The death of Ibrahima: A systemic tragedy

Pubblicato Gennaio 20th, 2021 di Angelo Radmüller & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English).

On  9 January 2021, a 23 year old named Ibrahima died in police custody after he filmed a corona control near the Brussels North station. Reports indicate that he was not drugged, as was initially indicated or hinted to by the police, playing with prevalent stereotypes in disgrace of the victim’s dignity. Neither is there certainty about whether he was beaten. The autopsy result indicates heart failure as a cause of death. This event and the neighbourhood in which it took place are culmination points of the tragedy that we collectively are going through.

East of the North station, Schaerbeek borders Saint Josse-ten-Noode, the poorest commune in Brussels. The street next to the station features a red light district, while one street further features a bazaar that sells almost anything from workshops in northern Africa and around the globe. West of the North station, there are skyscrapers with headquarters of banks, telcos and energy providers. But one of the World Trade Center buildings also houses the general directorate of Belgium’s foreigner’s office, and nearby Parc Maximilian was until shortly the site of a refugee camp that was regularly evicted.

Here when a banker in a suit walks by a homeless refugee at North station, power and wealth collide with the sordid misery which their ever-accelerating accumulation by a few produces for the many. And here, where the most powerful meet the most fragile, young Ibrahima lost his life.

It is a heinous question whether his life could have been saved if he had not been left unattended in critical state during custody at the police station, because any attempt to answer it would silently acknowledge that his detainment was justified in any way. Put the other way round: Had the police not decided to pursue Ibrahima, he would probably still be among us.

Ibrahima did nothing wrong — all he did was film a corona control

But while filming the authorities is not a crime, it is often de facto punished by the authorities, because they perceive it as a threat.

Being under scrutiny is new for law enforcement agencies. For the first time in history people have the technological means to effectively watch the watchmen. And this capacity threatens authoritarian undercurrents in our formally egalitarian and democratic societies, which flow strongest wherever law and order is concerned. The natural reaction seems to be the suppression of inquiries.

Thus the political fight about the right to use data-driven technologies to exercise democratic control is currently under attack in a variety of places.

Take, for example, the Assange process where an old wartime law is being used to vanquish a journalist who quite responsibly published video proof of war crimes. Or the french governments’ attempt to potentially criminalise any recording of law enforcement authorities. Or Frontex’ lawfare against freedom of information inquiries. But by far the most frequent cases are police officers in the street who, when confronted with being filmed, may resort to unlawful and presumptuous conduct.

In this case, sanitary measures served as a pretext to pursue someone who filmed a police control and the result was a premature death.

Let me put it here very clearly that I am not accusing individuals who are doing a difficult job. The underlying problem is of an institutional nature, and needs institutional solutions. Sensitisation and continued education of law enforcement agents is as necessary as a functioning judiciary in establishing a peaceful society.

It is not a coincidence that the victim is a person of colour

The North station area has a history of racist police misconduct that has incidentally become visible to the public when Pirette Herzberger-Fofana got brutalized by the police after she filmed a police control there. Law enforcement agents were not able to grasp that somebody bearing several markers of the socially faible, having dark skin and being a woman, could be what she was: a member of the European Parliament.

Furthermore, in the wider Brussels area there have been a number of police-related deaths of young people, which the community remembers very well. The last one was Adil, who died during the first lockdown after a police car wittingly crashed him during a chase. Their names are written on the walls across town, and signs with the names of half a dozen victims are present at every demonstration; so too at the protests following Ibrahima’s death.

These protests opened another act of the tragedy: after a peaceful protest of 500 had dissolved about one hundred rioters set a police station ablaze and wounded four members of the police. Over 100 arrests have been made. The king’s security forces couldn’t help but drove the king by, so he could also have his share of the spectacle.

While I understand the anger fueling these protests, resorting to violence is awfully wrong. It only helps the haters, who will happily add their spin of Brussels as a hell-hole full of migrant violence throwing stones at the king’s convoy and  will gladly use images of a justified protest to propagate hardline politics against society’s’ most vulnerable and to reinforce their divisive us-against-them narrative.

All of this happened in my neighborhood, in Brussels, in ‘Europe’s capital’. But basically it’s the same story that in some variation is happening regularly throughout Europe and at our borders. We must not allow these incidents to go unnoticed and the police force must do better in order to address systemic racism.

What’s left for us is to mourn the victims, and the duty to fight for a different tomorrow without tragedies like these. 

If we in Europe, born of conflict, have one mission, it has to be this: to achieve peaceful coexistence.

Photo Source: Belgian Network for Black Lives on Twitter. 

Angelo Radmüller is a member of the National Collective of DiEM25 in Belgium, a stay at home dad and immigrant living in Schaerbeek, Brussels.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: belgique belgique Grassroots Ibrahima police police

How to revive the environmental protest

Pubblicato Gennaio 19th, 2021 di Giovanni Gaggero & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English), Opinion.

Towards political solutions to the climate crisis

It’s been two years since one of the most iconic climate activists Greta Thunberg gave her speech at the COP24 United Nations climate change summit (December 2018), giving birth to the Fridays for Future movement. In the same months, the Extinction Rebellion movement was launched in the UK, with about one hundred academics signing a call to action in support. 

Considering decades of appeals made by the scientific community, they can be considered very young movements, born on the sense of urgency caused by the substantial political inaction of European parties.

Fridays for Future and Extinction Rebellion have always declared themselves as political movements but without supporting any particular party. This feature characterised their actions and their relationships with parties, which would have been difficult anyway because of the international nature of these movements and a very fragmented scenario in European policy for climate change. It’s worth noticing that the relationship between these new environmental movements and the green european parties has never been particularly strong.

Meanwhile in the US, the main environmental movement — the Sunrise Movement — has a completely different story. The Sunrise Movement targeted the democratic party in order to promote their ideas on climate policies with different actions.  Their most famous action, which gave visibility to the movement, was the sit-in in Nancy Pelosi office in November 2018,  supported by the congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Why are European environmental movements like Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future so distant from any political organisation?

The answer to this question is complex, but two main reasons can be identified: the lack of credibility of most parties in addressing the climate crisis, and the absence of an international political response.

Up to now, new environmental movements have been quite immune from the trivial “green propaganda” of many national political parties. In fact, the goal to limit the temperature rise below 1,5 degrees as declared in the IPCC reports is a sacred constraint for them, and any political party that doesn’t explicitly declare to have the willingness to address this issue and concrete proposals is considered as not worthy of their vote.

Moreover, many political parties seem to have betrayed their original ideas regarding green politics; last but not least the young “movimento 5 stelle” in Italy which — despite the fact that environment is one of the 5 keywords that gave birth to its name and symbol — hasn’t yet taken concrete actions after almost 3 years in the government. The result of this situation is that many young voters remain unrepresented.

The present analysis could be considered over-simplified: in American culture, it is much more common that organisations and people endorse a political party. In addition, none of the two models can be declared uniquely more effective than the other. Still, a fundamental issue should be highlighted: the distance between environmental movements in Europe and politics is huge, and this results in an highly ineffective effort for political pressure.

The lack of a minimal political representation for environmental movements results in many right-wings parties which can afford to ignore the climate issue, and many left-wing parties that are proposing minimal action. Meanwhile, in the US, all democratic candidates to the primary elections have been “forced” to include at least some actions of the Green New Deal endorsed by the Sunrise Movement and Bernie Sanders. This has a strong link with the Green New Deal for Europe, which didn’t receive such visibility.

The driving force to effectively implement green policies can be the cooperation between environmental movements and a pan-european political party. 

In 2021, the COP26 United Nations conference on climate change will take place

The main challenge for environmental movements is to translate their consensus into selective political pressure towards credible political actors, while maintaining their original ideas.

These movements have a strong ideological link with DiEM25, since they embrace the ideals of anti-racism and LGBTQIA+ rights, and have already shared some campaigns like #MakeAmazonPay. Still, a serious gap remains. FFF and XR will never declare themself as socialist movements:

https://twitter.com/XRebellionUK/status/1300794775138906114?s=20

It’s a respectful choice, since the root topic, the climate crisis, should embrace everyone, regardless of its political background. 

Nevertheless, these movements are mature enough to understand that capitalism as usual will never solve the climate crisis. There is no evidence supporting the existence of a decoupling of economic growth from environmental pressures on anywhere near the scale needed to deal with environmental breakdown. But also, and perhaps more importantly, such decoupling appears unlikely to happen in the future. Environmental movements must recognise that without a concrete opposition at the heart of our economic and political system, their action will remain ineffective. They can decide not to declare any political affiliation, but should act like they had one.

On the other side, DiEM25 has to be more inclusive in his debate for a post-capitalist vision. Economic issues should be communicated “as simple as possible, but not simpler”. What does it mean to take concrete actions to fight the climate crisis? We are not talking about goals, we are talking about solutions. This is a privileged starting point, since most political organisations silently ignore that there is an “expiration date” to implement green policy.  As it stands, there will be no real green policies in this Europe. The environment is another problem that capitalism as usual cannot, and will never, solve. Just spread this awareness, before it’s too late.

Photo Source: Photo by Markus Spiske from Pexels.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: extinction rebellion Fridays for Future

The Progressive International will send an observer delegation to Ecuador

Pubblicato Gennaio 18th, 2021 di DiEM25 Communications & inserito in Articles.

Etichette: delegation Ecuador élections progressive international south american

Why identity politics is killing the Left

Pubblicato Gennaio 18th, 2021 di Erik Edman & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English).

The misguided celebrations surrounding the inauguration of Biden-Harris offer an excellent opportunity to see the vacuousness of identity politics in action, and offer a general reminder not to lose sight of the real route to power

A lifetime ago, I used to lead tourists around London on a “Signs and Symbols” tour. One of the most striking realisations while researching the tour was that symbols are adaptable, malleable concepts. They are dependent on their cultural context. Take the image of a serpent, for example: its meaning varies across the globe from a symbol of evil to one of healing, or from the representation of the cyclical nature of life to an expression of the endlessness of the cosmos. Symbols are also defined by the period during which you come across them: an owl in medieval Europe was a symbol of sloth and laziness because of its nocturnal nature, while in classical times it was a symbol of wisdom due to its relationship with the Goddess of wisdom, Athena. The symbolic plot thickens further when one considers that they can be defined by the intention of the person wielding their cryptic power: one architect might include ivy in the columns of his cathedral because they are aware that it symbolises eternity, while another might do so because they saw it somewhere else and, well, thought it looked nice. Symbols on their own, at any rate, are nothing. Mean nothing. Context is what gives symbols power and without it they are nothing more than an image.

Consider, within this context, identity politics. We have seen of late fellow social media users share messages of hope such as the following by Stacey Abrams:

While today’s terrible display of terror and meanness shakes us, let’s remember: @ossoff, Jewish son of an immigrant & @ReverendWarnock, first Black Senator from Georgia, will join a Catholic POTUS & the first woman, Black + Indian VP in our nation’s capital. God bless America.

— Stacey Abrams (@staceyabrams) January 7, 2021

She mentions that Joe Biden is Catholic, Kamala Harris Black and Indian, and so on, but doesn’t touch on the one thing that should matter in politics: what is their programme? Even when the programme is quite rigorous and progressive, as is the case with that of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the instinct of many is to instead flaunt the fact that she is Latina.

Is it not the uttermost expression of the continued heritage of colonialism and patriarchy to reduce individuals to their ethnicity, their gender or sexual orientation? What do I care that Margaret Thatcher was the first woman Prime Minister, when her politics were so monstrous? What do black people make of the fact that Barack Obama was black, when he did so little to tackle the inequality that people in the United States, and especially the black community, suffer from?

Identity politics

Identity politics has powerful and important philosophical elements underpinning it: a foundation in fundamental truths that lend the entire vacuous concept credibility. The basic principle, for example, that all people should be unfettered when pursuing their aspirations, or when living their lives in general. It should be as natural to see a woman in a position of power as it is to see a man, and the colour of one’s skin should not negatively affect their life opportunities or the way in which they are treated by others. And then that essential fact is taken and reduced to a variety of different approaches, based on the injustices faced by different groups. The core value of “freedom for oppression” that unites all these struggles is fragmented and divided along various fault lines.

Does the fact that Kamala Harris is of black-Indian heritage carry any inherent significance or value in terms of the struggle to address inequality or discrimination? Is her election a success in and of itself, without reflecting on what she represents, not symbolically, but through her ideas and politics? Surely, the only thing that matters when picking a politician to support should be what that politician will do with the power we give them. Those who guide the conversation away from this core principle — that is to say, about politics, programmes and the likelihood for real change that a person represents — and over to the external symbolism of a candidate or an administration — are ultimately motivated by the fact that they cannot win the argument on content. If they did, they would not feel the need to shift the focus.

All this is not to say that the election of a black president, or a black-Indian woman Vice President, is in and of itself meaningless — of course not. Apart from being a reward for the superhuman effort these people had to make to get to where they are, their election is a reflection of our own progress, of our own ability as a society to not discriminate against those people and elect them to positions from which they may represent us. Of course, combating hateful and discriminatory ideologies is a never-ending struggle against ourselves and society’s worst instincts, but their election shows how more and more people who look different to their predecessors can find themselves in positions of power, which is fantastic and proof that when it comes to discrimination and lifting the glass ceiling, our societies are making some progress.

However, electing people who symbolically represent our ideals for progress means nothing if they do not wield radical political programmes. Biden himself stated that nothing would ‘fundamentally change’ if he was elected and Kamala Harris as VP is exactly the kind of pseudo-progressive smokescreen that his presidency would require. A quick overview of her contradiction-filled legal and political career confirms that she can dog whistle with the best of them. It is not good enough to create the space for more women and people from minority groups to be elected, if it comes at the cost of them being able to affect change. In this context, their election is not a success; it is a consolation prize. And, if they are elected but ineffectual, that only serves to ultimately undermine the electability of the groups they represent.

Which brings us to the wider problem of focusing on symbolism rather than content and effectiveness. When we are entertaining the idea that Trump has been defeated, we are flirting with escapism at a time when it is particularly dangerous to do so. The politics and politicians (regardless of their race, gender, sex, or religion) whose failure to engage meaningfully with the real problems faced by millions of Americans have once again triumphed. Hailing them as our liberators from Trumpism, when in fact they are the hotbed that developed the fascist bacterium that is plaguing the US in the first place, is only allowing for the disease to mutate and grow stronger.

It alienates ever more people who know, from lived experience, that a return to “normal” is in no way what their lives, or the planet, needs. It is an unquestionable declaration of war on anyone who voted for Trump or dared to believe (however erroneously) some part of his rhetoric of radical change. The Democratic Establishment, which is dependent on the status quo for its continued survival, has not defeated Trumpism: it has empowered it. And when Trumpism returns, it might do so without a clown at the helm. At a time when more and more people are losing hope in democracy’s ability to change their lives for the better, the most dangerous thing one could do is to support and glorify the election of politicians that add to this perception.

Europe suffers from the same power-obsessed sclerosis that is dooming all of us to environmental apocalypse and socio-economic disaster. Every argument levelled against the political establishment in the USA in this article can also be levelled against its European equivalent. Just a brief overview of the state of affairs in Europe confirms this: the rise of the far-right, the inability of the European Union to respond to the crises it is facing, our pseudo-environmentalist policies, all characterised by an insistence to focus on appearances rather than substance — a favourite example is what the European Commission is desperately trying to present as a “Green” New Deal, or the classist undertones of what was supposed to be a shining example of European solidarity: the Recovery Fund. It is the backdrop for the drama of a political Establishment that is out of touch, out of ideas, and unwilling to give up its hold over the current system, even though that system is doomed to collapse (taking us all down with it).

In our effort to liberate all those subjugated by power-structures such as colonialism, patriarchy, and capitalism, we cannot afford to shift our gaze away from the means through which this liberation will come about.

We cannot afford to take solace in empty symbols

Rather, we must engage in the struggle itself. Having a woman in a position of power is not necessarily a victory in the struggle against patriarchy if she does not remove barriers for fellow women. Having a person of colour in a position of power does not address racism and its symptoms if they do not alleviate poverty and discrimination for marginalised groups. And indeed, they all mean nothing if they focus on their own communities and do not act as leaders for all people — failure to do so only entrenches the right-wing argument that politics is about “us-and-them”, instead of the Left’s ‘us’. What we need is not a conglomeration of champions of various causes, but individuals whose vision and political framing aims at bringing us all together.

Having a woman, or a member of a minority group, elected is not good enough. Reducing people to their identity is a betrayal of their humanity and their right to engage with the world as complex human beings. It is also a betrayal of our own struggle to settle for symbols instead of political actors with rigorous ideas for change, whoever they might be. Symbols are important, but they mean nothing without their context. We need both.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: Biden harris identity politics joe biden Kamala harris

MeRA25 launches their own radio!

Pubblicato Gennaio 15th, 2021 di DiEM25 Communications & inserito in Articles, MeRA25.

Follow the day-to-day issues with MERA25 Radio

The voice of all those people who were silenced by the capitulation on the night of the Referendum was heard again for the first time in Parliament four years later — with the entry of MERA25 in Parliament. But this voice is still being silenced outside Parliament. It is presented as an echo of a mob that either went to destroy Greece (ND-PASOK propaganda) or was under delusions (SYRIZA propaganda). But this voice cannot be silenced forever. It will also be heard outside Parliament.

While the political leaders will talk about the pandemic in Parliament, Boulika Michalopoulou will launch Radio MERA at radiomera.gr.

MeRA25 refuses to be silenced!

MeRA25 Radio went live today 15 January at 12:00 (GMT+2). For the initial launch period, the daily live broadcast will be 2 hours long, from 12-14.00 (GMT+2). Under the title “MeRA25’s viewpoint”, it will focus on the day’s issues, through the lens of MeRA25. The “voice” of the radio will be seasoned radio broadcaster Boulika Michalopoulou.

The initial broadcast will be at least 4 hours long, covering tomorrow’s Parliament’s proceedings. You can also look forward to new hosts and programmes which will soon be announced, covering a variety of areas such as culture, ecology, and economics!

The broadcast page can be found here.

Etichette: Greece MeRA25 Parliament radio

The state of our unions in the UK

Pubblicato Gennaio 15th, 2021 di Benjamin James Davies & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English), Opinion.

It’s more important than ever for each of us to join a union, agitate, organise and fight for a fairer, greener world

2021 will be the most important year for British trade unions in nearly a century. Following decades of neoliberal assaults on the power of unions, from the dismantling of sectoral collective bargaining, through to the introduction of employment tribunal fees and the 2016 Trade Union Act that introduced a 50% turnout requirement for strike ballots, many would have been sceptical of the ability of British unions to withstand a crisis on the scale of the coronavirus pandemic.

Since 1979, trade union membership in Britain has more than halved, with secure, unionised work largely replaced by the euphemistic ‘flexible labour market’– resulting in millions working in the ‘gig economy’ in insecure, low-waged jobs, the vast majority in the private sector. Brexit can be partly viewed as a wider Conservative project aimed at eroding the power of Britain’s trade unions, with Westminster expending a gigatonne of political capital to claw back the ability to ‘level the playing field’, in this case by tearing up as many labour rights as possible. A plan was recently leaked which threatens to abolish the 48-hour week itself and could rob workers of the right to a weekend.

In the face of these attacks, one would expect the Labour party to take up the mantle of defending workers’ rights, but Labour’s ‘New Leadership’™ are far more interested in silencing dissent from the left, which has brought them into direct conflict with several unions in recent weeks. The decision to back Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal and the inevitable assault on workers’ rights that this will entail has saddled Labour with baggage that it will take decades to deal with.

Into this vacuum that many on the left would expect the party to fill, there has been a resurgence of union activity and strike action in the last year, with at least twenty major organised strikes underway at the time of writing. From Unite workers at Barnoldswick, who manned the picket line for nine weeks in the freezing cold to protect 350 jobs from being relocated overseas by Rolls-Royce, (and are currently negotiating a “landmark deal”) through to GMB workers at British Gas who are striking as we speak, trade unions are taking an active and visible lead in the struggle for job security and dignity.

The ‘fire and rehire’ scheme

One despicable tactic that unscrupulous employers like British Gas, British Airways and Tower Hamlets Council have been employing during the pandemic has been the “firing and rehiring” of staff on worse pay, longer hours and fewer benefits. For British Gas engineers like Paul Vowles, this has caused him anxiety, stress and sleepless nights. In the largest gas strike in 40 years, thousands of engineers with the support of GMB have refused to accept these detrimental employment terms and life-threatening conditions and are taking up the fight for security and dignity in their workplace.

After 13yrs of service, Mr O'shea is sacking me on 31st March if I don’t agree and sign his new contract on significantly worse terms. Less pay, more hours and fewer benefits. No redundancy, no choice. Fire + rehire is morally wrong and soul destroying #StopTheBritishGasFire pic.twitter.com/zi69XznSSY

— pete howis (@HowisPete) January 8, 2021

With an overwhelmingly hostile mainstream media unwilling to take up the cause of these workers, social media has been vital for striking workers, garnering wide visibility using hashtags like #StopTheBritishGasFire to flood Twitter with videos of solidarity. Matthew Bateman, the managing director of British Gas was thrilled that the strikes didn’t garner wider media coverage, so one can only hope that the leaked video of his laughing dismissal of the strike demonstrates the naked contempt with which he and other bosses hold their workers.

As long as ‘fire and rehire’ tactics are legal, if unpopular, it is likely many employers will continue to use them and risk strike action. It goes without saying that unions must resist these measures, and Labour must fight to outlaw the practice. In the meantime, anyone looking to demonstrate practical solidarity with British Gas workers should give generously to the strike fund.

Day 4 strike action …been with the company 28 + years of loyal service working in all weathers day and night helping vulnerable customers and now the company who has made a massive profit,plans to fire and rehire its loyal employees on much worse terms.. #stopthebritishgasfire pic.twitter.com/uZHYc9yLPE

— steve (@steve87105078) January 10, 2021

Eroding protections and unemployment

As well as practices like ‘fire and rehire’, millions of workers have had to endure life-threatening conditions. These include NHS staff, public transport and care home workers through to shop assistants, with many hundreds dying after being infected in the workplace. Even when told to self-isolate, many workers have been unable to do so due the woeful provision of statutory sick pay, which costs the average worker £800 over a two week period if they can’t work from home.

The failure to provide decent statutory pay for those self isolating is a direct cause for the massive surge in cases in recent months — millions face the inhumane choice of being covid-safe or being financially secure. Unions have been extremely vocal in calling for an increase in statutory sick pay. Throughout the crisis, they have brought the continued lack of PPE to light. The NEU — the largest teachers’ union in the UK — organised a massive and ultimately victorious campaign earlier this month to force a characteristically late and shambolic Tory u-turn on school closures. In spite of horrific statistics showing that school children had some of the highest infection rates of any age group, and the deaths of many teachers, the government insisted that schools were in fact, safe.

Shamefully, Keir Starmer refused to back the NEU until given the go-ahead by Boris Johnson, giving Starmer the dubious accolade of being one of the few Labour leaders to have been outflanked on the left by the Tories on workers’ rights. The NEU meanwhile has seen a massive surge in membership in recent weeks, with over 20,000 members having joined since the 1st January, and will likely use this enormous boost to continue their struggle against a pay freeze that is currently due to last until 2022.

With nearly ten million jobs having been supported during the crisis by the furlough scheme, official unemployment figures belie the true extent of the jobs crisis in the UK — officially less than 7% are unemployed. However, the major unemployment shock will come when the scheme is wound down and millions of jobs are lost. Even prior to the crisis, the ‘gig economy’ in the UK has created a subset of precariously employed workers — roughly 1 in 10 work via ‘gig economy’ platforms with irregular shifts. These workers are overwhelmingly young, with no savings or secure housing: nearly 60% of regular platform workers are aged 16 to 34.

These workers, often in sectors hit hardest by the virus like hospitality have suffered disproportionately and seen their already meagre protections eroded. Into this space, unions like IWGB and UVW, founded in the last decade have risen to the challenge and secured recognition of many of their members, including outsourced cleaners and couriers as ‘employees’. This important distinction that earned many the right to sick pay, annual leave and a secure minimum wage for the first time. UVW are currently supporting SAGE care workers as well as Great Ormond Street Hospital cleaners in their struggle for a living wage and better terms. The victories won by IWGB and UVW show that the power of union organising isn’t limited to ‘traditional’ industrialised or public sector jobs, and that as people’s patterns of work change, new forms of union organising can support members in their struggle for decent pay and conditions.

A New Deal for workers

One of the most vital arenas for union organising for years to come will be the fight to secure a Green New Deal for people and planet, with a just transition for workers towards a decarbonised economy. With the government dragging its feet and announcing a pathetic ‘Green Industrial Revolution’ woefully ill-equipped to tackle the climate crisis, grassroots climate organisations and trade unions must collaborate to take the lead and agitate for an ambitious alternative to the failed status quo.

Rather than a short-termist strategy that focuses on survival for industries that are facing terminal decline, such as fossil fuels, unions must push for a just transition that would invest in green industries such as renewables and guarantee retraining where necessary, with well-paid, secure green jobs for their members.

A job creation programme on a scale not seen since the Second World War is the only solution to the intersecting crises we face. Investment in publicly-owned renewable energy, public transport and a National Care Service would create at least one million secure green jobs. These policies were part of Labour’s 2019 manifesto, as part of their Green Industrial Revolution, a pledge secured by Labour for a Green New Deal with the support of unions at Labour’s conference that year.

Unions must hold Labour to account and demand they fight for a much more ambitious green job creation scheme than their recent ‘Green Economic Recovery Plan’ called for. In tandem, climate organisations must pick up the basic principles of union organisation and agitation for secure jobs and better working conditions as a fundamental demand of their movement: climate action without class struggle is just gardening.

Unions must be internationalist in their approach towards securing a just transition: in a globalised economy, nothing would be more damaging to the power of multinational corporations than coordinated strikes across entire supply chains, with the recent Make Amazon Pay campaign an example of a programme of a “common program and an uncommon collective action plan”.

Unions at the forefront of the struggle

Union democracy has become an increasingly prominent (read heated) arena for debate about the future of the labour movement. While turnout in Unison’s recent general secretary election was woefully low (around 10% – indicative of generally low engagement across the movement), a concern for those on the left was the failure to unite behind a single candidate, which resulted in a split vote and a victory for Christina McAnea. The left should take note of this development well in advance of Unite’s general secretary election later this year, which is currently shaping up to feature at least three left-wing candidates in opposition to Gerard Coyne. Low turnout in internal union elections is indicative of a broader failure to engage a large and growing grassroots membership and transform it into a productive, empowering and vibrant space for political education and demonstrations of practical solidarity. These criticisms could also be applied to the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn, and we all know how that turned out, so it is vitally important that trade unions do not let this crisis (or crises) go to waste, and that they waste no time in empowering their members in this crucial year for the labour movement.

Unions will be at the forefront of the struggle for better pay and working conditions for NHS staff in particular, and with the Tories subjecting the rest of the public sector to wage freezes, we must ensure that the unions avoid falling into their ‘divide and rule’ trap, pitting different sectors against one another. At least one million public sector workers will see their wages freeze, while some lower-income workers have been promised a pay rise, which is yet to have materialised.

Even before the pandemic, public sector wages had been squeezed in proportion to inflation over the last decade, which when coupled with ballooning costs of living amounts to a massive decline in ‘real wages’. People who have already been suffering a drastic decline in income and living standards have suffered disproportionately during the Covid crash, and four in ten low income workers are at a high risk of losing their job. With millions living on a knife edge, paycheck to paycheck, struggling to feed their children, the workers and communities of Britain need powerful, proactive and ambitious trade unions more than any time in living memory. That ambition can’t be limited to protecting industries and jobs on a case by case basis, unions must organise to secure a fairer society based on social and economic justice.

We are seeing glimpses of the great industrial militancy that used to bring governments to their knees. It is time to politicise the issues of our time and encourage the widest possible participation to press for full employment, a four day week and a Green New Deal. We must fight for a new social contract; following the enormous sacrifices made by so many during the last year. The bare minimum we should fight for is pay rises and better conditions for those who have kept the country going and kept our friends and loved ones alive at great cost.

Donate to  the strike fund!

Photo Source: GMB Union on Twitter. 

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: COVID-19 labour rights pandemic UK union unions United Kingdom workers

We need to radically reimagine the way we travel and commute

Pubblicato Gennaio 14th, 2021 di Davide Sette & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English), Opinion.

Let’s start with a fact: electric vehicles (EVs) are better for the environment than internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. We should focus on promoting electric vehicles and not waste time trying to delay the inevitable. However, this is a difficult goal, especially when there’s a lot of false and misleading information being pushed out, whether by Toyota’s president or fake PR firms.

The oil and (some) automotive industries’ increasingly crude attempts to spread misinformation about electric vehicles is a bid to protect a business model increasingly recognized each day as harmful to the planet and to each and every one of us. Even recently, Aston Martin has found itself at the centre of a storm for not coming clean over its role in authoring a widely-debunked study that claimed electric vehicles are a more polluting option than ICE vehicles.

Let’s talk inequality

So all good? Well, it’s eminently possible to want a carbon-neutral, quiet, clean-air future but still have questions that haven’t yet been answered. How do we avoid giving low-income drivers — reliant on landlords or councils to provide domestic charging — the choice of sticking in an old internal combustion engine car or being forced to use expensive rapid chargers if they get an EV? Will the fuel of a tenant parking on the street with no choice of energy provider cost more than that of a senior manager who can plug into their solar-panelled house each night? In embracing a zero-emissions future, we need to make sure that nobody is treated unfairly or gets left behind.

The development in battery prices is rapidly creating the conditions that could give electric vehicles a significantly lower total cost of ownership.  This means that at least one conviction of policy makers needs to be reexamined: the idea that more stringent fuel efficiency norms will determine the speed of electric vehicles adoption. However, charging infrastructure needs to be available for potential owners that cannot charge the car on their own driveway and fast chargers need to become abundant and cheap.

How does battery production impact human rights?

In considering the net impact of a transition from fossil fuels to electric vehicles, however, it is important to note that fossil fuel exploration and extraction has been associated with some of the most severe problems of human rights abuse, conflict and corruption in the world. The average scores on the Resource Governance Index for oil-producing countries (47 out of 100) and mineral-producing countries (48 out of 100) are virtually identical, signaling that mis-governance remains a challenge in both sectors. A recent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) survey of officials from state-owned enterprises identified mining as the industry with the second-highest incidence of corruption, with 50 percent of respondents saying they had observed corrupt acts. The sector with the highest incidence of corruption was oil and gas, at 63 percent.

The urgency in getting a lithium supply has unleashed a mining boom, and the race for “white oil” threatens to cause damage to the natural environment wherever it is found. But because they are helping to drive down emissions, the mining companies have EU environmental policy on their side. Everyone having an electric vehicle means an enormous amount of mining, refining and all the polluting activities that come with it. In the so-called Lithium Triangle of South America vast quantities of water are pumped from underground sources to help extract lithium from ores, and this has been linked to the lowering of groundwater levels and the spread of deserts. Similarly in Tibet, a toxic chemical leak from the Ganzizhou Rongda Lithium mine poisoned the local Lichu river in 2016 and triggered widespread protests in the region. Europe will need to scale up its battery recycling capacity: even in a scenario projecting only moderate uptake of electric vehicles by 2030, the current Li-ion recycling capacity will not be able to cope with projected demand from exhausted electric vehicle batteries. 

In the case of cobalt (also used for cleaning fossil fuel), 60% of the world’s supply comes from the Democratic Republic of the Congo where large numbers of unregulated mines use children as young as seven as miners. There they breathe in cobalt-laden dust that can cause fatal lung ailments while working tunnels that are liable to collapse. However, electric vehicle manufacturers are transitioning away from cobalt: Tesla’s current vehicle batteries contain less than three percent cobalt and the company has announced that their next generation of batteries will be cobalt-free. The negative human and environmental consequences of cobalt mining are indeed real and well-documented. However, a serious solution to the exploitation of mine workers involves a comprehensive national trade policy and an economy-wide effort to curtail the use of cobalt.

Debunking myths

We should face these challenges in order to make mining more environmentally sustainable. Existing problems should not serve as excuses for pearl clutching and renewables bashing before taking a ride back in a far worse fossil fueled car. Misleading reports about electric vehicles generally rest on six faulty assumptions:

1. Overestimating battery manufacturing
2. Underestimating battery lifetime
3. Assuming an unchanged electricity mix over the lifetime of the BEV
4. Using unrealistic tests for energy use
5. Excluding fuel production emissions
6. Lack of system thinking.

Professional debunkers have already explained the flaws of these ‘studies’ and that proper calculations show electric vehicles already emit less than half the greenhouse gasses of their fossil fueled counterparts. If we speculate about a future in which production and driving are done on renewable energy this results in at least ten times less emissions than what is achievable with combustion engines using fossil fuels.

A study recently published in Nature found that current models of electric vehicles have lower life-cycle emission intensities than current new petrol cars in 53 of 59 world regions, accounting for 95% of the global road transport demand. Relative differences range from electric vehicles being around 70% less emission intensive per vehicle-kilometre in Iceland, Switzerland and Sweden, to being 40% more emission intensive in oil-shale-dependent Estonia.

In 2030, under the current technological trajectory and the end-use without power policies scenario, the resulting average emission intensities of EVs do not exceed those of fossil-fuel based alternatives in any of the ten countries with the highest transport and heating demands, even without additional decarbonization policies in the power sector. This implies that in the medium term, in almost all cases, the more effective policy strategy for reducing transport emissions is to push electric vehicles instead of supporting the uptake of more efficient fossil-fuel based technologies.

Laws are too timid: the case of Italy

Despite these evidences, the Italian Parliament gave the green light to a package of incentives which is targeting so-called “Euro 6” thermally efficient vehicles, as electric and hybrid cars still have little foothold in Italy. The incentives, strongly pushed by car dealers in order to empty their forecourts of unsold vehicles, encourage the purchase of Euro 6 cars that emit up to 110 grams of CO2 per km (the EU target of 95g/km entered into force in 2020 and European car manufacturers must comply with it or face high fines).

In 2019 the FCA group, which owns Fiat, had to resort to forming a pool with Tesla — costing it €1.8 billion — in order to avoid more substantial fines for not producing and selling zero and low-emission cars. On the eve of the launch of the Fiat500e, FCA’s first fully-electric mode, the Italian government should have allocated funds to new technologies only. A smart, forward-looking industrial strategy would ensure that the state loan guarantee for FCA comes with green strings attached and that the scrapping mechanism would be for zero-emission cars only.

A silver bullet?

The electrification of private transport is not a silver bullet — local and national policies need to reduce car ownership and use, and promote active travel and shared mobility. But electric vehicles could certainly replace conventional cars and largely eliminate GHG emissions in the process.

To support the transition towards electrified transport we should create institutions that will coordinate the various works and redistribute the benefits from the Global North and the Global South. As Yanis Varoufakis pointed out, a credible International Green New Deal should use transnational bond instruments and revenue-neutral carbon taxes — so that the money raised from taxing diesel can be returned to the poorest of citizens relying on diesel cars, in order to strengthen them generally and also allow them to buy an electric car.

The efficiency of a hybrid vehicle could theoretically become almost 50% higher than in today’s cars, but that would require a range of breakthroughs that are currently not on the horizon (we’re talking about plug-in hybrid, not “self charging hybrid”, which Michael Liebreich brilliantly described as “fossil-fueled car being marketed to people without knowledge by people without ethics”). Furthermore, the consumer interest in large SUVs with powerful motors outstrips the modest advances in efficiency, and if we take road testing as our benchmark there has been basically no improvement of CO2 emissions per kilometre in the last 20 years. If we aim for a world with billions of SUVs, we will still ruin our natural habitat and make living on this planet much harder.

Green New Deal for transport

There is no time left for new polluting vehicles to be rolling out of our factories. Our Green New Deal for Europe must amend the Vehicle Emissions Regulation to introduce a new ‘Euro 7’ standard that is consistent with zero-exhaust pipe emissions on all passenger vehicles. This will require that all new vehicles are fully electric, or powered by any other green technology. Buses or light vans should be included. All heavier goods vehicles must also be zero emissions, subject to specific exemptions made by the Commission on a temporary basis, to the extent enabled by technology. In addition, the Emission Performance Regulation should be changed to require that all vehicles that are manufactured have zero exhaust-pipe emissions, or that from 25 December 2021 no dividends or director compensation may be paid. Emission Performance Regulation (EC) 443/2009 contains the present rules. For each month of infringement, fines amounting to 10 percent of annual turnover shall be paid.

Beyond that, car ownership remains a luxury that not every member of society can afford. Without robust, inexpensive public transport networks and a continued focus on private car ownership, our transport systems will continue to allow exclusion of certain segments of the population. Another solution is to invest in fleets of clean, shared vehicles forming part of connected transport systems that minimise environmental degradation while maximising access and opportunity, which the Green New Deal for Europe points out. These can take the form of electric taxis operating on a car-pooling model, providing door-to-door services to all passengers at low cost. But one thing is certain: we need to radically reimagine the way we travel and commute.

Photo Source: Mike from Pexels.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: Green New Deal Green New Deal for Europe transport

DiEM25 in Germany: Retrospection on an unusual year

Pubblicato Gennaio 13th, 2021 di Vincent Welsch & inserito in Articles, Local News (English).

For the German DiEM25 landscape, 2020 brought considerable change to our activist endeavours and electoral wing

On 1 January 2020, one day after the European Union shrunk for the first time in history, DiEM25’s German electoral wing hosted a members assembly in Frankfurt. This charted the course for it to become a fully-fledged German federal party.

The step became necessary when at the end of 2019 our members voted in favor of transforming the organisation — which until then had been a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) only capable of running in EU elections. This new DiEM25-affiliated party is capable of running in any legislative elections in Germany, from municipal councils to the federal parliament. Like all of our electoral wings, this party would have to consist entirely of members of DiEM25 and adhere to our progressive agenda, principles and electoral guidelines.

Just a few days after the assembly, the city of Hanau was struck by a brutal right-wing terror attack targeting non-native citizens; nine people were murdered. DiEM25 moved quickly to condemn this act of barbarity and to offer our collective condolences. Half a year later, we joined the call for a commemorative rally in Hanau, an intention that was ultimately blocked by tighter COVID-19 restrictions at that time.

This instance of course was not the only time the pandemic upended DiEM25’s plans last year. The “Billionaire, pay your share!” event scheduled for the end of March in Luxembourg had to be indefinitely postponed following extensive mobilisation and anticipation within our movement’s ranks in Germany the weeks prior.

DiEMTV

Due to the pandemic, we focused on other initiatives. In April we kicked off our local video series of DiEM TV, presenting to a German-speaking audience — among other topics — the Green New Deal for Europe, of which the German-language version was released shortly before.

Our authors and volunteer copywriters covered a multitude of subjects and tackled a lot of issues. We seconded our French comrades’ push for rent and mortgage relief and addressed it in the domestic context as well. On more than one occasion, we explored the grim reality of modern-day platform capitalism, and our members discussed important matters such as intersectional feminism and drug policy, urging the government to adopt an interdisciplinary liberal approach.

Julian Assange

First in Leipzig at the beginning of August, then in Frankfurt at the beginning of September, DiEM25 in cooperation with the Courage Foundation unveiled the #WeAreMillions exhibition in support of Julian Assange and freedom of the press. The local DiEM25 group in Bonn later staged a creative protest, shining a light on the increasingly precarious situation of journalists and whistleblowers worldwide.

The annual summer festival in Berlin

Despite the pandemic, German DiEM25 members managed to gather in-person for their annual summer festival in Berlin. During the event, we diligently and responsibly adhered to the COVID-19 measures. This experience, which included many valuable workshops and social activities, certainly contributed to (re-)energizing the movement in Germany.

Our German electoral wing is looking for volunteers who are ready to build up a new, competitive progressive party

At the end of November, the German electoral wing congregated in another assembly — this time purely digital — and neatly updated its statutes to conclude the legal transition process towards a real party; an opportunity that, if used in the right way, will set DiEM25 in Germany up for success in the years to come.

• If you can help with organizing in any way, contact [email protected]
• If you like to contribute your ideas and expertise to our country-specific programme for Germany, write to [email protected]
• Also make sure to check out the electoral wing’s website as well as DiEM25’s People’s Gatherings project, which will serve as a source of inspiration for the creation of our national policies

Etichette: 2020 coronavirus COVID-19 electoral wing Germany Grassroots

On the right’s perverse hijacking of the left’s “populism”

Pubblicato Gennaio 12th, 2021 di Peace and International Policy Collective & inserito in Articles, Member-contributed (English), Opinion.

The attempted coup in Washington D.C. could have been expected

The brewing public restlessness finally reached a symbolic boiling point. The mob, with cries of “StopTheSteal”, snaked, climbed and stormed their way into the halls of power on Capitol Hill. With world leaders swiftly condemning this latest manifestation of hate, the deep schisms that generate the animosity however are largely left out of the debate.

While rightfully condemning violence, shouldn’t our elected leaders begin to name the real offender, global capitalism? The continued generation of greater inequality, job, health and housing insecurities, coupled with loss of livelihoods due to climate change and pollution, is fertile ground for populism.

The statistics in the United States are telling: The top 1% increased their wealth from $4.81 trillion in 1989 to $36.8 trillion in 2020, while the bottom 50% saw a 46% decrease in share of wealth over the same period! Some of the largest ‘jumps’ in wealth for the wealthiest occurred in the midst of the 2008-2010 financial crisis and the current pandemic. The rapid concentration of wealth — naturally gives rise to increasing control over government priorities.

Witness the almost 8 months of wrangling over $2000 survival cheques to millions of Americans while the $700 billion corporate bailout was completed in less than 4 weeks. This is while 78% of the American workforce — prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic — are living paycheque to paycheque. Access to vaccines amidst the pandemic will be equally problematic. Nearly all of the vaccines manufactured by Moderna and Pfizer have already been secured by wealthy countries.

The Trump protesters — seemingly swayed by Trump that their enemy is the “other” — respond automaton like to the calls of their leaders, believing in a renewed manifest destiny for 21st century America. Having being fractured, securitised and collateralised, the divided only saw resonant unity in the emotive messaging that were dispensed from the altar of power. The election loss of Trump became a mortal wound to the last remaining symbol of hope for the millions who are left-behind. Without a new vision, this soon to be tsunami of populism in the United States will emerge with an authoritarian at its helm come 20 January 2025.

A missed opportunity for the EU

Almost 100 years ago, Mussolini began his march to Rome and thus ascended to the heights of power on the back of fascist ideology. With history providing sufficient hindsight, the leadership of the European Union missed an opportunity to reflect on the events in the United States and the possibility for the same in the EU.

While condemnations and calls for peaceful transfer of power were matter of course, the root causes remain unsaid. European Commission President von der Leyen’s statement, calling on Biden to address the “big issues of the future” are concerns that would also need resolving in Europe. Most importantly, her call to “strengthen democracy” is imminently vital to all nations and regions beholden to predatory capitalism.

Existing democratic deficiencies in the EU, coupled with systematic dysfunctions laid bare by COVID-19 — never mind the exploitation of the pandemic for more profit — are severe signals that change is needed. After all, the administration of Donald Trump only required four years to reach its current hiatus — further forestalling is therefore not an option if Europe wishes to see a revival of democracy on the continent.

This disparate transformation through populism — having taken shape from Brazil to the Philippines and Hungary to Egypt — “established the ground for alternative movements that have the potential to transform the daily lives of people”. By adopting a united stance to this, the combined dynamisms of progressives worldwide must be channelled to changing humanity’s course away from dystopia.

Activism — from on the ground community organising to advancing transformative policy agendas — needs to be coordinated and harmonised to tackle the oligopolists of our time. From co-founding Progressive International to challenging Amazon through the #MakeAmazonPay campaign, DiEM25 is building momentum towards an alternative future.

Join us to realise our collective vision!

Photo Source: Blink O’faneye.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect DiEM25’s official policies or positions.

Etichette: Coup democracy Trump von der Leyen washington

• «
• ← Precedente
• 31
• 32
• 33
• 34
• 35
• 36
• 37
• Successivo →
• »