================================================
01 - Hoppauf - Hakoah!
von: <OEKOLI_Wien@gmx.net>
================================================

In der Diskussion um die Wiedererrichtung des von den Nazis arisierten
Sportplatzes des jüdischen Sportvereins Hakoah (hebr. Kraft) setzt eine
Bürgerinitiative und die Grüne Bezirksgruppe Leopoldsstadt seltsame
Prioritäten. Die
Grünen sind zwar grundsätzlich für die Errichtung eines Sportplatzes für die
Hakoah, wie bereits bei der Errichtung einer jüdischen Schule am Rande des
Augartens, wird jedoch der Standort Augarten mit dem Hinweis abgelehnt, daß
die
"grüne Lunge" der Leopoldsstadt nicht zerstört werden dürfe. Für Bezirksrat
Adi Hasch ist ein "Park in einem dichtverbauten Wohnbezirk" ein "denkbar
schlechter Platz um eine Sportanlage zu errichten" und Bezirksrätin Heidi
Cammerlander erklärt in der Gratis-Parteizeitung "Die Grünen Leopoldsstadt":
"Es
erscheint mir nicht richtig, den Augarten zu beschneiden." Sie spricht von
einem
"Verlegenheits-Smog" der sich ausgebreitet habe und fragt ob eine solche
""Wiedergutmachung" nicht eine fragwürdige wäre, denn in welcher Relation
würde
diese Wiedergutmachung stehen?"

Der Augarten mit seinen NS-Flagtürmen, seinen für die Öffentlichkeit nicht
zugänglichen Bereichen und seinen bereits existierenden Sporteinrichtungen
wird für die Grünen zu einen schützenswerteren Gut als die Wiederbelebung
von
jüdischen Einrichtungen im 2. Bezirk, dem alten jüdischen Herz der Stadt.

Wir sind dagegen, den Sportplatz der Hakoah wegen einiger Parkbäume an den
Rand der Stadt zu drängen. Ziel einer Standortsuche für die Sportstädten
kann
nur ein möglichst gut geeigneter Ort für die Hakoah sein, die lange genug
auf
die Rückgabe ihrer von den Nazis geraubten Sporteinrichtungen warten mußte.

Hoppauf Hakoah!

--
Ökologische Linke (ÖKOLI)
Schottengasse 3a/1/4/59
A-1010 Wien

e-milio: oekoli_wien@gmx.net
Visite our Website: http://www.oekoli.cjb.net
Ökoli Vorarlberg: http://PolitiX.cjb.net

Wenn ihr an unseren spanischen/französischen/englischen
Aussendungen
interessiert seid, um Infos weiterzuverbreiten, meldet euch!
*********************************************************
*
*********
don't forget to say hello to echelon:
abhoermethoden, bombe, cia ,datenklau, echelon, freak, grundrecht,
hacking, iridium, joint, kommunismus, lauschangriff, mailbombing,
oecalan, pgp, querulant, rasterfahndung, besetzung, behörde
shell, tristero, urheberrechtsverletzung, wanze, geld, asyl,
ausländer, zukunft, nigeria, ahim, widerstand
LEAVE BUSINESS AND JOIN DEMONSTRATION

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
AKTIONEN UND ANKÜNDIGUNGEN
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
================================================
02 - Dresden: 13 februar's comin' + paranoide neo-nazis
von: <aktuell@nadir.org>
================================================

13 februar's comin' + paranoide neo-nazis
> Von : AntifaRechercheTeam Dresden [ART]
> Ort : Dresden
> Datum: 10.02.2002
>
>
> Gedenk-Auftakt zum 13. Februar 2002 in Dresden
> 70 Neo-Nazis halten Saalveranstaltung ab
> Neo-Nazi-Trauer um Bombardierung Deutschlands 1945 etabliert sich
bundesweit
>
> Am 9. Februar haben die Dresdner Neo-Nazis mit einem unglaublich
paranoiden Aufwand eine Veranstaltung in städtischen Räumen (Club
Müllerbrunnen) abgehalten. Der (geheime) Schleusungspunkt am Rande der Stadt
wurde durch Neo-Nazi-Kleingruppen zur no-go-area. Mit am Start: bekannte
Nazi-Schläger-Combos und fast sämtliche Dresdner Nazi-Kader. Details and
Fotos at
>
> http://venceremos.antifa.net
>
> Diese Veranstaltung war der Auftakt zur alljährlichen Dresdner
Grossveranstaltung für Geschichtsrevisionismus. In den 80iger Jahren
etablierten Friedensgruppen das Trauern um die toten Nazis des 13. Februar
1945 (Bombardierung durch die Alliierten). In den 90iger Jahren begannen
Neo-Nazis sich in das Trauer-Spektakel zu integrieren. Das gemeinsame
Treffen von Bürgern und Neo-Nazis - inhaltlich wie ganz real vor der
Frauenkirche zum Gedenken bei Glockengeläut - fand grossen Anklang bei den
Neo-Nazis. Die Zahl der Teilnehmerinnen am Gedenkmarsch zum 13. Februar
stieg stetig. Dieses Jahr ist mit 1000 zu rechnen, es können auch ein paar
mehr werden.
>
> Erstmals gab es in diesem Jahr in Magdeburg einen Nazi-Aufmarsch
anlässlich des Jahrestages der Bombardierung. Nach Dresden gehts dann munter
weiter am 23. 02. in Pforzheim und am 30. 03. in Lübeck. Ab 8. Mai sollte
der Spass dann erstmal kurz wieder vorbeisein. (Mal davon abgesehen, dass in
Dresden auch zum 1. und 8. Mai jährliche Nazi-Aufmärsche stattfinden.)
>
> Da in Dresden von links bis rechts alle am Trauern sind, findet niemand
Muße zur Zivilcourage gegen den Nazi-Aufmarsch am 13. Feb.
> Die Stadt hat wie jedes Jahr eine Allgemeinverfügung erlassen, nach der
Versammlungen rund um die Frauenkirche verboten sind. Dass diene dem Schutz
der Trauer und des Gedenkens. Der Bürger-Mob mit Kerzen, der sich dabei
ansammelt, gilt nicht als Versammlung im politischen Sinne. Obwohl die
politische Ausrichtung völlig klar ist: Täter werden zu Opfer gemacht,
Geschichtsrevisionismus, Verharmlosung der Verbrechen des NS,...
> Demonstrationen können ausserhalb eines bestimmten Gebietes in der
Innenstadt stattfinden. Die Neo-Nazis laufen halb drumherum, die
Friedensdemo ist ein bisschen raus aus'm Zentrum und am Altmarkt kundgebt
das offiziöse Pack: Bürgermeister etc.
>
> Um die Route der Demonstration "Wir danken den Allierten für die
Zerschlagung Nazi-Deutschlands" wird noch verhandelt. Alternativ empfehlen
sich private Stadtrundgänge um das Spektakel zu besichtigen.
> Stadtplan etc. at
>
> http://venceremos.antifa.net
>
> Aufruf siehe: http://www.nadir.org/nadir/aktuell/2002/01/20/8208.html
>
>
> *** nadir-aktuell-abo -- Aboliste mit Nachrichten von http://www.nadir.org
> *** Beitraege: nadir-aktuell@nadir.org / Redaktion:
nadir-aktuell-red@nadir.org
> *** Unsubscribe: majordomo@nadir.org mit unsubscribe nadir-aktuell-abo im
body

================================================
03 - Vorschlag: Bürgerinitiative Neuwahlen ins Parlament einbringen
von: <rosaflieder@hotmail.com>
================================================
Titel:
Vorschlag: Bürgerinitiative Neuwahlen ins Parlament einbringen

Wir planen einen "Nachschlag" zur Demo am 2.2. und wollen in der Sache nicht
locker lassen. Vorschlag unten.
Am Freitag 17h (ort folgt) wollen wirs bei einem offenen
Koordinationstreffen vorstellen, Entwurf soll bereits vorliegen.. Falls Ihr
Euch in die Ausarbeitung des Entwurfs einschalten wollt, herzlich
willkommen!
Vorschlag:
Möglichst rasch in den Nationalrat einzubringen:eine
BÜRGERINITIATIVE für SOFORTIGE NEUWAHLEN
(Arbeitstitel BI Neuwahlen)

Dazu genügen 500 Unterschriften, die sind rasch beisammen, (s.
parlament.gv.at)
Sie sollten aus möglichst vielen gesellschaftlichen und politischen Kreisen
zusammengesetzt sein unter Einschluß möglichst vieler prominenter Namen.
Zur Einbringung in den Nationalrat eine Pressekonferenz. (mit Prominenz +
Basisinitiativen gegen SB) In die Begründung müssten die anderen beim
Vernetzungstreffen beschlossenen und die vorgebrachten Forderungen
einfließen.
Wie weit sich das weiterführen läßt, wird von der Zustimmung und Mitarbeit
abhängen.
z.B. kann man alle 14 Tage Unterschriften nachreichen (Presse informieren),
eine eigene BI (z.B. "Tirol f. Neuwahlen") einbringen etc.

Begründung + Vorteile:
* das Thema kommt nicht vom Tisch und wir stellen klar, daß wir nicht aufs
Zerbröseln der Regierung warten oder Haider das Gesetz des Handelns
überlassen.
* jeder Einzelne kann leicht mitmachen (entweder nur durch Unterschrift oder
durch selber sammeln) - in ganz Österreich, falls gewünscht.
* In Form "paradoxer Intervention" werden die Mechanismen der Macht
öffentlich (z.b. werden Anträge nicht mal mehr auf die TO der
Parlamentsausschüsse gesetzt, geschweige denn, dem Nationalrat vorgelegt.
* Neben dem Bundespräsidenten (sich an ihn zu wenden ist problematisch und
umstritten) kann auch der NR die Koalition auflösen und Neuwahlen
herbeiführen. Theoretisch wäre das bei geheimer Abstimmung auch denkbar.
Praktisch kann diese Bürgerinitiative vermutlich nur Öffentlichkeit
herstellen, dies aber kontinuierlich und beharrlich, falls gewünscht
* Die von vielen gewünschte größere Plattform (z.B. um im nächsten Wahlkampf
gemeinsam klare Forderungen an die Parteien zu richten, zu denen sie
Stellung nehmen müßten) könnte so praktisch ein bißchen wachsen.

Nachteil: Im Gegensatz zu einer Demonstration schließt die BI Menschen, die
Österreich "bevölkern" der Form nach aus: Unter 19jährige, keine Österr.
Staatsbüger. Dies könnte man jedoch ebenfalls deutlich machen z.B. durch
Extra-Listen: ("Denen das Recht auf Initiative verwehrt ist" o.ä.) Unter
dieser Koalition sind die Bedingungen auch für MigranntInen und Asylsuchende
ein Horror, denkbar schlechte Kampfbedingungen auch für ein ausgedehnteres
Wahlrecht
Wenn jeder, der unterschreibt, auch was zahlt gehen sich Inserate aus.

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
KOMMENTARE - MELDUNGEN
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
================================================
04 - Texas Todestrakt - ÜBER DEN RAND
von: <no.conditions@teleweb.at>
===============================================
ÜBER DEN RAND
VON PAUL COLELLA.

Das Schweigen vieler meiner Mitgefangenen erstaunt und erschreckt mich.
Unser Problem liegt in diesem Schweigen, denn bevor wir dieses nicht
brechen, wird niemand von der Depression und Angst und den Gefühlen der
Hoffnungslosigkeit und Verzweiflung erfahren, die wir hier erleiden. Wir
als verurteilte Männer sind bereits großen Mengen an Stress und
geistigem Leid ausgesetzt, die durch die geistige und körperliche
Folter, die wir hier täglich erleiden, noch verstärkt werden. Doch die
Verwaltung weigert sich anzuerkennen, daß es hier ein Problem gibt, da
so viele von uns schweigend leiden.

Da ist eine Handvoll von uns, die protestiert und versucht ihnen
Widerstand zu zeigen, doch unsere Anstrengungen werden von einer
Verwaltung niedergeschlagen, die uns nur als Problemgefangene darstellt
und sagt, daß von den mehr als 450 Männern hier 430 mit allem zufrieden
sind, was hier stattfinden. Wir wissen alle, daß das ein totaler
Bullshit ist. Larry Todd und Larry Fitzgerald hätten gut in die
Propagandamaschinerie von Hitler gepasst. Sie lügen, oh wie sehr sie
lügen, doch wie können wir verurteilten Männer dies beweisen ? Ich kenne
zahlreiche Männer, die sich langsam von der Realität entfernen. Die
Depression und Verzweiflung in ihnen ist so groß, daß sie nur auf ihren
Betten liegen und stundenlang gegen die Wand starren. Sie wissen
vielleicht nicht, mit wem sie reden sollen oder wem sie schreiben
sollen. Sie leiden schwiegend, aus Angst vor der Vergeltung, die hier im
Polunsky Unit so häufig stattfindet.

Ich denke, daß ich mit Gewissheit sagen kann, daß wir hier im Todestrakt
nicht zufrieden sind. Die meisten hier wissen einfach nicht oder
verstehen nicht, daß nur wenn sie ihr Schweigen brechen, wenn sie mit
den Ketten rasseln und gegen die Haftbedingungen und Behandlung hier
protestieren, etwas ändern werden können. Es wird nicht über Nacht
geschehen. Sie würden etwas von den materiellen Dingen verlieren, an
denen sie so sehr hängen, doch die Dinge werden sich ändern, wenn wir zu
Reden beginnen. Laßt die Welt hören was vor sich geht. Es liegt keine
Schande darin, depressiv und verzweifelt zu sein. Es ist keine Schande,
um Hilfe zu bitten ... Die Schande liegt nur in unserem Schweigen.

Seit neun Jahren bin ich im Todestrakt, sieben davon habe ich im Ellis
Unit verbracht, wo soziale Interaktion und kreativer Ausdruck erlaubt
war, wo einige Fernsehprogramme und Zeitungen erlaubt waren und wo es
bei Problemen jemanden gab, der sich darum kümmerte, bevor das Problem
eskalierte. Diese letzten zwei Jahre waren die Hölle. Ich habe Männer
beobachtet, die langsam verrückt wurden. Die Typen liegen einfach nur
herum. Die Typen verlieren ihren Verstand. Ich habe gerade einen Artikel
aus der Ausage der Dallas Morning News from 27. Januar gelesen, in dem
die Frage aufgeworfen wurde, ob Monty Delk (Hinrichtungsdatum
28.02.2002) ein Mann mit Schwierigkeiten oder ein Schwindler ist. Sie
hinterfragten Montys Krankheit. I have jahrelang in seiner Nähe gebracht
und kann sagen, daß man das nicht spielen kann. Wäre er solch ein guter
Schauspieler, könnte er Millionen in Hollywood machen. Ich habe ihn
Dinge machen sehen, die kein geistig gesunder Mann machen könne. Er
wurde verrückt nachdem er in den Todestrakt gekommen ist. Andere, die
über den Rand gegangen sind sind Emanuel Kempa, Charles Mines, Shhid
Babini, Victor Saldano, Alen Ripkowski und die Liste wächst. Manche
versuchen die Anzeichen zu verstecken. Manche wissen einfach nicht, daß
sie über den Rand schlittern. Wie viele mehr werden es noch ? Wenn Ihr
einen Angehörigen im Todestrakt von Polunsky habt, bitte ermuntert sie
zumindest dazu, das Schweigen darüber zu brechen, was sie durchmachen
müssen, bevor sie ÜBER DEN RAND schlittern ...
Von Paul Colella
http://www.deathrow.at/paul

===============================================
05 - WORKERS POWER GLOBAL WEEK 9 February 2002
E-newswire of the LRCI
von: <harvey@lrci.fsnet.co.uk>
================================================
WORKERS POWER GLOBAL WEEK
E-newswire of the LRCI
9 February 2002
Subscribe to: newswire@workerspower.com
http://www.workerspower.com

============================================================

>> WELCOME TO ISSUE #80
Workers Power Global Week is the English language e-newsletter of the LRCI.
To unsubscribe mail to: unsubscribe@workerspower.com. Please forward this to
a comrade.

============================================================

>>GERMANY: VIVA ARGENTINA! MARTIN OGANDO (PTS) TOUR STARTS
>>ZIMBABWE: FIGHT MUGABE¹S CREEPING DICTATORSHIP
>>ZIMBABWE: THE FAILURE OF THE MDC.
>>BRITAIN: SOCIALIST ANSWER TO THE RAIL CRISIS
>>BRITAIN: WHERE IS GLOBALISE RESISTANCE GOING?

============================================================

>>GERMANY: VIVA ARGENTINA! MARTIN OGANDO (PTS) TOUR STARTS

Workers Power Global, Germany

The Argentinian revolution has begun. It has stimulated the imagination of
anti-capitalists, trade unionists, anarchists, communists worldwide. It
poses the question of working class power in a practical sense in the here
and now.

That is the reason why Martin Ogando¹s tour has attracted hundreds of
visitors in Germany, the first leg of his speaking tour throughout Europe.

Martin is student activist of the PTS, a revolutionary-socialist
organisation of 700 in Argentina which has participated actively in the
revolutionary events around the downfall of President de la Rúa.

Martin took part in the fighting in the revolutionary days and studies at
the university of Buenos Aires.

Martin addressed the final meeting in the DGB trade union headquarters in
Munich on 2 February, the day 15,000 youth, anti-militarists, socialists,
communists and autonoms were able to break through the police lines and
defend their right to demonstrate against the ban of the state.

Than he spoke in Kassel, Darmstadt, Berlin, Munich and Dresden meetings.

Martin gave an account of the revolutionary days and the political
developments since. Most importantly, he addressed the strategic political
questions of the revolution: the need to bring the working class to the
forefront of the struggle, the need to fight Peronism¹s influence in the
workers¹ movement, to unite the vanguard around a revolutionary programme,
to create new soviet-type organisations of the class and, centrally
important, to create revolutionary workers¹ party which can lead the class
and the plebeian masses to socialist revolution.

Every speech of Martin was followed by an extensive, lively and inspiring
discussion on his thesis. Solidarity with the Argentinian revolution has
been planned and discussed as well as the questions of strategy and tactics
to win.

Martin is now touring the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria, Britain,
Sweden, France and Greece.

Attend the meetings in your country ­ or you will miss a great opportunity.

FOR A LIST OF MARTIN¹S TOUR VENUES AND DATES SEE:
http://wwww.workerspower.com/wpglobal/ptstour.html

FOR MORE ON ARGENTINA IN REVOLUTION SEE:
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/Argentina-revcrisis.html
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/argentinaprotests2k1.html
http://www.pts.org.ar

============================================================

>>ZIMBABWE: FIGHT MUGABE¹S CREEPING DICTATORSHIP
Workers Power Global, London

Zimbabwe is a country created by British imperialism. First, the robber
baron Cecil Rhodes took the land from the Shona and the Ndebele peoples and
then Britain took it from Cecil Rhodes. Since the end of the 19th century
black people have either been the workers on large white owned farms or eked
out an existence on small plots of land.

The white farmer settlers under the white supremacist Ian Smith declared
"independence" from Britain in order to hang on to their power and wealth.
With the collusion of the British Tories they held on for over twenty years.
Finally they succumbed to the national liberation struggle and to pressure
from imperialism. The latter saw that it could best preserve its interests
even under the "Marxist-Leninist" Robert Mugabe. And how right they were.

Unlike South Africa, where the struggle for emancipation took place in the
cities and shanty towns, the liberation forces in Zimbabwe were, in the
main, made up of Africans from families who had lost their land to rich
white farmers. Redistributing land was a key demand in building the
liberation movement and its ultimate victory.

At the time of independence in 1979, white people were less than one per
cent of Zimbabwe's population of 12 million but owned a third of the arable
land- the very best. Of the rest of the 11 million plus population more than
70 per cent still lived on the land. Presently, 4 000 large-scale white
commercial farmers still own 11.2 million hectares of the most fertile land
in the country, while one million black families are crowded into the
remaining 16.3 million hectares of largely communal lands.

Expectations were high after 1980 that black rule would ensure a
redistribution of land to the black rural population. But the agreement
brokered by Britain and accepted by Zanu-PF, led by Robert Mugabe, ensured
that the constitution ruled out any land seizures.

Even the political privileges of the whites were preserved. For the first
seven years a separate electoral roll for 700,000 whites directly elected 20
MPs whilst the 11 million black population elected 100 MPs. The murderous
racist Smith still sat in parliament.

In the first 10 years, 70,000 families were resettled with about 120 acres a
family. There were plans to resettle another 100,000 families. But at the
beginning of the 1990s the resettlement plan ran into the buffers of the
IMF.
The 1991 Economic Structural Adjustment Programme-agreed between Mugabe and
the IMF- offered foreign debt relief in return for cuts in welfare spending
and the introduction of free market reforms.

This meant strengthening the grip of white capitalists in farming and
industry though sections of the Zanu-PF leadership also benefited from
privatisation and corruption became rife within the ruling party and the
state machine.

When a further Land Redistribution Act was enacted in 1992 much of the land
redistributed went straight to Zanu-PF leaders and the growing black
bourgeoisie. By the mid-1990s, black families had been settled on about 900
farms: slow progress after 15 years of Zanu-PF rule.

It wasn't until the struggles of 1996-8 against unemployment and poverty
that Mugabe started to play with the land question.

During these years, when the majority of the population was suffering the
effects of structural adjustment, workers took to the streets to protest and
peasants occupied farms. They were led by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade
Unions (ZCTU).
The ZCTU, under the pressure of rank and file union militants and
socialists, eventually made a call for the creation of a workers' party.
According to the Zimbabwe International Socialists (ISO) - affiliated to the
International Socialist Tendency (IST), led by the British SWP:

"From that time onwards, the party started to be built in the townships. The
ISO played a major role in building what became MDC structures.
Unfortunately, when the MDC was officially launched in September 1999, most
of those who were appointed to the interim leadership were middle class. The
workers who were involved in building the structures, and the regional
chairpersons of the ZCTU who were also central, were hardly to be seen."

The result was that it was not a workers' party but the Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC). The MDC had at its head the top ZCTU leader Morgan
Tsvangirai, but it was a popular front drawing in middle class elements. At
this point the MDC supported land redistribution too.

The war veterans also came onto the political stage during this phase.
Originally, they campaigned for better pensions (not land), a demand
initially refused by Mugabe. He ordered the tear gassing of veterans who
were occupying the President's residence in 1997. He later conceded the
pension increase but imposed a tax on workers to pay for it - leading to
more strikes and demonstrations.

The veterans became better organised, their leaders rose in the ranks of
Zanu-PF. Then- under pressure- Mugabe took up the question of land
redistribution. It was a cynical manoeuvre on his part- a means to rally the
rural poor and use them as a battering ram against the rural and urban
working class.

It was also a desperate bid to hang on to power. Given the rapidly
deteriorating economic conditions he was facing a humiliating defeat at the
polls. He had to revive his "left" credentials, tarnished after seventeen
years of swindling the masses out of the fruits of victory over the white
racists.

Mugabe declared in late 1997 that the government was going to seize the land
of 1,500 white farmers. But international pressure, and a run on the
Zimbabwean dollar, led to Mugabe backtracking and bringing the target down
to around 1,000 farms. Still, the white farmers and British imperialism set
up a hullabaloo about the threat to private property and "democracy".

But who would get the land under Mugabe's schemes? Farm workers alone number
around 350,000 and account for a quarter of Zimbabwe's workforce and there
are many more peasants with their small holdings. So for many land is key to
both survival and for work

The General Agricultural and Plantation Workers Union of Zimbabwe estimates
that in the past redistributions only three out of 500 people given land
were farm workers. Less than 1,000 farm workers' families out of 122,000
families were given land.
The Commercial Farmers' Union puts the figure nearer 10 per cent for land
seized recently. Even accounting for land going to war veterans and families
of people robbed many years ago, there is a large amount of land going to
Zanu-PF bureaucrats and black capitalists.

In this situation, any serious opposition movement-claiming to represent the
workers and the poor- would propose a democratic land redistribution. It
would argue for land for the veterans, certainly, but above all for the farm
workers and the peasants. If that opposition movement were a revolutionary
socialist one it would not condemn land seizures. Quite the opposite it
would support and help organise them.

It would urge the forming of democratic land councils by the whole rural
population to expropriate the white farmers and- for that matter- the
Zanu-PF bureaucrats who corruptly acquired land. These councils could debate
and decide on the best way to organise ownership and agricultural production
so as to ensure a good standard of living, health care and education for the
rural population and how to feed the cities.

Democratic co-operatives would allow maximum involvement of the rural poor
with the retention of modern machinery and large scale organisation. But
this could not and should not be imposed on the masses.

A party which proclaimed the need for such an agrarian revolution would be
able isolate Mugabe and the Zanu-PF thugs. To a general strike in the towns
and cities it would add a genuine struggle for land in the countryside which
would rapidly disintegrate the social base of Mugabe and his cronies.

But, the opposition MDC has carried out a directly opposite policy. It has
failed to offer a really progressive alternative to Mugabe.

FOR MORE ON ZIMBABWE SEE:
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/Zim-populist.html

============================================================

>>ZIMBABWE: THE FAILURE OF THE MDC.
Workers Power Global, London

At its foundation the MDC was overwhelmingly dominated by workers and led by
trade union leaders. It arose out of militant opposition to the IMF measures
carried out by Mugabe.

But instead of forming a workers' party the union bureaucrats encouraged the
NGOs and middle and small scale black bosses, to enter the MDC. There was a
rapid evolution of the MDC into a popular front party where bourgeois
politicians could politically exploit the workers' votes and activists to
get into power and carry out a neo-liberal policy.

Since the elections of 2000, the MDC actively sought and received support
from the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), which is the main representative of
the mainly white big farmers and from British imperialism. Despite being
born out of strikes and land occupations in 1998-99, the MDC in 2000 was
saying that "land seizures should stop and a commission be set up".

It has also agreed to carry on with the IMF's structural adjustment
programme. This was a betrayal of the interests of the workers and the rural
poor and allowed Mugabe and Zanu-PF to label the MDC as a creature of
western imperialism.

Whilst it is vital that the international workers' movement defends the
democratic rights of the popular opposition to Mugabe in Zimbabwe -
specifically the labour movement and the youth - it should not join in the
calls for imperialist sanctions as Morgan Tsvangirai repeatedly does.

In Zimbabwe, the ISO- though it criticises the MDC leadership continues to
call for a workers' party and has been threatened with expulsion-has in
practice adopted a stage-ist strategy. First elect the MDC as it is: then
the workers will be disillusioned and turn to class socialist politics. Thus
in an interview in Green Left Weekly, paper of the Australian Democratic
Socialists a spokesperson of the ISO is reported as saying that:

" -the ISO would prefer to remain in the MDC until workers have had the
opportunity to experience it in office. The ISO will urge a vote for the MDC
in the 2002 presidential election so that workers can gain 'some bourgeois
democracy', such as the right to strike."

This "stages theory" represents an enormous error- similar to voting for the
ANC in South Africa. The alternative is to hold fast to the revolutionary
strategy of permanent revolution-to fight for a workers' government, allied
to a peasant agrarian revolution. Only victory for the workers and the rural
and urban poor will assure democracy in Zimbabwe.

At the ballot box as well as in propaganda socialists should consistently
fight for class independence. Any other course will strengthen not only the
MDC capitalists but Mugabe as well.

Socialists in the ZCTU and the working class base units of the MDC should
call for the immediate severing of the block with the IMF, British
imperialism and the white farmers. They should call for the expulsion of the
middle class leaders. They should not support a vote for or the installation
of a neo-liberal MDC government.

They should fight to get the working class trade union base to place demands
on all the MDC candidates and support only those who break from the
pro-imperialist line and call for land seizures by the masses and the
take-over of factories and businesses owned by imperialist corporations.

If ISO members are adopted as MDC candidates they ought to publicly announce
that they will not accept the discipline of the leadership but will- before,
during and after the election- fight for agrarian revolution and a workers'
uprising against the IMF policies of either Mugabe or Tsvangirai.

A party that is in league with the white farmers and capitalists, with
British imperialism and the IMF does not deserve the support of Zimbabwe's
workers and peasants. If they make the mistake of voting for it out of
justified hatred of Mugabe's dictatorial methods then this is
understandable.

Understandable but wrong. When workers find this out from bitter experience
they will have a right to say to revolutionary socialists "why did you
advise us to vote for them?" To then reply "in order to be with you" will
hardly be a cause for gratitude.

FOR MORE ON ZIMBABWE SEE:
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/Zim-populist.html

============================================================

>>BRITAIN: SOCIALIST ANSWER TO THE RAIL CRISIS
Workers Power Global, London

Stephen Byers shocked the nation¹s capitalists by putting Railtrack into
administration. It looked like a clever move. Putting it into the hands of a
board with trade union involvement caused some to quip that this was a
Blairite version of "nationalisation without compensation under workers'
control". It was nothing of the sort. And it had some unforeseen
consequences for Byers.

First of all the finance capitalists of the City of London went bonkers.
They threatened to withhold funding ­ or charge a lot more ­ in private
finance projects across the board. Byers had to rely on the process called
"Railway Administration" which had been drawn up under John Major when no
one even contemplated that Railtrack could go bust.

It is modelled on the normal capitalist version of company law whereby the
administrator ­ in this case Ernst & Young, being paid £1m a week ­ has to
consider all bids and get the best deal for the City money men. But in the
last analysis the decision will be taken by Byers. So in order to obey the
niceties of capitalist law, Byers has now excluded himself from the process.

Railtrack is, therefore, leaderless and without direction. Managers and
technicians are leaving in droves. At one point there were just six people
on the Railtrack staff with the necessary qualifications to keep the network
operating within legal requirements!

Alongside this Morton was drummed out of the SRA and an ex-Virgin boss took
over and produced a new plan within three weeks of arriving. The new plan is
ambitious but falls far short of what is needed. All the investment is
geared to solving the political problem of commuter chaos but it leaves many
small towns unconnected and ignores recent economic developments. Even in
the south east, major infrastructure projects like Crossrail ­ linking
London¹s east and west ­ are not supported.

The whole plan is based on the regime of high fares that has been in place
since privatisation. While it envisages merging the TOCs to avoid the more
ludicrous aspects of fragmented timetabling, the deal is they get longer and
cheaper franchises.

But the biggest problem with this new SRA plan is: who will fund it? The
government promised £34bn of public money over 10 years ­ but acknowledges
that £65bn is needed. The rest is supposed to come from the City of London.
All the experts acknowledge it will not ­ because of the risks involved and
because they fear another Railtrack style forced insolvency. The Commons
Transport Select Committee was brutally frank about this in its report dated
31 January 2002:

"The economy of the United Kingdom depends on an efficient railway. This
will not be achieved without investment on a scale which dwarfs the figures
proposed in the first 10 Year Plan. We recommend that the forthcoming review
of the 10 Year Plan establish the amount of additional public money needed
for rail investment and that the Treasury make an unequivocal commitment to
provide the necessary long-term funding. Without additional resources, the
Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions will have to
reallocate more money in the 10 Year Plan from roads to railways in order to
ensure that the targets for rail are met."

The latest magic solution is "special purpose vehicles" (SPV) ­ effectively
a form of re-privatisation, where the assets already sold to Railtrack are
sold again to consortia of TOCs, banks and the government in return for
upgrades. The Transport Committee recognises that these are a totally
unproven solution and many rail bosses are wary of them. The New Southern
Railway, from London to Brighton, was supposed to be the guinea pig for the
SPV solution. It has failed because the TOC, Railtrack and private
construction company Bechtel can¹t agree over who will bear the risks.

The problem is clear: the amount of money needed is more than £65bn, the
amount of money available from the government is less and the private sector
wont top up the difference. It poses the obvious question: what use is the
private sector at all? Why should private firms get the gain of ownership
when they are not capable of bearing the pain of investment.

The Transport Committee plan, published last month, is the brainchild of old
Labour's Gwyneth Dunwoody and goes well beyond anything Blair would actually
allow. Yet all it does is offer a series of half-baked capitalist solutions.
Its action plan is a calculated study in avoiding stating the obvious ­
privatisation has failed and we need renationalisation.

It calls for the SRA to take strategic control of the industry ­ but wants
the TOCs to be given even longer-term franchises.

It calls for stiffer penalties on the TOCs for failure ­ but the TOCs are
failing already and many are in the red. It is clear many will go under ­
but the Transport Committee plan can¹t countenance the "n" word:
nationalisation. It calls for Railtrack¹s successor to be set up as soon as
possible ­ but again won't call for renationalisation. The plan recognises
the SPV solution is unproven and admits most of the risk will be taken on by
government: so why are the privateers to be rewarded at all?

It calls for Railtrack to take over maintenance and upgrade from the
Bechtels and the Balfour Beattys of this world. But in practice the same
firms will be re-employed as subcontractors.

It calls for new lines to be build alongside old ones, and for total
electrification ­ two sensible proposals that will clash with the commercial
interest of the TOCs so badly that they will never happen.
And it calls for more public investment ­ without saying where the money
will come from.
The socialist alternative is simple. Nationalise Railtrack, the TOCs, the
maintenance giants, the freight companies. Nationalise the old train
building companies and end the wasteful scam of train leasing. Build and run
the trains and track under state control. Reorganise the railways as a
single system, with one integrated timetable. But run it under workers' and
passengers' control ­ not the SRA and a set of useless passenger
representatives drawn from the stockbroker belt.

Direct control by the workers and users is the best way to ensure safety and
efficiency.

This can all be paid for with public money. We need at least £60bn over the
next ten years ­ possibly £100bn. But costs could be lessened by cutting out
the profit slice that goes to the maintenance and train leasing and building
companies. Nationalisation will cut costs.

As for compensation, its should only be paid to shareholders who are workers
that got shares foisted on them in lieu of bonuses. Everybody else should be
told: read the small print stoopid.

The money needed to upgrade the railways should be raised by taxing the rich
and the corporate profiteers. Even £100bn would be peanuts compared to the
amount of money that flow through the City of London each year. Instead of
raising fares, fares should be cut so that commuting becomes virtually free
and longer distance travel much cheaper. Commuting should be subsidised by
local taxation on businesses.
And the whole rail system needs to be modernised in the context of an
integrated transport plan. That was something else New Labour promised but
only socialism can deliverS

FOR MORE ON THE SOCIALIST ANSWER TO BLAIR AND NEW LABOUR SEE:
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/WPBAPcontents.html

=========================================================

>>BRITAIN: WHERE IS GLOBALISE RESISTANCE GOING?
Jeremy, GR Steering Committee member, London

Despite our successes in drawing in new layers of activists and pulling off
some impressive mobilisations (May Day, Genoa) and a higher profile in the
media than any other single anti-capitalist group, Globalise Resistance (GR)
has not yet grown into a large dynamic network. Outside of London and, to a
lesser extent, a few other cities and towns, GR barely exists at all. Our
task is to diagnose why this is and prescribe some remedies.

GR's problems can be summarised as follows:
o We concentrate too much on summit-hopping and lectures/film showings. We
are not yet a "network based on direct action". Often we appear too
centralised. At the moment GR is dominated - politically and
organisationally - by the party that initiated it, the Socialist Workers
Party (SWP).

The problem here is not the right of the SWP to push its politics in GR. All
groups should have that right and I would claim the same for Workers Power.
We defend that right in GR and any other anti-capitalist campaign against
the anarchist attacks on "Leninist parties". But we need to make sure we
don¹t allow that right to become an automatic privilege for one party over
all others.

o Our local organisations in towns and colleges have disappeared in many
areas. Even where they do exist they don¹t have enough of the dynamism and
DIY panache that has made the anti-capitalist movement in other countries
such a success.

o Other wings of the movement remain suspicious of GR. While NGOs and
anti-globalisation activists may enter joint actions, the attempt to set up
Attac in the UK reveals their unease at working with an umbrella group that
has a high proportion of revolutionary socialists in it. The anarchist and
libertarian wing of the movement has broken off all relations and attacked
GR as an SWP front in the red-baiting pamphlet Monopolise Resistance.

o We have failed to spread the anti-capitalist movement - either broaden it
by drawing in thousands more youth, or deepen it by drawing in thousands of
organised trade unionists.

o How do we strengthen GR? How do we take real steps towards the objectives
we have set ourselves? Here are a few suggestions.

o Any revival of GR must start by transforming our base organisations. GR
should set itself up as a network for local anti-capitalist,
environmentalist, anti-racist/fascist, internationalist and trade unionist
campaigns, groups and even individuals to use. Regular GR meetings should
combine political discussion - not just lectures, but debates, videos,
Question Time formats, teach-ins, real workshops (i.e. open-ended
brainstorming sessions which may lead to actual campaigning ideas) - and
preparing for direct action-style campaigns.

o GR must be a direct action-based network. People will not join and remain
active participants in an anti-capitalist network which only provides
transport for big demos and gets speakers from around the world to large
counter-conferences. It must have a staple diet of campaigning activity to
sustain and nourish it, to draw in and activate ever wider layers - and,
crucially, to combat capitalism!

All GR groups, especially new ones, should be encouraged to support No
Sweat, which is ideal because you can take action on any high street. But it
shouldn¹t be the only or main activity of GR groups. GR groups should
develop our own campaigning ideas and network with others to do stunts and
actions. GR must be decentralised in this sense.

o It is not essential - or even desirable - for every campaign or action
taken up by GR to have the GR brand. Where a pre-existing campaign is
calling for support for a particular struggle then GR should build support
without trying to take it over. Where a local injustice or piece of blatant
hypocrisy needs to be exposed, build an alliance with other interested
parties under a neutral name open to all. When building for big events like
Genoa or May Day or responding to international developments like the war
against "terrorism" or the Argentinian uprising, form a new committee with
GR plugged into it. In other words, GR should be a network which can and
should be plugged into other networks.

o Obviously some people will become GR enthusiasts. Excellent. But we should
resist any attempt to turn GR into a party. We should remain an inclusive
network where different parties and traditions can work together on commonly
agreed goals. Of course, things happen which GR needs to take a position
on - police violence on demos, civil disobedience tactics, the war against
"terrorism". It would be ridiculous if GR was unable to respond to these
events - in fact we would wither away if we didn¹t. These positions should
be taken by local GR groups and the national steering committee after a full
discussion. What if this leads to different GR groups taking different
positions? So what? It¹s hardly the end of the world, and proves we¹re a
dynamic network, not a front organisation.

o A century of anti-capitalist struggle has seen bureaucratic monsters time
and again rise up and strangle the movement, destroy its most militant
elements and betray its cause - be that the USSR, or the leaderships of the
mass trade unions and the modern social democratic and Labour parties.

Clearly GR is not faced by a threat on this scale and the SWP are not latter
day versions of Stalin. But bureaucratism exists in all sorts of
organisations. We¹ve got to be aware of this and know how to combat it.

Bureaucracies don¹t develop because some people are control freaks, power
crazy or police agents. They develop because some people have greater
opportunities and abilities than others and, in order to get things done,
will short-circuit democratic debate, put things into action and then seek a
democratic mandate, or even just do it "because it¹s gotta be done and if I
don¹t do it nobody will".

GR has not been immune to such pressures: from arranging platform speakers
at events to printing up leaflets with prices set. These problems arise
because the SWP is by far the largest organisation in the GR network and has
placed full-time workers and numerous resources at GR¹s disposal. Fine. But
their responsibility ultimately rests with the SWP, not GR.

To combat this tendency we have to learn to walk on our own rather than rely
on getting a piggy-back from someone who can already run. Let¹s rotate the
duties that confer control. Let¹s put out fewer or less well designed
newsletters and leaflets. Let¹s wait another week before we make a decision
that could not be easily unmade. GR may look less professional, but it will
feel a whole lot more genuine.
In addition, let¹s put in place ways to encourage horizontal communication
and debate. A new more accessible e-list should be set up, the website
should have pages for local groups to post, add comments, have local
addresses for groups to contact each other without going through the centre.
The steering committee should have its own e-group as well.

Over the next few months GR groups can establish themselves as effective
networks by taking No Sweat actions in the run-up to International Women¹s
Day, joining in Rail Strike support activities, preparing for May Day
activities and making Argentina the focus for a campaign of international
solidarity. But the anti-capitalist movement also needs to take a hard look
at where it¹s at. GR must engage in the ongoing dialogue about where the
movement as a whole needs to go.

The anti-capitalist movement has forced the capitalists onto the defensive,
promoted the struggles of people in the South who are at the sharp end of
globalisation¹s neo-liberal offensive, and raised awareness among tens, if
not hundreds of thousands of people - especially youth - about the role of
capitalism in all these injustices.

But it has also come up against a counter-offensive. The detention of May
Day protesters in London and Birmingham, the attempted murders in
Gothenburg, the murder of Carlo Giuliani in Genoa, the drawing up of the
anti-terrorist act last year and the new laws drafted after 11 September -
all point to the fact that the capitalist state is trying to criminalise and
terrorise our movement. At the same time, it is prepared to offer
negotiations and even (cosmetic) reforms to that wing of the movement which
is prepared to break ranks and denounce/ demobilise the most militant wing.

In Britain, we have additional problems: namely the disunity of the movement
and the fact that the organised working class movement is led by a Labour
loyal faction which will not lead a fight against privatisation, cuts and
job losses.

We should look to where the movement is strongest and see if we can learn.
Certainly the USA has a strong anti-capitalist movement which was built up
over many years of locally-based direct action groups. But it is Italy where
the movement has made great strides in the past year.

The Italian example
>From a sectarian tradition of legendary proportions, the Italians have
forged a unity against Berlusconi based on social forums which themselves
are based on social centres. The social centres (usually squatted) are open
to use by any organisation or group of people on the condition that they
apply the principles of anti-racism, anti-fascism and anti-sexism in their
practice.
GR should campaign for such forums - and where possible centres - to be set
up across Britain. The following kinds of organisations/campaigns could join
the forums or use the centres.
o Anti-racist and anti-fascist campaigners
o Trade union rank and file activists, strikers, etc.
o Anti-privatisation/PFI/PPP activists
o Anti-capitalist groups/campaigns
o Environmentalists
o Refugee support groups
o Anti-war groups
o Welfare and legal rights advisers
o International solidarity campaigns/exiled activists

By its very nature, such a campaign will involve networking with other
groups - and thus breaking down some of the divisions that exist. It will
also mean working with different allies and using different strategies in
different areas.

Even without premises, we should attempt to get social forums up and running
in Britain. These should not be limited to the existing anti-capitalist
organisations and campaigns. We should approach any campaign or group that
is active and supports the three principles behind the Italian social
centres movement: Socialist Alliances, trade union left alliances, Stop the
War coalitions, the Anti-Nazi League, black and Asian groups, school student
campaigns and student unions, international solidarity campaigns.

Every area of struggle will benefit from having a network in place to
support its actions. Imaginative and new methods of organising action can be
exchanged, as can information. Prejudice and distrust can be broken down.
Strikers can immediately call on a group of activists prepared to go out and
build active public support for the services or industries at risk. Many of
us could reduce the number of meetings we go to as well!

The proposal of social forums and, wherever possible, social centres should
be the crowning idea with which we can relaunch GR and take the movement
forward.

I hope this contribution is not taken as a "dig" at anyone. It is an honest
attempt to take GR forward. I certainly believe that GR can play an
important and constructive role in transforming the anti-capitalist movement
and revolutionising the labour, anti-racist and women¹s movements.

FOR MORE ON THE ANTI-GLOBALISATION MOVEMENT SEE:
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/genoabalance.html
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/gothenburgbalance.html
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/Nicesummit.html
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/gttenburgG8.html
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/globalisation.html
http://workerspower.com/wpglobal/FTAA.html

=========================================================

>> BECOME A CORRESPONDENT FOR WPG
The LRCI has members across the globe - but there are many countries where
we have no correspondents. Send us your news and views:
newswire@workerspower.com

============================================================

>>SUBSCRIBE TO WORKERS POWER PAPER; MONTHLY 12 PAGES OF ANALYSIS.
Send cheque for £9 (UK),£20 (Europe), £18 (rest of world) to "Workers Power"
at BCM Box 7750, London, WC1N 3XX, UK

>> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE >> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE

-top-

Redaktionsschluss: 10. Februar 2002, 22:00 Uhr
Diese Ausgabe hat vlatka frketic vlakta_frketic@hotmail.com
zusammengestellt


Fehler moege frau/man mir nachsehen!