New website, new paper, reflects new situation in Canada

By Fightback editorial board

Capitalism depends not just on profit, but on ever-increasing profit. Unfortunately, the world and its markets are finite. When profits are low, the bosses must cut costs to stay afloat, and it is always the working class that bears the brunt of these cuts, in the form of lay-offs, plant closings, and the clawing back of wages and benefits that already did not keep up with inflation. The bourgeoisie puts pressure on their governments to facilitate these attacks, by cutting social spending in favour of tax cuts for the rich, and by easing already minimal labour and employment standards. The fight to break the backs of labour is well underway. In British Columbia, Quebec, and Ontario, so called neo-liberal governments have caught the near-sighted leadership of the labour movement by surprise. "We are shocked", say the old reformist leaders of the NDP.

We see these attacks across the country. The BC Liberals have ripped up and legislated contracts, and legislated striking workers back to work, consciously and meticulously nullifying basic "rights" that workers fought and died for and that the labour leaders take for granted. The already pitiful minimum wage has been undermined by a $2 lower training wage. Children can work at 12 years old and the 8-hour day can be signed away in a "mutual agreement between equal parties", i.e. worker and boss. Gordon Campbell's good friend Jean Charest was eager to follow suit in Québec, with a program of "cost reductions, savings and budgetary constraints", and amending the labour code to allow contracting out. Dalton McGuinty, Ontario Liberal premier since October 2003, brought down a budget including regressive taxes in the form of medical premiums, increased user fees, and surprise, surprise, cuts to social spending. Prime Minister Paul Martin may have swept the Liberal leadership on his neo-liberal conservative agenda, but he certainly did not fair so well in the Federal general election. He is now the leader of an unstable minority government and is likely kicking himself for ever saying "Gordon Campbell is my kind of Liberal".

In the tradition of the 1980s' BC Socreds under William Bennett and British Tories under Margaret Thatcher, these grade-A villains hit hard and fast, in hopes of overwhelming, disorientating, and destroying the labour movement.

Fortunately, Canadian workers have made it known that they will not stand idly by while their living standards are eroded to ease the burden of a stagnant economy on their capitalist oppressors. In Newfoundland, the Tory government's demand for concessions on issues of job cuts and privatization brought 20,000 public sector workers out on April 1st, in the largest strike in the province's history. 48 hours before the strike began, the Tories tabled a budget calling for the elimination of 4,000 public sector jobs over four years. It was clear from the start that, like his cohorts in BC, Quebec and Ontario, Premier Danny Williams, one of Newfoundland's wealthiest businessmen, had no intention of respecting the right to strike. Even the Globe and Mail recognized Williams' back-to-work legislation as "historically harsh" (Richer. Globeandmail.com, 28 April 2004). Just one day later, the BC Hospital Employees' Union defied a similar order, and their illegal strike began (see BC General Strike betrayed by union bosses, http://www.marxist.com/canada/canada_gs_betrayed.html).

It is not because of some predetermined Canadian moral integrity that we have had the right to strike, a minimum wage, anti child labour laws, etc. It is because working people lifted their heads, recognized their collective power, formed unions, and made political demands from which they did not back down. The bourgeois attacks will continue, and struggles that have been fought and won will have to be re-fought. The ruling class will show no respect for the laws and "rights" that have become a thorn in their side. And while the academic left, who cannot think outside the box of bourgeois legality, will be sending letters to the government attempting to draw their attention to laws that have clearly been "overlooked", the working class will be doing instinctively what only we can do-going on strike, halting production, and protesting en masse in the streets. This is not some far fetched fairytale. Strike waves and mass movements are not foreign to Canadians. Marxists are often referred to as the memory of the working class. Let us remember the Winnipeg general strike and the Vancouver general strike (both 1919), the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s, the Waffle movement of the early 1970s, and BC's last general strike movement-Operation Solidarity of 1983.

Workers will be protesting and picketing, and they will be chanting "Fight back" - "They say cutback; we say Fightback!" The struggles for day-to-day bread and butter demands will be linked instinctively to the struggle for a better system. And it is up to the Marxists to explain that this is a struggle against capitalism, and for socialism. Trotsky explains in the Transitional Program that "it is necessary to help the masses in the process of the daily struggle to find the bridge between present demands and the socialist program of the revolution"-to fight tooth and nail for every demand, but to continually explain that true freedom from exploitation cannot be obtained within the confines of capitalism.

There is a new mood in the Canadian working class and that mood is reflected in the launch of a new revolutionary organ. Marxist.ca and Fightback aim to bring together those who genuinely wish to build a Bolshevik organization to fight for socialism. We are 100% in solidarity with the ideas of the International Marxist Tendency, www.marxist.com, and our sister papers around the globe. Frederick Engels commented that in some periods 20 years might pass as a single day, but also that the events of one day may express the history of 20 years. We are entering such a turbulent period, where the only barrier to overthrowing capitalism is the ability of Marxists to forge an organization capable of doing the job. We need both financial and human support. We call on readers of In Defence of Marxism in Canada to support us, subscribe to Fightback, and join our fight to transform society.

For more information contact: Fightback@marxist.ca
Fightback #540 - 1917 W. 4th Ave. Vancouver, BC. V6J 1M7

Hands off Venezuela takes to the streets in Montreal

"You need to get out of here now or these people will kill you." This was the earnest and forceful advice given my friends and I about three minutes after we arrived at Montreal's Venezuelan consulate on August 15, referendum day in Venezuela. There were only three of us – my roommate Albert with his camera, Macdonald, a pro-Chavez activist, and I – waiting to be joined by a group of others who shared our views on events in Venezuela. Our intention was to demonstrate support for pro-Chavez voters, signs in hand.

Immediately after we arrived, these signs garnered us hisses, boos, and heckling from the predominantly upper-class, white Venezuelans who had lined up to vote "Yes." We were attempting to get past the line to a clear area when our way was blocked by some particularly aggressive individuals. One woman (who had been informing us that we had no right to be there as we were not Venezuelan, and thus could not possibly know what we were talking about) left to call the police. Another tried to grab the sign, reading "Chavez no se va," out of Macdonald's hand – and Macdonald grabbed it back. He was unceremoniously shoved to the pavement. Albert pulled out his camera and began snapping pictures; he was grabbed from behind, his arms pinned behind his back, and someone tried to smash his camera. Hostile, shouting Opposition supporters surrounded me and prevented me from moving. Other comrades and supporters began to arrive. The crowd began singing the Venezuelan national anthem. We began singing the Internationale. At this point the police arrived.

The class instinct of the police to side with the rich was impeccable. Since we had been the ones assaulted, it was obvious to Montreal's finest that we were at fault. We were told to cross the street...  for our own safety of course. Our protestations that we had not instigated the events fell on deaf ears; we crossed the street, the crowd cheered. The police stayed around, for our own protection of course, pointing at us and talking among themselves. After about 45 seconds, they informed us in the courteously contemptuous style of policemen everywhere that if we stayed there, we would receive $150 dollar fines for loitering. But unnoticed by us, our side of the street had begun to fill with other pro-Chavez Venezuelans. We immediately began gathering signatures on the Hands Off Venezuela petition, moving up and down the street in avoidance of the loitering tickets.

Our main man from the anti-Chavez group, the one who had assaulted Macdonald, crossed the street and began yelling insults at Macdonald (who was still carrying the same sign.) He charged at him a couple of times, unsuccessfully attempting a repeat performance, as the police looked on passively, for our own protection of course. I yelled at the cops in English and French to do their job and intervene. One displayed his great respect for law and order with the comment, "I don't care." Albert pulled out the camera again, and suddenly, in the absence of backup, the hero of the Opposition became a little camera-shy. A policeman came up to him and threatened him with a ticket once again. Albert began shouting back at him, but an older lady who had signed our petition took his hand, saying simply, in a most soothing tone of voice, "Let's go."

At this point, a contingent of Bolivarians marched up the sidewalk toward us. They had been holding a pro-Chavez rally, in a park just down the street, which we had intended on attending. From what we were able to gather from conversations afterward, they had heard a broadcast over Montreal's Spanish radio, live from outside the consulate, that Chavez supporters were inciting violence with pro-Chavez signs. Their instincts immediately informed them as to what was taking place and they came to rescue us.

A more welcome sight could not be imagined. As opposed to the flashy clothing and expensive cars of the crowd across the street, these people were visibly working-class, soft-spoken, gently expressing sympathy and concern for us. Their demeanour was one of genuine camaraderie; almost all of them wore Che t-shirts. It seemed like a sea of red… In response to the changed balance of forces, the police left us alone, the crowd's taunts became quieter.

We walked the few blocks to the pro-Chavez demonstration. We were at home. Pro-Chavez songs provided a beautiful backdrop to the political exchanges, friendly conversations, and the dancing. Albert's saviour from outside the consulate, through an exchange of broken French between us, let me know that she wanted to take our petition around. She filled three pages worth of signatures. Another man showed us pictures which he had taken during the massive demonstrations which defeated the April 11 coup. We, non-Venezuelans and complete strangers, were part of a family.

There was more drama to the day; police cars menacingly surveyed the gathering, more Yes-side supporters took our pictures, but it didn't matter anymore. We spent hours in the park relaxing and making contact with people from the Bolivarian Association in Montreal. We were invited to all their meetings as comrades, friends, and fellow revolutionaries.

The day was a success for us, and as it turned out, a success for Chavez, for the Bolivarian revolution, and for the international working class - as the referendum was resolved in favour of Chavez. In Venezuela and in Montreal, we held our ground and retained a base for advancement. For us, this is only the beginning.

On August 29th, a small group gathered for an information picket outside the American consulate in Vancouver, British Columbia. At least twenty activists came out to show their support for the Venezuelan revolution, to carry placards, distribute leaflets, collect signatures, and discuss with passers-by. The crowd included activists of all ages and backgrounds, including Venezuelan and Iranian émigrés and NDP youth from around the province. One sandwich board read "What's the difference between Bush and Chavez?" The response on reverse attracted many laughs – "Chavez won his election". The picket was generally well received and many signatures were gathered.

At the Vancouver Labour Day celebrations on September 5th, Hands off Venezuela took to the streets again. At this mostly apolitical event, our table was a pole of attraction for anybody looking for political ideas. Over one hundred workers and youth signed the petition.

The Third Way Raises its Ugly Head in the NDP

Take back the BC NDP!

By Mike Palecek

Carole James came to power without a platform. She said nothing concrete in her campaign for leader and clearly had no real plan for how to move forward. This is precisely why the party brass rallied around her and got her elected. Each of the four leading candidates represented a different section of the party. Nils Jensen was the Blairite, who urged the party to move to the right and grudgingly admitted to donating money to the BC Liberal Party in the last provincial election. Leonard Krog represented the old guard of the last NDP government and specifically, the Glen Clark wing of the party. Steve Orcherton was an unapologetically working class candidate who demanded that the NDP “fight the real enemy” and return to its principles. And finally, Carole James was an empty smile.

The ruling clique of the party chose Carole as their candidate. Although they would have been much happier with Nils Jensen, they recognized that the rank and file would not accept him and backing Nils would only discredit them. A few of the more right wing elements of the NDP executive openly endorsed Nils Jensen, but the rest fell into line behind Carole James. One by one, the public sector unions began endorsing her.

The endorsement from CUPE was an absolute betrayal. The rank and file of CUPE was solidly behind Steve Orcherton. Steve was the only MLA in the last NDP government that had the courage to stand up for CUPE members when the NDP government legislated them back to work. He broke ranks with the NDP caucus to defend the right to strike and this earned him the hatred of the party brass.

It was clear at convention that the Carole James campaign had money. Her office had computers, a photocopier, fax machine, big full colour posters, scarves and all kinds of excessive propaganda. She was being backed by a major machine, but why? Why would the leaders of the labour movement and the NDP be so eager to back someone with no real political direction? It is all very simple. They wanted someone pliable. They needed a leader that they could control; that is, a leader that wouldn't lead. And this is precisely what they found in Carole James.

Since that convention, Carole James has moved steadily to the right. Her speeches: clearly written by her handlers. She was complicit in the sellout of the HEU strike and actually laid the groundwork for the deal by stating that the government should at least remove the retroactivity of the wage cut. This set the bar for the compromise, at the expense of the entire labour movement.

The ruling clique of the NDP is preparing an election platform that Tony Blair would be proud of. The general idea: no promises. They will tell British Columbians that our province has been so damaged by the BC Liberal government that they don't know if they can fix it. They will tell us that you can't unscramble an omelet. And they will say that they will do their best, but can't make any guarantees. And of course, if they promise nothing, that is exactly what they will deliver.

There is a misconception that socialists have to water down their program to gain votes. On the contrary, this is actually the only way the NDP could lose the next election. People are very angry with Gordon Campbell's government. Only a few months ago, the rank and file of the labour movement was ready to shut the province down with a general strike to bring down the government. Workers desperately want an alternative and of course the NDP is that alternative. But we must give people something to vote for. If the NDP doesn't give people something concrete to vote for, they won't bother to vote at all. A commitment to take back the privatized crown corporations, overturn the reactionary legislation and restore funding to social programs, in contrast would result in a landslide victory in May 2005.

On July 15, 2004 Carole James made an historic speech go the Coalition of BC Businesses. In this speech she unintentionally defined herself as a Blairite. She calls for a close partnership between business and the NDP. She embraces the market economy and calls for “a partnership, built on trust between government, labour, and the business community.” James says that “New Democrats and the business community share a lot more in common than is often assumed.” Refering to the recent labour unrest in the province, she claims “we need an approach that cools things down, that demands of each of us a willingness to listen, to encourage compromises and to provide a new kind of leadership for BC.”

But there can be no partnership between business and labour. They have conflicting interests. These compromises will always come at the expense of working class people. The members of the Hospital Employees Union were forced (against their will) into “a compromise”. That's political jargon for fifteen percent wage cut!

Capitalism is in crisis on a world scale. Markets are stagnant at best. International conflicts on every level are popping up like bush fires. Any spark can ignite a firestorm, whether it be revolutionary movements in Latin America, war in the Middle East or public sector strikes in Newfoundland and British Columbia. The crisis of global capital penetrates every sector of society. No one is left untouched. Capitalism cannot afford to give any reforms, and workers cannot afford to take any more cuts. This situation is a recipe for an explosion of the class struggle.

There is no such thing as “an approach that cools things down”. To compromise is to attack the working class. The only options are accepting defeat or escalating the struggle. The class fight will be fought out to the finish, one way or another. This is not something any individual can control, but an integral part of the market economy which Carole James so eagerly embraces.

How is it that such massive contradictions can build up in the Labour movement? To understand this we must understand exactly what the labour movement is. In the last analysis, unions are organs of struggle. They are bodies of workers organizing to defend themselves and to improve their working and living conditions. They take on a democratic form and can be an accurate expression of the needs of working people. During times like the present, workers flood into the organizations which they have created.

But in times of relative class-peace, workers stop participating in the labour movement and spend their time living their own lives. Workers come to meetings when they feel they have a reason to. And when things are relatively calm, the unions are left to a few staff members to run. Running a union can take on a business like form and bureaucracies develop. Union officials can become accustomed to stability and become inflexible. They find nice cushy jobs and start to feel untouchable. But as the class struggle picks up again, these bureaucrats are actually a barrier to the movement. Again and again, when workers return to their mass organizations they find their leaders telling them to compromise. They are asked to wait patiently for the trouble to pass.

Unions are not static structures. They are living bodies which are in constant flux and in a never-ending process of renewal. As the rank and file comes into conflict with their leaders, they use the democratic structures of the union to replace them. These bureaucrats and careerists consequently fear their members. This is why they are afraid of mass movements. This is why they will not mobilize their members. This is why they will so willingly sell out their members if they think it will cool down the situation. Some leaders try to use bureaucratic and undemocratic methods to prevent such movements, but in the end it doesn't matter. They will be swept aside and new leaders will be elected.

The New Democratic Party is the political expression of the labour movement. It is a workers' party, organically linked to the trade unions. The NDP is the only party in Canada capable of representing the working class. All of the same processes that take place in the labour movement are reflected inside the NDP. As people try to fight back against capitalism they will find themselves inside the NDP. They will find a leadership that isn't prepared to lead a fight, a leadership that asks them to compromise, a leadership that is a barrier to their struggle. And they will be forced into opposition with this leadership. Very soon, such leaders will be swept into the dust bins of history.

The right turn of the leadership of the BC NDP represents a real danger for British Columbia. It could mean another five years of attacks from Gordon Campbell and his cronies. It will take a mass movement of the people to bring the NDP back to power. It is even more important that this movement continue after the election—not only to defend the NDP from the attacks of the media and the ruling class, but also to hold the leadership accountable to the working people who elected them. The time has come for every class-conscious worker and activist to come into the NDP and fight for ideas that can win.

Take Back the BC NDP!
Kick out Gordon Campbell!
Fightback for Socialism!