Socialist Alternative

Published On April 16, 2016

Published On April 16, 2016 | By Rachel Lovitz

Che Taylor, a 46-year-old father, was fatally shot by Seattle police officers on February 21, while appearing to comply with the officers’ commands to get down on the ground and put his hands up .

Dashcam video of Che Taylor Shooting from SPD Blotter. Credit: youtube.com

The shooting occurred against the background of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) findings against the Seattle Police Department (SPD) which found a pattern of excessive and unnecessary force used by officers, especially toward people of color. The investigation was mandated in 2010 after SPD officers shot and killed John T. Williams, a partially-deaf Native American man holding his woodworking tools, who did not respond to their calls of “hands up”. The DOJ’s report revealed that SPD officers systematically escalate situations when arresting people for minor offenses. Fifty percent of the cases where police used excessive force involved people of color–in a city that is 70% white.

Public response and protests

Four days following Taylor’s death, nearly 100 protesters rallied outside SPD headquarters and marched across downtown, chanting #Blacklivesmatter, demanding justice, police accountability, and an investigation of the officers involved.

Seattle City Council Member Kshama Sawant speaks to the crowd. Credit: Alex Garland of The Stranger

Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant joined the demonstration, calling on Police Chief Kathleen O’Toole to come to a public hearing in front of the City Council. Sawant sent public requests to the heads of both City Council committees empowered to hold such a hearing, Councilmembers Bruce Harrell and Lorena Gonzalez, but both declined to take the initiative.

At a 2/23/2016 press conference, Seattle King County NAACP Pres. President Hankerson claims shooting of Che Taylor was an execution. Credit: Seattle King County NAACP

While a closed-door investigation takes place, the corporate media and political establishment have had no problem liberally referring to Taylor’s criminal past to implicitly justify the killing, in spite of the ambiguity of the video footage of the incident. Shortly after the shooting, Mayor Ed Murray announced that Taylor’s death appeared to be justified, although an investigation was needed. Seattle NAACP President Gerald Hankerson has slammed the police and local media for repeatedly referring to Taylor as an armed felon without concrete evidence that he had a gun, and with existing allegations that the weapon that eventually turned up was planted by the police.

How can we achieve #JusticeForChe and police accountability?

Che Taylor’s wife, Brenda Taylor, marches next to Che’s brother. Credit: Alex Garland of The Stranger

Socialist Alternative calls for a full investigation of Che Taylor’s death. If the City Council won’t agree to hold a hearing, then the public should demand one. Black Lives Matter activists and members of the community should come together to demand a hearing and real police accountability, not just perfunctory reforms.

While the DOJ has sung the praises of the SPD reform project, activists and community groups have broadly criticized the reforms as superficial.

The DOJ’s process included the creation of a temporary civilian oversight board, the Community Police Commission. But in 2013 the 15-member commission unanimously threatened to resign, protesting its extremely limited authority to in to carry out real use-of-force reforms needed. Later, when the commission put forward legislation to become a permanent body, the federal judge overseeing the process used a heavy hand to stop the proposal in it’s tracks.

A democratically elected community oversight board has become one of the key demands Black Lives Matter has put forward. Such boards would need full powers, including the power to subpoena police officers, is an essential starting point to begin holding  police accountable.

Learning from the fight against racism and the right in Chicago

We cannot have illusions in either corporate party that benefits from the disenfranchisement, poverty, and criminalization of the working class, especially the black working class and poor.

The protester in the front left of this photo is wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt; the poster in the far right is a reference to Trump’s comments about immigrants being rapists. Credit:Scott Olson/Getty

Last November in Chicago, Black Lives Matter activists shut down national chain stores on Black Friday in protest against police brutality. In December thousands took to the streets in Chicago, blocking intersections and the interstate, calling for Democratic “Mayor 1%” Rahm Emanuel to step down for covering up the police murder of a black teenage boy during his campaign. This month, hundreds of Black Lives Matter activists and Bernie Sanders supporters protested at a Donald Trump rally in Chicago, calling out his racism and anti-immigrant fear-mongering, and shutting down the event.

Winning greater police accountability will require building our movement and standing up to the political establishment–both the Democrats and the Republicans–for being complicit in a system that perpetuates abuse of police powers. As in Chicago, we must expose the Democratic Party in Seattle for what it is: a force that will dig in its nails at every turn to protect establishment interests, not the interests of working people.

Published On April 16, 2016 | By Keely Mullen

Time for a Massive Jobs Program

The horrific conditions in Flint, Michigan have brought to national attention a much deeper crisis of capitalism: the crisis of deteriorating infrastructure. In 2014, one-fifth of all children tested in Detroit showed positive for lead poisoning.

The problems facing poor families in Flint are not exclusive to that city. They are experienced by poor and working people across the country. Nearly 24 million homes in the United States have crumbling lead paint on their walls. And now, 17,000 children in Newark, New Jersey will be tested for lead poisoning after elevated lead levels were found in the drinking water at close to half of the schools in the city.

Lead poisoning directly contributes to severe brain damage, in some cases leading to behavioral problems, low IQs, poor performance in school, and difficulty learning. Due to the ferocity with which the lead industry has fought regulation, it was not until 2008 that lead in paint was reduced to a tolerable level. The lead industry, with the help of their purchased politicians, has carried out the collective poisoning of hundreds of thousands of American children. The crisis in Flint, and now in New Jersey, indicates that lead is no longer restricted to crumbling paint and dust, but it has made its way into our water supply, largely as a result of deteriorating pipes and collapsing infrastructure.

Rebuild Infrastructure and Create Millions of Jobs

A section of the collapsed I-35W Mississippi River bridge, Minneapolis, Minnesota

This should serve as a massive cry for infrastructural investment. Many American roads, waterways, bridges, and grids are in a state of decay. We saw this demonstrated in 2007 with the collapse of the I-35W Mississippi River Bridge in Minneapolis that killed 13 and injured 145. From methane leaks in our gas distribution pipelines to lead poisoning in our waterways, we need a massive overhaul of American infrastructure – which would lead to the creation of millions of jobs. Bernie Sanders has called for $1 trillion to be spent over five years on infrastructural investment, which would create 13 million good-paying jobs. This would be a great start.

American infrastructural investment has failed to keep pace with either the needs of the American people or the rapid technological advancements of the past two decades. When profit stands between the needs of people and our capacity to meet those needs, we wind up with crises like the ones we are seeing in Flint and Newark. In order to live in a world that meets the needs and capacities of all people, we need an economy that is democratically planned by those who actually make the economy run: the workers, not a handful of billionaires.

Published On April 16, 2016 | By Sonia Chien

By June, the Supreme Court will rule on Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, a case that could have disastrous implications for reproductive rights across the country. In 2013, Texas passed House Bill 2, severely limiting Texas women’s access to abortion facilities. This bill has closed more than half the clinics in Texas: down from 41 to 18.

The legal arguments center on whether or not these changes can be characterized as “undue burden,” which was defined by the Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood v. Casey as health regulations that can have “the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion.” HB 2 forces longer waiting periods for treatment, prohibits abortion past 20 weeks post-insemination and, with a later amendment, requires all clinics to have mandatory ambulatory surgical center (ASC) certification.

The primary cause of the 1973 passing of Roe v. Wade was the militant political activism that dominated the public sphere at the time.

Earlier this March, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the Whole Woman’s Health case. According to a U.S.News & World Report article: “If the Supreme Court rules against Whole Woman’s Health, Texas will be left with as few as nine abortion clinics” (1/11/2016). In the wake of Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, Whole Woman’s Health said goodbye to an opponent; however, if all of the remaining justices vote according to their party, the vote will be split 4-4, bringing the decision back to the Fifth Circuit, the body that upheld the restrictions in the first place.

NARAL Pro-Choice Texas: Abortion Clinics in Texas, 4/16/2016

Texas’ HB 2 law is representative of an overarching national War on Women. In 1982, there were 2,900 active abortion clinics in the United States. As of 2015, there were 739, with the number continuing to decrease. NARAL Pro-Choice America reports that sixteen states have piggybacked on Texas’ recent restrictions. Among the most extreme, Indiana’s bill would force mothers to pay for the funerals of miscarriages. Without concerted action, these types of restrictions will continue to be implemented all across the country.

The primary cause of the 1973 passing of Roe v. Wade was the militant political activism that dominated the public sphere at the time. Advancements in civil rights have always been fought for and achieved by mass movements of the working class, not by the intent of state and federal bodies. It is essential that we join together as the working class to build an independent political alternative to the two parties. A unified movement that fights capitalism’s oppression of women with a single-payer health care system and safe access to abortion is the only way to ensure reproductive rights for all.

Published On April 14, 2016 | By Joshua Koritz 

On April 1, over 100 people packed a room near O’Hare Airport in Chicago in advance of the biennial Labor Notes conference. Reports were shared from union locals across the country – all reflecting the still growing momentum for Bernie Sanders within the labor movement. Though the internal situations differ, veterans of the labor movement were all astonished at how quickly Labor for Bernie has grown and gathered endorsements.

Labor for Bernie has had enormous success: it has nearly 30,000 likes on Facebook, five major national unions have endorsed Sanders as well as nearly 100 other union locals. Most recently, Sanders won the endorsement of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU). This groundswell of support, unfortunately, stands in sharp contrast to the role of a number of union leaders who rushed to back Hillary Clinton and, in many cases, gave their own membership no opportunity to express their views democratically.

Speakers and participants arrived from around the country including Seattle socialist councilmember Kshama Sawant. Many raised the importance of continuing the network that Labor for Bernie has started after the Democratic primary. There was talk of independent electoral politics and building a lasting alternative, however it was guarded and speculative. To huge applause, Kshama called for labor to make a jailbreak out of supporting corporate Democrats and to run its own candidates. An important element of the forces that could be gathered to form a workers’ party was visibly represented in the room.

National Nurses United (NNU) and California Nurses Association (CNA) Director of Public Policy Michael Lighty explained the top issue for the NNU; “Medicare for all is at the forefront. It is unconscionable that a Democrat [Clinton] can be running saying, ‘We’ll never get single payer.’”

Reports from unions around the country included the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), Minnesota Nurses Association, the American Postal Workers Union, United Electrical Workers (UE), New York State Nurses Association, New Jersey Industrial Council, and Unite Here Local 2 in San Francisco. Experiences and internal situations vary widely from the NNU which endorsed Bernie nationally, to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) which decided on no national endorsement and has let its locals decide their own endorsements. From AFSCME Council 28 in Washington state which went against its international endorsement to back Bernie, to the CWA which did an online poll of its members and now backs Bernie.

Bernie Sanders’ campaign is creating political dialogue within unions, between unions, between rank-and-file union members, and a bottom-up pressure on labor leadership. This pressure will continue to push for greater democracy and help redevelop activist networks in locals, and in cities and local areas.

Inevitably and correctly, the question of the lack of democracy in some unions around presidential endorsements was part of the discussion. Peter Olney, a retired ILWU member pointed out that LaborForBernie has been crucial to democratizing the endorsement process by providing an organizing nexus and putting pressure on union leaderships. ILWU failed to endorse Bernie several times until the pressure of the LaborForBernie made the difference. He argued for forming an organization out of LaborForBernie to last past the 2016 elections.

Larry Cohen, Senior Adviser to the Sanders campaign and past president of CWA, made a special trip to Chicago to address the meet up. He reported from Bernie’s official campaign. The main strategy the campaign for labor is to encourage union members to sign pledge cards to vote for Bernie. He also emphasized an inside-outside strategy, both for the DNC, and for the Democratic Party. He pointed out, “What does democracy look like? It doesn’t look like 750 super delegates.” Yet still he encouraged people to wage a fight within the corporate Democratic Party structures. This strategy does not clearly answer the question of how we will fight and win real change including key elements of Sanders’ campaign like single-payer health care, free education, and a federal $15 minimum wage. This will require the rebirth of a genuine fighting labor movement combined with a political force that is wholly answerable to, and controlled by, working people not the corporate interests who want to keep us down.

In the panel, and in open discussion, this question of building a new party to represent the interests of working people was also discussed. Kshama Sawant argued forcefully for unions to run their own candidates independent of the two corporate parties. Fresh from the Chicago Teachers Union picket lines earlier in the day, she pointed out the continued backstabbing of Democratic Party politicians like Rahm Emanuel. In contrast, she brought up the shining example of Seattle where electing an independent socialist was a vital part of Seattle being the first city in the country to win $15. “We railed against the Democratic Party and got a real echo. People are fed up with the status quo. We won because we have Socialist Alternative, an independent organization, free from corporate influence or the strings of the Democratic Party,” Kshama explained.

From the floor, Socialist Alternative speakers raised the idea of calling a national conference to discuss how to keep Labor For Bernie together even after 2016 – such a conference could be a step to a new party of the 99% run by, and for, working people with the vital leadership of organized labor. Concretely, unions should look to run independent candidates in local areas to build off of Bernie’s success.

Published On April 14, 2016 | By Tom Crean

After a string of primary and caucus wins, culminating in Wisconsin last week, Bernie Sanders regained momentum and has forced Hillary Clinton into a dogfight in New York State which will likely be a decisive battle. If Clinton loses New York on April 19 it would be a humiliating blow that could send her campaign into crisis. This is why the establishment has come rushing to her aid with a brutal media campaign against Sanders.

On the other hand, if Sanders who already faces a very steep hill to win the majority of pledged delegates, loses this huge state with its nearly 250 pledged delegates, it will much more clearly put the Democratic nomination beyond his reach. The media will then engage in an orgy of triumphalism. But the real point will not be that Hillary survives but that the revolt against the establishment has become so strong that it forced the heir apparent into such a protracted fight.

It is abundantly clear that large numbers of Sanders supporters who were attracted by his call for a political revolution against the billionaire class, for single payer, free education and a $15 minimum wage, have been further radicalized by the experience of the undemocratic primary process controlled by the Democratic Party’s corporate establishment. From the attempt of the Democratic National Committee last December to deny Sanders access to critical voter data; to the way debates were kept to a bare minimum; to the role of the corporate media in trying to shut out or distort Sanders’ radical message, millions have seen through this cynical game. Many have become particularly incensed at the role of the super-delegates – party officials who are chosen by the leadership to help maintain their control of the party – and the fact that in state after state where Sanders has won, all or almost all of the super-delegates are still going to Hillary.

The corporate media has said Bernie is unelectable, but national polls over the past couple months have consistently shown Clinton and Sanders tied or even Sanders edging slightly ahead and, in head to head polling against Trump and Cruz, Sanders does much better than Clinton. Also, contrary to the mainstream media narrative, Sanders has been gaining support among black people and Latinos, particularly young people. One recent national poll showed Sanders inching ahead of Clinton among Latinos nationally. This shift was clearly visible in the South Bronx, one of the poorest areas in New York City, on April 1 when 18,000 turned out to hear Sanders, nearly half of them people of color.

Of course in the early primaries in the South, Sanders lost the black vote overwhelmingly. This reflected a number of things including that Sanders remained an unknown quantity in the black community until very recently; the historical support for the Clintons especially among older black voters; Hillary’s presentation as the inheritor of Obama’s legacy and his implicit endorsement of her; and the relative low proportion of younger black people voting. Hillary retains these advantages but it is striking how they have diminished as the primary process has proceeded.

In the Bronx, there was huge openness to Socialist Alternative’s call for a new party of the 99% and for Sanders to run all the way to November as an independent, if he loses the primary. As we said in the leaflet we distributed, “We need Bernie on the ballot in November when even more people will pay attention. We need to keep fighting, but how can we make sure our movement for a political revolution does not end up imprisoned by the constraints of the Wall Street dominated Democratic Party?”

Establishment on the Attack

For nearly two months after Super Tuesday the liberal corporate media largely ignored Sanders and focused on Trump 24/7. There is no doubt that Trump’s vicious right populist circus is compelling viewing and sells papers. But this focus also clearly served Clinton’s campaign by presenting her as the “experienced,” “tested” candidate who could be relied on to defeat Trump – who rightly scares progressive workers, young people, women and people of color – in the general election. Fear of Trump in reality has been the main prop holding up her weak campaign.

Sanders winning seven out of the last eight caucuses and primaries has, however, forced Clinton back in the ring with Sanders, making a series of attacks. The New York media has swung in hard behind her. Particularly outrageous has been the coverage in the Daily News, the nation’s fourth largest circulation paper. They initially gave space to criticisms of Clinton before attacking Sanders from all sides, especially on the issue of gun control with front page headlines like “Bernie’s Sandy Hook Shame” trying to suggest his votes on particular pieces of gun control legislation contribute to mass killings like the one in Sandy Hook.

But what is even worse is the role of the leaders of key public sector unions like the United Federation of Teachers and AFSCME in a city where the labor movement still has substantial weight. They have gone into overdrive to back Clinton despite her long, dedicated service to Wall Street; her failure to support $15 as a federal minimum wage, single payer healthcare or free college; and her support for job-killing trade deals.

The reality is that the New York primary which is closed is inherently unfavorable to Sanders, as it excludes the large number of independents who would vote for him if the primary was open. Current polls show Sanders somewhere between 10 and 15 points behind statewide.

The Sanders campaign is pushing back, opening offices around New York City and holding daily rallies around the state and the city. There is also a March for Bernie on Saturday with key labor supporters of Sanders speaking including Rose Ann De Moro of the National Nurses Union and Larry Cohen, ex-president of the Communications Workers of America whose members have just gone on strike against Verizon. Also speaking will be Seattle socialist councilmember Kshama Sawant.

The city’s historically most militant union, Transport Workers Union, Local 100, has now come out in support of Sanders. The Indypendent and Occupy Wall Street activists have printed 500,000 copies of a four page pro-Sanders newspaper called Battle of New York to be distributed across the city and state in coming days. Finally the debate being held tonight between Sanders and Clinton will be critical to Bernie’s effort to close the gap. He will have to make the case decisively that Clinton’s promises and fake shift to the left during the primaries cannot be trusted.

Time for a New Party of the 99%

Socialist Alternative will be present at all these events talking to people about the need for a new party and the real meaning of democratic socialism, a term which Sanders’ campaign has popularized to an audience of millions. We will be gathering signatures on our new national petition calling on Bernie to run through November as an independent.

If Sanders loses, all the enormous energy created by his campaign, the enormous hunger for change, must not go to waste. Sanders must not endorse Hillary Clinton and thereby demoralize hundreds of thousands of his best, most dedicated supporters.

Reflecting the increasingly militant mood of Sanders’ supporters, several prominent figures including Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow and Daily News columnist Shaun King have called for a new party on the left. An online petition entitled “A Love Letter to Bernie” is calling for turning his donor base into a membership organization with democratic input into the platform and building this organization locally beyond this election. This also points in the direction of a new party but it does not clearly spell out that this organization must become fully independent of the Democrats if it is to really represent the interests of workers and young people.

And even if Sanders were to somehow overcome all the obstacles in New York, and throw the Hillary Clinton campaign into crisis, it will still be an all-out fight to win the nomination with the party apparatus doing everything in their power to sabotage the political revolution. In this situation, building the structures of a new party would be even more imperative.

The Battle of New York is now fully engaged and has demonstrated more clearly than ever the enormous potential for building a real left in this country and the need to break with the Democratic Party.

Published On April 9, 2016 | By Bryan Koulouris

The billionaires that control the Democrats don’t want Bernie Sanders’ radical program to win. Last December, the Democratic National Committee tried to sabotage Bernie’s campaign by cutting off his access to vital voter information. The party establishment has mobilized the unelected super-delegates as the reserves should their chosen candidate run into further difficulties. The Democrats even tried to keep Sanders off the ballot in New Hampshire. Coin tosses were used to defeat him in Iowa. They used illegal campaigning in Massachusetts and looked the other way while Arizona engaged in blatant voter suppression.

The corporate media either ignores Sanders or calls him “unelectable” despite polling higher than Clinton against Trump. Yet, Bernie has won many states, and the enthusiasm for his message – mega-rallies across the country and tens of millions in donations from working people – shows the potential for a new party in this country that refuses to take a dime in corporate cash. The “unDemocratic” Party is what stands in our way.

Every vote for Bernie is a vote for a $15 an hour minimum wage, free college tuition, and a trillion-dollar jobs program paid for by taxes on the richest 1%. We want to be able to vote for Bernie and his program in November too! The Democratic Party is doing everything they can to block us, and we need to lay the groundwork now for Bernie to run as an independent if he loses the nomination. Socialist Alternative is campaigning for Bernie to run as an independent. Below are some common questions and answers from discussions we’ve had with activists in Bernie’s campaign.

Bernie said he won’t run as an independent. Why should we pressure him?

Despite being pro-union all his life, Bernie wasn’t for a $15 an hour minimum wage until recently. He responded to the movement and started putting this demand at the forefront of his campaign. Despite getting arrested fighting against racism and discrimination, Bernie wasn’t putting the struggles of people of color as a centerpiece of his campaign until Black Lives Matter activists got involved. Now, Bernie is speaking clearly about the need to fight institutional racism with an excellent program of demands.

We can affect Bernie! Let’s build a movement for him to run as an independent! As Bernie has said over and over, this campaign isn’t about him, it’s about us. It’s about what we’ve built. We should have a voice in how to continue the political revolution. Bernie should call a conference of all his supporters to urgently discuss the way forward, and Socialist Alternative would argue for this conference to be a step towards an independent campaign and a new party of the 99%.

I’m afraid of Trump’s racism and sexism. Wouldn’t Bernie split the vote and let Trump get into the White House?

This is what Bernie himself raises, and it is absolutely correct that Trump is a real threat to the rights of working people, women, and people of color. However, a Hillary candidacy and potential presidency would be a gift to Trump and the right-wing populist policies he represents. Hillary’s pro-corporate, warmonger policies would lead to more of the poverty and discontent that fuels Trump’s train of hate. To cut across Trump, we need protests that connect the fight against racism to a working-class program for jobs, education, housing, and healthcare. We also need candidates – like Bernie – that refuse to take a dime in corporate cash to show a real alternative to the establishment and the Wall Street domination of both parties.

Still, we realize that many people would be horrified at the prospect of an open bigot having a chance at sitting in the White House and would be unwilling to risk having a “spoiler” campaign. Bernie could still run an all-out campaign in more than 40 states and run no risk of playing the “spoiler.” Most states will be won by either a Democrat or Republican with a clear majority. Less than ten will be “swing states.” In those swing states, an independent Sanders campaign could organize people to build the political revolution and fight for the strongest possible vote in neighboring states that are already guaranteed to be won by either a Democrat or Republican. This is one tactic that could be discussed as an option by a conference that pulls together all Sanders supporters to talk about next steps for the political revolution.

Isn’t it too late for Bernie to get on the ballot as an independent?

No, it isn’t. Jill Stein is currently the strongest left candidate outside of the two major parties. Jill and Green Party activists are still fighting to get her on the ballot in all 50 states. Jill has been friendly towards Bernie supporters, and he could potentially run alongside her in a historic step forward for working-class politics.

Published On April 7, 2016 | By Emily McArthur

On March 29th, three days after Washington voters delivered a 73% victory for Bernie Sanders, Socialist Alternative drew together over 100 people for a meeting at the Seattle Labor Temple titled “Which Way Forward for the Political Revolution?”

The discussion highlighted the international proportions of the struggle, with people all over the world looking for an alternative to establishment politics. Paul Murphy, an elected member of the Dáil (Ireland’s Parliament) representing the Socialist Party, spoke alongside Seattle’s socialist City Councilmember Kshama Sawant.

Working through the Movement4Bernie campaign, Socialist Alternative’s Seattle branches participated in all of the exciting activity around Bernie Sanders leading up to the March 26th Washington Primary. We organized marches, public forums, and a hugely successfully Labor for Bernie rally.

The success of our work came into full view at the crowded public meeting at the Seattle Labor Temple. While the whole country has been buzzing with the millions of individual donations and stadiums packed with tens of thousands for the Sanders campaign, Seattle – home to America’s second most famous socialist – has shown the concrete results of electing an independent candidate. Seattlites donated to Sanders more than anywhere in the country, and packed two massive rallies in one week leading up to the primary.

In this atmosphere of candidate-centred enthusiasm, Socialist Alternative members consistently pointed a bold way forward: if Bernie is blocked from winning the rigged Democratic Party primary process, he should run as an independent through November. In the lead up to Washington’s caucuses, SA members held discussions with thousands of enthusiastic people getting engaged and invited them to our public meeting.

In Seattle’s Labor Temple, the room was brimming despite the meeting being held on a weekday directly after work hours. The crowd was diverse in all ways but one: they were all excited to push forward on a plan to win bold demands like 15/hr federal minimum wage, universal healthcare, and free college tuition.

Paul Murphy, our guest from Socialist Alternative’s sister organization in Ireland, opened the debate with an international scope. Paul described how the political situation in the United States is an echo of what is happening globally. Establishment parties who have dominated politics in European countries for decades are losing popular support, and voters are looking for new answers. He pointed to movements in Greece, Spain and his own country. With the establishment at a crisis for credibility and ideas, there are exciting opportunities to boldly point toward a socialist future. Rising support for socialism is underscored by his own successful election in Dublin, the rapid rise of Jeremy Corbyn to lead the British Labour Party, and of course by Bernie Sanders.

Kshama Sawant’s speech was inspiring, yet posed the hard questions facing Sanders supporters. Bernie’s campaign is wildly popular, but what do we do if he loses the nomination? While losing Bernie’s fighting voice for left politics in the presidential campaign would be a major blow, ceding the ground of anti-establishment politics to Donald Trump makes the situation much more grave. Kshama repeated her call on Bernie to run all the way through November, as an independent if needed, both in order to push for his platform in the general election, but also to forge the grassroots organizing and campaign infrastructure from Bernie’s campaign into the basis for a new party of the 99%.

The crowd participated in an open mic discussion, and the hot topic of the day was how to use Bernie’s insurgent campaign, and the millions who have been drawn to his platform, to build a new party to challenge the two parties of big business.

Kshama Sawant gave a characteristically rousing opening speech, but the highlight of the night was in her closing remarks. The hunger and space for an alternative is there, she said, and the best thing you can do to help build it is to join Socialist Alternative! Through an organized socialist force, we can build not only a political alternative, but also an alternative to the rotten capitalist system. We have a world to win.

Speaking alongside internationally acclaimed environmental activist and author Bill McKibben, Socialist Alternative’s Kshama Sawant outlines a socialist strategy for the climate justice movement. The talk by the Seattle City Councilmember on “Uniting Against the Climate Crisis: The Way Forward for the Climate Justice Movement” was recorded April 4, 2016 at Town Hall Seattle.

Published On April 5, 2016 | By Dave Murray

It has been called the “biggest leak in history”: 2.6 terabytes of information, containing 11.5 million files – the client database of Mossack Fonseca, a shady Panamanian law firm – was secretly passed to the International Commission for Investigative Journalism (ICIJ) roughly a year ago.

What companies like Mossack Fonseca do is allow the global rich to hide their money. Of course when we say hide we mean “steal” and when we say “their” we mean “our”, since most of this cash has been generated by fraud, theft, illegal trafficking of drugs, people and weapons, misappropriation of public funds, corruption in public office, tax avoidance and tax evasion.

The anonymous shell companies, foundations and trusts they set up have been likened to “getaway cars” for the high-end criminal. You load up the swag and put your foot down. On second thoughts, drive as slowly as you like – the cops are in on it.

Media focus

The ICIJ started to release the story over the last few days through respectable outlets like theGuardian and the BBC. What is remarkable, given the wealth of new evidence, is that the focus has been on cases that were already in the public domain.

For example, David Cameron’s late father, who set up an offshore trust to hide the family millions from UK tax collectors (widely reported in 2012). Or Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad’s bagman, Rami Makhlouf (sanctioned by the EU in 2011).

Another focus has been on people from the Washington book of bad guys such as Vladimir Putin, or various members of the politburo of the Chinese ‘Communist’ party, all of who, unsurprisingly, have secret hoards of cash.

Is it possible that most of the people implicated in this scandal are ‘respectable’ business figures and politicians from western ‘democracies’? People like Cameron who says that his tax affairs are a “private matter” and who claims to have done nothing illegal? The ICIJ’s data would seem to say so – with the UK featuring strongly as a source of dirty money.

While 2,200 children die every day from diarrhoea, an easily treatable illness, $20 trillion sits anonymously in offshore jurisdictions around the world. Tax avoidance is not a victimless crime.

Unfortunately, while the villains make the rules, it is not a crime at all. Time to put them out of business.

See also ‘Fighting the great tax robbery’

Take the wealth off the super-rich

Reverse the cuts to HM Revenue and Customs. Close tax loopholes and enforce collection of avoided taxes. Increase taxes on the super-rich and big business

Nationalise the banks and the major corporations under democratic workers’ control and management – with compensation only on the basis of proven need

Through public ownership of the commanding heights of the economy, democratic socialist planning of industry and services can be introduced to meet the needs of the majority

Published On April 5, 2016 | By Tony Saunois

Bernie Sanders campaign – an opportunity to build a new party of the 99%

By Tony Saunois (CWI Secretary) who recently visited the US for meetings of Socialist Alternative

The US Presidential election campaign represents a turning point in US society and the struggles of the working class, the middle class, young people and all those exploited by capitalism. US society is gripped by a mass politicisation and rejection of, or mass opposition to, the established political parties and their leadership. 26% of the electorate are registered Republicans and 30% Democrats. Yet the largest group are registered ‘independents’ – 43%, indicating just some of the potential for the support for a new party. The two party system in the US is now disintegrating.

Both the parties of US capitalism, the Republicans and the Democrats, are riven by division and upheaval. The emergence of the right-wing, racist, reactionary populist, Donald Trump, signifies the losing of control of the Republican Party by the ruling class which is currently struggling to re-gain full control of it. At the same time there is a massive struggle under way to win the Democratic Party nomination, as millions have rallied to support Bernie Sanders “Democratic Socialist” challenge to the pro-Wall Street Hilary Clinton.

Whatever the outcome of these unprecedented battles, US society will never be the same again. At root these developments reflect a massive class polarisation which has opened up. It is reflected in the enormous inequality which has opened like a chasm ripping society apart. Between 1947 and 1979 the income of the bottom 20% rose by 122%. Following the application of “Reaganomics”, the richest 1% saw their income increase by a staggering 270% while the rest remained stagnant or declined. If wealth distribution was the same today as in the 1970s the bottom 20% would each be US$11,000 per annum better off!

Amongst young people in particular there is a revolt against the “system” and thirst to listen to socialist ideas as an alternative to the still powerful but decaying US imperialism. The Washington Post carried an article entitled: “Our socialist youth: Why millennials are embracing a bad old term…This week, we’re talking about the rise of socialism” (21st March 2016).

The bold intervention of the CWI sister organisation, ‘Socialist Alternative’, especially the double election victory of Kshama Sawant in the Seattle council elections, has been one factor, amongst others, which has contributed to developments around the Sanders campaign and assisted in putting the issue of socialism on the table for debate in the election. In the same way as in Britain the presence of Socialist Party members in leading positions in some important trade unions prevented the leadership of them supporting anti-Corbyn candidates.

These developments in the US are having and will continue to have, a powerful impact internationally and on the struggles of the working class in many continents – especially in the neo-colonial world. The revolt of the US masses and support for Bernie Sanders’ ’Political Revolution’ is inspiring activists in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe.

Tremendous support for Sanders

Despite the efforts of the capitalist press and media to downplay or ignore the massive support won by Bernie Sanders the decisive fact is the tremendous support he has won. The press and media has given his campaign little coverage and tried to smother it in silence. Or, alternatively, some papers like the Washington Post, have attacked him in sixteen articles carried in the space of 16 hours!

Over five million donations have be made to Bernie Sanders campaign from approximately two million people!. Following what the press dubbed his disappointing results on March 16th when voters in Illinois, Ohio, Missouri and other states went to the polls, over US$4 million was raised by Sanders in three days! Following his landslide wins in Washington, Alaska and Hawaii he raised a further US$4 million in two days!

Yet, far from being “disappointing”, as the media tried to portray the, his results on the primaries on March 16th were an indication of his growing support. The outstanding feature of these elections, was that he did so well in a number of key states. In Illinois, which includes the massive working class city of Chicago he went from being twenty points behind to lose by only a few percentage points! In Chicago he polled 45.5% of the vote despite having the entire rotten Democratic Party machine pitted against him. Clinton won it with 53.6% of the vote. Sanders won 312,572 votes to Clinton’s 368,395.

In Chicago a bitter struggle is taking place against the hated Democratic Mayor, Rahm Emanuel – Obama’s former Chief of Staff – who is carrying out vicious attacks involving the sacking of teachers and closure of pubic schools. The militant teachers’ union, the CTU, has called a strike on April 1st threatening to “shut down the city” which has now been joined by the fast food workers demanding a minimum wage of US$15 an hour.

Emanuel endorsed Clinton in the primary, fuelling support for Sanders who proclaimed at the mass rally in Chicago: “I would like to thank Rahm Emanuel for not endorsing me. I do not want the endorsement of a Mayor who is firing teachers and shutting down schools”. A bold statement in contrast to Jeremy Corbyn in Britain who is endorsing the right-wing Labour candidate for London Mayor, Sadiq Khan who proudly boasts he will be the most “pro-business” Mayor, or Joe Anderson in Liverpool and others who are carrying out cuts and attacks on the working class.

In state after state, mass rallies of thousands – even tens of thousands- have taken place. One of the most recent was in Seattle – attended by 20,000 people – called at two days’ notice! This was also addressed by ‘Socialist Alternative’ member and councillor, Kshama Sawant who called for a new party of the 99%. This was followed by landslide victories for Sanders in Washington State where he won 73% of the vote and Alaska where he won a staggering 82%. These victories have undoubtedly given a tremendous boost to his supporters and renewed momentum in his campaign which will be taken into the crucial states of Wisconsin, New York, California and others in the coming months. At the time of writing Clinton is declining to debate with Bernie in New York!

The Un-Democratic Party and the primaries

Yet the undemocratic nature of the Democratic primaries and Democratic Party means that it is still very unlikely Sanders will win a majority of the elected delegates – although this cannot be entirely excluded if the momentum he has gained in Washington, Alaska, Hawaii and other states continues especially in New York and later in Calafornia.

However the Democratic Party has hundreds of “super delegates” – former and current Senators, Governors, Presidents, party officials and others – who are mainly defenders of the ruling class and whose votes can act as a veto on Clinton’s behalf. In reality it is not a party with individual membership but an electoral machine with no democratic check or accountability. In Arizona there is a major upheaval following Clinton’s victory as it has emerged that tens of thousands of people were prevented from voting due to lack of sufficient polling stations, ballot papers and people being wrongly registered. There is demand here for a re-run of the election to be held in June. The election system is designed to block the type of revolt that is currently taking place.

Yet such is the surge in support for his radical reformist polices and the idea of a “political revolution”, it is not absolutely certain it will be able to do so. Should Sanders manage to win despite the major obstacles which exist, the Democratic capitalist leadership would never accept such an outcome. They would move to sabotage his campaign and an effective split in the party would develop.

Despite the fact that the un-democratic primary system and “super delegates” are likely to prevail and endorse Clinton, the party convention in July is set to be a battleground. This will pose the crucial question of what next for Bernie should Clinton, as is most likely, secure the nomination.

The CWI and its sister organisation in the US, Socialist Alternative, have argued from the beginning that it was a mistake for him not to run as an independent and use the campaign as the basis to build a new party of the 99% and the working class that will fight Wall Street and the ruling class.

However, the struggle has developed for him to secure the Democratic Party nomination. We do not think it is likely this will succeed given the capitalist, undemocratic nature of the party, but while not fully agreeing with his programme, we wish him and his supporters well and wanted him to win a victory and still do. ‘Socialist Alternative’ intervened in this movement, launching the ‘Movement for Bernie’ to try and assist those drawn to this movement reach the conclusion of the need to build a new party and for Bernie to run independently if blocked by the Democratic Party.

While the undemocratic nature of the primaries and the Democratic Party make this unlikely the mass enthusiasm Bernie Sanders continues to enjoy and the mobilisation of millions in support of his campaign however are increasingly posing the question – what should he do if he loses the convention?

For a new party and Bernie to run independently

Urgently, a national assembly of Sanders supporters and those who want to fight to defend all workers’ interests, against racism and build a new political alternative to the capitalist Republicans and Democrats and the ruling class they represent needs to be called by Bernie. This could lay the basis to harness the movement his campaign has unleashed and debate the next step to take the struggle forward.

If blocked at the Democratic convention and by the Democratic Party his struggle should continue and he should stand as an independent or on the Green Party ticket in the November Presidential elections. This is the way to ensure the mass movement that has developed is taken further forward and the next stage of the struggle prepared for. From this the basis could be laid to build a new party from this movement.

At the outset of his campaign Bernie declared that if defeated for the Democratic nomination he would endorse Clinton. This would be wrong and would risk dissipating the mass movement aroused in this struggle. While it is entirely understandable that Bernie and many of his supporters want to defeat the right-wing Republicans and especially a racist populist like Trump or Cruz, endorsing Clinton is not the way to do this. Firstly, it is not certain that Clinton would be able to defeat either of them, such is the mistrust in her. All of the recent opinion polls indicate that the candidate most likely to beat both Trump and Cruz is Bernie Sanders.

The entirely understandable desire to defeat the Republican and thereby a “vote for the least bad” sentiment is like that which developed in Britain when Blair stood for the first time in 1997 with an opportunity to defeat the Tories.

However, Blair, the outright representative of capitalism in the New Labour Party following his election victory, unleashed a series of vicious attacks against the working class and joined Bush in creating the bloodbath of the Iraq war. A Clinton Presidency would have the same characteristics as a Blair in the US today.

The real fear of a big layer that standing independently could “split the anti-Trump vote” could be answered, if there was a real threat of the racist Trump winning by Bernie standing in most states, but not in the tightly fought swing states. This would allow him to fight in the large majority of other states and forge together the forces for a new party.

Standing as an independent and using this campaign to lay the basis for building a new party would ensure that a weapon is forged for the US working people to use in the struggles that will erupt under either a Clinton or Republican administration and future elections to the House of Representatives and Senate two years later.

Recently, in an interview on the ’Young Turks’ alternative media channel, Bernie has been more conditional about endorsing Clinton. He in effect placed conditions on her saying she needed to supporta programme of : – Medicare for all, a single payer health care system, a US$15 hourly minimum wage; rebuilding of crumbling infrastructure, action on climate change, free tuition at colleges and universities, a tax on Wall Street speculation and an ending of all corporate loopholes. He also indicated he would not include Clinton in a Cabinet should he be elected President.

This represented a significant change in Bernie Sanders’ previously categorical arguments about endorsing Clinton and him not running independently. This reflects the dynamic of the campaign and pressure from the new fresh forces supporting him. At the same time he wrongly raised the idea of transforming the capitalist Democratic Party rather than building a new party.

It is extremely unlikely the Democrats or Clinton could accept all of his demands – in effect his entire programme – which would commit them to opposing the neo-liberal policies they have been defending and implementing. Yet even if they did make some verbal commitment to accept some of his programme they could never be trusted to enact it following the election. Clinton and the Democratic Party leaders are staunch defenders of capitalism and its interests.

Whether this less emphatic position of Bernie indicates he could be pressured by events to take the right step and run independently remains to be seen, although at the moment, it seems unlikely.

Republican Party in turmoil

How the battle develops in the Republican Party is a factor that could have an impact on this possibility. While Trump has taken the lead, it is not certain he will win the Republican endorsement. The party establishment is at sea and opposed to him. Some appear to now have thrown their support behind the equally right-wing Cruz. For them Trump is a dangerous maverick. Yet like the movement in support of Sanders he reflects the turmoil in US society and overwhelming feeling amongst the mass of the population that the old established order no longer represents them or defends their interests.

Significantly, Trump is directing his reactionary populist propaganda at winning sections of the white working class who feel abandoned and that nobody is speaking for them. It is not an accident that he has raised, in the past, support for a free health system and, recently, declared he will not touch social security. His reactionary populism is not a defence of classic neo-liberalism which is one reason why the Republican elite is opposed to him.

However, it is not certain Trump or the other candidates will meet the requirement of the “rule 40” introduced in 2012 to stop Ron Paul securing the nomination. To get onto the first ballot each candidate first needs the majority in eight states and to then win the nomination by over 51% of the votes on the first ballot. The rules committee is considering a change to the convention rules – by arbitrary imposition – indicating the undemocratic nature of the Republican Party as well. As one leading Republican commentated this would mean “a political Jihad” at the Republican convention in July. Already Trump and Cruz have said they would not necessarily endorse each other as Republican candidates if selected. This could mean Trump, if he is blocked, running independently on the Libertarian Party ticket meaning two right wing candidates. It is also possible that Trump win the official Republican nomination but an anti-Trump Republican also stands as an independent. Such developments could increase the pressure on Bernie to do the same on the Democrats side and run independently if blocked by the Democratic Party.

This possibility would open the way for an explosive political development which although not the most likely cannot be entirely excluded.

There is political turmoil and social upheaval in the US at this time. Developments within the political parties and infrastructure are not under the control of the ruling class and the outcome of the struggle in either party is not predetermined or settled in advance.

Neither is this process likely to end at either of the party conventions or even following the Presidential elections in November. The forces unleashed in both party campaigns reflect the social and economic crisis facing US capitalism. This will remain whoever wins the election in November. There is a crying need for a new independent party of the working class and all those exploited by capitalism – the 99%. Although not in the purest way, the movement behind Bernie Sanders reflects this. Most of those attending his rallies and supporting him are not members of the Democratic Party and they are fresh to politics. The five million donations from up to two million people to his campaign represent the outlines of a new movement that has yet to be born as a new independent party.

A new workers’ party

As the CWI has pointed out previously the formation of new workers parties’ rarely takes place in a pure form, especially where conscious socialists or Marxists are not at the head of the process. Often elements from or around capitalist parties or institutions can be affected by the class struggle and play a role. In Greece the former workers’ party, PASOK, found a part of its origins in the liberal capitalist Centre Union. In Britain some elements from the Liberal Party and Liberal trade unionists were involved in the eventual formation of the Labour Party. In Brazil forces from capitalist institutions like the Roman Catholic Church were crucial in the formation of the Workers’ Party – the PT.

These are the processes still unfolding in the US around the struggle for the Democratic Party nomination for Presidential candidate. How far this will develop is uncertain. It is likely to continue even after the Presidential election should Sanders or his followers try and establish a permanent organisation “to continue the political revolution”. If established it may could be partly in, and partly out of the Democratic Party. This is already being discussed by some commentators – a left-wing version of the Tea-Party.

This could even exist for a period of time operating in a hybrid fashion – half in and half out of the Democratic Party. The situation could even be very different in different states and endure for a time before the situation becomes clarified – either resulting in a break from the Democrats or possibly disintegrating, if it becomes trapped inside the Democrats, and disappointment or disillusionment setting in amongst its supporters. This is not a certainty but is a possibility inherent in the charged political and social situation which exists. It would require a skilful intervention and orientation by Marxists to participate in such a development and struggle for it to move towards the formation of new party of working people.

These upheavals in the USA have crucial lessons for the international workers movement and are an anticipation of the developments that will rock other countries. They will have a big impact on the international workers’ movement as they are unfolding in the world’s largest imperialist power. The CWI and its sister organisation in the US, Socialist Alternative, is actively involved and participating in these struggles, assisting workers and youth to draw the conclusion that a new independent party of working people is necessary and taking the steps needed to help build it.

Published On April 5, 2016 | By Nick Wozniak and Steve Edwards

On April 1, Chicago teachers shut down the third largest school district in the U.S. to protest the Chicago Public School (CPS) system’s failure to pay normal increases to teachers guaranteed by contract and also to demand adequate funding for the school system. Gathering at over 600 public schools starting at 6am on Friday, teachers rallied at each school for an hour or two then united at ten different meet-up points. Across the city, thousands of teachers, parents, students, community members, and members of other unions participated.

The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) which organized the one day political strike called for other unions and workers to join in a fight for funding and were answered enthusiastically. Over 40 community groups acted in solidarity. The Fight for 15 coordinated walkouts at McDonald’s locations throughout Chicago. Teachers joined marches that stopped at McDonald’s to protest the low wages plaguing working class communities.

Kshama Sawant speaks at a CTU rally in Chicago on April 1, 2016.

On the Northwest side, teachers were joined by Northeastern Illinois University workers organized by AFSCME. The action in that neighborhood moved from McDonald’s to a rally at Northeastern’s campus protesting college budget cuts by Republican Governor Bruce Rauner. Speakers at the Northeastern rally included Seattle socialist city councilmember, Kshama Sawant. Rallies also took place at the University of Illinois at Chicago and Chicago State University where student activists who recently stepped forward to fight Donald Trump’s racism and budget cuts stood with the CTU.

Signs on the picket lines parodied Governor Rauner and Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel as ruthless villains representing the 1%. Both have both committed themselves to cutting education and attacking union rights as a part of a pro-business agenda. But teachers and the many thousands out to support them did not buy that the state is “broke.” Instead, they argued that the state and city budgets were “broke on purpose” and demanded full funding. One slogan captured the sentiment: “We need teachers. We need books. We need the money that the bankers took.”

Refunding toxic swaps; a financial transaction tax; progressive taxation of the rich; redirecting millions from corporate subsidies – the question of the day was not whether there is revenue available to fully fund schools and services, but how could a fight be waged to wrest it from billionaires like Ken Griffin who fund both Rahm and Rauner.

The corporate Chicago press attacked the CTU strike as a “tantrum” and CPS sued the union on April 1 claiming the strike was illegal, but denunciations did nothing to stem the day’s ecstatic mood. Citywide actions converged in a massive rally of up to 15,000 downtown at rush hour. Speakers denounced the greed of the 1% and called for full funding of education and services, but many did not hear them as the crowd had grown far too large. Marching through the rain, teachers and their supporters shut down major streets in a show of working class unity.

The CTU’s April 1 strike was a true achievement. Although the situation in the union’s contract negotiations with the city is currently quite murky, Rahm may be forced to make concessions [for more details see the accompanying piece below]. But as the CTU has made very clear, they are not just fighting for a decent contract for their members, but for quality education and quality life for all of their students. Of course these are not contradictory goals, as teacher activists have emphasized in the slogan “Our teaching conditions are students’ learning conditions.” But in the current circumstances, a new contract for teachers, like in 2012, will not mean an end to assaults on public education.

Critically, the teachers’ strike action was explicitly geared towards building solidarity and confidence to prepare CTU members and working class communities for future struggles. Many teachers expressed huge appreciation for the deep community support. What is happening in Chicago has many lessons for the rebuilding of a fighting labor movement across the country.

There is huge potential coming out of April 1 to build a sustained fight back against vicious corporate politics in Illinois. Any gains won by the teachers will be a product of mass solidarity, and it’s crucial that those gains be used to lay the groundwork for continued mass struggle against Rahm and Rauner. The duo’s alliance against working people exposes the two major parties as pro-corporate collaborators. The CTU has played a highly effective role in galvanizing working class anger at the establishment in the city and can play an historical role in turning that anger towards mounting a political challenge to corporate domination. Given the totally corrupt Chicago Democratic Party, this will require building a new political party of the 99% out of mass struggle.

The following article appears in the new issue of Socialist Alternative. It was written before the strike but gives useful background to the above report.

Chicago Teachers’ Political Strike

New Phase of Struggle Against Billionaires’ Agenda

Chicago teachers are taking a stand to defend public education against the billionaires’ agenda. On April 1st the Chicago Teachers’ Union (CTU), after 9 months without a contract, will launch a one-day city-wide strike to demand the funding that public education needs.

Rather than simply replicating its 2012 nine-day strike which pushed back but did not defeat many of the education deformers’ demands, CTU is now involving other unions and community groups in a one-day, political strike whose sharpest demand is to tax the richest 5% of Illinoisians up to $6 billion to pay for educational and social needs. Although this demand doesn’t mention the biggest prize – a transaction tax on the La Salle Street futures and commodities exchanges, which could raise billions, the demand that is being made puts the cost of the crisis where it belongs: on the super-rich. The union also calls for action against banks that have cheated City and State governments through toxic swaps, and against the TIF funding racket which allows the Mayor and City Council to give rich developers millions that were meant for schools.

Rahm Blunders

The Emanuel administration began the academic year (and negotiations) with a plan to lay off 1,500 employees, targeting Special Education workers for layoff at a rate ten times that of other groups. This sabotaged the entire system, as schools were forced to cram special needs students into regular classrooms. Then, after months of bargaining, the Chicago Public School (CPS) Board stuck on its demand for teachers to pick up the whole of their pension payments: a 7% pay cut. (The schools’ pension funding crisis was created by the Board’s past failures to actually make these payments).

In February the Board made a contract offer that addressed some of the union’s demands, but the union rejected it because of language that was unenforceable or could be overruled by existing law. Key issues were class and caseload sizes, the 7% pension payment, layoffs, a cap on new charter schools, a moratorium on school closings, and reductions in standardized testing and punitive teacher evaluations.

CPS responded to the union’s “no” vote by publicly threatening to immediately end the 7% pension payments. Although later put on hold, this illegal threat, along with the Board’s existing refusal to pay contractually mandated “step and lane” pay increases, created a legal basis for immediate strike action without going through mediation, which would have delayed strike action until almost the end of the school year.

CTU Shows Leadership

The union has boldly used the Board’s over-reach as a way to challenge the power of the Mayor, the Governor, the legislature and their big business backers.

This boldness comes from years of internal organizing to democratize the union, while building community alliances to fight against school closures and standardized testing. Despite three years of harassment and retaliation for the 2012 strike, including the closure of 50 schools involving huge layoffs in 2013, and the illness of its President Karen Lewis, whom polls showed beating Mayor 1% if she had been able to run in the 2015 elections, the CTU has come back fighting and continues to break new ground in building community support.

For example, the union voted to support Black Lives Matter activists in the #RahmResign protests that began last year after Mayor Emanuel had concealed the police murder of Laquan McDonald. Although still controversial within the union, this position has elevated the CTU’s position as a defender of black and working class people against the racist justice system and trigger-happy cops.

The April 1st strike continues the CTU’s track record of building working class, grassroots power. The union is calling for day-long pickets at all 600+ schools, solidarity walkouts and a mass rally downtown to disrupt the evening rush. In a move unprecedented in recent labor struggles,, the Fight for Fifteen declared a simultaneous sympathy strike, while SEIU Healthcare, college and university unions, community groups and the city’s subway train operators’ union are all supporting the day of action. Many are planning solidarity actions that will converge on the downtown, rush-hour rally.

April 1st is unmistakably a political strike, legalized by the overreach of the Board when it unilaterally canceled raises. If it forces the city to return to the bargaining table with an enforceable contract, this would be a real victory, boosting the confidence of workers throughout the region. A victory for the CTU and its allies against the billionaires’ agenda would put it in position to galvanize all of the ongoing struggles in Chicago and the region into a fighting, ongoing movement  with national implications.

This would also pose the question of launching a new political force of the 99% in Chicago, with the CTU playing a key role, which could truly challenge the domination of the 1% in the years ahead.

We call for:

Tax the rich to restore all cuts and fully fund education services

Fund the pension system; all workers deserve a decent retirement

Published On April 1, 2016 | By Kshama Sawant

Yesterday brought great news for the labor movement, with the Supreme Court affirming the dismissal of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (CTA), a lawsuit that was aimed at undermining public sector unions and the labor movement in general.

If the ruling had gone the other way, Friedrichs v. CTA would have reduced the entire public sector to “right to work” status. This would have been a travesty for workers and their families.

While we should celebrate, we must remember that this ruling was won by chance. We cannot rely on appointments or circumstantial developments at the highest levels of the establishment to avert disaster. To protect our rights and usher in a new era of gains for working people, we need to unite,systematically rebuild the labor movement, and leverage our collective power together.

Our victories in the fight for $15/hour in 2014 and the Seattle Education Association strike in 2015 serve as reminders of how we can win if we get organized, formulate concrete demands, and fight unrelentingly.

This weekend, I will be in Chicago for the Labor Notes Conference. I will also be there to stand in solidarity with my sisters and brothers in the Chicago Teacher’s Union (CTU) as they go on strike in defiance of the politics of austerity and privatization being pushed on the city by their Mayor and former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Like the Seattle Education Association’s strike, the CTU have widespread public support. Fight for 15 organizers and other social justice activists will be joining the teachers on the picket line.

This is precisely the kind of solidarity we will need, across regions and struggles, to wrest real victories from the billionaire class and rebuild a fighting labor movement.

Published On April 1, 2016 | By Bryan Watson

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has backed down from a provocative proposal to cut  $485 million, or one-third of the budget, in state funding from the City University of New York’s (CUNY) system. While a relief it’s disgraceful that the debate has been about cutting funding and not increasing it. JAMES HOFF, a member of CUNY’s Professional Staff Congress (PSC), reports on the brewing fightback.

On March 10, more than a thousand CUNY faculty, staff, students, and community members gathered in front of the offices of New York State’s Democratic Party Establishment Governor Andrew Cuomo to demand a fair deal for the 25,000 members of  CUNY’s Professional Staff Congress (PSC) union who’ve been working without a contract for six years. Billed as “CUNY Rising,” the union-sponsored event was followed by a smaller public meeting with union leaders and members of the Working Families Party and other community organizations to chart a political path forward to a fair contract.

Two days later a very different kind of meeting, advertised as the CUNY Struggle Popular Assembly, was held at the Graduate Center. ore than 100 CUNY activists, faculty, staff, and community members, including dozens of rank and file unionists, gathered for a day-long public assembly to formulate a set of demands and actions for transforming the university. Among these demands were calls for a free and open university without tuition or fees, full pay equity for the thousands of exploited adjunct faculty and graduate students, and a fair contract for all members of the PSC.

Though radically different, these two events, as well as the dozens of recent protests and rallies at CUNY, showcase the growing militancy of the university community. They also point the way forward for a renewed and united fightback against Democratic Party politicians like Governor Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio who have all failed to reverse or address the decades-long privatization of the once great university system.

They Say Cut Back

Like other public universities across the country, CUNY has been subjected to decades of budget cuts that have led to skyrocketing tuition and fees, making the university increasingly unaffordable for the working class and students of color it was originally founded to serve. In less than three decades annual tuition at CUNY’s four year colleges have increased by an astounding 400% (from $1,250 in 1989 to $6,330 today), and the unelected CUNY Board of Trustees is set to debate yet another round of multi-year increases that could raise tuition every year for years to come. Meanwhile, the percentage of the university’s budget that is covered by the state and city has shrunk to historic lows. Currently only a little more than 50% of the University’s senior college budget is funded by the state. The remaining is funded almost entirely by student tuition and fees.

Thanks to Governor Cuomo, the university is now facing one of the most devastating budget cuts in its 170 year history. Legislators in Albany are currently debating the Governor’s proposed 2017 budget, which, until recently, included a $485 million cut to the state’s share of CUNY’s operating budget. Though the governor claimed the shortfall could be easily offset by reducing administrative costs–code for slashing jobs–CUNY Chancellor James Milliken warned that such a cut could lead to massive layoffs or even the closing of several campuses. Though the Governor seems to have backed off the proposed cuts, it’s clear he has no intention of restoring the much needed funding. Indeed, as many observers have noted, the Governor’s cuts to CUNY’s budget were likely little more than a game of smoke and mirrors designed to soften the blow of a budget that contains no funds for increased personnel costs, and does not keep pace with inflation or increased enrollments.

While CUNY students have seen their tuition increase dramatically, the faculty and staff of the university are also under the gun. The members of the Professional Staff Congress union have been working without a contract for six years and have not received a raise since 2009. In November, after years of resistance, CUNY’s management made an offer of a partially retroactive 6% wage increase over six years. Since the cost of living in NYC has increased by 23% during this same period, that offer would have meant a significant pay cut for the thousands of hard working union members who make the university run. It was resoundingly rejected by the union. In response CUNY’s management has since turned to the state for help, filling for mediation with the anti-worker New York state Public Employee Relations Board.

We Say Fight Back

In response to the deteriorating conditions of negotiations, the PSC has begun building for a historic strike authorization vote. Such a move would be unprecedented, seeing that the New York State Taylor Law expressly forbids public employees from going on strike or taking any kind of action that stops, slows down, or otherwise interrupts regular work. Punishments for violating the Taylor Law include jail time for union leaders, fines of up to two days wages for every day of work missed, and the suspension of card check dues.

Whether the union leadership is prepared to utilize a strike authorization, thereby breaking the law, is another question. The last time the Taylor Law was defied was in 2005 when thousands of public transit workers, represented by the Transport Workers Union Local 100, shut down the subway system. The leaders were jailed, members were fined, and the union suffered a setback. One big difference today is the widespread anger at the political establishment and the 1%. The Taylor Law can be defeated, if the union takes a strategy of fully mobilizing community support linking strike action to a struggle for all working families and drawing in the wider labor movement, students, and other broad support in an active and organized way.

The PSC union has 25,000 members. So far 4,000 have signed a pledge for a strike authorization vote and the union has held a couple spirited rallies. But, preparing a strike will require activating a large number of members, along with the tens of thousands of students and wider community. A whole layer of PSC members would need to take up ownership of a serious strike mobilization, organizing big campus meetings and campus actions, in preparation for larger mobilizations of 10,000 or more, as a decisive means of seriously building up the confidence of members that a strike can be successful. This is possible, but takes a leadership committed to galvanizing the membership by taking up key demands like pay increases for tenured faculty of 5% a year, and an increase in per-course salaries of adjunct faculty from $3,000 to the MLA recommended salary of $7,000. It means building democratic organizing structures to involve wider numbers of members in the planning of the struggle at CUNY.

Such a bold strategy would inevitably come up against the opposition of the Democratic Party establishment.  It’s clear Governor Cuomo is a corporate politicians and not on the side of the CUNY workers and students. But Mayor de Blasio, along with the entire Democratic Party, a party dominated by big business, cannot be relied on. It was recently exposed the Mayor has taken more than $1 million in donations from big developers and real estate companies for his now defunct charity, Campaign for One New York. The PSC snubbed Cuomo for an endorsement in the last election. But, the unions should go farther and stop funding parties and politicians that take money from big business. We should start running our own candidates, independent of the Democrats, as a step toward launching a new party of the 99%, which would be a necessary tool to mobilize millions of working people against the corporate establishment and their social service slashing agenda.    

CUNY has seen more than its fair share of struggle and has weathered countless crises’ over the last century, but there has not been a moment like this in decades. CUNY stands on the precipice of an historic opportunity to stand up to the bosses’ Taylor Law and to push back the forces of austerity, setting an example for faculty and students across the country.

Published On March 31, 2016 | By Stephan Kimmerle, Committee for a Workers' International (CWI)

In an interview on March 23 on The Young Turks, Bernie Sanders laid out the need to build movements and run candidates beyond his own presidential bid to achieve a “political revolution.” However, he also outlined a strategy to push Hillary Clinton to the left, should he lose the Democratic Party primaries. Many Bernie supporters understood his comments as putting conditions on Clinton for his endorsement for her should he lose and they see this as positive. However, this plan will not take the political revolution forward. If Sanders loses in this Wall Street dominated party, Bernie needs to run until November as an independent or with the Green Party’s Jill Stein. Bernie’s supporters cannot allow this movement to become imprisoned within the narrow confines of the Democratic Party.

Hundreds of thousands gathered in Washington state on Saturday, March 26, to caucus for Bernie Sanders. Despite a huge delegate lead for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the political revolution is alive and fighting back. Sanders took Washington state, Alaska, and Hawaii in a landslide. Tens of thousands flooded Seattle’s Safeco Field the day before the caucuses. In all the remaining states that have not yet voted, millennials and other “Sandernistas” are eager to raise their voice for $15 an hour nationwide, for Medicare for all, and for tuition-free education.

At the same time, the debate has started about what to do if Sanders falls further behind and can’t win the nomination. Even after the impressive successes on March 26, he needs to win 57 percent of all the remaining pledged delegates from all the upcoming states just to draw even with Clinton, not counting any super-delegates – who are 490 to 27 against Bernie. While there are upcoming primaries where Sanders is poised to do well, polls in a number of other states, including New York show, significant obstacles for Sanders. Sanders himself responded to this growing question in an March 23 interview on The Young Turks. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxVbuO7xM4g )

“If we don’t win …”

‘If we don’t win,” the senator from Vermont outlined, the question is, “what [is] the Democratic establishment going to do for us?’” Sanders went on: “Are they going to welcome into the Democratic Party the working class of this country and young people or is it going be a party of the upper middle class and the cocktail crowd and the heavy campaign contributors?”

Unfortunately, the experience of the Bernie Sanders’ campaign reveals the answer: The DNC might allow you for a time at their cocktail party, but this is a party paid for – and, therefore, controlled by – Wall Street and big business.

Kshama Sawant and Socialist Alternative argued, long before Bernie’s announced his candidacy, that Sanders should run independently. Instead, he decided to try to run within the Democratic Party. But Kshama and Socialist Alternative did not stand on the sidelines. When Bernie Sanders, unapologetically describing himself as a  “democratic socialist,” announced his bid to run with a pro-working-class agenda within the framework of a pro-corporate, anti-worker party, we campaigned to build support for Bernie’s program. We have, of course, disagreements with Bernie including important aspects of his foreign policy. But we energetically campaigned to take Bernie’s platform to the broadest audience. We saw that Bernie was offering a political program that could mobilize millions. We became part of the growing upheaval under the slogan of a “political revolution against the billionaire class.” We launched #Movement4Bernie and engaged actively in Labor for Bernie in order to participate in discussions with the most serious Bernie supporters.

What has been the experience so far? On the positive side, tens of millions have been inspired by a bold call to take the power out of the hands of the corporate elite, their politicians, and the establishment media.

On the other side, the Democratic Party primaries have proved hostile territory for such a call. The Democratic Party is dominated by Wall Street money that Clinton easily cashed in. Bernie had to reach out to millions of individuals and their small contributions to try to match that. The primaries are run through the structures of that party which is controlled by its establishment, as evidenced by the unelected superdelegates. If this process continues without a major upheaval on a scale that we have not yet seen, the political revolutionaries will lose that battle.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Filling the Football Stadiums?

Despite having many recent big successes, Bernie Sanders is still lagging behind in these primaries. This is not because his policies don’t resonate and inspire people. He’s significantly behind because the Democratic party functions to promote corporate politicians like Clinton who claim to be more progressive than the racists and sexists of the right-wing, while still attacking the interests of working people and the poor, to a “lesser” degree.

“I’ve talked to Democratic Party leaders,” argues Bernie, “and said you know what, instead of going around and raising all kinds of money from wealthy people, why don’t you meet in some football stadium and bring out fifty or hundred thousand people, bring the damn Senate in there, Senate Democrats, and start talking to people, ask them what they want you to do.”

So why doesn’t the Democratic Party leadership fill football stadiums? Maybe it’s because the corporate-dominated politics of the Democratic Party don’t inspire people. Also, maybe it’s because they won’t, because almost all these establishment Democrats actually do not want to mobilize all these working people into political activity. Tens of thousands shouted their support for Bernie at Seattle’s Safeco Field on Saturday. Compare that to Clinton’s rally in Seattle with around 2,000 people in a high-school gym. Corporate Democrats are the “super-delegates” who by 467 to 26 support Clinton, the Walmart, Wall Street, war mongering candidate. They are the ones who Bernie has described as “scared to death” about his success.

“Revitalize the Democratic Party”

“If I can’t make it – and we want to try as hard as we can till the last vote is cast,” argued Bernie Sanders in the interview, “we want to completely revitalize the Democratic Party and make it a party of the people rather than just one of large campaign contributors.”

Interviewer Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks asked Bernie how would he do this, and what policy positions he would want Clinton to take up.

“I want Secretary Clinton, if she is the nominee, to come out for a Medicare for all, single-payer health care system, I want 15 bucks an hour as a minimum wage, I want to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, Flint, Michigan, is not the only community in America that doesn’t have safe drinking water … I want a vigorous effort to address climate change … making public colleges and universities tuition free, Wall Street tax on speculation to pay for that, ending all these corporate loopholes.”

For people who remember Sanders’ previous promise to endorse Clinton, should he lose, this can sound more positive as it puts up some demands on her. Some people have begun to hope that Sanders might not endorse Hillary.

Sanders has shifted to the left in the course of this campaign; he has turned his fire increasingly forcefully against the establishment and its ties to corporate interests. This is a big part of his massive appeal.

But what is the logic of Sanders’ position taken to its conclusion? Can the Democratic Party establishment accept his full program? It is certainly true that Hillary and the establishment want Sanders on board for the general election and for him to bring along his base, especially among young people. The primaries have exposed her weaknesses and the shallowness of the support for the establishment.

We have pointed out before that the Democratic establishment, reflecting the interests of the top one percent, cannot accept Sanders’ program of radical reforms. It would give too much encouragement to the working class to fight for real change. Of course, this does not mean that the Democrats can’t shift their rhetoric a few degrees to the left, as Hillary already has. But does that mean that, when push comes to shove, they will deliver on primary promises?

The way Sanders raised these demands to Clinton, in the context of him fighting for every last vote, suggests his strategy is about trying to push her to the left and reform the Democratic Party some time in the future when his campaign is no longer dangerous for the establishment.

This is exactly the point which Cenk Uygur pressed Sanders on: Even if Clinton makes this or  that or promise, would Bernie really believe her?

In answering, Sanders referred to Tom Donahue, lobbyist of the Chamber of Commerce, who said, “Don’t worry what she [Clinton] said in the campaign, she’s just trying to match Bernie Sanders. If she’s elected, I think she’ll be okay on the TPP,” the neoliberal free-trade agreement she pushed as a secretary of state and is now suddenly opposed to.

Seeing the contradiction in his position, Sanders adds: “What we need is to create a movement which holds elected officials accountable and not let them flip on the issues.”

Without movements, without the energy of the masses flooding into the political arena, nothing will be changed. But without an organizational and political backbone, these movements will be co-opted and sold out. This has happened so many times in the past

Again, what is the logic of Sanders’ plan to “revitalize” the Democratic Party? To do this we would need independent movements and independent organization. To successfully defeat the Democratic Party establishment, the movement would need to develop organization and leadership to focus its struggle and combat the corporate cash of corporate Democrats. This organization would need to be strong enough to challenge the corporate leaders and representatives. In other words, we would essentially need to build an independent party. In other words, if we would need a new party to challenge and defeat the Democratic Party leadership and structures, why misdirect this energy into  the Democratic Party in the first place?

At the end of the day, the Democrats can’t be a party of the corporate elite and a party of the 99%. We argue that the time has come to build a party of the 99% independent of both corporate parties. Kshama Sawant’s election and re-election as a socialist city councilmember in Seattle shows the way.

“We need – win or lose for me – a political revolution”

When the Democrats make clear that they won’t adopt the program of Sanders’ political revolution, what will he do? In the interview, Sanders correctly emphasized: “we need – win or lose for me – a political revolution which starts electing people who are accountable to the working families in this country.”

We say, let’s get organized, let’s build the movements and the independent structures to do so. Let’s not spend more energy within the deadend framework of the Democratic Party, but build a party based on working-class people.

So far, Bernie Sanders campaign has juggled the contradiction of running for a pro-working-class program in a Wall-Street-dominated party. Until now, the dominant feature within that contradiction has been an uprising of a new generation against the corporate politicians. A new generation is searching for a political alternative. If Sanders runs just to push Clinton to the left, his campaign will sooner rather than later turn into a cover for the Democratic Party machine. The dominant feature of his campaign would turn into its opposite; from encouraging revolt, to co-opting and channeling millions of his energetic supporters into the corporate campaign of Clinton. It would also demoralize many of the best people.

Socialist Alternative has outlined how Bernie could run all through November without ignoring the fears about Trump and the huge pressure to rally behind Clinton, see our article from March 17.

As it becomes more and more clear that Bernie Sanders is very unlikely to have any chance at the Democratic Party convention, with all its undemocratic procedures, we need to discuss this plan B. Bernie Sanders and his supporters need to develop a strategy to unleash the movement from the constraints of this Wall Street party, not allow it to be jailed within the undemocratic primary behind Clinton. The Democratic Party was built to be that prison controlled by corporate powers to serve their interests. Just painting the prison walls of the Democratic Party will not do the job. An independent party of, by, and for the 99% is needed.

Published On March 27, 2016 | By Cillian Gillespie

This weekend marks the centenary of the Easter 1916 Rising against British rule in Ireland. For many working class people in Ireland this event is regarded as a key defining event in Irish history, with its participants and leaders held in high esteem.

Their actions are viewed by many as a blow to Ireland’s historic colonial masters. Over the course of one week, a small armed force took on the military might of the British Empire, which at the time constituted the largest imperial power in the world. A significant proportion of the main forces that participated, the Irish Citizen Army and the Irish Volunteers, were working class in their composition or were drawn from the lower middle classes.

While the capitalist establishment in the South is more than willing to celebrate the rising in this centenary year, their forbearers took an altogether different attitude to the events of 1916. Nowhere is this more exemplified than in an editorial that appeared in the Irish Independent on May 10, 1916, with a picture of the great socialist leader and key participant in the rising, James Connolly, beside it, which called for ‘’…the worst of the ringleaders [to] be singled out and dealt with as they deserve.’’

A badly wounded Connolly was executed two days later. The paper’s proprietor, William Martin Murphy, leader of the 404 bosses that had locked out Dublin’s working class in 1913, was effectively campaigning for his execution. It was only after Connolly was safely dead that the bosses’ paper called for clemency and after 16 leaders of the rising met a fate similar to Connolly’s.

Today in Northern Ireland the rising is a more divisive event, reflecting the broader clash of aspirations in terms of the national question amongst the Protestant and Catholic working class people. Notwithstanding the much-hyped talk of peace and reconciliation over the last quarter of a century capitalism has proven itself incapable a solution to sectarian division and conflict. History, like many aspects of northern society, has become a sectarian battleground.

Britain’s oldest colony

Ultimately the rising had its roots in the oppression by British imperialism that had stretched over several centuries. This colonial oppression of Ireland had not only resulted in the denial of its right to political freedom and independence, but also its economic strangulation.

This was firstly done by destroying Ireland as a competitor to British capitalism in the aftermath of the Act of Union of 1801. Mass emigration from Ireland, particularly in the years of the great famine of the mid-19th century, also served to also create a cheap pool of labour for British industrial cities and satanic mills.The population of Ireland fell dramatically and never recovered, from around 8 million in 1840 to 6.5 million today. Ireland also became Britain’s “bread basket” and would provide raw agricultural products, mainly meat, to feed these same cities.

It was for this reason that James Connolly wrote: “The struggle for Irish Freedom has two aspects: it is national and it is social.”

Connolly argued that only a revolutionary movement of the working class that united both Protestant and Catholic workers, and linked with the struggle for a socialism could end Ireland’s colonial domination.

Connolly and the rising

Alongside Jim Larkin, Connolly played a critical role in the huge battles of the Irish workers’ movement in the aftermath of the founding of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union in 1909. This culminated in the Dublin Lockout of September 1913.

While not an outright defeat, the outcome of the lockout did cut across the momentum that the ITGWU and Irish workers’ movement generally had developed prior to 1914. Two other events were to have a negative impact of the development of the workers movement in this same year.

The first was the danger of the partition of the island, the ’divide and rule’ policy which was being openly discussed by sections of the British ruling class. Connolly correctly foresaw this as a “carnival of reaction”. Such a scenario, as history would later prove, would result in the increase in sectarian division between working class people to the benefit of imperialism and capitalism.

In August 1914 another catastrophe befell the workers’ and socialist movement in Ireland and throughout Europe, with the outbreak of the First World War. This was a war fought between the capitalist powers of Europe over whose respective ruling class would maximise their profits through control over the world market. This event, in and of itself, may not have come as a surprise to socialists such as Connolly, but the support given to it by the official leaders of the socialist movement certainly did.

In violation of the basic principles of working class solidarity, they shamefully rallied in support of their own ruling classes in a war that would result in the killing and maiming of millions of working class soldiers and that was, up until that point, unprecedented in its barbarity.

While Irish Home Rule leader, John Redmond – whom the present southern Irish care-taker government have seen fit to celebrate on a large scale banner in Dublin’s College Green – rushed to support the imperialist war and advocate that members of the Irish volunteers should enlist in the British army, Connolly wrote in hope that: “Ireland may yet set the torch to a European conflagration that will not burn out until the last throne and the last capitalist bond and debenture will be shrivelled on the funeral pyre of the last war lord.”

Road to rebellion

As the bloody carnage of the war dragged on, Connolly was driven by a burning desire to strike a blow against the capitalist and imperialist order in Europe. However, Connolly was isolated in Ireland, with no direct links to other revolutionary socialist leaders who stood against the imperialism war slaughter, such as Lenin and Trotsky in Russia, Luxemburg and Liebknecht in Germany, and Maclean in Scotland.

During the war, Ireland was not immune from the jingoism that had developed across Europe. Many working class people in Ireland, including those who had been blacklisted as a result of the Lockout, were also economically conscripted into the British Army. Linked with this was the looming threat of actual military conscription being introduced in Ireland, as it had been in Britain.

It was in this context that Connolly became increasingly desperate to see some kind of rebellion take place in Ireland and in the absence, at that stage, of a mood for rebellion among broader sections of the working class, he looked to the forces of militant nationalism. These forces took the form of the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) and those sections of the Irish Volunteers who had refused to heed Redmond’s call to support the British military effort.

The Volunteers were formed in 1913 by Eoin McNeill and others, partly in response to the formation of the Ulster Volunteer Force in the North East in opposition to Home Rule (self-government for Ireland within the United Kingdom). The Volunteers grew rapidly to 180,000 members. The Irish Parliamentary Party, led by Redmond, was concerned by this development and manoeuvred to take control of the Volunteers.

When World war One broke out Redmond approached the British government with a craven offer -the Irish Volunteers would defend Ireland for the Empire so that British troops could be withdrawn and sent to the front. The British ruling class dismissed his offer out of hand and instead enlisted Redmond as its recruiting sergeant in Ireland. The Volunteers split in two. The big majority went with Redmond’s re-named National Volunteers but a still sizable 13,000 stayed with the Irish Volunteers.

The IRB’s maxim had been that “England’s difficulty was Ireland’s opportunity”. It had been preparing in secret for a rising since the outbreak of the war. In January 1916, Connolly was co-opted on to the military council of the IRB to prepare for a rising to take place at Easter. In fact, for months, Connolly’s Irish Citizen Army –created for the purpose of strikers’ defence against police attack – was threatening to lead a rising of its own.

Easter rising

On Easter Monday 1916, an estimated 1,300 Irish Volunteers, 220 members of the Irish Citizen Army and a few dozen Hibernian Rifles seized control of the centre of Dublin. They declared an ‘Irish Republic’, erected barricades and waited for the inevitable assault from British forces.

For one week, the insurgents stood firm even though outnumbered by twenty to one. They were quickly surrounded and shelled mercilessly. By the end of the week they were forced into an unconditional surrender. Sixty rebels, 120 British troops and 450 civilians lay dead, with more than 2,500 injured.

Crucial factors, such as the countermanding order to the Irish Volunteers by McNeill (the nominal head of the force who reflected the conservatism of the Irish middle classes) on Easter Sunday and the British seizure of the German submarine, the Aud, which contained 20,000 rifles set for the rebels, cut across the scale and intensity of the fighting that took place. However, ultimately the rising was most likely doomed to failure from the outset, given that there was little mood or support for such an action amongst the population at large. No call was made for a general strike during Easter week to paralyse the movement of British troops.

An outstanding Marxist thinker and heroic workers’ leader, Connolly felt deeply the setbacks suffered by the Irish working class and the great betrayal of the international socialist movement leaders. He concluded that “even an unsuccessful attempt at social revolution by force of arms…would be less disastrous to the Socialist cause than the act of Socialists allowing themselves to be used in the slaughter of their brothers in the cause. A great continental uprising of the working class would stop the war”.

In his determination to act, Connolly, in the run up to and during the rising itself, made political concessions to the forces of nationalism he was fighting alongside, temporarily setting aside some of the ideas and methods he had so carefully developed during decades of revolutionary activity. This is best reflected in the Proclamation he put his name to, which is, notwithstanding the positives sentiments it contains, is a nationalist document.

Having decided to participate in the rising, it would have been better if Connolly had put out a clear separate socialist document that outlined his vision of a “Workers Republic”, where its wealth and resources would be under the democratic ownership and control of the working class.

The lost revolution

The tremendous courage and self-sacrifice displayed by Connolly (and indeed the others who fought in the rising) cannot be disputed. However, the prematurity of the rising can be seen by looking at events that followed it. In the opening chapter of his celebrated work Labour in Irish History, Connolly had written that: “Revolutions are never the by-products of our minds but of ripe material conditions”

While the “material conditions” for a socialist revolution against British and Irish capitalism had not developed by 1916, the impact of national and international events in the period following 1917 made such a revolution a real possibility. The outbreak of the Russian Revolution and the revolutionary wave that swept Europe had a deeply radicalising effect on the working class on this island.

This radicalisation had an effect not only on the south, where opposition to British imperialism began to harden in the aftermath of the rising, but also amongst Protestant and Catholic workers in the North. This resulted in a whole series of local and national general strikes, in “soviets” (democratic workers’ councils) being proclaimed and, in some cases, strikers and workers taking control of cities, such as Belfast and Limerick, and the development a pro-socialist outlook within society.

The absence of a revolutionary socialist leadership, which could unite the working class and these movements in the struggle for socialist change, meant that the revolution of this period gave way to the counter-revolution of the partition (imperialist division) of the island. The tragedy of Connolly was that he did not live to see these events and therefore play the necessary role in building such a leadership.

Contrary to the mythology purported by today’s political establishment and mainstream historians, the “revolutionary period” of 1916 to 1922 did not give way to a positive outcome for working class people. What was created were two oppressive, sectarian states that failed to deliver for the needs of working class people, and still do to this day.

It is for these reasons that we must learn from the past and strive to construct a socialist movement that can deliver the real change that working class people need.