----------
From: Communist Party of Canada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:23:55 -0400
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: People's Voice articles - Sept. 1 - 15, 2001
PEOPLE�S VOICE ON-LINE
Issue of September 1 - 15, 2001
ARTICLES FROM THE COMMUNIST PRESS IN CANADA
(The following articles are from the Sept. 1-15/2001 issue of People's
Voice, Canada's leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free
if the source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $25/year, or $12
low-income rate; for U.S. readers -- $25 US per year; other overseas
readers -- $25 US or $35 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, 706 Clark
Drive, Vancouver, Canada, V5L 3J1.)
INDEX
1) LABOUR DAY 2001 - Editorial
2) CANADA ENTERING PERIOD OF "GREAT POLITICAL FLUX"
- Interview with CPC leader Miguel Figueroa
3) OTTAWA MUST SAY NO TO MISSILE DEFENSE! - Communist Party
***************
1) LABOUR DAY 2001
Labour Day was not the choice of radical workers for an annual holiday; in
large part, it was the invention of shrewd bosses aiming to undercut
working class participation in May Day. But this statutory holiday at the
end of the summer is a good time to reflect on labour's progress, and in
some cities to march together for a welcome display of union power.
In many respects, the last year has been mixed, a time of
important gains and worrying setbacks. One of the most dramatic episodes
has been the dispute involving the CLC, CAW and SEIU, just when maximum
unity is needed to beat back the employers and their governments.
Fortunately, the CAW is now back in the House of Labour. But this case
proves the need for solutions to long-term problems such as the lack of
Canadian autonomy and internal democracy for some unions, the lack of clear
jurisdictional guidelines in the workforce, and the need for more militant
leadership. We hope that delegates to next year's CLC Convention can
address these matters in ways which advance the interests of all Canadian
workers.
On the negative side of the balance sheet from the last twelve
months, ruling class attacks against wages and benefits, working
conditions, labour and democratic rights, and social programs have become
even more intense. The latest anti-labour moves by the new Liberal
government in B.C. prove that this corporate assault is far from finished.
But there have also been positive signs. Nurses and other health
care workers from the Atlantic to the Pacific have repeatedly shown a
strong militant spirit, refusing to let governments and employers tear down
the health care system without a fight. Workers in many provinces have kept
up picket lines for months, battling for decent wages and working
conditions, better pensions, and even the right to join a union and win a
collective agreement. Events ranging from the massive rally against the
FTAA in Quebec City to the Solidarity and Pride conference in Vancouver
show that growing numbers of organized workers understand the need to build
alliances and to unite for progressive change.
On Labour Day 2001, our mottos include: an injury to one is an
injury to all! No justice, no peace! The struggle continues!
*******************
3) CANADA ENTERING PERIOD OF"GREAT POLITICAL FLUX"
People's Voice recently interviewed Communist Party leader Miguel Figueroa
on some of the big political developments taking place in the country at
the present time.
People's Voice: The mainstream capitalist press is full of coverage about
the battle on the Canadian Right. How does the Communist Party view these
developments?
Miguel Figueroa: The bourgeois press has tended to treat the struggle
within the Canadian Alliance as a "crisis of leadership." The blunders of
Stockwell Day have been well documented by the media, along with every
twist and turn in the caucus revolt which has shaken the Alliance from
Parliament Hill down to the constituency level.
In our opinion however, these are symptoms, not causes. At root,
the crisis within the Alliance arises from its failure to extend its
electoral base to allow it to form a viable alternative to the Chr�tien
Liberals. The fact is that a healthy majority of Canadians have refused to
buy its extreme right-wing policies, even in populist guise.
In a very real sense, Reform/Alliance has outlived its usefulness
to the ruling class. It should be recalled that the Reform Party arose in
the late 1980s, when the federal Conservatives under Mulroney were slumping
below 15% in the polls. Ruling monopoly circles became concerned -
especially after the 1993 elections when the Tories were reduced from 172
seats to two - that one of their two chosen parties was about to implode.
It was around this time that big business interests began to seriously
promote Reform as the new political vehicle on the right. They needed
Reform as a kind of "way-station" to hold onto traditional PC voters. The
tactic was never fully successful though, especially with voters in Central
and Eastern Canada, and of course in Quebec.
This explains why big business interests - the real force behind
both the Tories and the Reform (not to mention the Liberals) - began
pushing the "unite the right" slogan even before the 1997 elections. The
morphing of Reform into the Canadian Alliance was intended to pressurize
the federal Tories to fall in under the Reform umbrella -- with a new party
name and leader, of course -- but the stubborn Tories did not cooperate,
and the exercise failed miserably.
Now the situation is somewhat reversed. The Tories have stabilized
and the Alliance is hemorrhaging, so monopoly is "pulling the plug" on the
CA politically and financially to force the bulk of the Alliance to
collapse into the federal PCs.
It's hard to imagine the Alliance surviving to remain intact as a
major force on the right. But in the short run, the social conservatives
and Christian fundamentalist right will likely try to keep the Alliance
afloat as an even more extreme, ultra-right party, as happened with the
B.C. Social Credit Party in the 1990s.
People's Voice: Although less publicized, there is a deepening crisis
within the social democratic Left as well. Could you comment?
Figueroa: The crisis within the ranks of social democracy, and its impact
on possible realignments within the Left, will have a telling effect on the
fightback by labour and democratic movements across the country, at every
level. Our Party is paying special attention to this question.
Canada has entered a period of great political flux, of new
dynamics and potentialities. When our Central Committee convenes in early
October, we will have a full discussion on these developments and come
forward with a more detailed analysis of the domestic political situation,
especially with respect to the Left. My comments should be taken as
preliminary reflections prior to that discussion.
The crisis within social democracy has been brewing for some time
now, both in Canada and internationally. The NDP has suffered electoral
setbacks and defeats over the recent period, but the crisis is essentially
an ideological one.
The debate over the future of the NDP and of the left generally
has been ignited primarily by the deepening assault by monopoly finance
capital on the working class and working Canadians in general, and the need
to galvanize a viable and united opposition.
The sad truth is that the right-wing leadership of the NDP has
retreated in the face of this unprecedented offensive, accommodating itself
to the main tenets of neoliberal ideology and practice.
The NDP leadership has failed miserably to defend the interests of
the working class and the oppressed within the traditional confines of
Parliament and the legislatures. And it has done virtually nothing to
mobilize popular opposition; in some cases, it has actually stifled
extra-parliamentary action.
But the class struggle has not abated. Nor has the broad labour
and democratic fightback. As a result, a wide gulf has opened between the
activists in the labour and mass democratic movements - many of whom are
current or former members of the NDP - and the right-wing NDP leadership.
That chasm can no longer be papered over in the name of "unity." Sharp
debates have broken out inside the NDP itself, and within the trade union
and other movements about their relationship to the NDP.
A growing number of activists, especially young people, are
searching for new militant forms of organization and resistance of a left,
anticapitalist character. This search takes many and varying expressions
across the country.
In English-speaking Canada, efforts to rejuvenate and restructure
the Left forces have accelerated. A couple of years ago, Sam Gindin, a
former leading figure in CAW, wrote an article called "Rebuilding the Left"
which sparked widespread discussion in progressive circles. Essentially,
Gindin argued that the NDP had lost all credibility as a political vehicle,
and that a new left-wing formation was needed. He called for a "structured
movement against capitalism" something more than a mass movement, but less
than a fully structured political party. RtL forums and committees of left
activists have since sprung up in several cities.
The RtL process is an important and welcome development, although
not without its problems. It is quite decentralized, with differing
political currents leading the process in each centre. It lacks a clear
decision-making structure, so it is uncertain how the various RtLs will
relate to one another and achieve consensus.
Currently, activists are debating proposals for a "basis of unity"
for the RtL. Many useful ideas and positions are coming forward, but
differences over long-term objectives are also arising. For instance, some
feel that the basis of unity must explicitly call for "socialism," while
others want to restrict the RtL's basis of unity to a vague
"anticapitalist" orientation.
This reflects the disparate ideological trends within the RtL
process, running from reformist, left social-democratic, anarchist,
trotskyist to communist and other revolutionary positions. Given that, it
is unlikely that this initiative will move beyond its current status as a
loosely structured movement, toward a bona fide socialist organization, as
some would prefer. However, the RtL does serve a very useful purpose, by
bringing left activists from various backgrounds together in joint
discussion and some coordinated action.
The "New Politics Initiative" is the most recent development on
the left. The NPI unites many prominent NDP members and activists from the
labour and democratic movements -- Judy Rebick, and MPs Svend Robison and
Libby Davies, amongst others. They aim to rally support to transform the
political outlook, leadership and structure, and even the name of the NDP
into a new Party based on a left, environmental and grassroots democratic
program.
The NPI's Vision statement is a far-reaching document which calls
for socialist transformation, but not a revolutionary transition to
socialism. It outlines an inclusive and bottom-driven approach to political
change, designed to appeal to young activists in the anti-globalization
movement who are alienated from political parties and the electoral process.
Its immediate tactical objective is to refashion the NDP along
left social-democratic lines. If the forces behind the NPI do not win
majority support at the National NDP Convention this November in Winnipeg,
leading to fundamental changes to policy and structure over a two-year
period before the next NDP convention, the supporters of NPI have declared
their intention to proceed building such a "new party" anyway.
Federal leader Alexa McDonough and the current right-wing
leadership are worried about the NPI, which they interpret as a
thinly-veiled leadership challenge by Robinson. They have formed
"NDProgress" to counter the NPI, and to argue (quite erroneously) that the
main problem holding back the NDP electorally is its failure to make a
clean break with its traditional social democratic policy roots, and
embrace a more "mainstream" political agenda.
What will happen in Winnipeg? The NPI will garner support, but not
likely enough to carry the votes on its main demands. The current
leadership is manoeuvring to grant certain minor structural concessions in
order to undercut support for the "left opposition." Will the main backers
of NPI make a clean break with the NDP if they lose? This, too, is
unlikely, despite the fact that many of its supporters clearly favour that
option.
Why should Communists and other left-wingers outside the NDP be
concerned about this battle between different wings of the reformist camp?
Because a left social democratic party would play a much more positive role
in the unfolding class and democratic fightback than would an even more
right-wing, Blairite NDP.
There are other developments in left and progressive circles. Many
left-minded individuals are gravitating towards the Green Party, which
continues to gain members and popular support, especially in B.C., Quebec
and parts of the Prairies. Still others are attracted to "direct action"
forms of struggle, coming under the influence of anarchist ideas.
The Communist Party is also growing again, as an increasing number
of young activists make a definitive break with capitalist ideology and
search for a revolutionary alternative.
In short, there all sorts of developments swirling in left circles
these days. While there is no indication yet of an emerging pattern or
direction, conditions are improving to move left and progressive
cooperation and unity to a higher plane.
People's Voice: There have been some exciting developments in Quebec
recently in this regard.
Figueroa: In many respects, Quebec is leading the way in building left
cooperation and unity. Some important objective factors are contributing to
this development.
First of all, the labour movement in Quebec has, over the past few
decades, been more oriented toward political action. Sovereigntist
sentiment is fairly widespread among organized workers, but none of the
three central trade union bodies are officially affiliated to the PQ. So
there is no "contracting out" of labour's political program to a "third
party" as is still largely the case in the rest of Canada.
A second, closely related factor is that there is no mass
social-democratic party with a firm base inside the working class movement.
The NDP has never been able to take root in Quebec, due largely to its
backward and frankly chauvinist position on the national question. The PQ,
especially in its early years, did advance some useful reform measures, but
it has never been a social democratic party as such. In any case, the PQ's
steady move toward neoliberal policies has sharply reduced its support
within labour and progressive circles.
These conditions have combined to create sufficient political
space for diverse left social-democrats, communists, left nationalists,
etc., to coalesce around a common program against neoliberalism and
capitalist globalization, and in support of the main economic and social
demands of working people. This has expressed itself in the recent
formation of the Union of Progressive Forces (UPF), a coalition uniting the
Assembly for a Progressive Alternative (RAP), the Party of Democratic
Socialism (PDS), the Communist Party of Quebec (PCQ), sections of the
labour movement, and nonaffiliated left and democratic forces into a
political and electoral front. The Quebec Green Party is not formally a
member at the moment, but it has agreed to cooperate closely with the UPF.
Not all sections of the broad "left" support the UPF; some
anarchist and extreme left-sectarian forces have adopted a hostile
attitude. But the main organized formations on the left are supporting it,
and the door is wide open to others as well.
The UPF coalition has already scored some impressive gains. In a
provincial by-election in the Mercier riding this past April, UPF candidate
Paul Cliche garnered nearly 25% of the vote in the long-time PQ riding. The
result shook the Pequiste leadership, who are now worried about their
chances of reelection if the UPF runs a full slate in the coming general
elections.
There is a lively internal debate about the UPF's future. Should
it remain an electoral coalition, in which each constituent party maintains
its political and ideological independence while agreeing to a common
program? Or should it become a mass, federated party in its own right? Any
hasty or premature move to a federated party would likely flounder, given
the diversity of positions on fundamental issues among its constituent
parties and forces. That said, the UPF marks an exciting beginning in the
process of rallying the left and progressive forces in Quebec on a class
and democratic basis, and can serve as a useful example in other parts of
Canada as well.
People's Voice: How do you see the role of the Communist Party in this
emerging process?
Figueroa: Our Party continues to be strongly committed to the goal of
forging cooperation and unity among the left forces. I use the term
"continues" because it is important to make clear that this is not at all a
new position. We readily admit that there have been lapses in the past,
when we committed sectarian errors in our relations with others. But it
should be noted that the CPC was by no means the worst offender in this
regard. On numerous occasions, our Party was in fact the victim of vicious
sectarian attacks -- even crude anti-communism -- by others who professed
to be part of the "non-communist left."
Our approach flows from our strategic view of the need to build
the overall unity of the working class, and to unite our class with other
democratic forces against attacks by finance capital and its state, to move
onto the offensive to win fundamental changes, and ultimately to achieve
the victory of socialism. This cannot come about if the most class
conscious and militant sections of the working class and democratic
movements fail to achieve a durable unity in action, in struggle.
Today there are significant stirrings within the broad left, and
an active searching for the way forward. In my opinion, the Party needs to
become much more engaged in this unfolding process, on many levels. In
Quebec, our Party is fully involved in helping to nurture and build the UPF
process, and in developing dialogue with other left forces. In the rest of
the country, our members are also involved in many not all of the RtL
discussions and forums.
Of course, the NPI process stands somewhat differently. At this
stage at least, it is an initiative within the NDP to bring about its
complete reorientation or transformation into a "new," left
social-democratic party. It would be inappropriate for Communists to
intervene in such an internal debate within another party, and we will not
do that.
The NPI is a very significant development however, one which is
forcing into the open a long overdue debate about the self-defeating
direction which the right-wing leadership of the NDP has taken that party
over many years. We wish the supporters of the NPI every success.
In general, Communists should place emphasis on finding ways to
bring the diverse left and progressive forces into "working unity" on
initiatives, campaigns and struggles around which we can all agree. This
would be far more useful than expending energy trying to obtain the
"unobtainable" - absolute ideological clarity or unity - within the broad
left (and within the RtL itself) which, after all, is made up of a broad
sweep of both revolutionary and reformist currents.
While engaging ourselves constructively in these broad left
initiatives and forums, we as Communists cannot downplay or neglect our
primary responsibility to build the revolutionary left, and especially the
Party itself. These two tasks can sometimes, in the course of our
day-to-day work, come into conflict, but they are not contradictory or
irreconcilable. On the contrary, they are complementary tasks,
dialectically linked.
Life has always demonstrated that the stronger and more
influential the Communist Party and the revolutionary left forces are in
general, the more powerful are the interventions of the left as a whole in
the class struggle and in the various mass democratic struggles of the
Canadian people.
One of the most valuable contributions our Party can bring at this
critical moment is our ideas: our analysis of capitalism and imperialism
today, and the strategy and tactics needed in the struggle, not to reform
capitalism, but to replace it with socialism, with genuine people's power.
These ideas are encapsulated in our new party program adopted
earlier this year, the final version of which will be rolling off the
presses this month, and in our "Proposals for a People's Alternative,"
which advances an immediate program around which labour and its democratic
allies can unite and fight.
Our new program is the product of extensive analysis, reflection
and discussion by Communists in Canada and around the world over this past
decade, since the demise of the Soviet Union and the political and
ideological crisis within the Communist movement as a whole. It directly
addresses virtually all of the key topics and issues up for debate amongst
the broader left.
We need to boldly take these documents - our ideas - out into the
left, labour and democratic movements, share them with our friends and
allies, and make them the property of the wider fightback movement.
*************
3) OTTAWA MUST SAY NO TO MISSILE DEFENSE! - Communist Party
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT�S plan for a national missile defence system against
�rogue states� is a cover for a new and incalculably dangerous arms race,
according to an Aug. 22 news release from the Communist Party of Canada.
Since missile defenses will increase the threat of nuclear war and
destroy global security, the CPC said, Ottawa must take a position against
the deployment of the missile defense system.
�Missile defences are the leading edge of an arms race to protect
and promote U.S. corporate global domination,� warns Darrell Rankin, a
member of the CPC�s Central Executive Committee. �The government of Canada
must join with world opinion and oppose the U.S. missile defence plan.
Nearly all Canadians and the people of the world will be hurt by the
deployment of missile defences.�
The CPC statement says:
�The NMD program is dangerously destabilizing precisely because
its is an adjunct to a first-strike strategy actively being pursued by
Washington. Its real thrust is directed against such powers as China and
Russia, not against so-called �rogue states.�
�Foreign minister Manley�s recent criticism of the NMD is welcome,
but it is still unacceptable that the Chr�tien government has so far
refused to publicly declare that Canada will not take part in a �missile
defense� scheme. The choice is clear. Either we support peace through
disarmament or we end up with an arms race that will end with the most
destructive consequences for humanity.
�All the accomplishments of the peace and disarmament movement are
in danger. Two world wars in the last century are proof enough of the
tragic consequences of the arms race.
�Those wars caused untold death and destruction. The wars, and the
nuclear �cold war� that followed, spawned a worldwide movement for peace
and disarmament, supported by the Soviet Union and other socialist
countries whose aim was to end the arms race and avert war.
�Today, the far-right political forces grouped around U.S.
president George Bush have brought the world to an impasse, virtually
negating all hope of reducing the threat of war through disarmament.
�On May 1, Bush declared the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty
irrelevant to current security needs. He pledged to end seeking national
security through a policy of massive nuclear deterrence. Both of these
statements are thoroughly deceptive.
�Bush said that nuclear weapons �still have a vital role to play�
and that the world situation now required �a new policy, a broad strategy
of active non-proliferation, counter proliferation and defences.�
�Bush said nothing about the pursuit of security through mutual,
balanced and verifiable disarmament. His statement is a call for a renewed
arms race led by the U.S., and U.S. military intervention to ensure that
other countries do not possess weapons of mass destruction.
�The North Atlantic Treaty Organization�s �strategic concept�
adopted in 1999 openly supports this aim of U.S. imperialism. The military
alliance will intervene rapidly in countries that challenge NATO by
obtaining biological or chemical weapons or that violate the
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
�All these facts point to the dangerous striving for military
domination and solutions in the interests of global capitalism. They point
to the growing anger of the corporate ruling class in the U.S. against the
spreading protests against corporate globalization. They point to the
growing influence of the military-industrial complex in U.S. politics that
threatens to undermine democracy internationally and in the United States
itself.
�The mobilization of opinion and the actions of millions of people
against the NMD are necessary to prevent war and safeguard peace. We must
demand that Canada speak out clearly against this new, dangerous
escalation, and call for our immediate withdrawal from NATO and NORAD.
�Unless the people end this new arms race, it will end humanity.�
