a rich local oligarchy and foreign (largely US and Spanish) interests led to Morales’s presidential victory in December 2005. From the late 1990s onwards, Morales helped lead the cocaleros (coca growers) in a campaign against the US-pushed eradication of the coca leaf — which can be processed into cocaine, but in its natural form is nothing more than a mild stimulant used by indigenous people for centuries and a key source of livelihood to thousands of cocaleros.In 2000, Morales helped lead the successful fight against the privitisation of water, the Bolivian poor taking on US corporation Bechtel and winning. Morales also helped lead the uprisings against the privatisation of gas, with nationalisation of Bolivia’s gas reserves a key plank of his election program .In 2003, 67% of Bolivians lived in poverty, with only 64% of households equipped with electricity, and only 31% having sewerage access. Just days after his election, Morales explained to an “In Defence of Humanity” conference the aims of the mass movement he headed: “This uprising of the Bolivian people has been not only about gas and hydrocarbons, but an intersection of many issues: discrimination, marginalisation, and most importantly, the failure of neoliberalism.”On May 1, 2006, Bolivia nationalised natural gas reserves, with the state to receive 82% of the revenue, which corporations previously took for themselves. Morales has increased Bolivia’s annual natural gas revenues from US$300 million to $2 billion a year. The Morales government has nationalised a tin smelter, most of Bolivia’s largest tin mine and the country’s railroads. Government officials have suggested they intend to move to nationalise electricity utilities.In 2006 the government completed the re-nationalisation of water companies, and is negotiating the re-nationalisation of the country’s main telecommunications company. Morales has instituted a retirement pension to all eligible Bolivians equal to the minimum wage. He increased teachers’ salaries by 10% and reduced parliamentary salaries by 50%.With proceeds from gas nationalisation (and with significant help from Cuba and Venezuela) Bolivia now has 20 new hospitals, 2000 Cuban doctors providing free health care, and the beginnings of a land reform program that is redistributing land to landless campesinos as well as tractors to assist in working it. Bolivia has embarked on a literacy campaign which has seen 73,000 out of 300,000 participants already graduated.However, the Morales government has faced its biggest challenge in the constituent assembly. The right-wing elite, backed by a savage and racist propaganda campaign in the private media, succeeded in stalling one of the key components of the process of change promoted by Morales and demanded by the poor. There have been often violent mobilisations for and against the assembly process, raising fears the country was slipping towards a civil war.The decision to push ahead with the assembly in the face of the violent campaign on the streets, fuelled by racist propaganda in the media, is a sign that the Morales government is looking to break the stalemate that Bolivia has been in for much of the year, with neither the forces tied to the oligarchy nor the popular movement headed by Morales able to enforce its will on the nation. By turning to the people with the planned referendums, Morales is attempting to re-legitimise his government and its radical project. In a country where the private media remains powerful, and the forces opposed to change have a significant social base in the largely white middle class, it is a risky move, but perhaps unavoidable. The future of Bolivia hangs in the balance.
Bolivia’s indigenous, left-wing President Evo Morales has announced plans to hold a referendum on whether or not he will continue in office, according to a December 5 New York Times article. The aim is to overcome the stalemate the country has faced between the right-wing elite — opposed to the process of change pushed by Morales — and the poor and indigenous majority that put Morales in power. The vice president and nine state governors will also a vote on continuing in office.
The reasons for this move are easy to understand. Bolivia is in upheaval. Events that began on November 19, with violent right-wing protests in Sucre, could mark a decisive step in the countries battle for justice for the indigenous majority and for social-justice orientated industrialisation to overcome poverty and the crippling effects of underdevelopment. It was to achieve these aims that Morales was elected in December 2005. He has since implemented the demand of Bolivia’s powerful social movements for a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution according to these principles.On November 24 it was decided to move the assembly, meeting in Sucre, to military barracks on the outskirts of the city in an attempt to escape the wave of violence already washing over the city — which saw the brutal eviction of 300 campesinos (peasants), who had arrived in Sucre to help physically defend the assembly, from their sleeping quarters. The move sparked further violent protests.In an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the assembly, right-wing opposition delegates had already walked out, declaring the process had become “illegal”. On November 23 — free of the stalling tactics of the opposition that has seen the assembly miss its one-year deadline for a new constitution in August — 139 of the 255 assembly delegates approved the broad outlines for a new draft constitution. The assembly is yet to adopt the specific clauses and content of the constitution. Once completed, the proposed constitution will be put to voters in a referendum.The fight to pass constitutional changes has been an important step in Bolivia’s indigenous-led struggle against the devastating affects of neoliberalism on the country.Bolivia’s struggle to rise up against decades of subservience to a rich local oligarchy and foreign (largely US and Spanish) interests led to Morales’s presidential victory in December 2005. From the late 1990s onwards, Morales helped lead the cocaleros (coca growers) in a campaign against the US-pushed eradication of the coca leaf — which can be processed into cocaine, but in its natural form is nothing more than a mild stimulant used by indigenous people for centuries and a key source of livelihood to thousands of cocaleros.In 2000, Morales helped lead the successful fight against the privitisation of water, the Bolivian poor taking on US corporation Bechtel and winning. Morales also helped lead the uprisings against the privatisation of gas, with nationalisation of Bolivia’s gas reserves a key plank of his election program .In 2003, 67% of Bolivians lived in poverty, with only 64% of households equipped with electricity, and only 31% having sewerage access. Just days after his election, Morales explained to an “In Defence of Humanity” conference the aims of the mass movement he headed: “This uprising of the Bolivian people has been not only about gas and hydrocarbons, but an intersection of many issues: discrimination, marginalisation, and most importantly, the failure of neoliberalism.”On May 1, 2006, Bolivia nationalised natural gas reserves, with the state to receive 82% of the revenue, which corporations previously took for themselves. Morales has increased Bolivia’s annual natural gas revenues from US$300 million to $2 billion a year. The Morales government has nationalised a tin smelter, most of Bolivia’s largest tin mine and the country’s railroads. Government officials have suggested they intend to move to nationalise electricity utilities.In 2006 the government completed the re-nationalisation of water companies, and is negotiating the re-nationalisation of the country’s main telecommunications company. Morales has instituted a retirement pension to all eligible Bolivians equal to the minimum wage. He increased teachers’ salaries by 10% and reduced parliamentary salaries by 50%.With proceeds from gas nationalisation (and with significant help from Cuba and Venezuela) Bolivia now has 20 new hospitals, 2000 Cuban doctors providing free health care, and the beginnings of a land reform program that is redistributing land to landless campesinos as well as tractors to assist in working it. Bolivia has embarked on a literacy campaign which has seen 73,000 out of 300,000 participants already graduated.However, the Morales government has faced its biggest challenge in the constituent assembly. The right-wing elite, backed by a savage and racist propaganda campaign in the private media, succeeded in stalling one of the key components of the process of change promoted by Morales and demanded by the poor. There have been often violent mobilisations for and against the assembly process, raising fears the country was slipping towards a civil war.The decision to push ahead with the assembly in the face of the violent campaign on the streets, fuelled by racist propaganda in the media, is a sign that the Morales government is looking to break the stalemate that Bolivia has been in for much of the year, with neither the forces tied to the oligarchy nor the popular movement headed by Morales able to enforce its will on the nation. By turning to the people with the planned referendums, Morales is attempting to re-legitimise his government and its radical project. In a country where the private media remains powerful, and the forces opposed to change have a significant social base in the largely white middle class, it is a risky move, but perhaps unavoidable. The future of Bolivia hangs in the balance.
For information - Solidarity Appeal with People, Government, Communist & Progressive Forces of Bolivia
Thanks to SolidNet for sending this to us - Ed
The political process in Bolivia faces a critical moment.
The reactionary forces, the oligarchy, the US government and some European forces promote a large scale campaign aiming to reverse the progressive processes in this Latin American country.
The goal of all these forces is to block the changes promoted by the Constitutional Assembly for a democratic Constitution for the benefit of the popular demands.
The retrograde forces, defeated on October 2003 and during the elections in 2005 try again to reorganize their ranks, to stop any change and to undermine President Evo Morales.
In order to achieve their goals they use any means, including armed groups.
The consequent progressive forces of the country, the social movements and organizations, after great and heroical battles, alongside with the Moviemento al Socialismo [MAS] under the presidency of Evo Morales, were the winners with big majority in the elections.
Now these forces try to valorize this victory in order important demands of the working people to be adopted and further promoted.
We, the signatories of this appeal, sharply denounce the support provided by the US government as well as its direct involvement in the subversive actions in Bolivia.
We also denounce the scandalous tolerance showed by other imperialist states and international organizations towards such inadmissible actions.
There is an urgent task the reactionary forces to be unequivocally condemned, isolated and defeated both on national and international level.
We stand on the side of the people of Bolivia and fully support the great mobilizations against the plans for a coup d'etat.
We support the alliance between the people and the government of Bolivia against the machinations of the oligarchy.
We express our full solidarity to the Bolivian people, to the government of the President Evo Morales, to the Communist Party of Bolivia, to MAS-IRSP and to all other progressive and anti-imperialist forces and movements in their great battle in defense of the progressive gains, in the struggle for deeper changes.
We call on for the development by all means of a large solidarity movement with the anti-imperialist forces and the people of Bolivia.
The parties
PADS, Algeria
Communist Party of Argentina
Democratic Progressive Tribune - Bahrain
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers’ Party of Belgium
Communist Party of Bolivia
Communist Party of Brazil
Communist Party of Britain
New Communist Party of Britain
Party of the Bulgarian Communists
Communist Party of Chile
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia & Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Egypt
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Greece
Communist Party of India
Tudeh Party of Iran
Communist Party of Ireland
The Workers Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists
Jordanian Communist Party
Socialist Party of Latvia
Lebanese Communist Party
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Communist Party of Macedonia
Party of Communists, Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
New Communist Party of Netherlands
Communist Party of Norway
Peruvian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Socialist Alliance Party, Romania
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sri Lanka
Sudanese Communist Party
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Turkey (TKP)
Communist Party of Uruguay
Communist Party, USA
Communist Party of Venezuela
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
The political process in Bolivia faces a critical moment.
The reactionary forces, the oligarchy, the US government and some European forces promote a large scale campaign aiming to reverse the progressive processes in this Latin American country.
The goal of all these forces is to block the changes promoted by the Constitutional Assembly for a democratic Constitution for the benefit of the popular demands.
The retrograde forces, defeated on October 2003 and during the elections in 2005 try again to reorganize their ranks, to stop any change and to undermine President Evo Morales.
In order to achieve their goals they use any means, including armed groups.
The consequent progressive forces of the country, the social movements and organizations, after great and heroical battles, alongside with the Moviemento al Socialismo [MAS] under the presidency of Evo Morales, were the winners with big majority in the elections.
Now these forces try to valorize this victory in order important demands of the working people to be adopted and further promoted.
We, the signatories of this appeal, sharply denounce the support provided by the US government as well as its direct involvement in the subversive actions in Bolivia.
We also denounce the scandalous tolerance showed by other imperialist states and international organizations towards such inadmissible actions.
There is an urgent task the reactionary forces to be unequivocally condemned, isolated and defeated both on national and international level.
We stand on the side of the people of Bolivia and fully support the great mobilizations against the plans for a coup d'etat.
We support the alliance between the people and the government of Bolivia against the machinations of the oligarchy.
We express our full solidarity to the Bolivian people, to the government of the President Evo Morales, to the Communist Party of Bolivia, to MAS-IRSP and to all other progressive and anti-imperialist forces and movements in their great battle in defense of the progressive gains, in the struggle for deeper changes.
We call on for the development by all means of a large solidarity movement with the anti-imperialist forces and the people of Bolivia.
The parties
PADS, Algeria
Communist Party of Argentina
Democratic Progressive Tribune - Bahrain
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers’ Party of Belgium
Communist Party of Bolivia
Communist Party of Brazil
Communist Party of Britain
New Communist Party of Britain
Party of the Bulgarian Communists
Communist Party of Chile
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia & Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Egypt
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Greece
Communist Party of India
Tudeh Party of Iran
Communist Party of Ireland
The Workers Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists
Jordanian Communist Party
Socialist Party of Latvia
Lebanese Communist Party
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Communist Party of Macedonia
Party of Communists, Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
New Communist Party of Netherlands
Communist Party of Norway
Peruvian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Socialist Alliance Party, Romania
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sri Lanka
Sudanese Communist Party
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Turkey (TKP)
Communist Party of Uruguay
Communist Party, USA
Communist Party of Venezuela
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)