>
> WW News Service Digest #65
>
> 1) Vermont victory for same-sex couples
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 2) How to save the environment
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 3) Johns Hopkins students win concessions
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 4) Mumia & Feinberg at Antioch graduation
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 5) In memory of Kamau
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 6) Behind the IMF & World Bank
> by "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>-------------------------
>Via Workers World News Service
>Reprinted from the Mar. 30, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>-------------------------
>
>REMARKABLE VICTORY IN VERMONT:
>SAME-SEX COUPLES CLOSER TO EQUAL RIGHTS
>
>By Preston Wood
>
>In a remarkable victory in the struggle for equality for
>lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, the Vermont
>House voted 76-69 last week to support a bill that would
>give same-sex couples most of the same rights and benefits
>afforded opposite-sex couples who are married.
>
>Stopping short of affirming the right of same-sex couples
>to marry, the bill creates a "separate but equal" system
>for same-sex couples in Vermont. "The state," the bill
>reads, "has a strong interest in promoting stable and
>lasting families, including families based upon same-sex
>couples."
>
>However, the bill also specifies that "actual" marriage
>can only exist between a man and a woman.
>
>In spite of a desperate attempt by right-wing forces to
>crush it, the bill is expected to pass the Vermont Senate
>and Gov. Howard Dean has indicated that he will sign it
>into law.
>
>The measure mandates spousal rights for same-sex couples.
>And it stipulates that Vermont family divorce courts would
>handle the dissolution of same-sex civil unions.
>
>The Vermont victory is a strong response to recent right-
>wing, big-money initiatives around the country where
>bigoted measures--aimed at lesbian, gay, bi and trans
>couples--have attempted to legally ban same-sex unions.
>
>In California, the right wing spent over $16 million to
>get such a measure passed. A gigantic mobilization of the
>Republican right wing and a shocking lack of vocal
>opposition to the proposition from the California
>Democratic Party led to a right-wing electoral victory.
>
>This bigoted Proposition 22 officially bans same-sex
>unions in the largest state in the country. California has
>one of the largest openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans
>populations in the world.
>
>REDEFINING FAMILY
>
>The Vermont legislation, however, towers over the recent
>California ballot measure in its historical context. For
>the first time in this country, a law specifically granting
>major spousal rights to same-sex couples appears to be
>headed for passage.
>
>The roots of this tremendous victory for same-sex couples
>are found in the great struggles for equality that the
>lesbian/gay /bi/trans movement has waged over the years--
>especially since the Stonewall rebellion in 1969.
>
>It is also a result of the struggle of women against
>sexual oppression that has been going on since the advent
>of a patriarchal, male-dominated, propertied class
>centuries ago.
>
>Prior to the advent of patriarchal, class-divided
>societies, women's role was vastly different than it is
>today. Society was organized in a way that provided a
>division of labor and sharing of the wealth among men and
>women.
>
>But since the advent of chattel-slave owners, feudal lords
>and capitalist barons, women have been subjugated to
>domestic servitude and oppression under the patriarchy,
>where ruling-class men control the wealth and means of
>production in society.
>
>Today women are still struggling for an end to inequality
>and oppression around the world. But many gains and gradual
>advancements in the means of production have afforded women
>the possibility of scoring significant victories against
>centuries-old forms of discrimination, as independent wage
>earners, unionists and other important social roles.
>
>While far from achieving full equality, women's struggles
>today are redefining age-old institutions such as marriage
>and the family. A new definition of sex roles is forcing a
>new definition of those relationships in both social and
>legal spheres.
>
>Gains by the women's and lesbian/gay/ bi/trans movements
>are the underlying reason for the recent passage of the
>"civil union" legislation in Vermont. While only
>transpiring in a small state, the Vermont victory will have
>great repercussions everywhere.
>
>The lesbian/gay/bi/trans movement has certainly entered a
>new phase. Marriage itself, whatever it is becoming for
>people both gay and straight, is an ever-changing
>institution. The reactionaries fear the changes that are
>coming and they are desperately resorting to the most
>extreme bigotry to fight them--such as rushing to
>fundamentalist religious doctrine to justify their goals.
>
>Really at stake, though, is the struggle for sexual and
>gender equality, and that struggle is unstoppable. Without
>the gains won by the lesbian/gay/bi/trans and women's
>movements, the Vermont victory could not have happened.
>Polls indicating widespread support among working people in
>the U.S. for same-sex marriage reflect this growing
>consciousness and signal the potential for greater unity in
>the struggles yet to come.
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
>copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
>changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
>Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message
>to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org)
>
>
>
>Message-ID: <01b201bf9977$31e03b40$0a00a8c0@home>
>From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [WW] How to save the environment
>Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 07:06:19 -0500
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>-------------------------
>Via Workers World News Service
>Reprinted from the Mar. 30, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>-------------------------
>
>HOW TO SAVE THE ENVIRONMENT
>
>By Barb Neth
>Buffalo, N.Y.
>
>Life on Earth became a possibility only because
>circumstances billions of years ago created a blanket of
>delicately balanced gasses in the atmosphere. This caused a
>complex and interdependent ecosystem to develop that
>allowed for the evolution and habitation of carbon-based
>life forms--like humans. But the world today is faced with
>serious environmental problems that threaten a breakdown of
>that ecosystem.
>
>Global warming is probably one of the gravest
>consequences. The burning of fossil fuels like oil, gas and
>coal causes the release of carbon dioxide--CO2--and other
>greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. The earth's climate
>heats up: the "greenhouse effect."
>
>This produces a chain reaction of profound shifts in the
>ecosystem. The end result is severe weather events,
>droughts, floods and heat waves.
>
>Global warming is only one part of the environmental
>problem. Deforestation has brought a loss of habitat and
>the extinction of many insect, animal and plant species.
>
>An estimated 80 percent of the world's forests have been
>fragmented or destroyed, due to logging for wood and paper
>products or for agricultural development. Deforestation has
>also contributed to the greenhouse effect by limiting the
>amount of plant life that helps absorb CO2.
>
>Oceans and other major water systems are seriously over-
>fished. Many are also polluted by the dumping of toxic and
>other waste, and from underwater nuclear explosions.
>
>The air is contaminated by a multitude of pollutants
>including factory emissions, pesticides and vehicle
>exhaust. Many of these are persistent organic pollutants,
>or POPs, which result from the manufacture and disposal of
>products made from chlorinated compounds.
>
>One example is polyvinylchloride, a kind of plastic that
>can be found in everything from toys to medical supplies to
>plumbing parts. POPs are extremely toxic in small amounts.
>They travel easily on air and wind currents, endangering
>people all over the world.
>
>This multitude of atmospheric toxins and other waste turns
>normal rain acidic. "Acid rain" can kill trees and destroy
>lakes.
>
>Strip mining and unchecked development have caused
>destruction of the land and erosion of the soil.
>
>Wasteful and inappropriate use of precious resources like
>water also has led to an inequitable distribution of
>resources. The United Nations estimates that 1.2 billion
>people have no access to clean drinking water. Yet millions
>of gallons of water per year are wasted on swimming pools
>for the casinos of Las Vegas--which was built in the middle
>of a desert.
>
>Drilling for, transporting and refining oil has resulted
>in air, land and water contamination. Oil exploration
>continues to make inroads into wildlife areas and protected
>habitats in the pursuit of more reserves. More spills and
>other damage to vulnerable and fragile ecosystems are
>inevitable, and could have catastrophic consequences for
>generations.
>
>Ozone is the only atmospheric gas that can protect people
>from biologically damaging ultraviolet light. However, the
>release of nitrous oxide and chlorofluorocarbons has
>depleted the ozone layer. In some places the layer is so
>thin it is referred to as a ."
>
>Other natural resources besides rainforests and certain
>animal and plant species are being depleted at an alarming
>rate. Oil, coal and minerals are finite resources of the
>Earth. Yet the United States consumes over two-thirds of
>the oil produced worldwide.
>
>Then there's the Pentagon. There is no greater polluter of
>the air, land or water--or any bigger consumer of
>resources--than the U.S. military.
>
>Obviously, wars and military interventions in and of
>themselves are environmentally destructive.
>
>The U.S. military has littered the world with land mines
>and depleted uranium. DU, an extremely dense and heavy
>metal, is a byproduct of the nuclear weapons industry. The
>U.S. military has found that using DU this way is a
>"solution" to its problem of nuclear waste, and it makes
>effective weapons.
>
>On impact, DU weapons fragment and send microscopic bits
>of radioactive material airborne. When these particles are
>breathed, they cause "hot spots" of radioactivity and
>concomitant health problems. They also radiate the food
>chain, the soil and the water supply.
>
>The United States used DU weapons extensively in the wars
>against Iraq and Yugoslavia. Many scientists and health
>experts believe that DU is a contributing factor to Gulf
>War syndrome.
>
>During the Vietnam War, the Pentagon sprayed over half of
>Vietnam with Agent Orange, a chemical defoliant that
>releases dioxin as an inevitable byproduct. Over three
>decades after the end of the Vietnam War, Vietnamese babies
>are still being born with traces of dioxin in their
>tissues.
>
>Even when it is not engaged in warfare, the Pentagon is
>constantly testing all kinds of weapons--conventional,
>nuclear, chemical and biological. The U.S. military is the
>single biggest culprit in the ozone depletion crisis. It
>has released over two-thirds of the CFC-113, a leading
>ozone destroyer, now in the atmosphere.
>
>It is also the biggest consumer of oil. The amount of oil
>the military uses in one year could run all U.S. public
>transit systems for 22 years. In less than one hour, one F-
>16 jet fighter consumes twice as much gas as the average
>motorist does in a year.
>
>There have certainly been efforts to deal with and even
>solve these environmental crises. There are many watchdog
>groups and environmental action groups--Greenpeace,
>EarthFirst! and the Sierra Club, to name a few.
>
>The grassroots movements have won some gains, most notably
>in networking and in research efforts highlighting
>environmental problems that otherwise would have gone
>unrecognized and unchallenged. They have helped inspire
>mass struggles that have focused the spotlight for
>environmental devastation on corporate greed and government
>inaction and complicity. These grassroots movements have
>forced commendable concessions and regulatory measures out
>of manufacturers and governments.
>
>But there can be little doubt that the environment remains
>in serious peril. That will continue to be the case as long
>as only the symptoms are treated and the underlying cause
>is not eradicated.
>
>What is the underlying problem? Are human beings just
>destined to self-destruct? Is it progress? Technology gone
>mad? Owls vs. jobs?
>
>The question must be considered within the context of the
>dominant economic and social system worldwide: capitalism.
>Capitalism is a system based upon production for profit,
>not for need. This profit, and the means of producing it,
>is privately owned and controlled.
>
>All the different corporate entities compete with each
>other for access to resources and markets, and whoever is
>able to make the highest rate of profit comes out on top.
>It is therefore the nature of capitalism to always pursue
>the highest rate of profit, and to move toward
>monopolization.
>
>More and more wealth inevitably becomes concentrated in
>fewer and fewer hands. The imperialists have formed huge
>transnational corporations that set up and use
>international organizations like the World Trade
>Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the World
>Bank in order to more efficiently pursue their super-
>profits.
>
>Nothing, no matter how important for humanity, will be
>allowed to seriously interfere with this goal. The
>imperialists won't even consider developing and producing
>products that don't harm the environment if it interferes
>with their ability to make the highest possible rate of
>profit.
>
>Solutions to many of the environmental crises already
>exist. Technology and knowledge are available to research
>and develop alternative energy sources, and to recycle and
>safely dispose of waste. It is already possible to
>manufacture ecologically safe and biodegradable products.
>And there are alternatives to plastic products, pesticides,
>chemical fertilizers and the like.
>
>Science and technology hold the potential for organizing
>human development in a way that makes life easier and more
>enjoyable without disrupting the ecosystem. But under
>capitalism it is the owning class that controls the world
>market and the access to that technology.
>
>The capitalist class's interests are diametrically opposed
>to those of the working class.
>
>Sustainable development is the concept that continued
>growth could be planned with an eye toward future
>generations. The Earth's resources could be monitored for
>wise and efficient use. It means an equitable, rational,
>planned, humane stewardship of the Earth.
>
>Here's one example. The environmental movement forced
>Congress to pass the Clean Air Act. This is supposed to put
>"scrubbers" on factory smokestacks to remove pollutants.
>
>This is not an economically onerous solution for the
>single biggest cause of acid rain. But it means that
>industry would need to defer some profits in the interest
>of clean air. These deferred costs are not expenditures
>that factory owners can use to generate more profit, like
>spending money on expansion. There's no return on their
>investment, so to speak.
>
>So, act of Congress or not, the bosses have found many
>efficient ways to get around this regulation. One is to
>move production to countries that the imperialists have
>kept technologically underdeveloped where little or no
>environmental safeguards exist.
>
>It is not that these underdeveloped countries do not care
>about the environment. But colonial and later imperialist
>policies have ensured that these countries remain
>underdeveloped and in debt, and therefore at the mercy of
>predatory global capital. They have no choice but to accept
>the dictates of the imperialists.
>
>Some U.S. corporations stay here and simply ignore the
>regulation, polluting with impunity. A nominal fine or a
>slap on the wrist cuts into their profits less. Industry
>also invests money in getting rid of regulations through
>lobbying or financing political campaigns.
>
>So a few regulations or laws don't really answer the
>environmental problem. No attempts to make capitalism
>kinder, gentler, or "greener" will ever be able to change
>the inexorable fact that the system's first concern is
>profits.
>
>There is no deed that capitalism won't commit to get a
>higher return on investment.
>
>There is therefore an irrevocable and irreconcilable
>antagonism between planned, sustainable development and the
>system of capitalism.
>
>At times, some in the environmental movement have drawn an
>equal sign between a big transnational corporation's clear
>cutting of old-growth rainforests for lumber and paper
>products and Indigenous people in the Amazon cutting down
>sections of rainforest for agricultural purposes.
>
>The transnational corporations are making super-profits
>from clear cutting. Indigenous people are just trying to
>survive by chopping down a few trees. Because of the big
>landowners and agribusiness, they have no access to other
>usable land. Both scenarios result from capitalist
>exploitation. So it's important to recognize and fight
>against capitalist exploitation and degradation of the
>ecology if there is to be working-class unity on this
>issue.
>
>What's needed is an environmental justice movement that
>recognizes the relationship between environmental, social
>and economic justice, that includes being sensitive to
>issues of environmental racism.
>
>It's in the best interests of both the environmental and
>labor movements to work together for common cause--
>environmental protection, good wages and decent jobs here
>and all over the world. Imagine what a force that would be.
>
>Raising these demands would make it harder and less
>lucrative for the capitalists to pollute and exploit and
>extract enormous profits at the expense of humanity and the
>environment--here or around the globe.
>
>And it would shake the very foundations of their
>predatory, irrational, inhumane system. Once the shaking
>starts, the next step will be to topple it over. That's
>exactly what communists want to do.
>
>Only the deliberate activity of the world's workers and
>oppressed peoples can sweep away the polluters along with
>the hazardous waste they have created on this planet. Only
>a planned, rational system that is based upon production
>for need and not for profit can develop all of humanity in
>a way that is ecologically balanced.
>
>Socialism is that system. The ecology movement has
>attacked socialist countries, like the former Soviet Union
>and now China, for poor environmental practices. However,
>both countries fought to build socialism in a hostile
>imperialist world. Both the former Soviet Union and China
>were forced, because of military threats, economic
>blockades and lack of access to technology and goods, to
>take steps for their immediate survival that may not have
>been in the long-term interests of the environment.
>
>Just as the struggle to save the environment must be
>global, so must the building of socialism. The working
>class--not some small, elite owning class--must be the
>stewards in charge of the environment, to plan development
>and production to meet society's needs.
>
>With the science and technology that already exist, this
>could be accomplished without disrupting the ecosystem. By
>eliminating the profit motive, the masses of people can
>build a society that provides a decent life for all without
>destroying the planet.
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
>copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
>changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
>Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message
>to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org)
>
>
>
>Message-ID: <01bd01bf9977$52318c00$0a00a8c0@home>
>From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [WW] Johns Hopkins students win concessions
>Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 07:07:13 -0500
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>-------------------------
>Via Workers World News Service
>Reprinted from the Mar. 30, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>-------------------------
>
>17-DAY JOHNS HOPKINS OCCUPATION:
>STUDENTS WIN CONCESSIONS, VOW TO KEEP FIGHTING
>
>By Workers World Baltimore bureau
>
>Students from the Student Labor Action Committee at Johns
>Hopkins University ended their 17-day occupation of the
>administration building on March 16 after winning a set of
>concessions from the university.
>
>The agreement between the students and administration will
>result in modest wage increases for the lowest-paid workers
>at Johns Hopkins--especially the 900 workers at the
>hospital and School of Public Health.
>
>The agreement also stipulates measures that open Johns
>Hopkins to public scrutiny of its wage structure.
>
>Student organizers vow to continue their fight for a
>living wage--$7.90 an hour--for university workers. The
>administration still refuses to agree to this demand.
>
>Students emerged from the administration building carrying
>picket signs and chanting: "What do we want? A living
>wage!"
>
>They were greeted by scores of placard-waving students and
>community supporters. Students and their supporters
>immediately held a rally in front of the administration
>building.
>
>Dr. Chester Wickwire, former chaplain at JHU and a civil-
>rights and peace activist, lent humor to the rally. He told
>those gathered that in order to avoid the scrutiny of
>campus security, he was forced to discuss strategy with
>student leaders in the womenbathroom.
>
>
__________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
___________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________
