Kategori: Politik

Indigenous Peoples’ struggle in the Philippines

U.S. Central Intelligence Agency map of the Philippines, published by University of Texas Libraries.

The population census conducted in the Philippines in 2010 for the first time included an ethnicity variable but no official figure for Indigenous Peoples has been released yet. The country’s Indigenous population is estimated to be about 20 million of the national population of 100 million, based on the 2015 population census.

The Indigenous peoples organize in geographical group collectives covering the majority of tribes in each region: in the northern mountains of Luzon (Cordillera) as Igorot and in southern Mindanao as Lumad. There are smaller groups collectively known as Mangyan in the island of Mindoro as well as smaller, scattered groups in the Visayas islands and Luzon, including several groups of hunter-gatherers in transition.

Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines have retained much of their traditional, precolonial culture, social institutions and livelihood practices. They generally live in geographically isolated areas with a lack of access to basic social services and few opportunities for mainstream economic activities, education or political participation. In contrast, commercially valuable natural resources such as minerals, forests and rivers can be found primarily in their areas, making them continuously vulnerable to development aggression and land grabbing.

The Republic Act 8371, known as the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA), was promulgated in 1997. The law has been lauded for its support for respect of Indigenous Peoples’ cultural integrity, right to their lands and right to self-directed development of those lands. More substantial implementation of the law is still being sought, however, apart from there being fundamental criticism of the law itself. The Philippines voted in favour of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), but the government has not yet ratified ILO Convention 169.

The situation of Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines is worsening under the Duterte-regime. Development aggression has intensified, with various mining, energy and other so called ‘development’ projects encroaching on Indigenous territories. Human rights violations are likewise escalating, with Indigenous activists comprising most of the victims. In 2019, the international watchdog Global Witness has declared the Philippines as the world’s deadliest country for environmental defenders, with 30 deaths recorded in 2018.

China-funded projects violating Indigenous Peoples’ rights

After the Philippine government signed numerous loan agreements with the government of China in 2018, various issues hounded the loan agreements for the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project (even though construction started the same year) and the Kaliwa Dam project. Both projects are located in Indigenous territories in the Cordillera and Cal- abarzon regions affecting at least 3,765 Indigenous people. The loan agreements for these projects have not been disclosed to the public and have stirred criticism when leaked copies reached the public in 2019. Cordillera Peoples Alliance (CPA) denounced the onerous and lop- sided loan agreement between the governments of the Philippines and China for the project, which CPA characterised as a debt trap for the Filipino people and a sell-out of the country’s sovereignty.

Meanwhile, opposition to the China-funded Kaliwa Dam project has intensified as the project will displace over 1,400 Indigenous Dumagat families and affect more than 100,000 peoples. Despite the threats to Indigenous communities and the massive damages to the environment and biodiversity that the project may cause, President Duterte declared he would use ‘extraordinary powers’ to ensure that the project will push through. Indigenous Peoples and various groups also criticised the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for issuing an environmental compliance certificate despite stiff opposition to the project.

On April 4 and May 9, petitions were lodged by the Makabayan Bloc, KATRIBU national alliance of Indigenous Peoples and environment advocates at the Philippine Supreme Court. The petitions were attempts to stop the implementation of the loans for the Chico River Pump Irrigation and Kaliwa Dam projects, since several provisions of the loan agreements violate the 1987 Philippine Constitution. These violations include the confidentiality clause, the choice of Chinese law as governing law, the selection of an arbitration tribunal in Hong Kong and the waiver of sovereign immunity over Philippine patrimonial assets of commercial value. On the Chico River Pump Irrigation Project, the Malacanang Palace said it will comply with the Supreme Court’s order for the government to respond to the petition against the project but insisted that the loan deal is constitutional. To date, Cordillera Indigenous Peoples do not know if the government has made any response.

Another China-backed flagship project of the Duterte administration that outrightly disregarded Indigenous Peoples’ rights is the New Clark City, which is envisioned by the government to be the first smart and green city in the country. The first phase of the project, which housed a “state-of-the-art sports facility” that was used during the 2019 South East Asian Games, has already displaced over 27,500 members of the Aeta Indigenous people. Expansion of the project threatens to displace around 500 Aeta families. The Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA), a government-owned corporation under the Office of the President that is mandated to strengthen the country’s Armed Forces while building cities, maintains that the Aetas are not displaced as there are no Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles in the area.

The latest deal between the Chinese government’s Belt and Road Initiative and the Duterte administration’s Build, Build, Build infrastructure program is the proposed 250-megawatt South Pulangi Hydroelectric Power Plant (PHPP) project, which will flood 2,833 hectares of Indigenous lands in four towns near Davao City and will affect residents of 20 communities. The USD$800 million contract agreement between PHPP CEO Josue Lapitan and China Energy Engineering Co Ltd Chairman Dong Bin was signed in April 2019 without the consent of the affected communities. For many years the Indigenous Peoples’ opposition to the PHPP has been met with militarisation, harassment, indiscriminate firing and extrajudicial killing.

Mining and other energy projects

Large-scale mining remains a constant threat faced by Philippine Indigenous Peoples. In August 2019, Cordillera Indigenous Peoples formed the Aywanan Mining and Environment Network in opposition to the mining applications of the Cordillera Exploration Company, Inc. (CEXCI), a subsidiary of Nickel Asia Corporation in partnership with Japan-based Sumitomo Metal Mining Co. Ltd. CEXCI’s mining applications cover 72,958 hectares of land in the ancestral lands of the Indigenous Peoples in the Cordillera and parts of Ilocos Sur. Petition-signing against the mining applications of CEXCI started in August 2019 and is continuing.

In Didipio, Nueva Vizcaya, a people’s barricade which started in July 2019 led to the temporary suspension of the gold and copper mining operations of multinational company OceanaGold. The company’s mining permit (Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement) expired in June 20 after 25 years of operation. Pending the renewal of its permit to operate, the company appealed to continue its operations but this was denied in a regional trial court. Communities affected by the mining operations opposed the renewal of the company’s mining permit. They have long been complaining of the environmental destruction and human rights violations committed by OceanaGold. In Mindanao, the Lumad Indigenous Peoples continue to oppose at least three mining tenements that were approved by the government and cover around 17,000 hectares in the Pantaron mountain range, which straddles the provinces of Davao del Norte, Davao del Sur, Bukidnon, Misamis Oriental, Agusan del Norte and Agusan del Sur. The Pantaron range is the main source of the major watersheds in the region.

In the energy front, aside from hydropower projects that the Duterte administration continues to build, the Kalinga geothermal project of Aragorn Power and Energy Corporation and Guidance Management Corporation, in partnership with global energy company Chevron, is about to complete its exploration stage. The project covers 26,139 hectares in Kalinga province.

Escalating attacks against Indigenous Peoples’ organisations and human rights defenders

Following the issuance of Executive Order 7022 by President Duterte in December 2018, the Duterte regime has intensified attacks against Indigenous Peoples through the formation of the Task Forces to End the Local Communist Armed Conflict. Executive Order 70 is part of the government’s “whole-of-nation” counter-insurgency operation plan which has an “Indigenous People”-centric approach. The attacks are meant to quell Indigenous Peoples’ resistance to development aggression and government policies that violate Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and results in further marginalisation of Indigenous Peoples in the country.

In the implementation of Executive Order 70, the Department of Education ordered the closure of 55 Lumad schools, leaving 3,500 students and more than 30 teachers out of school and jobs. The closure order was on baseless claims of the government that the Salugpongan schools are teaching students to rebel. The Lumad Indigenous Peoples decried this injustice that only deprives Lumad children of their right to education.

Strategies of disinformation are being used by other government agencies, such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), and presidential agencies like the Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO), Office of the Presidential Adviser for the Peace Process (OPAPP) and the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA). Political dissenters are politically vilified and tagged as communists or members of the New People’s Army (NPA).

In a series of briefing sessions on the Whole of Nation Approach to government agencies in Baguio City, NICA has been presenting Indigenous Peoples’ organisations and Indigenous Peoples human rights defenders as Communist Terrorist Groups and members of the NPA. UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Vicky Tauli-Corpuz, and some leaders of the CPA were accused of being infiltra- tors to the UN on behalf of the Communist Party of the Philippines and the NPA.

In a congressional briefing on 5 November 2019, Indigenous Peoples’ organisations such as the CPA, humanitarian organizations such as the Citizens’ Disaster Response Center and Oxfam Philippines, and the National Council of Churches in the Philippines were labeled by the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Department of National Defense as communist terrorist groups.

The dangerous labelling of Indigenous Peoples’ organisations and human rights defenders as communist terrorist groups and members make them vulnerable to various forms of human rights violations. As of August 2019, eightysix Indigenous people have fallen victim of extrajudicial killings (at least nine victims in 2019), 66 Indigenous people were victims of frustrated extrajudicial killings (at least eight victims in 2019), 36 are political prisoners, and 31,004 were victims of forced evacuation since Duterte assumed the presidency in July 2016.30 Many of the victims were opposing development aggression, human rights violations and the policies of the government that violate Indigenous Peoples’ rights.

Indigenous Peoples’ advocates were not spared from the tyranny of the Duterte regime. Brandon Lee, a Chinese-American volunteer of the Ifugao Peasant Movement in the Cordillera region, has been brand- ed as an enemy of the state and was shot in front of his house in August 2019. He is now back home in the United States for his recovery.

The criminalisation of Indigenous human rights defenders is continuing. From 2016 to August 2019, trumped-up charges caused the arrest and detention of at least 196 Indigenous people, 36 of whom remain unjustly imprisoned. Datu Jomorito Guaynon, chairperson of Kalumbay Regional Lumad Organization remains in prison after he was arrested due to fabricated criminal charges. Rachel Mariano, a health worker of the Community Health, Education, Services and Training in the Cordillera Region, was acquitted in September 2019 after a year of detention. However, the judge who acquitted her, Mario Bañez, was shot dead two months later.34 Mariano still faces other fabricated charges and is out on bail.

After two-and-a-half years, the Martial Law in Mindanao was lifted on 31 December 2019. However, according to the Armed Forces of the Philippines, it will remain under a state of emergency by virtue of Proclamation No. 5536 which was issued in 2016. Indigenous Peoples thus fear that the situation will not change much since the proclamation allows military and police forces to impose checkpoints and curfew. They fear that the continued significant presence of the government’s armed forces in Mindanao and military operations will continue to protect investments in Indigenous territories.

Bringing the issues to the United Nations

Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines look forward to the UN probe on the human rights situation in the country. In preparation for the UN probe and for other international engagements, Indigenous Peoples human rights defenders representing various Indigenous Peoples’ organisations gathered in November 2019 for the national consultation workshop on the issues faced by Indigenous Peoples.

The national consultation workshop consolidated the data on the situation of human rights and economic, social and cultural rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was presented during the Asia Consultation with UN Special Rapporteur Vicky Tauli-Corpuz in November 2019. It also served as the basis for the Philippine Indigenous Peoples’ submission to the UN Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights to contribute in the UN Human Rights report on the Philippines.

The struggle continues

Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines are further strengthening their organisations and their struggles for human rights and Indigenous Peoples’ rights towards facing the challenges in the next year.

Source: The Indigenous World 2020, The International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA).

Varför kritisera?

Varför, vem, vad, när och hur ska vi kritisera?

“Kritik är en revolutionär plikt.” sade Lenin.

— Är det rätt och riktigt av en person i en grupp att kritisera andra grupper eller deras medlemmar när de gör fel?

— Är det rätt och riktigt även om det handlar om en nationell eller internationell syskonorganisation?

— Ja, det är inte bara rätt rätt och riktigt, utan dessutom nödvändigt. Det är faktiskt vår omvälvande plikt att göra det.

Den allmänna principen för kritik är att om den som upptäcker ett fel måste kritisera det, oavsett vad felet är och oavsett vem som begår det. Kom ihåg att vi kritiserar våra kamrater för att stötta i arbetet med ständiga förbättringar och/eller för att förmå andra att inte göra samma fel. Att avstå från att framföra kritik är själviskt och indikerar att du inte bryr dig om de konsekvenser dessa fel kan få.

Privat framförande av kritik är utan tvekan oftast bäst och mest effektivt, men dess görlighet begränsas inte sällan av rådande omständigheter och det finns många tillfällen då privat framförande varken är genomförbart eller korrekt.

När så är möjligt bör vi – åtminstone till en början – framföra idéer, förslag och kritik direkt till de personer som vi tror har nytta av det. Ofta tör detta om möjligt göras privat, men om idéer, förslag och kritik av vikt passerar obemärkt, så är det ofta nödvändigt framföra dem i ett större forum och stundom även motiverat att offentliggöra dem. Syftet med ett offentliggörande är att väcka opinion och därmed, genom att utsätta motsträviga individer för sociala påtryckningar, framtvinga ett reviderat beslut.

Ofta har vi dock ingen direktkontakt med den individ eller grupp som vi ser begå ett eller flera allvarliga misstag. Direkt och privat kritik är i de flesta sådana fall inte möjlig, inte ens i början.

Den viktigaste poängen med att framföra kritik är ofta inte att hjälpa den vars misstag kritiseras, utan snarare att hjälpa andra att undvika samma och relaterade fel. Då är det inte bara lämpligt utan helt nödvändigt att öppet och offentligt framföra kritiken.

Vi måste alla lära oss av andras erfarenheter, både av vad de gör rätt och av vad de gör fel. Den offentliga och om möjligt avpersonifiera kritiken av misstag är ett av de viktigaste sätten för oss alla att förstå sanningen och den finna den bästa vägen framåt. Att motsätta sig lärorik, öppen, offentlig kritik är därför i hög grad att motsätta sig ordentlig utbildning massorna.

På grund av den pedagogiska roll offentlig kritik spelar är det viktigt att inse att sådan kritik är berättigad även när det inte finns något som helst hopp om att kritiken kommer att iakttas av det direkta målet för densamma.

Faktum är att det ofta är nödvändigt att kritisera de avlidna, eftersom kritiken kommer att tjäna till att upplysa nu levande. Det finns t.ex. många goda skäl att kritisera beslut fattade av Stalin (för att inte nämna Chrustjov).

Men det är såklart inte bara de döda vi kan kritisera. Det görs många fel i vår rörelse i dag, inte bara av individer och grupper i andra länder, inte bara av människor i syskonorganisationer, utan även av oss själva och våra egna grupperingar.

“Kritik är en revolutionär plikt.” sade Lenin rätt och riktigt. Lenin hade heller inga reservationer när det gäller att kritisera kamrater i andra länder, inte heller Rosa Luxemburg eller andra revolutionärer. (Även Marx och Engels kritiserade misstag var än de såg dem.) Naturligtvis var inte all denna kritik alltid korrekt, men det fanns under rörelsens första sekel ett mycket hälsosammare klimat för öppen kritik än det gör idag. Vi måste gå tillbaka till en sundare situation med fri, öppen och ömsesidig kritik.

PS. Förutom kritik, som riktar sig till den egna åsiktssfären, med korrigerande eller bildande syfte, finns det kritik med andra syften. Till dessa hör att:

  1. förmå politiska motståndare att ändra kurs,
  2. förmå väljare att byta sida,
  3. reta upp en motståndare så att denne begår repellerande misstag,
  4. piska upp en antagonistisk stämning mot partier som befinner sig på fel planhalva.

Fidel och Che

Möten i revolutionen

Möte mellan Fidel och Che.
Fotot är hämtat från Cubadebate.cu

En kronologi av mötesögonblick mellan befälhavarna Fidel Castro och Che Guevara. Ögonblick som markerade de kubanska revolutionens historiska vändningar. Under tolv år ledde de båda hjältarna processen av revolutionär omvandling från handling och tanke.

Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz träffar Ernesto Guevara de la Serna.

19 juli 1955: Fidel möter den argentinska läkaren Ernesto Guevara i den lilla lägenheten på Emparan 49-C, där María Antonia González bor.

9 juli 1956: Fidel förblir fängslad tillsammans med Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, Calixto García Martínez och Santiago Liberato Hirzel vid Miguel Schultz 136 Immigration Station för att det påstås att deras invandringsdokument har upphört att gälla.

I Sierra Maestra 1957.

25 november 1956: Fidel avgår tillsammans med Raúl Castro, Camilo Cienfuegos, Ernesto Guevara och 78 andra expeditionsmedlemmar till Kuba från den mexikanska hamnen Tuxpan ombord på båten «Granma» med avsikt att starta om den väpnade kampen i bergen i Sierra Maestra.

21 juli 1957: Fidel befordrade Ernesto Che Guevara till befälhavare i revolutionsarmén.

I Sierra Maestra 1958.

29 augusti 1958: Befälhavare Ernesto Guevara och hans kolonn lämnar Sierra Marstra för invasionen av de centrala och västra provinserna på Kuba.

1 januari 1959: Fidel beordrar de invasiva kolonnerna nr 2 och 8 under befäl av Camilo Cienfuegos och Ernesto ”Che” Guevara, att fortsätta marschen mot Havanna.

5 januari 1959: Fidel möter Che igen i Camagüey. Befälhavare Guevara var i Havanna framför Cabaña fästning. De utbyter om situationen i landets huvudstad och samordnar nästa uppdrag.

12 juni 1959: Fidel och befälhavare Ernesto Che Guevara tar avsked vid Havannas internationella flygplats ”José Martí”, inför Ches diplomatiska resa som för honom till Spanien, Egypten, Irak, Sudan, Indonesien, Ghana, Pakistan, Indien, Japan och Marocko, där Che skall förhandla om att öppna nya marknader för Kubanska produkter.

7 oktober 1959: Fidel, i sällskap med befälhavare Ernesto Che Guevara, håller ett möte med de ansvariga för National Institute for Agrarian Reform (INRA). INRA Industrialization Department skapas och Che utses officiellt som chef.

2 augusti 1961: Fidel och befälhavare Ernesto Che Guevara tar farväl vid Havannas internationella flygplats ”José Martí”, inför Ches resa, i egenskap av ordförande för den kubanska delegationen, till konferensen för det interamerikanska ekonomiska och sociala rådet i Punta del Este, Uruguay.

Sista fotografiet tillsammans.

1965: Fidel tar farväl av Che innan denne åker till Kongo. Det är sista gången som de kära vännerna fotograferas tillsammans.

Ches avskedsbrev.
Fidel informerar folket om Ches fall i strid.

15 oktober 1967: Fidel framträder framför tv-kamerorna och informerar officiellt folket om Ches fall i strid.

3 oktober 1965: Fidel läser Ches avskedsbrev.

Av: Edilberto Carmona Tamayo, redaktionellt team på webbplatsen “Fidel Soldado de las Ideas” den 14. juni 2019

Sovjetunionen och andra socialistiska stater i EMENA hade mycket som var problematiskt.

¡Товарищ!

Sovjetunionen och andra socialistiska stater i EMENA hade mycket som var problematiskt.

Det är dock fel att som västereuropé döma dem alltför hårt, vi är alla sedan mer än ett sekel indoktrinerade med massiv anti-kommunistisk propaganda.

Att mycket i Sovjetunionen och Öststaterna var enormt bra glöms väldigt lätt bort: arbetspolitik, bostadspolitik och pensionssystem, lagstiftad jämlikhet mellan könen, samt antirasistisk lagstiftning för att dra några exempel.

Ett stort problemet är att så snart man påpekar de goda aspekterna av Warszawapaktländernas internpolitik så antas man även vara positiv till auktoritärianism och censur.

Aktiva kommunister är väl medvetna om de socialistiska staternas problem och anser ett totalt avståndstagande vara rent skadligt för arbetarrörelsen.

Tyvärr är det avståndstagande krafter som fått nästintill totalt företräde i dagens vänster.

Leben in der DDR

Die Demokratische Republik oder die Bundesrepublik? So sagen Menschen, die in beiden Systemen gelebt haben

Vorteile von der DDRNachteile von der DDR
– Für mich hatte die DDR nichts Schlimmes.
– Es war alles ruhiger, geordneter
– Jeder hatte Sicherheit
– Es gab keine Miethaie.
– Man konnte sich auf Nachbarn und Freude verlassen, was nicht mehr der Fall ist, da jeder nur an sich denkt.
– Beruflicher Streß war geringer
– Man brauchte sich nicht um so viele Dinge kümmern
– Es gab damals nicht solche erbitterten Konkurrenzkämpfe wie heutzutage.
– Für die Kinder wurde viel mehr getan. Wenn man Hilfe brauchte, wurde einem geholfen
– Irgendwie lief alles mehr in Ruhe ab
– Billige FDGB-Reisen.
– Kinderfreundlich.
– Jeder hatte Arbeit.
– Jeder war sozial abgesichert.
– Kein Elternteil brauchte sich um ihre Arbeit Sorgen zu machen
– Man kannte keine Überfälle am Tage in der Stadt
– Kollegialität im Arbeitsprozeß.
– Die Kinder hatten es sehr schön. Kindergarten, Ferienlager und viele Veranstaltungen in der Schule, Jugendklubs.
– Jeder hatte sein Auskommen, ohne Angst vor dem nächsten Tag
– Das Leben war ruhig, kein Streß
– Für jeden Menschen wurde eine Arbeitsstelle geschaffen, ob nötig oder nicht.
– Man konnte Tag und Nacht ohne Angst durch die Parks, Felder, Wälder und einsame Straßen gehen.
– Die Schule war nicht so anstrengend
– Fast alle waren gleich
– Jeder hatte Arbeit bis zur Rente sicher
– Billige Scheidung. Bus und Kino waren billiger
– Polizei und Justiz gingen härter gegen Kriminalität vor
– Keine Staus auf den Straßen
– Einfache Art der Steuern und Sozialversicherung
– Die Jugend war disziplinierter
– Kultur war für alle erreichbar
– Alle hatten Arbeit, was man so Arbeit nannte
– Die Bürokratie war nicht so extrem wie heute
– Niedrige, stabile Mieten, für jeden bezahlbar. 		– Die Lauferei beim Einkaufen, das Anstehen, wenn man mal was haben wollte. In den Urlaub mußte man sich Zwiebeln und teils sogar Kartoffeln mitnehmen, weil man nichts bekam.
– Eine gute Wohnung zu bekommen war nur über Beziehungen möglich
– Es ging alles zu extrem nach Plan
– Bevorzugung der SED-Genossen in allen Lebensbereichen.
– Die Partei hatte immer recht
– Bei Reisen in die BRD starke Kontrolle (Hunde)
– Man konnte keine eigene Entscheidungen treffen , alles wurde vorgegeben ? Nicht mal einen Sack Zement bekam man ohne Beziehungen.
– Jahrelang auf eine Wohnung warten war für Kinderreiche besonders schlimm (8 Kinder)
– Schlechte Versorgung mit Babynahrung
– Schießen auf Menschen
– Als DDR-Bürger im Ausland nur Mensch 2. Klasse mit seinem Geld
– Politische Zwangserziehung bereits in Kinderkrippen und Kindergärten
– Machtlosigkeit gegenüber den staatlichen Organen.
– Der Hochmut der Handwerker
– Trennung von Verwandten im Westen – Die ständige Bespitzelung
– Es gab wenig Obst und Fleisch.
– Materialmangel im Krankenhaus
– Niedrige Renten
– Keine Aufstiegschancen, ohne in der Partei zu sein. Es gab keine großen schlimmen Sachen, es waren die Kleinigkeiten.
– Das Schlimmste war die Lüge, mit der wir gelebt haben. Wenn man die Zeitung aufmachte, da war von Erfolgen und Planerfüllung zu lesen, und jeder wußte, daß das nicht stimmte.
– Die Vereinnahmung von Kindern durch den Staat.
– Daß man seine Westverwandtschaft “sterben ” lassen mußte.
– Auf eine Trabi mußte man 14 Jahre warten, und er war sehr teuer.

Tillhör du de 3,25% rikaste?

Marxismen är ett omätligt sofistikerat, nyanserat och djupt ämne, fullt av otroliga insikter, men samtidigt kan det sammanfattas mycket enkelt: samhällsstrukturen bör inte byggas för att tillgodose privat strävan efter profit utan för att verka till allas bästa. Därför röstar jag rödare rött!

Beror det på din politiska affiliering, på att du tillhör de 3,25% rikaste eller på att du är ignorant, att du diskvalificerar kommunismen? Eller är det så att du helt enkelt inte orkar förklara ordets innebörd för alla som förknippar det med auktoritära centralistiska socialistregimer? Isåfall – ge inte upp!

Vad innebär kommunism? Det är ett klasslöst samhälle där staten avskaffats och ersatts med autonoma men samverkande kommuner som äger och förvaltar de gemensamma produktionsmedlen (i den syndikalistiska varianten förvaltas dessa istället av dem som arbetar i produktionen). Ekonomisk demokrati råder och alla bidrar efter förmåga i proportion till produktionsbehovet och får efter behov i proportion till tillgången. Allt är fullständigt jämställt och jämlikt och utanförskap finns inte.

Kommunism har hittills aldrig införts eftersom modellen kräver att alla länder inför kommunismen samtidigt. Vägen till kommunismen är socialism och det är socialism med varierande grad av centralism som funnits i t.ex. det forna östblocket.

Kommunism som ideologi är baserad på en idealiserad människosyn, som utgör grunden för visionen om den mognare människan och det mognare samhället. Att kommunism är närmast hopplöst att realisera i vår samtid torde vara uppenbart, kanske är det även naivt att försöka — men… att inte ens försöka är att kapitulera inför ståndpunkten att människorna är och förblir brutala vildar, om än i snyggare kläder. I takt med vetenskapliga framsteg utvecklas dessutom både socialismen och den konceptuella kommunismen.

Steget till att hävda att kommunism (n.b. som aldrig har införts) eller för den delen socialism (vägen till kommunism) ligger till grund för storskaligt dödande är oöverstigligt stort (istället utgör socialismen grunden för välfärden). McCarthyism (i en liberalkonservativ kontext) brukar man benämna spridandet av desinformation om kommunism och förföljelse av kommunister.

PS. Låt mig föreslå att de som inte är bekanta med dagens idéer om kommunism läser:

  • Varat och Intet (Sartre),
  • Eldorado (Voltaire),
  • Kapitalet (Marx),
  • Stat och Revolution kap. 5 (Lenin),
  • Chomsky’s Anarchism (Chomsky),
  • Feminism utan gränser (Mohanty),
  • Välfärd utan tillväxt (Jackson),
  • Politisk Religion (Jping Zuo)

The socialist parties must cooperate better

Comrades! I feel that 2021 is the year when, instead of devoting energy to criticizing our opponents, we should make every effort to tell everyone about our political line.

Original version in Swedish published in Dalademokraten February 12, 2021

When our personal views deviate significantly from the party’s, it would be dishonest not to make reservations and explain both the party’s and our own opinion.

The development of the party program is a democratic process and opinion formation within the framework of the party’s values is an important part of its constant adaptation to prevailing circumstances. The technology of today offers e.g. completely different conditions today than did just a few years ago and the development since 1848 has naturally been enormous.

The Swedish Left Wing Party is a socialist, feminist and anti-racist party on ecological grounds. We are part of the labor movement, the women’s movement, the anti-racist movement and the environmental movement, internationally and in Sweden. The party’s policies and activities are determined by our goal: to realize a society based on democracy, equality and solidarity, a society free from class, gender and racist oppression, a just and ecologically sustainable society where we build our own future in freedom and cooperation .

In order to change society, we must understand how it works. Theory and practice presuppose each other. For the Left Wing Party, Marxist and feminist theories are important political tools that must be used critically and experimentally, adapted to today’s conditions.

My personal opinion is that we must end the fruitless discussions about hair-splitting that have divided the labor movement on several occasions throughout history. From the first seed was sown in 1881 until today, the divisions have not been based on disagreement about the goal: economic democracy, but have been partly about the way there and partly the degree and character of authority.

When Hjalmar Branting, who represented a reformist agenda, agreed with the monarch and representatives of the capitalist class in 1917 to slow down development, this led to the progressive phalanx of the Social Democrats breaking out and forming what is today the Left Wing Party. In 1967, the progressives were divided into a series of divisions into what came to be known as the letter left. This has been of no use to anyone other than the monarch, the capital-owning class and its favorable pultrons.

I believe that we should as soon as possible form a cooperation body for at least F!, V, RS, SKP and K.

NOTA BENE: After the dissolution of the Paris Commune in 1871, the labor movement was divided into two parts: the syndicalist-anarchist and the socialist. I am convinced that when world socialism is achieved, this split will be reversed.

Hampus Cronander

En mer nyanserad bild av Josef Stalin och svältkatastrofen i Ukraina 1932-33

Tolka inte detta som förespråkande av Stalinismen. Som libertin anarkist-Marxist anser jag densamma vara reformistisk och byråkratisk, samt fruktansvärt auktoritär. Min avsikt är enbart att påvisa hur förljugen den bild vi serveras i västmedia är.

Josef Vissarionovich Dzjugasjvili, sedemera Stalin, känd som ”Soso” och ”Koba”, föddes den 18 december 1878 och var bolsjevikpartiets generalsekreterare 1922–1953, Sovjetunionens vozjd 1929-1953, samt premiärminister 1941–1953.

Den demonologi som beskriver hans eftermäle är naturligtvis en starkt överdriven karikatyr av såväl Soso — människan bakom Stalin, som hans gärning. För att förstå vad som verkligen hände måste vi lära känna både kontexten och de inblandade personerna. Efter Sovjetunionens fall öppnades arkiven och forskare från hela världen har kunnat ta del av brev, protokoll, dagböcker och rapporter som hemlighållits sedan 1953. Jag har läst några av de verk om Stalin som författats av dessa forskare och här följer mina anteckningar.

Soso var en hyperintelligent, begåvad politiker — en nervig intellektuell arbetsnarkoman, som närmast maniskt slukade skönlitteratur, poesi och historieböcker. Han led av kronisk tonsillit, psoriasis och svår reumatisk värk orsakad av de bistert kalla förvisningsåren i Sibirien. Han var en pratsam och sällskaplig, men samtidigt blyg, tafatt, ensam och olycklig människa, som gärna avskärmade och isolerade sig för att umgås med sina funderingar — ofta teoretiska hårklyverier. Hans humor var mörk och bistert ironisk. Han kunde sjunga, älskade trädgårdsodling, samt var en kärleksfull far och make.

Han motsatte sig den personkult som propagandan gett upphov till och om sig själv sa han ”Jag är inte Stalin. Stalin är Sovjetmakten. Stalin är den som finns i tidningarna och på porträtten, inte jag!”

Partiledningen och dess stab bodde allihop inträngda bakom Kremls murar och disponerade små lägenheter inrymda i det som en gång varit palats för tsaren och hans närmaste frälse. I den lägenhet som Soso och hans fru Nadja disponerade sov de sällan i samma rum. Soso, som arbetade sent på kvällarna och steg upp klockan fem om morgnarna för att fortsätta sitt flit, sov på en enkel brits i en skrubb innanför det arbetsrum han låtit inreda i lägenheten.

Efter en fest i november 1932 tog Nadja, uppfylld av obefogad svartsjuka, sitt liv genom att skjuta sig i huvudet med en .22 Mauserpistol. När Soso, framåt småtimmarna dagen efter festen, kom hem gick han direkt till sin skrubb och la sig. Nadja hittades morgonen därefter av en stabsmedlem. Ingen vågade väcka Soso för att berätta vad som hänt och det dröjde tills på eftermiddagen innan han blev tillkännagiven. Händelsen blev en vändpunkt i Sosos liv. Han sörjde otröstligt sin hädangångna hustru och misstänkte att någon kamrat, som varit på festen, tagit henne av daga, samt fruktade att han själv stod näst i tur. En utredning ledd av den extraordinära kommissionen för bekämpande av kontrarevolution och sabotage inleddes omedelbart. Det inträffade skulle visa sig förändra allt: Förkrossad av sorg förvandlades Soso till en svårt sargad, suicidal, ofta oförsonlig och nästintill paranoid man — blott en spillra av sitt forna jag.

För att döva sin smärta arbetade han ännu hårdare och begick, av ren utmattning i kombination med självpåtagen isolering, misstag i planeringen av jordbrukens produktion som skulle leda till att nästan 4 miljoner människor dog av svält — något som i resten av hans liv gav honom grava skuldkänslor.

Chrusjtjov, vars far rättmätigt fängslats av Stalin för förräderi, skulle i hämndlystnad efter Stalins död förvanska beskrivningen av svältkatastrofen och påstå att den med berått mod orsakats i syfte att utrota Ukrainas bönder. Dessa falska, svartmålande rykten togs naturligtvis tacksamt emot i västvärlden. I kapitalistiska länder svalt nämligen, under perioden 1870-1970, ca 1 miljon människor ihjäl per år, så vad passade väl inte bättre än att påstå att det var minst lika illa i socialistiska länder. Sanningen, att det totala antalet svältdöda i socialistiska länder under perioden 1918-1978 var knappt 5 miljoner, medan antalet i kapitalistiska system var 60 miljoner, uppmärksammades inte i västmedia (t.ex. var Winston Churchill, som hatade indier och tyckte att de förökade sig som kaniner, genom att vägra hjälpsändningar till Bengalen 1943 direkt ansvarig för 4 miljoner svältdöda, och västs handelsembargo mot Nigeria 1967-1970 ledde till att 2 miljoner barn svalt till döds).

Sexual rights and emancipation in Cuba.

The 1959 revolution represented Cuba’s achievement of national sovereignty; the launching of a project of social justice and equity; and the beginning of transformations in the nation and its culture, the most profound and radical in their history.

An event of such magnitude could not but completely change policies regarding gender and sexualities. This has been a process of complex cultural metamorphosis, leading to confrontations and dialogue between generations, cultural patterns, classes and social strata, in which women have been protagonists and promoters.

In this scenario of broad popular participation, the first actions were taken to implement political, economic and social changes that modified the role of men and women in society and within the family, in the relationships of couples, in sexualities, in intergenerational relations.

Between 1959 and 1961, the young Revolutionary state approved significant laws that responded to longstanding aspirations frustrated by the politicking of traditional parties, their corruption and servility to the powerful nation to the North. Outstanding among these was the Fundamental Law of the Republic of Cuba, approved on February 7, 1959, which established equal salaries for men and women.

On August 23, 1960, the Federation of Cuban Women (FMC) was officially established as an organized mass movement of women in civil society. Since then, women implemented our own project of empowerment as subjects by law, with a profound impact on all of society, politics and culture.

At the same time, different initiatives of broad citizen participation emerged, such as popular mobilizations in defense of terrorist aggressions organized by the government of the United States of America; women came to their homes dressed as militia members and their image in this new social role became everyday.

The broad incorporation of women into the workplace and a wide range of public events had a great impact on sexuality (Núñez, 2001). The new social condition of women contributed to changing the prevailing reproductive pattern from six children per woman to less than one son or daughter per woman (Alfonso, 2006), although the latest National Fertility Survey reports that the reproductive ideal for women is 2.13 and for men 2.31 (ONEI, 2009).

As a result of joint work by the FMC and the new National Public Health System, the National Family Planning Program was established in 1964 and in 1965 the voluntary termination of pregnancy was institutionalized as a free service, performed by professionals in public health institutions.

This was done with the goal of reducing maternal mortality and promoting and guaranteeing women’s right to make their own decisions about their bodies.

These decisions, along with other national program, contributed to a decrease in maternal mortality, which in 1959 was 120 per 100,000 live births, and by 1966 had been reduced to 60. Rigorous monitoring of this indicator to reduce its predictable causes is an ongoing task and one of the most important components of the Ministry’s Mother and Child Program, reporting a rate of 36 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2019.

In accordance its own mechanisms of participation, in 1972, the FMC established a multidisciplinary, inter-sectoral working group to manage and develop a National Sex Education Program.

The goal of this initiative was to respond to one of the proposals expressed by women in our annual plenary sessions: to prepare themselves in sex education in order to better guide their daughters and sons, and thus avoid the uncertainty they suffered. The National Sex Education Working Group was created with this premise.

The importance of sex education was acknowledged at the Second Congress of the FMC in 1974 and at the First Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba in 1975. Since then, sexuality education has been expressed in state policy, with families and schools recognized as the institutions with the greatest responsibility in the matter.

The policies of the 1960s were expressed in new laws during the 1970s, most notably the Family Code adopted in 1975 as a result of a broad process of popular consultation. Considered the most advanced for its time in the entire continent, it recognized the right of men and women to full sexuality and to share the same domestic and educational responsibilities.

As a result of the policy developed during the 1970s, Cuba was the first country to sign, and the second to ratify, government commitment to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW, 1979).

Cuban culture has a strong patriarchal Hispanic-African heritage, with a long homophobic tradition, a model of domination imposed by the Spanish colonial system and its official religion, along with a worldwide scientific approach that stigmatized homosexuality.

When the Revolution triumphed, medical, psychological, social and legal sciences around the world took positions against homosexuality, and considered it an example of illness, insanity, moral decadence and deviation from social norms.

Unfortunately, the permanence of institutionalized homophobia in the first decades of the Revolution has not been analyzed in all its complexity. This situation is exploited by those who only see it as an opportunity to profit from the well-funded market of attacks on Cuba. Given this reality, it is essential that our institutions critically analyze practices that are inconsistent with the humanist spirit of the revolutionary process.

David Carter (2004), in his book Stonewall, on the protests that ignited the gay revolution, wrote, in 1961, that laws criminalizing homosexuality in the United States were tougher than those in Cuba, Russia or East Germany, countries customarily criticized by the U.S. government for their “despotic methods” (Carter D., p.16).

Understanding the current situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI+) persons in Cuba, and the need to address attention to their needs as a question of policy, demands that we understand the historical evolution of the issue within the Cuban Revolution’s social agenda.

The National Working Group on Sex Education (Gntes, 1972), led by the FMC, became the National Center for Sex Education (Cenesex) in 1988, and since then has been subordinated to the Ministry of Public Health (Minsap).

Cenesex’s mission is to contribute to the development of comprehensive education on sexuality, sexual health, recognition and guarantee of the sexual rights of the entire population. Toward this end, the Center develops educational and communication strategies that include different national public welfare campaigns.

The initiative to celebrate the International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia, beginning May 17, 2007, has had significant impact on the mobilization of the Cuban population’s social conscience.

We welcomed the proposal by the French-Caribbean professor, Louis-Georges Tin, to place the celebration on the date of the World Health Organization’s decision to formally de-pathologize homosexuality, leaving behind unscientific points of view that contributed to stigma and discrimination. This occurred on May 17, 1990.

Since 2008, we have dedicated the entire month of May to developing educational and communication activities that promote respect for free sexual orientation and gender identities, as an exercise in justice and social equity, under the name of Cuban Days against Homophobia and Transphobia.

These days are coordinated by CENESEX, through Minsap, along with other state institutions, the government and the indispensable support of the Party at all levels. Campaigns have been focused on the family, school, work and, more recently, recognition of all rights for all people, without discrimination due to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Cuban Days against Homophobia and Transphobia have undoubtedly had an impact on the vision of the country approved by the 7th Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (2016) and the National Assembly of People’s Power (2017) after a rigorous process of popular consultation.

The Conceptualization of the Cuban Economic and Social Model of Socialist Development, and the National Plan of Economic and Social Development through 2030, expressly mention the need to confront all forms of discrimination, including that motivated by sexual orientation or gender identity.

In total harmony with these decisions, since 2019, our Constitution textually recognizes sexual and reproductive rights, prohibits discrimination against persons with non-homonormative sexualities, protects family diversity and clearly regulates marriage as a legal institution accessible to all persons without discrimination of any kind.

Of course, we still have a long way to go. That is why we educate for love and respectful coexistence, not for the perpetuation of relationships of domination or violence. We educate in the humanist and democratic principles that are inspired by the emancipatory paradigm of socialism, in freedom as a complex individual and collective responsibility. We will continue working until all justice is achieved.

First published May 18. 2020 at Cuba Inside the World

The anti-imperialist struggle and environmental issues: lessons of Thomas Sankara in Burkina Faso

After an article in Portuguese by
Ellen Monielle 2020-05-07

”The fight against desertification is a fight against imperialism. Imperialism is the incendiary of our forests and savannahs.” – Thomas Sankara

Thomas Sankara was the central leader of the popular and democratic revolution in the country Burkina Faso in West Africa from 1983 to 1987. In the early 1980s, Alto Volta — as the country was known until Sankara changed its name in 1984 — , a former French colony, faced a severe fiscal crisis, along with a political crisis. In this context, Sankara, defender of anti-imperialism and anti-colonialism, emerged as a spokesman for all African peoples who fought for better living conditions and against neocolonial oppression.
Moreover, it recognized the link between capitalist mode of production and consumption and environmental degradation. Taking into account the context of the time, Thomas Sankara was the first African president to perceive and recognize the protection of the environment as an emergency synonym, engaging in three main fights: against forest fires; against the wandering of cattle; and, finally, against the illegal cutting of firewood.
And so, when he took power in 1983, at the age of only 33, Sankara placed water, trees and life as fundamental and sacred elements in all the actions of the National Council of the Revolution (CNR), a congregation that led Burkina Faso. In addition, he created the committees for the Defense Of The Revolution (CDRs), formed by civil groups responsible for spreading the ideals of the revolution throughout the country’s villages. In this sense, it is the beginning of a revolutionary experience fueled by the desire for independence and the fight against imperialism.

In Sankara’s view, it was unacceptable to associate the African continent as an appendix of Western history. In this way, he vigorously defended in his speech the African search for greater self-sufficiency, reporting that it was time to “produce in Africa, transform in Africa and consume in Africa”. For this, in an arid country like Burkina Faso, being self-sufficient, in line with Sankara himself, meant the need to be environmentally sustainable.

“Imperialism is a system of exploitation that occurs not only in the brutal form of those who come with weapons to conquer territory. Imperialism often occurs in more subtle forms, such as a loan, food aid, blackmail. We are fighting against this system that allows a handful of men on Earth to rule all of humanity.” – Thomas Sankara

Therefore, Thomas Sankara made the protection and reforestation of Trees his priority and at events such as weddings, baptisms and visits of important personalities, it was celebrated with a planting ceremony. In addition to that the planting of trees should also be applied during international political summits or in the presentation of credibility letters to ambassadors.
In this perspective, ten million trees were planted under Burkina Faso in just fifteen months as part of a popular development program aimed at combating desertification. In the villages and valleys of the rivers, families were to plant a hundred trees a year in a vast operation called “popular harvest of Forest Seeds”, in order to supply the 7,000 nurseries.
In the national effort to reduce the consumption of firewood and to greet the New Year of 1986, all the children and students of the capital of Burkina Faso, Ouagadugu, built more than 3,500 improved stoves with their own hands, offering them to the mothers of the city. Thus, the cutting and sale of firewood were completely reorganized and strictly regulated. And as for the fires, all the criminal acts of burning were subject to trial and sanction by the people’s Courts of conciliation in the villages, and still, it is worth noting that the requirement to plant a certain number of trees was one of the sanctions issued by these courts.
In addition to this, it is necessary to recognize its commitment to family farming and food sovereignty.

Sankara yearned for food self-sufficiency and questioned:
“Where is imperialism? Look at your dishes when you eat. Rice and imported corn; that’s imperialism. To avoid this, let’s try to eat what we control.”

It therefore embraced agrarian reform to support small rural producers and cereal production, which before 1983 was close to 1.1 billion tonnes, rose to 1.6 billion tonnes in 1987. According to Jean Ziegler, former UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, “Thomas Sankara overcame hunger. It made Burkina Faso self-sufficient in four years.”

Finally, Sankara illustrated how society’s resources are required to improve the lives of the majority, rather than benefit the enrichment of the minority. His example threatened the power of the presidents of the region and, more generally, the French presence in Africa, thus leading to his murder. Soon, Thomas Sankara awakened the African population to an anti-imperialist message and restoration of national honor, mainly through its environmental protection policies, after two decades of disillusionment and post-independence neocolonialism.

REFERENCES

B., Amber. Thomas Sankara: Imperialism is the Arsonist of our Forests and Savannas. 2018: https://anti-imperialism.org/2018/02/26/thomas-sankara-imperialism-is-the-arsonist-of-our-forests-and-savannas/.

DEMBÉLÉ, Demba Moussa. Thomas Sankara: an endogenous approach to development. Pambazuka News 651, 2013: https://www.thomassankara.net/thomas-sankara-an-endogenous-approach-to-development/?lang=en.

JAFFRÉ, Bruno. Thomas Sankara, precursos de lutas de hoje. 2013: http://www.thomassankara.net/thomas-sankara-precursos-de-lutas-de-hoje/.

LEPIDI, Pierre. Thomas Sankara, l’immortel. 2019: https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2019/12/31/thomas-sankara-l-immortel_6024468_3212.html.

OUDET, Maurice. L’héritage de Sankara sur les questions de l’écologie et de l’environnement. 2012: https://www.pambazuka.org/fr/pan-africanism/lh%C3%A9ritage-de-sankara-sur-les-questions-de-l%C3%A9cologie-et-de-lenvironnement.

RIDDELL, John. Exhuming Thomas Sankara: Anti-Imperialism in Burkina Faso, 1983–87. 2017: https://johnriddell.com/2017/08/18/exhuming-thomas-sankara-anti-imperialism-in-burkina-faso-1983-87/.

SANTOS, Gabriel. Em memória de Thomas Sankara, um revolucionário. 2019: https://esquerdaonline.com.br/2019/10/17/em-memoria-de-thomas-sankara-um-revolucionario/.

Optimized by Optimole