says neal Lawson of Compass in the Guardian.
Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | Labour will lose the next election if it isn't brave enough to ditch Blair now: "In the world-view of the Blairites this is still a conservative country that we have to accommodate to."
This world view is - always was, Compassites! - flawed, and increasingly just wrong. Optimism of the intellect, optimism of the will!!!
Thursday, 31 August 2006
Wednesday, 30 August 2006
2 more reasons to oppose US capitalism
Two separate pieces in the good old Grauniad caught my eye this morning, by Duncan Campbell and Naomi Klein respectively.
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US accused of bid to oust Chávez with secret funds: "The US government has been accused of trying to undermine the Chávez government in Venezuela by funding anonymous groups via its main international aid agency.
Millions of dollars have been provided in a 'pro-democracy programme' that Chávez supporters claim is a covert attempt to bankroll an opposition to defeat the government.
The money is being provided by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) through its Office of Transition Initiatives. The row follows the recent announcement that the US had made $80m (£42m) available for groups seeking to bring about change in Cuba, whose leader, Fidel Castro, is a close ally of Mr Chávez."
Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | Disaster capitalism: how to make money out of misery: "I call it the Disaster Capitalism Complex. Whatever you might need in a serious crunch, these contractors can provide it: generators, watertanks, cots, port-a-potties, mobile homes, communications systems, helicopters, medicine, men with guns.
This state-within-a-state has been built almost exclusively with money from public contracts, including the training of its staff (overwhelmingly former civil servants, politicians and soldiers). Yet it is all privately owned; taxpayers have absolutely no control over it or claim to it. So far, that reality hasn't sunk in because while these companies are getting their bills paid by government contracts, the Disaster Capitalism Complex provides its services to the public free of charge.
But here's the catch: the US government is going broke, in no small part thanks to this kind of loony spending. The national debt is $8 trillion; the federal budget deficit is at least $260bn. That means that sooner rather than later the contracts are going to dry up. Insiders call it the 'homeland security bubble'.
When it bursts, firms such as Bechtel, Fluor and Blackwater will lose their primary revenue stream. They will still have all their hi-tech gear giving them the ability to respond to disasters, while the government will have let that precious skill wither away - but now they will rent back the tax-funded infrastructure at whatever price they choose.
Here's a snapshot of what could be in store in the not-too-distant future: helicopter rides off rooftops in flooded cities at $5,000 a pop ($7,000 for families, pets included), bottled water and 'meals ready to eat' at $50 a head (steep, but that's supply and demand), and a cot in a shelter with a portable shower (show us your biometric ID, developed on a lucrative homeland security contract, and we'll track you down later with the bill).
The model, of course, is the US healthcare system, in which the wealthy can access best-in-class treatment in spa-like environments while 46 million Americans lack health insurance."
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US accused of bid to oust Chávez with secret funds: "The US government has been accused of trying to undermine the Chávez government in Venezuela by funding anonymous groups via its main international aid agency.
Millions of dollars have been provided in a 'pro-democracy programme' that Chávez supporters claim is a covert attempt to bankroll an opposition to defeat the government.
The money is being provided by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) through its Office of Transition Initiatives. The row follows the recent announcement that the US had made $80m (£42m) available for groups seeking to bring about change in Cuba, whose leader, Fidel Castro, is a close ally of Mr Chávez."
Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | Disaster capitalism: how to make money out of misery: "I call it the Disaster Capitalism Complex. Whatever you might need in a serious crunch, these contractors can provide it: generators, watertanks, cots, port-a-potties, mobile homes, communications systems, helicopters, medicine, men with guns.
This state-within-a-state has been built almost exclusively with money from public contracts, including the training of its staff (overwhelmingly former civil servants, politicians and soldiers). Yet it is all privately owned; taxpayers have absolutely no control over it or claim to it. So far, that reality hasn't sunk in because while these companies are getting their bills paid by government contracts, the Disaster Capitalism Complex provides its services to the public free of charge.
But here's the catch: the US government is going broke, in no small part thanks to this kind of loony spending. The national debt is $8 trillion; the federal budget deficit is at least $260bn. That means that sooner rather than later the contracts are going to dry up. Insiders call it the 'homeland security bubble'.
When it bursts, firms such as Bechtel, Fluor and Blackwater will lose their primary revenue stream. They will still have all their hi-tech gear giving them the ability to respond to disasters, while the government will have let that precious skill wither away - but now they will rent back the tax-funded infrastructure at whatever price they choose.
Here's a snapshot of what could be in store in the not-too-distant future: helicopter rides off rooftops in flooded cities at $5,000 a pop ($7,000 for families, pets included), bottled water and 'meals ready to eat' at $50 a head (steep, but that's supply and demand), and a cot in a shelter with a portable shower (show us your biometric ID, developed on a lucrative homeland security contract, and we'll track you down later with the bill).
The model, of course, is the US healthcare system, in which the wealthy can access best-in-class treatment in spa-like environments while 46 million Americans lack health insurance."
Monday, 7 August 2006
Their Morals and Ours
In his 1936 pamphlet Their Morals and Ours, Trotsky attempted to steer a course between Stalinist and bourgeois moralities. Answering rhetorically the question of whether "lies and worse" are compatible with a “healthy socialist movement” (raised ironically enough by some "small and politically completely insignificant grouping"), the great man states that to:
1936: Their Morals and Ours: "...“lie and worse” are an inseparable part of the class struggle even in its most elementary form. It remains to be added that the very conception of truth and lie was born of social contradictions."
It has been fun to watch the trots (on all sides of the Sheridan trial) cling not only to bourgeois conceptions of sexual 'morality' (the 'fragrant wife', 'thou shalt not swing') but even to the whole bourgeois conception of 'truth' - as so eloquently and forcefully debunked by the sainted Trotsky himself in this seminal work which is surely taught to every cadre of the 57 varieties at an early stage of their development.
Indeed Colin Fox candidly and probably unwisely, even naively, revealed as much in evidence when - under oath to tell 'the truth' - he claimed he would lie (possibly even under oath) in certain circumstances (see Scotsman.com News - Scottish Socialist Party - I would have backed swing club 'lie' says SSP leader for Scotsman court report).
1936: Their Morals and Ours: "...“lie and worse” are an inseparable part of the class struggle even in its most elementary form. It remains to be added that the very conception of truth and lie was born of social contradictions."
It has been fun to watch the trots (on all sides of the Sheridan trial) cling not only to bourgeois conceptions of sexual 'morality' (the 'fragrant wife', 'thou shalt not swing') but even to the whole bourgeois conception of 'truth' - as so eloquently and forcefully debunked by the sainted Trotsky himself in this seminal work which is surely taught to every cadre of the 57 varieties at an early stage of their development.
Indeed Colin Fox candidly and probably unwisely, even naively, revealed as much in evidence when - under oath to tell 'the truth' - he claimed he would lie (possibly even under oath) in certain circumstances (see Scotsman.com News - Scottish Socialist Party - I would have backed swing club 'lie' says SSP leader for Scotsman court report).
Friday, 4 August 2006
Sheridan wins - you heard it here first
Well, well, well... Dr S Low up several notches... and I wouldn't usually blog myself, but hey ho, here we go - from 16 July:
Malky: Why 'Tommy drops his briefs': "Not sure what his reason for 'sacking' his lawyers is. But unlike everyone else - except Steven Low - I think he may stand a chance of winning. The wtnesses so far have been pretty dodgy to my mind. Anvar Khan promoting here book, and her and everyone else all in with the Screws up to their necks in cash. Not very credible."
Here's the BBC story...
BBC NEWS | Scotland | MSP Sheridan wins defamation case: "MSP Sheridan wins defamation case
Tommy Sheridan
The jury decided by a majority verdict in favour of Mr Sheridan
Tommy Sheridan has won his defamation case against the News of the World.
A jury of six men and five women took three hours to dismiss the tabloid's claims the Socialist MSP was a serial adulterer and swinger who used drugs.
Mr Sheridan had claimed News of the World stories about his sex life were untrue and represented himself in court after sacking his legal team.
The Sunday tabloid had claimed the reports were 'substantially true' and must pay Mr Sheridan £200,000 damages.
Mr Sheridan won his case on a majority verdict seven to four."
Malky: Why 'Tommy drops his briefs': "Not sure what his reason for 'sacking' his lawyers is. But unlike everyone else - except Steven Low - I think he may stand a chance of winning. The wtnesses so far have been pretty dodgy to my mind. Anvar Khan promoting here book, and her and everyone else all in with the Screws up to their necks in cash. Not very credible."
Here's the BBC story...
BBC NEWS | Scotland | MSP Sheridan wins defamation case: "MSP Sheridan wins defamation case
Tommy Sheridan
The jury decided by a majority verdict in favour of Mr Sheridan
Tommy Sheridan has won his defamation case against the News of the World.
A jury of six men and five women took three hours to dismiss the tabloid's claims the Socialist MSP was a serial adulterer and swinger who used drugs.
Mr Sheridan had claimed News of the World stories about his sex life were untrue and represented himself in court after sacking his legal team.
The Sunday tabloid had claimed the reports were 'substantially true' and must pay Mr Sheridan £200,000 damages.
Mr Sheridan won his case on a majority verdict seven to four."
Wednesday, 2 August 2006
All out of step except our Tony
BBC NEWS | Politics | Blair returns to face UK critics: "In a speech before leaving he warned of an 'arc of extremism' and said the West had not been 'bold enough.. in fighting for the values we believe in'.
But his words were branded 'foolish' and 'naive' by ex-Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
And deputy UN Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown urged Mr Blair to take a back seat in Mid-East peace talks."
But his words were branded 'foolish' and 'naive' by ex-Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
And deputy UN Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown urged Mr Blair to take a back seat in Mid-East peace talks."
The shameful behaviour of New Labour
Bob Thomson's letter in today's Herald
Gaun yersel Bob!
The shameful behaviour of New Labour
Your Letters August 02 2006
I will have been a member of the Labour Party for 43 years next month. Over the past few years I have considered resigning, as half the membership, more than 200,000, has done. But I took the view that it is our party, not Blair's or New Labour's, and would stay in to campaign to win the party back to its democratic socialist roots.
Nonetheless, I have never been so ashamed of this New Labour government as now. Its lack of condemnation of the Israeli government's illegal attack on Lebanon and, even worse, its complicity in the transport of weapons of mass destruction from the US to Israel is appalling. To think that a bomb transported through Prestwick could have killed all those women and children at Qana is deeply distressing and disreputable.
The deafening silence from most Labour MPs, MSPs and MEPs, including the First Minister and other Ministers, is shameful. The similar silence from LibDem Scottish Ministers is unsurprising; they, too, are as much chancers and hypocrites as New Labour.
I had the misfortune first to meet Blair in 1991. I didn't think much of him then, and my view has steadily gone downhill since. In my and many others' opinion, he shouldn't be in the Labour Party, far less leading it. He has involved us in more wars and conflicts than Churchill, malignantly interfered with the Scottish Parliament referendum, introduced tuition and top-up fees, is privatising health and education in England, corrupted the honours system and has saddled future generations with the costs of the private finance initiative.
Blair is Prime Minister by virtue of his leadership of the Labour Party. Despite party rules on nominations, he has not had to stand for election since 1994. Even banana republics go through the motions of elections.
Labour's share of the vote is in steep decline. At last year's General Election we received four million votes fewer than in 1997 and our lowest share of the vote since 1929. Next year's Scottish and Welsh elections don't look good. If Labour is to regain its radicalism and connect with the electorate, then its elective representatives, constituent trade unions, other affiliates and remaining individual members must act now to ensure there is a leadership contest at this year's party conference in September.
Bob Thomson, past Chairman/Treasurer, Scottish Labour Party, 741 Shields Road, Glasgow.
Gaun yersel Bob!
The shameful behaviour of New Labour
Your Letters August 02 2006
I will have been a member of the Labour Party for 43 years next month. Over the past few years I have considered resigning, as half the membership, more than 200,000, has done. But I took the view that it is our party, not Blair's or New Labour's, and would stay in to campaign to win the party back to its democratic socialist roots.
Nonetheless, I have never been so ashamed of this New Labour government as now. Its lack of condemnation of the Israeli government's illegal attack on Lebanon and, even worse, its complicity in the transport of weapons of mass destruction from the US to Israel is appalling. To think that a bomb transported through Prestwick could have killed all those women and children at Qana is deeply distressing and disreputable.
The deafening silence from most Labour MPs, MSPs and MEPs, including the First Minister and other Ministers, is shameful. The similar silence from LibDem Scottish Ministers is unsurprising; they, too, are as much chancers and hypocrites as New Labour.
I had the misfortune first to meet Blair in 1991. I didn't think much of him then, and my view has steadily gone downhill since. In my and many others' opinion, he shouldn't be in the Labour Party, far less leading it. He has involved us in more wars and conflicts than Churchill, malignantly interfered with the Scottish Parliament referendum, introduced tuition and top-up fees, is privatising health and education in England, corrupted the honours system and has saddled future generations with the costs of the private finance initiative.
Blair is Prime Minister by virtue of his leadership of the Labour Party. Despite party rules on nominations, he has not had to stand for election since 1994. Even banana republics go through the motions of elections.
Labour's share of the vote is in steep decline. At last year's General Election we received four million votes fewer than in 1997 and our lowest share of the vote since 1929. Next year's Scottish and Welsh elections don't look good. If Labour is to regain its radicalism and connect with the electorate, then its elective representatives, constituent trade unions, other affiliates and remaining individual members must act now to ensure there is a leadership contest at this year's party conference in September.
Bob Thomson, past Chairman/Treasurer, Scottish Labour Party, 741 Shields Road, Glasgow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
