China Worker

Hong Kong: Where next for Democracy Movement after "7/1"?

Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:31:58 GMT

Battle for democratic rights entering a crucial phase

Statement by Hong Kong supporters of CWI

1 July witnessed yet another massive demonstration in Hong Kong, with 76,000 marching for universal suffrage and against the non-elected government's handling of the economic crisis. Despite a turnout that was twice as big as last year's, the biggest July 1 procession under Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's tenure in office, sections of the media and pro-Beijing establishment are trying to portray this as a setback, and manufacture a crisis of confidence within the pan-democratic camp. "Pan-democrats to review what went wrong," ran one alarmist headline in the South China Morning Post (SCMP, 3 July). Ludicrously, the pro-Beijing legislator Chim Piu-chung has claimed that even the 200,000 who marched on June 4 was "still very small figures compared with the population of seven million in Hong Kong". This is incredible impudence from a man who speaks for just 468 "voters" in the Financial Services functional constituency, which is comprised mostly of stock market and futures traders. If 200,000 people, who against the advice of the government go out to commemorate "6/4" is a small number, what does this say about the total "electorate" of all the functional constituencies, which is just 175,000...?

This propaganda campaign is part of the power struggle ahead of the next round in the 12-year long battle for democratic rights against the Beijing dictatorship and its Hong Kong puppet regime. The pro-Beijing establishment, particularly the tycoon and capitalist class that has grown fat from the neo-liberal policies of the 'communist' party, fear the introduction of universal suffrage as a check and a popular counterweight to the untrammelled influence they hold over policy-making today. As one Hong Kong government-backed report warned in 2006, they fear that universal suffrage could lead to "the creation of a welfare state". Beijing is even more wary, seeing Hong Kong's democratic hunger as a potential threat to their mainland rule.

These forces control most of Hong Kong's "free press" and use this to try to mould public opinion, generally downplaying the significance of July 1 and other pro-democracy manifestations. On 5 June, the day after the biggest ever Tiananmen vigil, many newspapers only carried reports in their inside pages. The commercial TVB network triggered a storm of criticism by its (non)reporting of the June 4 vigil. The Association of Journalists recently produced their own report that warns self-censorship is increasing in the Hong Kong media, which does not want to antagonise Beijing. Following the 1 July march, the slant of official propaganda has changed. Now the problem, they claim, is that the event has been hi-jacked by "too radical" forces. This theme is echoed by ostensibly pro-democracy newspapers like the SCMP, which argued "the march is becoming a platform for radical protesters, who may deter more moderate marchers".

Hong Kong's political and business elite are clearly shaken by the far greater participation this year of workers' groups - trade unions, migrant organisations and others - demanding a minimum wage, no wage cuts, and opposing the anti-worker and anti-poor record of the Tsang administration. Likewise, the politicisation of a big layer of young people has the establishment trembling. As we wrote on chinaworker.info (2 July): "In outline, but not yet as a conscious or organised movement, yesterday’s demonstration represented the awakening of a new social force in which workers’ anger over the effects of the capitalist crisis is fusing with impatience over official foot-dragging in relation to democratic demands".

Electoral reform

Later this year the Hong Kong government will publicise its proposals on electoral reform. It will attempt to tread a political minefield: not to concede anything of substance to mass pressure, but attempting to disguise its sabotage as steps towards "eventual" universal suffrage. The media inquest over this year's 1 July demonstration is part of a pre-struggle over the government review findings. The pro-Beijing establishment want to sow divisions within the pan-democratic camp.

Attempts to portray 1 July as a disappointment, and pressure the event's organisers to distance themselves from the "radicals" are part of a tactic to try to split the pan-democratic camp ahead of the new proposals. A section of pan-democrat leaders, who ultimately base themselves on support for the capitalist system, have been moving towards an accommodation with Beijing. Such leaders see mass mobilisations only as "back-up" ahead of negotiations, rather than the main motor of democratic change. To differing degrees they are adapting to the argument that demanding "too much" from Beijing will only harden its opposition.

Another demonstration?

Socialists completely reject such arguments. At a meeting of the organisers, LSD legislator 'Long Hair' Leung Kwok-Hung correctly rejected the negative conclusions drawn by some from the 1 July march, stating the turnout was "satisfactory". There are several reasons why 100,000 people did not turn up as organisers had hoped. Undoubtedly factors such as the extreme heat and police obstructionism played their part. But another important factor was the close proximity to the record-breaking vigil of 200,000 people on June 4. Many people, including a big layer who protested against the Beijing-Tsang bloc on that occasion, did not see what decisive difference another demonstration would make. This was especially the case given that no clear demands or political strategy for taking the democracy struggle forward were offered by the organisers of the 1 July event.

The struggle for democratic rights in Hong Kong is intrinsically linked to the struggle against dictatorship in mainland China. It would be a fundamental misreading of the situation to believe Hong Kong is a 'separate case' or that the autonomy and important partial freedoms it enjoys are the product of a constitutional document, the Basic Law. Laws in general reflect the political and social balance of forces of the time. Macau is also covered by Basic Law, yet its autonomy and civil rights have been powerfully undermined this year with the introduction of the new security law (Article 23) that can serve to ban demonstrations and imprison regime critics. What protects Hong Kong from a similar fate is not a legal document, but the weight of mass pressure: the establishment and their Beijing guardians fear the consequences i.e. a huge popular backlash if they try to encroach on the civil liberties that have been won in Hong Kong.

At the same time the Beijing regime is terrified that the democratic virus will spread from Hong Kong to the mainland and encourage workers, migrants, students and others to fight for their rights. From such a regime it is extremely unlikely - to say the least - that a genuine form of universal suffrage, even on the lines of the West (which under closer examination is not so democratic), would be tolerated. Together, the Beijing and Hong Kong elites are cooking up a witches brew of emasculated, warped, "democracy". Their aim is to clog up the machinery using various devices so that Beijing retains ultimate control. And they hope to entice a layer of the present pan-democrat leadership into accepting such proposals as "a step in the right direction" in order, they hope, to limit popular opposition. Various proposals are being discussed such as keeping the elitist 'functional constituencies' but in a different - "more democratic" - form; and vetting candidates for high office through a "nominating committee" in order to disqualify "troublemakers". All these proposals amount to an authoritarian Trojan Horse they wish to insert into any system of nominal universal suffrage.

In coming months this struggle will move into a new gear. This is the real significance of 1 July 2009, which is a million miles removed from the pseudo debate in the media. The demonstration was a show of force, especially in that new layers linking democratic demands to demands for social justice made their appearance for the first time. This is a warning to Tsang and Co of the battles that lay ahead. But what is sorely needed now is a coherent strategy for the movement. This must be based on a democratic, grass roots model, with action committees in workplaces, colleges and housing estates. It must recognise that periodic demonstrations, while useful, are not enough in themselves. That above all the power of the organised working class is needed, in a campaign of mass protests, agitation and even strikes, to overcome the resistance of Beijing. A successful strategy must also connect this to the struggle of the mainland working class to throw off the shackles of dictatorship.

Socialists and the supporters of the CWI believe the struggle for democratic rights is linked to the struggle to sweep away the outdated and crisis-ridden capitalist system, in which real power rests with bankers and tycoons not with government (whether elected or not), and replace it with a new society of democratic socialism.

We call for:
No more delays - for an immediate move to free electons on the basis of one person one vote Replace the rubber-stamp Legco with a genuine people's assembly with powers to tax the super-rich, abolish poverty, implement a decent mimum wage, reverse privatisation and defend jobs The vote for all citizens at sixteen years of age including migrants Abolish the functional constituencies and all other closed circle elections For elected representatives to be paid only a skilled workers' salary, plus legitimate running expenses open to public inspection - no privileges for politicians and officials For a mass campaign based on the creation of action committees in workplaces and colleges, to include mass actions, walkouts and strikes, in order to build irresistable pressure behind these demands For public ownership under full democratic control of the banks and big companies, and the adoption of democratic socilaist policies as the only way to permanently secure democratic rights and eradicate the present deep crisis of the capitalist system.

Britain:Rob Williams reinstatement a victory for all workers

Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:17:35 GMT

Workers’ solidarity forces Linamar bosses back

Socialist Party reporters (CWI in England & Wales)

Rob Williams, leading Socialist Party (CWI in England & Wales) member and vice-chair of the National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN), has won his campaign against Linamar management in Swansea, who summarily sacked him without notice for an "irretrievable breakdown of trust".

The news of Rob William's unconditional reinstatement as convenor in the Linamar car parts factory in Swansea is a victory for all workers and militant trade unionism.

First of all, this victory is down to the marvellous solidarity shown by the Linamar workers in Rob William's plant - the Unite members who refused, under tremendous intimidation, to accept Rob's sacking.

They not only stood by him, but were prepared to take all-out strike action, for as long as it took, to get Rob his job back. The Linamar workforce were prepared to strike so that Rob could take his proper place in the factory as their elected convenor of the Unite shop stewards.

Support
This victory is also down to the tremendous support that Rob Williams received from around Wales, from the UK as a whole and, indeed, many other countries as well.

The big show of support for Rob at a mass rally of workers in Swansea, which took place the week he was sacked, demonstrated from the beginning that he was not alone and that many other were prepared to come to this aid.

The victory at Linamar is also down to the solid support that Rob had from Unite the union and its general secretary, Tony Woodley. The union has not always acted in this way in vital industrial struggles recently but we hope now that this will be a benchmark for the future.

As part of the campaign, Rob was sent by Woodley to the Ford assembly plant in Kansas, USA. This plant is the main recipient of the parts from the Swansea Linamar plant. It soon became clear that the plant in Kansas was already in deep trouble due to difficulties with supplies from Swansea. If an all-out-strike had started at Linamar, Ford would have had to shut the Kansas plant down for the duration.

Final straw
This pressure was clearly the final straw for the Linamar bosses, and they realised they were on to a loser if they maintained their victimisation of Rob.

Rob Williams would like to thank all those who sent messages of support and financial donations to the campaign.

The demo on Saturday which was planned in Swansea is now cancelled but there will be a victory rally in the near future.

This victory shows that the workers can fight back against victimisations and all that the bosses throw at us. This campaign should be seen as a benchmark for all future struggles, particularly following on from the victories at Visteon and the Lindsey Oil Refinery plants earlier this year.

Rob will be a platform speaker at the National Shop Stewards Network conference on Saturday 27 June in London. See the Socialist Party website for details.

Xinjiang: Brutal policing triggers deadly riot

Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:50:01 GMT

140 killed and 800 injured in worst ethnic clashes for decades in China’s Muslim-majority region

Vincent Kolo, chinaworker.info

A peaceful sit-down protest in the capital city Ürümqi by around 300 Uighurs, the Turkic-speaking minority that is the dominant population group in Xinjiang, was transformed by trigger-happy police into perhaps the most serious ethnic clashes seen in decades. Xinjiang, known as East Turkestan to many Uighurs, has seen ethnic tensions rise as a result of Chinese state repression that went into overdrive after “9/11” and the global “war on terror”, discrimination of non-Chinese speakers, and a yawning wealth gap that puts the indigenous population at the bottom.

The anger boiled over on Sunday 5 July as hundreds of riot police waded into what had been a peaceful protest by Uighurs, mostly youth. Xinhua News Agency report that around 1,000 Uighurs rioted, overturning police barriers, attacking bystanders and smashing vehicles. Witnesses quoted in Western media said that up to 3,000 rioters faced around 1,000 police and paramilitary police. Chinese media gave the figure of at least 140 people killed and 816 injured, warning that the death toll could rise. These reports state that 261 motor vehicles and around 200 shops were attacked or burned.

“The casualty toll, if confirmed, would make this the deadliest outbreak of violence in China in many years,” writes the New York Times. Already, this represents the most serious outbreak of violence in Xinjiang since 1997 and threatens to eclipse the horrific death toll in Tibetan areas last year. A total clampdown is now in force in Ürümqi with martial law declared and telephone and internet services cut. Dozens of casualties, from both Han and Uighur communities, have been taken to city hospitals.

China Central Television (CCTV) showed footage of Uighur protesters attacking and kicking people on the ground. Other people sat dazed with blood pouring down their faces. As with the rioting in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, in March 2008, such images will inflame anti-Uighur sentiment among sections of the Han Chinese who make up 92 percent of China’s population. Indeed, this is the intention of China’s ruling elite, who undoubtedly want to seize upon events in Ürümqi to create a welcome popular diversion from the deepening economic crisis and growing discontent that threatens to spoil the ruling ‘communist’ party’s celebration of 60 years in power this October. Typically, the central thrust of official propaganda is that the violence in Xinjiang was fomented from outside by exile groups - the message being that all Chinese should unite behind “their” government to protest against “foreign interference”.

No one should be fooled by this ‘spin’ on the events in Xinjiang. Reports at this stage are fragmentary, but the peaceful character of the initial protest in Ürümqi seems clear. Associated Press report that: “Accounts differed over what happened next in Xinjiang’s capital of Ürümqi, but the violence seemed to have started when a crowd of protesters – who started out peaceful – refused to disperse.” An American eyewitness was quoted by this agency saying that police pushed the protesters back with tear gas, fire hoses and batons, and protesters replied by knocking over police barriers and smashing bus windows. “Every time the police showed some force, the people would jump the barriers and get back on the street. It was like a cat-and-mouse sort of game,” he told AP.

Racist clash at Guangdong factory

The protest was held to demand answers from officialdom over an incident in Guangdong, southern China, on 26 June. A horrendous communal (ethnic) clash between Han Chinese and Uighur migrant workers at a toy factory in the city of Shaoguan resulted in two Uighurs being killed (although there are reports the number could be higher) and 118 injured from both ethnic groups. The incident was started by a Han Chinese worker who had lost his job at Early Light, a private company, that until recently employed over 50,000 workers in southern China. Rather than blaming the boss – Hong Kong’s ‘toy billionaire’ Francis Choi – this worker vented his anger on the 600 Uighur workers brought to the province as cheap labour (even cheaper than Han). This worker, who has since been arrested, circulated a false story on the internet claiming six Uighur men had raped two Han women at the factory. Gangs of Han workers attacked the Uighur dormitories with knives and metal bars and the Uighurs defended themselves with the same means – a bloodbath ensued.

This incident is highly symptomatic of processes in China, as tensions reach breaking point over unemployment (at a post-1949 record), pay cuts (200m migrants have been pitched into a new ‘race to the bottom’ competing for fewer and fewer factory jobs) and official corruption that penetrates almost every sphere of human activity. With all protest channels closed down and workers’ self-organisation outlawed, anger against the state is rising but so too is racism, crime, drug abuse, suicide, and other expressions of hopelessness. As a footnote on the Shaoguan incident, Choi, the billionaire toymaker, is officially worth US$1 billion and boasts a mansion with over 30 sports cars in its car park. The minimum wage set by Shaoguan’s government, which is the norm for most migrant workers, is just 500 yuan a month (approximately US$73). Such are the extremes of the ‘two Chinas’ today: A migrant worker would have to work for 261 years, not spending one fen (cent) of his wage, in order to buy one of Mr Choi’s Ferraris; yet such abysmally low wages are being fought over sometimes with tragic and bloody consequences.

The outbreak of street fighting in Ürümqi represents a ‘feedback loop’ from the clashes in Guangdong. Reports have circulated that police also took part in attacking the Uighur workers in Shaoguan, that several Uighurs despite being victims were among those arrested, and rumours that the mobile phones of Uighurs in Shaoguan had been confiscated to prevent them speaking out. Angered by these reports, and suspicious of another official cover up, a crowd of Uighurs went to the streets of Ürümqi to demand answers and protest against what is obvious discriminatory treatment.

State racism

The Shaoguan incident, widely reported on the internet and even in official media, has undoubtedly aroused deep indignation among Uighurs who have seen millions of Han Chinese move into Xinjiang, dominating the growing private sector (the population of Ürümqi, 2.3m, is now 70% Han Chinese), while Uighurs who move to other parts of China face systemic discrimination and racism, are harassed by police and other authorities, and ostracised as ‘untrustworthy’ and ‘prone to violence’ by some layers of the Han Chinese population. Racist ideas in any society do not arise spontaneously from below, but are implanted and cultivated by rulers to further their own policy interests. So it was with the rise of antisemitism in Europe, and “white supremacist” ideology against Afro-Americans in the U.S. And so it has been for decades in China with official distrust of the Uighur minority and their stubborn adherence to their own language, culture and religion, which in the bureaucratic-mandarin mindset poses a threat to “national interests”.

These prejudices are much in evidence now in the official version of the Ürümqi events. The claim that exiled Uighur spokeswoman Rebiya Kadeer, based in the U.S., is behind the riot cannot be taken seriously. Xinjiang’s Governor Nuer Baikeli has stated that, “After the [Shaoguan] incident, the three forces [i.e. separatism, militant action, and religious extremism] abroad strived to beat this up and seized it as an opportunity to attack us, inciting street protests.”

This claim is no more plausible than the claims the Dalai Lama orchestrated the rioting in Tibet last year, at a time when he was pleading to be allowed to attend the Beijing Olympics, the target of an attempted boycott campaign by his own supporters. Similarly when Han Chinese and other groups of workers stage strikes and street protests, the regime routinely points to the “black hands” of radical intellectuals, human rights activists, leftists, or falun gong practitioners, who they allege must be behind such actions - as if workers are too stupid to struggle on their own account!

In Xinjiang, while support for independence runs deep among Uighurs and other minorities, this is not yet a universal trend, and in this particular case it does not seem to have been the motor force of the protests. Eyewitnesses report that some Uighur protesters carried the Chinese flag. This is quite logical given that the aim of their action was to secure basic rights and assurances for Uighurs working elsewhere in China, but also in the hope the flag would offer some protection against repression and precisely the sort of propaganda against “separatism” that is now raining down. Having spread from Guangdong to Xinjiang, there is now a very real danger of racist revenge attacks on Uighurs in other parts of China, aggravated by chauvinistic government propaganda to justify the crackdown.

Police fired shots

From what are still sketchy eyewitness accounts it seems the security forces, after issuing several warnings to clear the area, atacked the demonstrators with gas and reportedly also cattle-prods, thus transforming a peaceful if angry protest into the worst violence in more than a decade. Even without a full picture of events (which may never emerge) this scenario seems very plausible. Several witnesses reported hearing gunfire in the evening of 5 July, by which time the riot was in full swing. Why would a several hour-long sit-down protest suddenly and without provocation go on a rampage, especially in a city where Uighurs are the minority, and where police numbers are overwhelming? As the Times (UK) points out: “Ürümqi has for years been one of the most well-controlled cities in Xinjiang because of the high and rapidly growing population of Han and the large presence of security forces.”

Are the security forces capable of turning one of the “most well-controlled cities” into a bloodbath? To answer this question we only need to look at their record elsewhere in China, where heavy-handed policing is a well-known major cause of unrest and rioting. We can point to the Weng’an incident (Guizhou province) one year ago as an example, and the Shishou incident (Hubei province) last month as another. There are too many other examples to list here.

The ruling party’s influential Outlook News Weekly commented as recently as its 15 June issue: “Party officials must pay close attention to mass incidents without making mountains out of molehills and seeing them as colossal ‘political incidents.’ Treating these incidents as anti-government actions and subsequently suppressing them with strong force would be the precise method of exacerbating problems, and would have the direct result of aggravating the opposition between officials and civilians.”

This is not the first time central government organs have urged a sensitive approach, fearing that local protests can easily spin out of control because as the same article explains, “social contradictions have already formed certain foundations of society and the masses, creating a powder keg ready to explode at the first hint of a flame...” Yet despite these wiser counsels, so contradictory and unstable is the Octopus of the Chinese state that while the head may urge caution, its tentacles proceed to do the exact opposite, clinging to what they understand best: brute force. This seems to have been the trigger for the latest eruption in Xinjiang.

Socialism and working class unity

A riot by its very nature is a blind and destructive action, an act of desperation. It is not a method for achieving conscious political demands; it does not follow a democratically agreed structure (which is outlawed and therefore very difficult in China), and in conditions like those in Xinjiang this can easily boil over into attacks on innocent civilians targeted for their ethnicity. Socialists in no way support or advocate rioting as a means of political struggle, but neither do we join the chorus – led by the Chinese dictatorship – that puts the blame upon the Uighur protesters for this turn of events. The responsibility for what happened lies with the Beijing regime and its security forces, whose zero tolerance towards public protests and any form of independent action and thought is creating social explosions all over China. This is exactly as socialists warned. One year ago, we warned on chinaworker.info: “Beneath this surface ‘calm’, however, Xinjiang remains a time bomb...” [The national question in Xinjiang, chinaworker.info, 15 January 2008]

Socialists are completely opposed to the Chinese regime’s policies in Xinjiang and the repression now underway in Ürümqi. The Chinese state acts in Xinjiang in the same way it acts over incidents of unrest elsewhere: to defend the interests of the moneyed elite and the untrammeled rule of the current dictatorship. An independent non-government enquiry should be established to look into the events of 5 July and 26 June, including representatives of the Uighur community chosen by themselves. Working class unity over religious and ethnic lines represents the only way out of this crisis. Full democratic rights, including an end to linguistic and ethnic discrimination at school and work, and the right of self-determination for national minorities, are an indispensable part of this struggle. Building a new socialist labour movement, based upon the bedrock of independent trade unions that organise all workers regardless of nationality, sex, religious beliefs, and hukou status, is the urgent task of our time.

For a Socialist Xinjiang and a Socialist China

From the book ‘China - Sweatshop of the World’ by Vincent Kolo and Chen Lizhi (available from chinaworker.info). This is an excerpt from the chapter on Xinjiang:

At this stage, it is not certain that a majority of Uighurs want outright independence. Despite the extremely lop-sided effects of today’s economic growth, it is clear that Xinjiang benefits from economic integration with the rest of China, and there is an understandable fear even among Uighurs that an independent state of East Turkestan could suffer lost jobs and investments. However, if the majority opted for independence, socialists would support this, but with the slogan of an “independent democratic socialist East Turkestan”, explaining that the grip of the Beijing regime (and the capitalist elites in Central Asia who also oppose independence), can only be broken by a successful socialist revolution on an all-China and all-Asia basis.

Only by linking their struggle, in other words, with a mass revolutionary movement of the working class in China and internationally, with the aim of ending capitalism and despotism, can the national oppression of the Uighur people be overcome. On the basis of a democratic workers’ and poor peasants’ government, the people of Xinjiang/East Turkestan would be free to decide what their relationship should be with the Chinese state, whether independence (with democratic guarantees including the right to autonomy or separation for the Han majority regions), or for genuine autonomy within a unified state. This would include the possibility of a wider socialist federation – on a democratic and voluntary basis – of China, Central Asia and Russia, opening boundless possibilities for the development of the massive economic potential of Eurasia.

On the basis of capitalism and imperialism, the national conflict in Xinjiang and the wider region is insoluble. This is why Marxists refuse to give any support to the existing nationalist parties and groupings – secular or religious – none of which put forward an alternative to capitalism and therefore, regardless of their stated aims, stand not for the abolition of oppression and poverty, but only for changing the national-state forms of this oppression. But we are completely opposed to the suppression of nationalist or religious organisations by the Chinese state and support their right to operate legally, just as we call for full democratic rights: freedom of political activity, freedom of worship, right of assembly, a free press etc. We defend the national and cultural rights of Uighurs and other minorities, including the right to use their own language in dealing with the state, equal status for minority languages in the school system and an end to all forms of discrimination in respect of jobs, housing and public services.

The working class in Xinjiang, and elsewhere, must organise independently of all capitalist political formations. To liberate itself it must forge links with the workers of other nations and other provinces of China. The Han Chinese working class must also embrace the struggle against national and religious oppression in Xinjiang as its own struggle. Xinjiang has become a training ground for the latest techniques in state repression and ‘anti-terrorism’ that will be used against all those who stand up to the dictatorial CCP regime: striking workers, anti-pollution activists, pro-democracy activists and socialists. Only by building a united working class movement, within which members of the oppressed national minorities will play a crucial role, can capitalism, authoritarianism and national oppression be consigned to the history books.

Linamar sack Swansea trade union leader

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:37:27 GMT

Socialist Party member Rob Williams, trade union (Unite) convenor of the Linamar car parts plant in Swansea, was sacked on 6 May.

This was in spite of a walkout by his fellow workers when he was first told he was being sacked, and the intervention of Unite leader Tony Woodley. The campaign for Rob's reinstatement is continuing, with the union balloting for strike action.

Rob spoke to The Socialist:

What's clear now is that my sacking is part of the company's strategy to attack the terms and conditions of our members in the plant. Clearly the company see my sacking as one part of a process.

The company want to renege on the agreements they made on pensions last summer. They want to 'buy down' terms and conditions, in other words give a one-off payment to worsen conditions. How voluntary that will be I don't know.

The members are now voting on strike action. But it is not just about me being sacked. It's not just about defending the union within the plant it is also now about defending their own contracts.

The talk around the plant is that I was offered a deal in the meeting. I didn't receive any formal deal off the company but there were certainly hints that I could have had my job back if I was prepared to recommend these attacks on terms and conditions. There was talk about a pay-out and there was talk about a job with the union, although I got nothing formal off the company or the union.

But with the company threatening our members' terms and conditions there was no way on earth that I was going to sign up to a sweetheart deal.&nbspThe point is it's not about Rob Williams. This is an attack on the union. And the only people who should decide who is convenor are the members in the plant.

On 6 March Tony Woodley met Brian Wade, the Canadian Linamar manager. All day Wade made it perfectly clear that his agenda was to reduce costs within the company. That means attacking our members' terms and conditions. Then about 4.30pm they said I was sacked.

I want to pay tribute to the workers at the plant because if they hadn't been prepared to stop work the previous week I'd have been sacked then.

There's a strike ballot now and the union are actively encouraging everyone to vote for the strike. We want to send a clear and loud message to the company that we're not prepared to accept the sacking and we're not prepared to accept the attacks on terms and conditions.

This is a matter for the whole union. Far bigger companies than Linamar in Swansea will be looking at this case to see if Linamar get away with it so they can do the same.

An attack on the union should be defended by the whole union. And the union should rule nothing in and nothing out.

What you can do

Phone protests to:Head of Swansea Linamar Brian Wade 01792 656339, personnel manager 01792 656238.

Messages of protest to linda.hasenfratz@linamar.com

Messages of support to Rob Williams: robbo@redwills.freeserve.co.uk

Donations to the campaign: Linamar workers' hardship fund, 31 Waun Wen Terrace, Swansea SA1 1DX.

Make cheques out to TGWU 4/1 branch. Or make donations direct through your own bank to: TG 4/1 branch, sort code 08 60 01, account number 20055051.

Hong Kong stages biggest democracy march for four years

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:34:38 GMT

More than 70,000 demand ‘one person one vote’ in biggest protest since Tsang took over

Vincent Kolo, chinaworker.info

The temperature in Hong Kong was sizzling yesterday, both in climatic and political terms. Organisers of the afternoon’s ‘Big Walk’ for democracy put the turnout at 76,000, twice the number who took part last year, and the biggest July 1 march since Donald Tsang Yam-kuen became Hong Kong’s ‘despot’ (Chief Executive) in 2005.

While the organisers had hoped for an even bigger turnout following the record numbers – 200,000 – who turned out to commemorate the Beijing massacre of 1989 on June 4, the demonstration was a thunderous protest against the Beijing-appointed Hong Kong administration, and by implication also against the misnamed ‘communist’ dictatorship in Beijing. A rainbow alliance of pan-democratic organisations demanded an end to the government’s delaying tactics over democracy, with many calling for elections in 2012 based on one person one vote, rather than the still unspecified pronouncements from Beijing of universal suffrage in 2017 “at the earliest” for the election of Chief Executive, and 2020 in the case of the Legislative Council.

Beijing’s quandary

The Beijing regime is stuck in a quandary over Hong Kong and its people’s demands for full democratic rights. The massacre in the Chinese capital of perhaps 1,000 protesting students and workers in June 1989 set off a chain reaction in Hong Kong with demands for democracy acquiring enormous force. This was something the British colonial administration that ruled Hong Kong for 156 years (until the handover on July 1, 1997) had never seen fit to allow. Beijing feels menaced by these demands, fearing the ‘virus’ of democracy will spread to the rest of China, unleashing forces that could bring about the government’s downfall. At the same time the dictatorship is constrained by a series of economic and political factors and cannot simply use brute force to club the ‘genie of democracy’ back into its bottle. For starters this would threaten an exodus from the Special Administrative Region and the risk of massive collateral damage to its position as a financial and legal centre, and conduit for massive investment into mainland China.

These realities are reflected in the official Chinese media’s coverage of the Hong Kong pro-democracy demonstration. While the official flag-raising ceremony and celebration of Hong Kong’s return to China 12 years ago is covered extensively, China Daily mentions only that “Later yesterday, some 26,000 people took to the streets according to police data, to protest.”

While not saying what the ‘protest’ was about, China Daily did report that several thousand took part in a separate protest against the banks over the Lehman Brothers ‘minibond’ affair. Without giving details (that major U.S. and also Hong Kong arms of mainland banks collectively robbed around 48,000 depositors of nearly HK$20 billion), the official media clearly felt safe to report on an anti-bank protest, but not one that directly challenges the methods and legitimacy of the Chinese regime.

Even the annual tug-of-war over numbers between the police and protest organisers is part of official efforts to downplay the July 1 demonstration. As quoted above, the police put the ludicrously low figure of 26,000 on yesterday’s pro-democracy march, just a third as large as the organiser’s estimate. Yet over the officially sanctioned pro-Beijing parade and ceremony we see organisers and the police arriving at the same figure of 40,000! Yesterday saw some angry scenes at the end of the day, as police penned in thousands who had waited for some time in the baking heat to join the march. Many people were treated by first-aid teams as the temperature in the shade hit 32 degrees Celsius. One politician even accused the police of deliberately holding up the progress of the demonstration so as to minimise the numbers participating.

Police numbers disputed

Umbrellas in Victoria Park

Greater numbers of workers and youth

The great significance of yesterday’s demonstration is that it transcended its previous character as ‘purely’ a march for democracy. Several trade union groups joined the procession for the first time airing their grievances over the government’s crisis-handling policies. This is an extremely important development and represents the possibility to lift the struggle for democratic rights onto a higher level, by connecting it firmly to the organised working class rather than as now, a movement dominated by middle-class professional groups and intellectuals.

Postal workers fighting cutbacks and a large contingent of civil servants who face job cuts through outsourcing (this is a group whose leaders have traditionally exchewed taking a ‘political’ stance) were there in the thick of it. 160,000 civil servants in Hong Kong are being pressured to take a 5.8 percent pay cut to ‘reflect’ the situation in the private sector – where over 40% have suffered pay cuts. There were also several thousand migrant workers from the Philippines, Indonesia, and elsewhere, demanding stronger protection and inclusion in any new minimum wage legislation. Not for the first time these mostly women workers, uprooted from their homes for many years to provide vital services in Hong Kong, proved to be among the most militant and class conscious. Their banners proclaimed “We are workers, not slaves!” and demanded “No wage cuts”.

Demonstrators in Hong Kong

Youthful protest

Hong Kong pro-democracy march

Events in the preceding days, with thousands of police threatening their first protest march for 30 years (narrowly averted by some deft official manoeuvring) underline the scale of the social crisis developing in Hong Kong. The South China Morning Post commented that the mood of some demonstrators “was angrier than in past years”. There was even a ‘complaints choir’ on hand to underline the rise discontent in the city!

More than ten thousand ‘bank victims’ organised a march earlier in the day that ended in turbulent scenes, with crash barriers torn down and some tussles with police, outside the headquarters of Bank of China. This bank, the Hong Kong arm of the mainland’s second largest bank, was the single worst offender in the Lehmans scandal. Later in the evening several hundred mostly young demonstrators staged a protest outside the government buildings, vowing to stay until Donald Tsang cam out to speak to them. These demonstrators, including ‘Long Hair’ Leung Kwok-Hung were forcibly removed by police in the early hours of the morning.

The youthful composition of the march, a surprise to some commentators, has been a hot topic in the media and clearly has the establishemnt politicians worried. “A considerable number of young people have developed an anti-establishment mentality,” commented professor Lau Siu-kai, who is the government’s top political advisor. Students turned out with tee-shirts bearing the slogan “We are not Donald’s [Tsang’ s] slaves”. League of Social Democrats legislator Wong Yuk-man saw the high youth participation in the following way: “They are the fresh force of democracy. Donald Tsang take heed.”

CWI Stall in Causeway Bay

Marchers in Hennessy Road

Need for a mass workers’ party

In outline, but not yet as a conscious or organised movement, yesterday’s demonstration represented the awakening of a new social force in which workers’ anger over the effects of the capitalist crisis is fusing with impatience over official foot-dragging in relation to democratic demands. This confirms a trend of radicalisation in Hong Kong dating back to last year’s Legco elections (only half the seats are actually elected) in which the radical League of Social Democrats (LSD) got ten percent of the vote in its first electoral test. The mass turnout yesterday follows a record turnout of 7,000 on May Day, and the mega Tiananmen vigil on June 4. With unemployment having almost doubled to 5.3%, and the economy plunging into a crisis even deeper than in the 1990s (GDP is set to shrink 6.5% this year) no wonder Tsang at the flag-raising ceremony spoke of a “challenging year”!

The crucial factor lacking in Hong Kong is a mass workers’ party that could provide a political focus and a vehicle for struggle for these different, but connected, layers. The gains of the LSD, while it is still a small force at this stage, undoubtedly show the potential for a new workers’ party to develop. This is becoming more and more urgent as the struggle with the Chinese regime over universal suffrage moves into its thirteenth year. Annual marches are not enough to shift such an entrenched regime that stands to lose so much from such an outcome. This does not mean the regime cannot be pushed into making retreats – yesterday (ironically, the ruling party’s 88th birthday) also saw it climb down over the introduction of the Green Dam-Youth Escort computer hardware that it wants installed in all mainland sold computers. Internet campaigners are warning, however, that their campaign must be continued as the authorities will undoubtedly return to this in future.

Socialists and the supporters of chinaworker.info point out the need for more resolute measures in the fight for democracy, and especially for the mobilisation of the working class in this struggle. We call for democratic committees in every workplace, school and housing estate to put muscle into the struggle. Youth could spearhead this movement by preparing as a first step a one-day school and college strike, linking the demand for universal suffrage with protests against youth unemployment and slave wages for young workers – for example at fast food restaurants. All such campaigning must be linked with the need for change in mainland China and support for workers’ struggle there. As we pointed out in the leaflet issued by CWI supporters for yesterday’s demonstration: “While the struggle for democracy can certainly start in Hong Kong, it cannot be won here alone – it is part of a wider struggle on an all-China basis to end one-party rule and introduce fundamental democratic rights”.

The supporters of the CWI and chinaworker.info took part in yesterday’s demonstration making the case that the struggle for democratic rights, and against unemployment and wage cuts, is linked to the need to break with crisis-hit capitalism and build a genuine socialist society with democratic control over the big companies, banks and wider economy.

Long Hair Leung Kwok-hung and LSD legislators

Hong Kong Complaints Choir

100,000 set to march against Hong Kong’s undemocratic government

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:18:01 GMT

Alarm in Beijing over Hong Kong’s deepening government crisis and growing demands for universal suffrage

Vincent Kolo, chinaworker.info

Demands for democracy are shifting into ‘storm force’ in Hong Kong on the twelfth anniversary of its return to China. Today’s (1 July) pro-democracy march from Victoria Park at 3pm is set to be the biggest for several years. Protests against the Beijing-picked government’s backtracking over introducing universal suffrage will be joined by other grievances from trade unions over pay freezes or cuts, bank victims’ groups, and others reeling from the effects of the global capitalist crisis. On all these issues the government of Donald Tsang Yam-kuen has shown itself to be extremely faithful to the interests of its ‘electors’ - the tiny group of Beijing-friendly tycoons and business leaders who dominate an 800-strong selection committee that chooses the government Chief Executive. Behind a smokescreen of economic ‘stimulus’ measures the government has been ‘stimulating’ its friends in big business while shifting the burden of the crisis onto the poorest sections of society.

The Chinese regime is clearly alarmed about the expected high turnout for today’s march, which can further weaken Tsang’s position and encourage workers, youth, and other groups to fight for their interests. Organisers are hoping that as many as 100,000 people will take part. Even the police are expecting about 90,000 people to turn out

“This year is the 60th anniversary [of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China]. They [Chinese leaders] are afraid they will lose face if many people hit the streets,” Democratic Party chairman Albert Ho Chun-yan, one of the organisers, said at a press conference yesterday.

Capitalist crisis

This year, the march has taken on a new role as a general focus for social grievances and ‘livelihood issues’ amid a severe recession (the economy slumped by 7.8% in the last quarter). Many public sector unions have decided to join the march and use it as a platform for their case as the government imposes a pay freeze, or pay cuts for better paid grades, and contracts out more and more public services. The anger in this sector is evident by the threat of the police to stage a protest march on Sunday. This is because a pay review that awarded the police a new pay structure has been put on ice by Tsang’s government until the “economy improves”. To this standard argument of capitalist politicians we would reply: Improves for who? The Hang Seng Index (main stock market index) has surged 28 percent this year and a new, but short-lived, bubble of speculative gains is benefiting banks, hedge funds and all the other shady and unaccountable financial institutions that created the present crisis. Bank profits are again heading upwards - but these are not frozen ‘until the economy improves’!

The police protest was narrowly averted by a hastily convened mass meeting at which Hong Kong’s Police Commissioner pledged his support - in vaguely formulated terms - for pay rises. The appearance of concessions to the police will surely encourage protests from other ‘disciplined services’ - the fire brigade, customs and immigration, prison services - also facing a pay squeeze under the government’s so-called crisis-fighting measures. A Chinese government analyst told the South China Morning Post that the regime viewed a possible police officers’ march as a “destabilising” factor in Hong Kong.

“The government has led the way in exploitation of workers by outsourcing our positions. We have to stop this by marching,” declared Tse Tin-wing, representing the postal workers. Two postal unions announced they would mobilise hundreds of their members to march today. They will be joined by several civil service unions affiliated to the Confederation of Trade Unions. Also participating will be several hundred victims of the Lehman Brothers ‘minibond’ scandal, which wiped out the savings of around 48,000 people in Hong Kong when the U.S. bank went bankrupt last September. They accuse the government of laxity and inaction over widespread abuses by major banks, more than 20 of which participated in the sale of these high-risk and now worthless financial products.

Effects in mainland China

The Hong Kong march will be closely watched, and not just by the government, in mainland China. Not coincidentally 1 July is also the day the Chinese dictatorship increases its internet controls by ordering that all personal computers sold from today must have the blocking programme Green Dam pre-installed. This order has drawn widespread protests, and rightly so, but will ultimately fail to block China’s more than 300 million internet users. Another unmistakable sign of greater political repression is the formal charging of democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, after seven months of arrest, with trying to ‘subvert the state’. Liu is the main author of the Charter 08 manifesto against one-party rule. His case will be taken up actively on the Hong Kong demonstration. While chinaworker.info does not support Liu’s pro-capitalist economic views, we unreservedly call for his release and for an end to the persecution of regime critics.

This year, especially in the wake of the largest ever 4 June candle-light vigil (for victims of the 1989 Beijing massacre), there is a heightened consciousness in Hong Kong about events in mainland China and the direct impact they have on the future of Hong Kong. Speaking on the Liu Xiaobo case, Civic Party politician Claudia Mo Manching said “If we don’t speak up, tomorrow’s Hong Kong may just become today’s mainland.” This is undoubtedly true, but the point is to fight to change mainland China. The struggle that has already begun in Hong Kong cannot be won in Hong Kong alone, but must spread to the mainland, into a mighty mass movement for full democratic rights, including democratic control over the big companies and banks whose profits rampage is wrecking the economies of Hong Kong, China and the world.

Further reading: chinaworker.info leaflet for 1 July march for democracy

Hong Kong security guards strike against longer work hours

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:31:01 GMT

Working day to be lengthened from 8 to 12 hours!

James Miller, chinaworker.info

Over 60 security guards employed in car parks across Hong Kong, owned by The Link Real Estate Investment Trust, took part in strike action last Friday, 26 June. The striking workers joined colleagues at a rally held at the Wong Tai Sin Shopping Centre and delivered a petition to Link management offices and government buildings.

Largely comprising middle aged, working mothers, the security guards chanted and carried banners aloft, in protest against the extension of working hours and prospect of likely job losses, should threatened changes to their working contracts be carried by their employers.

Management of the Link, which operates approximately 180 former Housing Authority car parks and shopping centre facilities, say that from mid-July, security guards working at its 180 car parks must work 12-hour shifts, rather than the current practice of 8-hour shifts. Although the security guards are to receive a tokenistic salary rise from HK$6,600 to HK$7,300 (per month), they are effectively facing a substantial reduction in their hourly rate – from $28 to $23.

The Link REIT, which reported profits of HK$2.19 billion over 2008, took over the ownership and management of car parks and shopping centre’s, located in public housing estates, from the Housing Authority in 2004 following a so-called divestment exercise, i.e. privatisation. In 2002, the Housing Authority introduced the three-shifts-a-day roster for its security guards in order to shorten the physically exhausting 12 hour shift to an eight hour shift. Management of the Link is now taking the retrogressive step of re-introducing the 12 hour working shift in its drive to exploit former publically owned facilities to maximize profits.

For security guards employed by the Link, the return to the 12 hour shift will mean that it will be difficult to meet the needs of their families, especially those with young children or the elderly to care for: those who escape the threat of layoff’s may still be forced to quit.

1 July: March for democratic rights in Hong Kong

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:44:02 GMT

End one-party rule! Mass struggle for democracy in Hong Kong and China

chinaworker.info

[1 July will again see a huge demonstration demanding universal suffrage in Hong Kong. This year the march may be bigger than for some years as a result of the economic crisis and political radicalisation that was manifested clearly in the 200,000 strong turnout for the June 4 commemoration of the victims of the 1989 Beijing massacre. The following is the text of the leaflet supporters of the CWI will give out in the demonstration.]

1 July 2009 - The Committee for a Workers' International (CWI) says:

End one-party rule
Mass struggle for democracy in Hong Kong and China

Once again Hong Kong is staging a mega demonstration to demand full democratic rights, not the bogus democracy of today. And once again millions of people and especially youth in mainland China are eagerly watching what happens in Hong Kong despite the best efforts of the one-party regime and its vast censorship machine to block out this information. June 4 this year was a turning point in Hong Kong's recent history. It was also a political earthquake against the Chinese dictatorship and its systematic attempts to hide its past crimes. When a record 200,000 people marked the 20th anniversary of the bloody Beijing massacre, this ignited new expectations and determination to struggle for democratic control over society and against the delays, manoeuvres, and lies of the dictatorship and its local apologists like Donald Tsang.

The progress towards free elections based on universal suffrage in Hong Kong has stalled. China's so called 'communist' regime fears that a shift to universal suffrage here will awaken massive pressure in other parts of China for similar rights. So, while the struggle for democracy can certainly start in Hong Kong, it cannot be won here alone - it is part of a wider struggle on an all-China basis to end one-party rule and introduce fundamental democratic rights. The CWI fights for:
- Democratic rights in China, a free press and the right of assembly
- An end to one-party rule and police repression, release all political prisoners, for freedom of political and religious association
- Support the struggle of workers in China to organise, build independent unions and stop 'blood-and-sweat' exploitation.

Lessons from Iran

As the increased repression and censorship around June 4 shows, the Chinese regime lives in dread of a new 1989-style mass movement for democratic rights. They fear that not only students but also workers who today are suffering pay cuts and factory closures could throw their weight into such a movement. This would be an even bigger threat to the autocratic system because of the decisive economic power of the working class especially once it begins to organise independently, build its own democratic trade unions and a workers' political party.

The revolutionary movement unfolding in Iran shows what could develop in China in coming years. Today's demonstration in Hong Kong should show its support for the struggle of the Iranian masses against the corrupt religious-capitalist regime. That regime has to resort to electoral fraud to get its candidates installed. In Hong Kong, however, this is not necessary - only 800 people, mostly millionaires, are entitled to vote for the head of the government. In other words, Hong Kong's government enjoys even weaker democratic legitimacy than the vote-rigging dictatorship in Tehran!

Warning from Macau

In 2003, half a million Hong Kong people marched to defeat the Article 23 security law which seriously threatened the freedom of assembly and free speech. This showed the power of mass struggle. But it also shows that 'old' victories have to be won again and again. The passage of a similar security law in Macau earlier this year punishes crimes of treason, secession or subversion against the Chinese government, including what it calls "preparatory acts" of these crimes, and the theft of state secrets. Leaflets like this one would be illegal under that law! The charge of 'state secrets' is widely used on the mainland, for example against lawyers for the parents of schoolchildren killed in the Sichuan earthquake.

Beijing will surely try to impose a new version of this law on Hong Kong in future. They desperately need ways to further clog up the machinery of any plan for universal suffrage with undemocratic conditions, clauses and limits, allowing them to keep ultimate control. They want a vetting system for candidates for Chief Executive, for example, whereby Beijing can block any candidates it deems as 'unpatriotic'. Exactly the same system operates in Iran (where religious rather than 'communist' officials decide who can and cannot run for president).

Mass struggle is only way

Such manoeuvres and sabotage must be met head on. It is mass struggle rather than deft negotiators and 'compromises' that have secured victory for mass democratic struggles throughout history. Especially it has been workers' organisations - mass trade unions and workers' parties - that have played a decisive role. This was the case in South Africa in the struggle for one person one vote of 20-30 years ago.

Demonstrations like today's play a crucial part in exerting mass pressure on the ruling group and showing the depth of support for democratic rights. But demonstrations once or twice a year - even large ones - are not enough in themselves to achieve victory in this struggle. A more far-reaching strategy is needed in which the crucial issue is democratic mass organisation. To succeed the movement must root itself in every workplace, college and housing estate, with democratic committees formed to agitate, educate and organise.

Students and youth can play a crucial role as the events of 1989 showed. While students do not have the same economic strength or cohesion as the working class, they can show the way and inspire by their own example. School and colleges strikes and mass occupations have traditionally been a feature of revolutionary struggles for democratic rights as in Mexico 1968, South Africa 1976, China 1989 and Iran today. These are examples that Hong Kong youth should learn from: build school/college action committees and prepare for mass action to put more power into the struggle for democracy. This example should be consciously spread to workplaces and trade unions. A campaign of mass meetings at workplaces could be used to prepare the working class to take strike action in support of demands for democratic rights.

"Profits before people"

It is not only the 'communist' regime that fears mass pressure for democratic rights in Hong Kong. Hong Kong's tycoon class and their counterparts in mainland China are agreed on a tactic of delaying and blocking so as to prolong the current undemocratic system in Hong Kong, as the best complement to one-party rule on the mainland. The super-rich have benefited enormously from the capitalist policies of the Beijing regime and are not anxious for the present status quo to end. Despite repeated claims the capitalist 'free market' automatically means democracy, this has no basis in fact in Hong Kong or China. Spokesmen for big business are always warning that Hong Kong's 'prosperity' would be threatened by greater democracy. Capitalist politicians like Donald Tsang echo such arguments: full democracy would result in 'chaos like the Cultural Revolution' he has said. More recently he told us that economic growth rather than massacres and repression should be the basis for an 'objective view' of the Beijing regime.

But what 'prosperity' are the politicians and tycoons talking about? There is little sign of this today as their system, capitalism, slides into an acute crisis. Hong Kong's economy is set to shrink by six to seven percent this year. Unemployment has doubled in a year. For tens of thousands of young people there is now only unemployment or 'slave labour' at fast food outlets like KFC - which pays just HK$16 an hour (US$2.06). The poorest are getting poorer: 400,000 workers earn less than HK$4,000 (US$516) per month in basic wage. Today the situation is worse even than in the 1990s crisis. How can this be called 'economic prosperity'? And yet this is the 'reward', if we believe Donald Tsang and Co, for not demanding 'too hasty' democratic change.

The economic crisis is not a naturally occurring 'tsunami'. The crisis is the product of a diseased system that puts the short-term profits of the biggest companies before people's needs and a planetary environment that has reached breaking point. In the last 20 years especially the global capitalist system has relied on super-exploitation in low wage economies like China alongside unprecedented financial speculation to create a global financial bubble. This bubble has now burst with disastrous results. In just one year, 30 million workers in China have lost their jobs. One in ten Americans are now dependent on food stamps. As little else than a financial centre (thanks to the designs of successive unelected governments) Hong Kong is one of the most exposed economies amid the global storm.

This is why socialists don't just fight to end the undemocratic rule of Tsang and the Beijing regime. We demand thoroughgoing social and political change. We demand the replacement of the toothless Legco with an elected popular assembly that has real powers to transform living conditions for ordinary working people - implementing a 40 hour working week, a minimum wage of at least $7000 a month and a promise of guaranteed jobs for school and college leavers.

For democratic socialism

The Committee for a Workers' International (CWI), with members across the globe, is fighting against autocracy, capitalism and war. CWI members have been active in struggle against dictators from Pakistan to South Africa, and against war from Sri Lanka to USA. In the June 5 elections to the European Parliament, CWI member Joe Higgins was elected for the first time on a surge of support as a result of many years of struggle against corruption, privatisation and neo-liberal attacks on working people. His example is an important one for Hong Kong: Joe Higgins will continue to live on an ordinary worker's wage and not accept the lavish lifestyle that parliamentarians are accustomed to. The struggle for democratic rights in Hong Kong and China is part of a wider struggle to change the world.

The CWI fights for:
- Free elections now, not in 2017 or 2020!
- Replace the rubber-stamp Legco with a genuine people's assembly elected on the basis of universal suffrage with the power to eradicate poverty, reverse privatisation and end unemployment.
- A voting age of sixteen years. Votes for all residents including migrant workers.
- All elected representatives to be paid only the wage of the average skilled worker in Hong Kong - stamp out corruption and official abuse
- Full support to the struggle of mainland workers against sweatshop conditions and for democratic rights.
- A mass workers' party to advance the struggle for a democratic socialist alternative to capitalist and authoritarian rule.

Join our struggle: cwi.china@gmail.com
Visit our website: www.chinaworker.info

Ireland: Socialist success in euro election

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:56:47 GMT

Governing Fianna Fáil suffer devastating setback - Is Labour an alternative?

Kevin McLoughlin, Socialist Party (CWI Ireland)

Joe Higgins’ euro-election victory in Dublin is a spectacular victory for the Socialist Party (CWI Ireland) and the left in general. Fianna Fáil, the governing party, suffered a devastating setback. The Socialist Party and other left groups also made gains in county council elections.

In 2007 Bertie Ahern won a third successive general election in southern Ireland, bringing the main pro-capitalist party, Fianna Fáil, close to an overall majority. On a 5 June 2009 parliamentary by-election, Ahern’s nominee, his hapless brother Maurice, came fifth in the Dublin Central constituency which Fianna Fáil had dominated for decades!

With 25.4% in the local elections and 24% in the EU elections (both held on the same day), Fianna Fáil got its lowest votes ever nationally, losing 84 council seats. They also lost one MEP and performed dismally in the two Dublin by-elections. The Greens won 18 council seats in 2004 but came back with three – a ‘just reward’ for that party’s unprincipled grab for power when it entered a coalition government with the right-wing Fiánna Fail after the 2007 general elections.

As spectacular as their fall was the dramatic victory of the Socialist Party’s Joe Higgins. Joe heaped misery on Taoiseach (prime minister) Brian Cowen, when he defeated sitting Fianna Fáil MEP, Eoin Ryan, for the final seat in Dublin.

The Socialist Party also performed very well in the county council elections, with Clare Daly, Ruth Coppinger and Joe Higgins elected in Fingal, and Mick Barry in Cork North Central. The party got over 22% of the first preference vote in Swords, 18% in Mulhuddart, 28% in Castleknock, and 26.5% in Cork North Central. Taking the eight local wards together where our ten council candidates stood, we got an impressive 13.5% of the total valid poll. Despite polling very well, unfortunately, our councilor in Tallaght, Mick Murphy, narrowly lost his seat. Importantly, the Socialist Party won two additional positions, with Frank Gallagher elected to Drogheda town council and Terry Kelleher to Balbriggan town council.

The final seats won in the euro elections (county council seats in brackets) were: Fianna Fáil three (218), Fine Gael four (340), Labour Party three (132), Socialist Party one (4), and one independent. The Green Party also won three county council seats, Sinn Féin 53, People Before Profits Alliance (PBPA) five, with 128 independents or ‘others’. Fine Gael easily won the Dublin South by-election. Significantly, Maureen O’Sullivan, the ‘Gregory candidate’ (named after a popular independent left-wing TD [MP] who died recently), beat the establishment parties in the Dublin Central by-election.
A hated government

Can the government survive this crushing defeat? Will the gains for Fine Gael last, and will the electoral growth of Labour make any difference for working-class people? The elections saw important victories for socialists, including the Socialist Party, the Tipperary Workers and Unemployed Action Group, the PBPA, the Workers Party and other independent lefts.

The hatred for Fianna Fáil was the defining characteristic of these elections. More than one in every three people who voted for Fianna Fáil in 2007 deserted it this time. Its vote in the locals in Dublin was down 6.5% on the disastrous vote they got in the 2004 local elections.

Out of 130 councillors in the four Dublin councils, Fianna Fáil has a paltry 18 – reduced by more than a third. In Cork city it lost five councillors and is left with six out of 31. In Limerick it has three out of 15. In Waterford, only one councillor out of 15.

The Greens won ten council seats throughout Dublin in 2004, today they have none. If the results were repeated in a general election, all six Green TDs would face losing their Dáil (national parliament) seats. The real probability of a complete annihilation at the polls if they continue in government may force the Greens to look for an issue around which they could exit and try to regain some credibility.

These results were fashioned by the economic crisis. People blamed Fianna Fáil. In addition, the vote showed there is little support for its policy of slashing pay and public spending. How the crisis develops will continue to be the crucial factor in determining how the different parties and forces will do in the years ahead.

Talk of ‘green shoots of recovery’ is a cruel joke. Consumption and economic activity are still declining rapidly, as are imports, signifying a big drop in domestic manufacturing, which is being badly hit by the high value of the euro. The austerity measures of the government will make conditions even worse for working people. It is a chilling prospect that the finance minister, in effect, predicted that more than 600,000, over 25% of the workforce, would be unemployed before the end of 2010!

On the basis of worsening conditions, a significant recovery of Fianna Fáil is not on the cards. In the general election, people are likely to be more desperate than ever to get rid of Fianna Fáil and its results could be even worse. Events can spin out of control and we have to be prepared that a general election could happen at almost any time.

At this point, the main beneficiaries are Fine Gael and the Labour Party, up by 5% and 4.5% respectively on the last general election. A significant portion of those who had supported Fianna Fáil over the last decade has switched to Fine Gael at this point and it is the biggest party in council seats and opinion polls.
Is Labour an alternative?

Labour increased its representation in the urban centres and now holds 45 of the 130 council seats in Dublin. It is behind Fine Gael in Limerick but is neck-and-neck or ahead in the cities of Cork, Waterford and Galway in terms of council positions. Labour is a key player on many of the main councils. But that does not mean there is any prospect of left-wing, fighting councils. Instead, regardless of the rhetoric on certain issues, services for working-class people will be attacked and undermined, including where Labour is dominant.

The boost for Fine Gael and Labour says more about the intense hatred of Fianna Fáil than indicating deep illusions in either of the official opposition parties. Neither has been in power since 1997, and the memory of that unpopular government or their disastrous coalition in the 1980s has understandably faded.

If the results of the local and euro elections were repeated in the next general election, Fine Gael and Labour would have a comfortable majority in the Dáil. Such a government would be a right-wing, anti-working class administration. That is not just because Fine Gael is likely to be in a coalition majority, it is also because Labour is part of the pro-capitalist establishment. Some may hope that, in the context of this extreme capitalist crisis, Labour may return to a left position under pressure from working-class people. There were also huge hopes in New Labour in Britain when it came to power in 1997 after years of Tory rule but look what was delivered!

The Labour Party in Ireland also ceased to be a workers’ party during the 1990s. It has moved ever further to the right under successive leaders, capitulating completely to the capitalist market. Its connection to the working class is gone and there is no committed left wing in the party. In power, any of Labour’s radical policies that may inadvertently remain on paper in policy documents will be discarded. Rather than reflect the aspirations of working people, Labour would heed and act under pressure from big business interests, demanding that the policy of making working people pay for the crisis is continued. Such an administration would likely become unpopular quickly.

On the basis of its previous record in coalition governments with the traditional capitalist parties and its recent record and policies, Labour will hugely disappoint its supporters and the working class by implementing a pro-capitalist agenda when in power. This will have a big impact on society. It will create the conditions for a further and more dramatic shift to the left and for the growth of socialist forces, including the Socialist Party.

In preparation for such a future opening, well before the local elections, the Socialist Party put forward very positive proposals that should have led to the establishment of a genuine left slate of candidates for the local elections. We were disappointed that others on the left did not fully engage or respond favourably to our proposal and as a result an opportunity was missed.

It is a mistake for the newly-elected PBPA councillors to refer to Labour and Sinn Féin as ‘left wing’ when these parties are committed to implementing pro-capitalist market policies. In a disgusting attack on union organisation and workers’ rights, Eamonn Gilmore, Labour Party leader, recently argued that public-sector workers should not take action against the government’s austerity programme.

By referring to Labour and Sinn Fein as ‘left’, and being open to an alliance and deals with them on local councils, PBPA is potentially giving support to those who will attack working-class communities. Such statements will reinforce illusions that may exist in these parties rather than pointing towards the need for a new mass left party. This mischaracterisation of what a left party and programme are needs to be resolved otherwise there is a real danger that the attempts to build a new party will fail.
Joe Higgins defeats Fianna Fáil

The victory of Joe Higgins was by far the biggest gain for the left and the working class in these elections. The result was greeted with huge enthusiasm, particularly in Dublin. For a campaign with only a fraction of the resources of the main parties, 50,510 first preference votes or 12.4% is an incredible result.

Our defeat of Sinn Féin MEP, Mary Lou McDonald, was a huge blow to its leadership and capped off a poor election for it, particularly in Dublin where it also lost three council positions. Within a couple of days, Sinn Féin’s longest serving councillor, Christy Burke, resigned from the party in Dublin. Then John Dwyer from New Ross, who got 5,000 first preference votes for Sinn Féin in the 2002 general election, also resigned.

Joe Higgins was elected on a clear socialist programme, which we outlined constantly in the media, on leaflets, and via our excellent campaign website. Joe’s main leaflet, distributed to over 200,000 homes, called for the nationalisation of the banks and major building companies, under the democratic management of working people, as the start of a state housing plan. We called for “a socialist Europe, where the wealth and resources are publicly owned and democratically run, to provide for the needs of people not profit”, and much else besides.

Joe’s election gives an indication of the potential that will emerge more generally, particularly if Labour is in a crisis-ridden government. A number of crucial factors came together at the right time. The record of Joe Higgins and the Socialist Party in major struggles – defeating water charges, fighting the bin tax (for which Joe was sent to prison), involvement in countless workers’ struggles, like the GAMA dispute – were absolutely crucial factors.

The opposition that Joe showed against Fianna Fáil in the Dáil, between 1997 and 2007, was also vital. More than anyone else, Joe exposed and warned of the crisis that Fianna Fáil’s policies and greed would lead to. Events have dramatically vindicated his and the party’s views. If people wanted to rebuke the capitalist greed that caused this crisis, Joe Higgins was clearly the most obvious candidate.

Even with such potential, a vibrant campaign is necessary to give people the confidence to turn out, that their vote can make a difference. A second Irish Times opinion poll showing Joe’s growing electoral strength was an important factor in boosting his chances, but it only had an impact because we had already increased our support and developed a momentum since the Irish Time’s first opinion poll.

The 50,510 voters knew very well that they were voting for a socialist. In an exit poll, when asked why they had voted for Joe Higgins, 48% said because of his personality/personal qualities; 29% because of his policies and 18% because he was the Socialist Party candidate. Of those made redundant over the last six months who voted, 32.4% voted for Joe. Clearly, what people refer to as Joe’s ‘personal qualities’ are directly related to his political views and his campaigning record. In other words, Joe Higgins and the Socialist Party were paid back for their record of consistently fighting for working-class people.

Other left candidates also won county council seats. Five PBPA councillors were elected to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, South Dublin and Dublin city councils. Two county councillors were elected for the Tipperary Workers and Unemployed Action Group; the action group won a seat on Carrick-on-Suir town council and five on Clonmel borough council. Independent left and Workers Party councillors were elected in Dublin, Waterford and Cork. These gains are important. On the basis of the councillors and groups pursuing the right policies and a fighting approach, they can make a real difference for working-class people in these communities.

The Socialist Party and the left must now use all elected positions to fight on the issues and to explain the need for a new workers’ party. Joe Higgins used many important media opportunities during the election to do precisely that. The Socialist Party is fully committed to use its positions, including that of the MEP seat, to push forward and help in the re-organisation of the working class and youth in the communities, workplaces and politically, in preparation for the inevitable opportunities that will emerge to build a new broad mass party of the working class.

Right now the focus needs to be on organising mass resistance and struggle to the draconian attacks that this government is implementing, and which are destroying the lives of working people and will make the crisis and unemployment even worse. This government has been weakened by the election defeats and, if united, working-class people have the power to push them back.

Iran: Mass protests erupt

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:18:12 GMT

New phase of struggle opens up

Tony Saunois, CWI

Mass protests and demonstration have erupted in Iran in protest at the apparent rigging of the Presidential elections by the Mahmoud Ahmedinejad regime. According to reports, the largest anti-government demonstration of over one million people took place in the capital Tehran. Reports coming out of Iran claim that over a dozen have been killed in clashes with the police and hated Basij militia. With heavy press censorship, much of the movement has been co-ordinated through the use of ‘Twitter’ – Iran has the highest number of internet ‘bloggers’ per head of population. Although the picture is unclear at the time of writing, reports of mass protest in other cities such as Shiraz are also emerging. Tehran University has been surrounded by armed police and brutal repression has been reported of students in their dormitories. Other reports speak of gunfire being heard throughout the capital during the night following the election. Ahmedinejad, who announced victory within a few hours of the polls, has apparently simply left the country and is in Russia attending diplomatic meetings.

Turning point

These mass demonstrations against the regime in Tehran have taken place despite the threat by the regime to authorise the use of live ammunition against the protestors. Although the situation still remains unclear it appears that big sections of the urban population have lost their fear of the regime and are prepared to take to the streets to protest against it. This represents a crucial turning in the struggle against any dictatorship. BBC video footage of the protests shows protestors refusing to disperse when faced with attacks by the military police. To the forefront of these protests have been the students but clearly with the active support of older sections of the population – especially white-collar workers. There are divisions within the regime about how to deal with this mass movement. This, combined with the mass mobilisation of the middle class and students, clearly indicates that important elements of a pre-revolutionary crisis are developing. At this stage however, the working class has not yet decisively joined the struggle and there is confusion in the political consciousness of those involved reflected in some of the religious slogans which are also being chanted such as “God is great”. However, it should be remembered that the first demonstrations of the Russian revolution in 1905 were led by a priest, Father Gapon.

How this movement will now develop is not yet clear but it has already forced the regime into an abrupt about turn. The Guardian Council, in the face of this mass opposition, has been compelled to overturn its previous decision and allow a recount of contested votes. This is a clear attempt to calm the situation as the regime fears that the protests will erupt further and develop into an uprising against the regime itself.

Fuelled by rising mass unemployment and a yearning for democratic rights, especially amongst the youth – 60% of the Iranian population is under the age of thirty. The urban youth in particular are in revolt against the theocratic repression which they have suffered. An important feature of this movement have been the mobilisations of young women, demanding “equality”. This was reflected in the enormous popularity of Zahra Rahnavard, wife of the main opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, during the campaign. It is unprecedented in Iranian elections for women to play such a leading role. At the same time, while the mass opposition in the cities has rallied to Mousavi, he is no socialist or defender of the working class and the poor. A former Prime Minister, his pro-capitalist programme is limited to reform of the current theocratic state. However, the attempt to rig the election by Ahmedinejad has possibly opened the flood gates to a mass movement that could topple his regime and open a new era in Iran. At the same time there is an apparent division between the rural poor and some sections of the most down trodden and oppressed in some of the cities and urban centres who have tended to support Ahmedinejad because of his right-wing reactionary populist stance against corruption and the rich liberal elite and “anti-western imperialist” stance.

Iran has been transformed in recent years with nearly 70% of the population estimated to be living in the urban areas with a highly educated layer of young people.

The decisive question in the short term is if the working class now moves into action following reports of trade unions discussing calling a general strike which is the main fear of the regime. At the time of writing the opposition has called off a mass protest scheduled to take place in Tehran to avoid clashes with pro-government forces. This illustrates the fear reformist pro-capitalists like Mousavi have of unleashing mass mobilisations which can easily get out of their control and move in a more radical revolutionary direction. It is possible that Mousavi may try and reach a compromise with the existing regime to avoid bringing the masses onto the streets. Alternatively, the regime may be forced to accept Ahmedinejad’s defeat in order to try to maintain control of the situation. Attempts may also be made to wind down the protests for fear of their consequences. Mousavi has already called on protests planned for tomorrow to be cancelled.

New phase of struggle opens up

However, the genie is now out of the bottle and a decisive new phase of the struggle has been opened in Iran. The struggle for genuine democratic rights, the right to strike, to hold free elections, form free trade unions, political parties and equality for women needs to be fought for by all workers, youth and socialists. The emergence of the working class into this movement can give it the necessary cohesion and power to defeat the regime. The formation of democratically elected committees of struggle from the workplaces and universities linking with the middle class and urban poor can form the basis of a united struggle. The calling of a general strike and forming a defence militia along with a class appeal to the rank and file of the army are steps which are necessary to take the movement forward to overthrow the regime. Such committees could also convene elections to a revolutionary constituent assembly to decide the future of Iran. The guarantee of democratic rights and a solution to the mass poverty and unemployment can only then be assured with the formation of a workers’ and peasants government on a revolutionary socialist programme to transform society in the interests of all working people. (Further analysis to follow)

See videos on BBC website: Woman injured at protest and Students hold secret rally in Tehran