Analysis: Bradley Manning accepts responsibility for act of conscience

digg

Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

Why, what it means, doesn’t mean, and what next
By Jeff Paterson, Bradley Manning Support Network. November 19, 2012. Published at Allvoices.com
Army Private Bradley Manning recently informed the military court that he was, in fact, the source of information published by WikiLeaks. While the 24 year old Intelligence Analyst, effectively, took responsibility for transferring classified documents, in violation of military regulations, he maintained that he was not guilty of all 22 charges against him.
“PFC Manning has offered to plead guilty to various offenses through a process known as “pleading by exceptions and substitutions,” explained Manning civilian defense attorney David Coombs on his blog. Manning is “attempting to accept responsibility for offenses that are encapsulated within, or are a subset of, the charged offenses…. PFC Manning is not pleading guilty to the specifications as charged by the government,” added Coombs. Nor is he “submitting a plea as part of an agreement or deal with the government.”
“Pleading by exceptions and substitutions” is very rare–so rare that most observers of the proceedings were thoroughly confused. Some media outlets incorrectly reported that Manning was “seeking a deal”, “pleading guilty”, or trying to nullify a life sentence–or even the death penalty. It’s important to clarify that no deal is being sought, Manning no longer faces the death penalty, and his plea doesn’t prohibit the maximum sentence of life in prison. Manning’s plea confused many, simply because the truth isn’t usually offered up in such proceedings without something in return. But that is what happened.
Why would Manning accept responsibility?
Manning needed to accept responsibility, so that he could move forward with his defense as a whistle-blower, ahead of the scheduled, February 4, 2013, start of his court martial at Fort Meade, Maryland.
Supporters of Manning have long hailed him as a young man, with a conscience, who heroically uncovered evidence of war crimes and government corruption. Yet, many cling to the narrative of Manning, the disillusioned, unstable, gay soldier, serving precariously under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”.
Neither the defense nor the prosecution, believe Manning’s difficulties in the Army are a primary aspect of what happened. Neither side has disputed Manning’s motives, as summed up in this online chat, prior to his arrest: “I want people to see the truth… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public… I was actively involved in something that I was completely against.” According to the prosecution, Manning also provided the following note, to WikiLeaks, when he, anonymously, uploaded a cache of battlefield reports of the Iraq War: “This is perhaps one of the most significant documents of our time… removing the fog of war and revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric warfare.”
While doing his job, Manning analyzed horrific surveillance videos of the bloody and chaotic Iraq War unfolding around him. In stark contrast to the “Aiding the Enemy” and Espionage Act violation charges the prosecution has painted him with, Manning is now free to explain how he was trying to do the right thing, expecting nothing in return, while sitting in that dark bunker at Forward Operating Base Hammer.
“God knows what happens now. Hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms – if not, we’re doomed,” Manning allegedly told a government informant before his arrest. Now with this plea offering, he’s taken responsibility on the most favorable terms available to him.
At the conclusion of the “Article 32” pre-trial investigative hearing back in December 2011, Manning’s attorney David Coombs explained that his goal was to show the court “why things happened, while the government was only interested in what happened.” In that context, this plea doesn’t represent a change of course for the defense.
What does such a plea actually change?
The plea offered by Manning doesn’t change the charges against him, nor does it alter the possible maximum sentence of life in prison.
The presiding judge, US Army Colonel Denise Lind, may choose to reject Manning’s plea on technical grounds (if so, technically, Manning will have to unaccept responsibility). If the plea is accepted, the prosecution is free to present its case as planned. Manning’s plea offering only addresses three lesser aspects of a couple lesser charges, so the government could easily accept Manning’s plea and still “upcharge” him.
Manning’s plea could make the prosecution’s job easier, if they are relieved of the burden of proving he accessed documents and transferred them to WikiLeaks. Without this new twist, Manning’s court martial was expected to last at least six weeks, with possibly four of those weeks dedicated to testimony covering information technology-related forensic evidence–such as computer and router logs, login passwords, network access records, and hard drive images. The court martial might now become an expedited two or three week affair.
While the government’s burden of proof may have been reduced overall, it is important to understand that Manning is only admitting to violating military regulations that cover the approved usage of secure computers and the appropriate handling of information. During previous pre-trial hearings, Manning’s defense has shown that every member of his intelligence office in Iraq also violated these same regulations. While other soldiers didn’t share documents with WikiLeaks, they did install unauthorized video games and software and they shared a library of bootleg music and movies on secure Army computers. As Manning is the only soldier charged with any of these violations, the issue of selective prosecution is raised.
Manning’s defense team has had a year, now, to review, at least, some of the forensic evidence. As a courtroom observer, I’ve found the prosecution’s data evidence compelling. It’s likely that Manning’s defense team doesn’t believe there is a reasonable chance to prevail with a “you got the wrong guy” argument, at least not in front of Judge Lind and a jury comprised of Army officers and career enlisted service members. Or, Manning may simply want to be able to tell the truth, regardless of the strength of the evidence available to the prosecution.
Actual deal now less likely
Now that Bradley Manning has unilaterally offered to take responsibility for the transfer of information to WikiLeaks, the prosecution has less motivation to offer him any worthwhile deal, including a sealed maximum sentence, in exchange for a prosecution friendly “Stipulation of Facts”.
A “Stipulation of Facts” is a document of agreed upon facts, by all parties, in a military court martial proceeding. The defense often agrees to facts favorable to the prosecution. In exchange, the defendant receives a sealed maximum sentence agreement opened by the judge only after sentencing. This “secret” agreement often reduces the sentence announced at the conclusion of a court martial. Given the extremely high rate of conviction by military trials, this is a routine defense counsel tactic.
Manning was pressured to cooperate with the government’s efforts to indict WikiLeaks (and Julian Assange specifically) with nine months of brutal and illegal pre-trial confinement conditions at Marine Base Quantico, Virginia, from July 29, 2010 until April 20, 2011. It is unlikely that he’ll change his mind now and cooperate after public outcry secured for him non-abusive confinement conditions at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Manning’s demeanor in the courtroom during pre-trial hearings indicates that he’s looking forward to making his case.
Late in the game?
Bradley Manning was detained in Iraq on May 27, 2010, and imprisoned two days later–129 weeks ago. So why did he wait until “so late in the game” to accept responsibility?
In the normal calendar of a court martial, the investigative “Article 32” hearing, the pre-trial “Article 39A” hearings, and the start of the actual trial, are supposed to take place within 120 days of arrest. This is the “speedy trial” guaranteed by military law. US military court martial procedures are dictated by various “articles” of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), with additional guidance from the Rule for Court Martial (RCM) manual.
So while the proceedings are now taking place quickly, for most of the last two and a half years, Manning has languished in prison awaiting his day in court. This has gone on for so long that the defense will be able to make a compelling argument for dismissing all charges, at the December 10-14 hearing at Fort Meade, based on the government’s violation of Manning’s right to a speedy trial under RCM 707 and UCMJ “Article 10”.
In his September 19, 2012, motion, Manning’s attorney, David Coombs, explained:
“With trial scheduled to commence on 4 February 2013, PFC Manning will have spent a grand total of 983 days in pretrial confinement before even a single piece of evidence is offered against him. To put this amount of time into perspective, the Empire State Building could have been constructed almost two-and-a-half times over in the amount of time it will have taken to bring PFC Manning to trial.”
This seems “late in the game” because the government changed the rules to extend the game by a factor of eight. During this seemingly endless game, the prosecution benefited from limitless resources, while the defense team got by on funding from a grassroots support campaign. It is precisely during the “Article 39A” hearings, finally underway, that motions and plea offers, such as Manning’s, are made and litigated.
The real defense
Manning’s attorney has long contended that the defense will show that the release of these documents brought little to no harm to U.S. national security, and that Manning’s motives were to expose crime, fraud, corporate malfeasance, and abuse. They hope to show that this was, indeed, the outcome. The prosecution’s position will remain that Manning’s motives and the actual outcomes are irrelevant during the guilt phase of trial.
Some members of Congress and media pundits have called for Manning to be lynched because “lives were put in danger”, and informants possibly killed. Yet the government has not named a single individual, anywhere on Earth, who was physically harmed as a result of the WikiLeaks publications—now over two years after the fact.
Every indication is that the “harm” was limited to the U.S. State Department being embarrassed by some diplomatic cables released; however, embarrassment has never been a legitimate justification for classifying a document—and certainly not the thousands of documents which we now know were inappropriately classified in the first place. Meanwhile, the Iraq War has ended (more or less), and we’re told that the Afghanistan War is nearing an end.
Command influence led to trial by judge alone
In another aspect unique to court martials, Manning, last week, opted not to be tried (and possibly sentenced) by a military jury, but by judge Colonel Lind alone. She will decide guilt or innocence on all charges and, if needed, determine sentencing at the conclusion of the punishment phase of court martial.
During an exchange, captured on video, President Barack Obama declared that Manning “broke the law”, at a campaign fundraiser in San Francisco on April 21, 2011. Echoing the Commander-in-Chief, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated that Manning “did violate the law“ at a press conference a couple of weeks later. Major General Michael Linnington, the direct overseer of Manning’s court martial (referred to as the “Convening Authority”), reports directly to the Pentagon. So it’s no surprise that the defense has little confidence in being able to find a jury untainted by this command influence. This type of influence is specifically prohibited under UCMJ “Article 37”; however, there is no indication, thus far, that the government will face any consequences.
Will Judge Lind be able to ignore the influence of her Commander-in-Chief and Pentagon superiors and, if so, will she then be moved by Manning’s arguments, and to what degree? Regardless, it is safe to say that Manning’s arguments, that he was following his conscience, will be more compelling before, and not after, the prosecution makes its case with forensic evidence.
Ensuring drama, to the very end of this court martial, Judge Lind will have nearly limitless leeway, when announcing punishment, if Manning is found guilty. While the maximum sentencing, on all 22 charges, amounts to a couple of lifetimes in prison, there are no minimum sentencing requirements. Manning could be found guilty of only one charge and receive life in prison, or be found guilty of all charges and sentenced to a few years or less.
The goal of “military justice” is not actually justice, but military discipline. Many factors, including public opinion and the “reputation of the military”, are key ingredients in determining what discipline is appropriate—more so than in civilian legal proceedings. If Judge Lind understands that a significant section of the American public is sympathetic to Manning, the odds greatly improve that she’ll find “middle ground” favorable to Manning throughout these proceedings.
Conspiracy of abuse at Quantico
Bradley Manning’s defense team is scheduled to argue another motion to dismiss all charges November 27th through December 2nd. This motion delves into great detail on how Pentagon-level Lieutenant General George Flynn secretly ordered extreme and unlawful confinement conditions for Manning at Quantico, Virginia. These conditions were so severe that United Nations Chief Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendez condemned them as “cruel, inhuman and degrading” in his official report.
While the UCMJ “Article 13” prohibits all pre-trial punishment any more rigorous than required to insure that the accused appears at legal hearings, Manning was subjected to solitary confinement, prohibited from undertaking any meaningful physical exercise, and subjected to around- the- clock harassment–including being stripped and made to stand naked during some roll calls.
The military doesn’t deny that the mistreatment occurred, but argues that it was for Manning’s well-being and safety. Brig authorities claimed that mental health assessments dictated these extreme “Maximum” measures and “Prevention of Injury” protocols for Manning alone out of all brig detainees and prisoners.
In emails, long hidden from the defense, it was exposed, in September, that Manning’s treatment had absolutely nothing to do with his health. Lt. Gen. Flynn, while serving as the Commanding General of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, illegally ordered Manning’s solitary confinement. These illegal orders were then carried out, down the chain of command, without much questioning. The only exception appears to be the mental health professionals, on staff at Quantico, who spoke up against Manning’s treatment. They were threatened with losing their jobs if they persisted with their objections.
Military law would appear to favor Manning’s motion to dismiss, based on these “Article 13” violations. Common sense, however, indicates that Judge Lind will be under unimaginable pressure not to do so. If Judge Lind doesn’t dismiss charges, the defense, in its court filings, suggests the more common remedy of multiple days of confinement credit for every day of mistreatment. The defense will argue for ten days credit, while the prosecution will likely ask for “one for one”—in other words, no additional credit.
If Judge Lind agreed to the defense’s credit position, Manning would receive nearly seven and a half years credit for his time at Quantico plus another couple of years credit for “appropriate” pre-trial confinement. In this situation, Manning might walk out of prison very soon, even if he were sentenced to ten years confinement. If Manning is sentenced to 100 years in prison, then this potential decade of confinement credit becomes meaningless.
If confinement credit, for being tortured, becomes worthless, Judge Lind would be giving the military a free pass to mistreat all pre-trial U.S. military personnel, if there were no actual consequences for doing so. This could be the point where the distinction between foreign “Enemy Combatants” at secret prisons facing tribunals, and our limited, but well established, guarantees of due process for U.S. military service members, as outlined by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, are forever blurred.
Many have chosen not to take a position, regarding Army PFC Bradley Manning, because they were not comfortable supporting someone for something they may, or may not, have done. Now is the time to get off that fence.

A former U.S. Marine artillery man, Jeff Paterson serves on the Bradley Manning Support Network (bradleymanning.org) Steering Committee, which is responsible for 100% of Manning’s legal fees, and is Project Director of Courage to Resist (couragetoresist.org), an organization dedicated to assisting U.S. military personnel grappling with matters of conscience in war.

From #Un-Occupied Boston (#Un-Tomemonos Boston)-What Happens When We Do Not Learn The Lessons Of History- The Pre-1848 Socialist MovementMarxism And The Jacobin Communist Tradition-Part Five-Karl Marx Before 1848 ("Young Spartacus"-September 1976)

Click on the headline to link to the Occupy Boston General Assembly Minutes website. Occupy Boston started at 6:00 PM, September 30, 2011.

Markin comment:

I will post any updates from that Occupy Boston site if there are any serious discussions of the way forward for the Occupy movement or, more importantly, any analysis of the now atrophied and dysfunctional General Assembly concept. In the meantime I will continue with the “Lessons From History ’’series started in the fall of 2011 with Karl Marx’s The Civil War In France-1871 (The defense of the Paris Commune). Right now this series is focused on the European socialist movement before the Revolutions of 1848.
****
An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend The Occupy Movement And All Occupiers! Drop All Charges Against All Occupy Protesters Everywhere!

********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
A Five-Point Program As Talking Points

*Jobs For All Now!-“30 For 40”- A historic demand of the labor movement. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay to spread the available work around. Organize the unorganized- Organize the South- Organize Wal-Mart- Defend the right for public and private workers to unionize.

* Defend the working classes! No union dues for Democratic (or the stray Republican) candidates. Spent the dough instead on organizing the unorganized and on other labor-specific causes (good example, the November, 2011 anti-union recall referendum in Ohio, bad example the Wisconsin gubernatorial recall race in June 2012).

*End the endless wars!- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops (And Mercenaries) From Afghanistan! Hands Off Pakistan! Hands Off Iran! U.S. Hands Off The World!

*Fight for a social agenda for working people!. Quality Healthcare For All! Nationalize the colleges and universities under student-teacher-campus worker control! Forgive student debt! Stop housing foreclosures!

*We created the wealth, let’s take it back. Take the struggle for our daily bread off the historic agenda. Build a workers party that fights for a workers government to unite all the oppressed.

Emblazon on our red banner-Labor and the oppressed must rule!

***********
Marxism And The Jacobin Communist Tradition-Part Five-Karl Marx Before 1848 ("Young Spartacus"-September 1976)

By Joseph Seymour

Past issues of Young Spartacus have featured the first four installments of "Marxism and the Jacobin Communist Tradition." The first part of the series was devoted to the Great French Revolution and its insurrectionary continuity through the Jacobin Communists Babeuf and Buonarroti. The second part treated the Carbonari Conspiracy, the French Revo­lution of 1830 and Buonarroti, the Lyons silk weavers uprising and the Blanquist putsch of 1839. The next article analyzed British Chartism in detail, and the fourth part discussed the origins of the Communist League. Back issues may be obtained for 25 cents per issue. Send your check or money order to Spartacus Youth Publishing Company, Box 825, Canal Street Station, New York, NY 10013.

Most of you know that the "young Marx" had something to do with the Young Hegelians and with Hegel's phil­osophy. The relation of Marx to the Young Hegelians and Hegelian philoso­phy actually involves two very differ­ent questions, and only the second is difficult, obscure and interesting Marx's relation to the Young Hegelians', which was a literary/ideological/ political movement among the radical intelligentsia, is actually quite straight-forward and easy to comprehend.

The Young Hegelians

Hegel lived through the epoch of revolution and counter-revolution, and he was probably the only really great thinker to be profoundly influenced by both the French Revolution and also the Metternichian reaction. He attempted to mediate on an ideological level between the revolutionary Europe of 1789-1815 and the reactionary Europe thereafter. Politically, he was a liberal, or consti­tutional monarchist.

Therefore, one aspect of Hegel's thought was an attempt to mesh the traditionalist ideology of post-1815 absolutism with elements of the En­lightenment of the French Revolution­ary epoch. This was obviously impossi­ble. As a result, even to this day there are those who claim that Hegel really was an orthodox Lutheran Christian, and those who claim that he really was an atheist. His writings had sufficient ambiguity making him appear to be both at a certain level of abstraction. Once Hegel died—and could no longer say what he meant—it was obvious that these tensions and contradictions in*his philosophy would blow up among his followers. And the blow-up came on the religious front.

There was enough in Hegel to indi­cate that he did, not take Christianity as the literal, gospel truth, but rather regarded the story of Christ as symbolic and allegorical. In 1836 a young Hegel­ian, David Strauss, wrote The Life of Jesus, arguing that Christ had "never existed but rather was only a popular myth. Since Prussia had a quasi -state religion, this book caused a big furor. The Hegelian school blew up and Strauss initiated the "left" Hegelians-the terms "left," "center" and "right" referring to the attitude toward religious orthodoxy.

The further evolution of the "left," or Young Hegelians is quite logical. From the rationalist criticism of re­ligious orthodoxy of David Strauss developed the outright atheism of Bruno Bauer: if God doesn't exist, it follows that nature and the material environ­ment shape humanity. From atheism, then, springs the naturalistic human­ism of Ludwig Feuerbach: In the l830's, those who believed that man makes so­ciety also believed that he could con­struct an ideal society. So the natural­istic humanism of the Young Hegelians led logically to communism, a step first
taken by Moses Hess.

Basically the Young Hegelians rep­resented in Metternichian Germany what the Enlightenment philosophes represented in pre-1789 France, a similarity which they fully recognized. However, around 1840 communism was not simply an idea, but in France was a movement which had acquired a mass artisan, working-class base.

The Rheinische Zeitung

In 1840 the king of Prussia died, and his death created certain expecta­tions of liberalization. However, it turned out that the new king was more reactionary than his father. In response the liberal big bourgeoisie, centered in the Rhineland (then the most econom­ically advanced part of Germany), a-adopted a more aggressive oppositional posture. They looked for writers to agitate and propagandize against ab­solutism, and they found the Young Hegelians.

The liberal bourgeoisie with their Young Hegelian ideologues founded the Rheinisctie Zeitung in Cologne. It is important to realize that the Rheinische Zeitung was supported by very promi­nent bourgeois forces. One of its leading backers, Ludwig Camphausen, became head of the Prussian government during the revolution of 1848.

Karl Marx, who was a respected member of the Young Hegelian circle, enters history as a literary contribu­tor, staff writer and finally editor of the Rheinische Zeitung. Thus, Marx's, first political experience was as a propagandist for the liberal big bourg­eoisie in the period when it had made a short-lived left turn against absolu­tism. At that time Marx was by no means the most left wing of the Young Hegelians; in fact, he was rather right -of-center.

The most radical wing of the Young Hegelians was an anarcho-communist circle called "The Free," which in­cluded Bruno Bauer, the extreme liber­tarian Max Stirner, a young Russian exile named Mikhail Bakunin and' a callow youth named Friedrich Engels. Members of "The Free" kept smuggling communist propaganda into the Rheinische Zeitung, much to the dismay of its wealthy liberal backers.

Marx's first political fight was against these anarcho-communists, whom he purged from the pages of the Rheinische Zeitung. In one of his letters of the period Marx wrote:

"But I have allowed myself to throw out as many articles as the censor, for Meyen and Co. sent us heaps of scribblings, pregnant with revolution­izing the world and empty of ideas, written in a slovenly style and seasoned with a. little atheism and communism(which these gentlemen have never
studied)."

-letter to Arnold Huge, 30 Novem­ber 1842

While Marx made the transition from liberal bourgeois democracy to com­munism the following year, this early faction fight reveals certain attitudes that would remain with him throughout his life. Marx was always contemptu­ous of petty-bourgeois radicalism, with' its desire to shock conventional opinion above all else. Conversely, Marx always took seriously the liberal big bourgeoisie whenever it opposed reaction; for example, his attitude toward Abraham Lincoln's Republican Party during the American Civil War.

Marx Becomes a Communist

In early 1843 the Rheinische Zeitung was suppressed, and Marx went into exile in Paris, where he encountered communism as a mass, artisan working-class movement. By late 1843 we know that Marx considered himself a communist and associated with the League of the Just, at that time under the influence of Cabet.

The period 1843-46 is now undoubtedly the most studied period of Marx's life. If you had fourteen lifetimes, you couldn't read all the works written about the young Marx. The older social-democratic and Stalinist traditions assume that when Marx became a communist in 1843, he was already in some sense a Marxist; that his refusal to join the League of the Just revealed that he was more advanced and had rejected its utopianism. I do not be­lieve this proposition can be defended.

What kind of communist was Marx in 1843? This is a difficult question to answer for a number of reasons.

First, Marx himself didn't know. Even geniuses like Marx go" through transitional periods where they do not have a fully consistent outlook. A careful reading of his writings during this period produce different interpre­tations, perhaps because his early works are not internally consistent. In later life Marx didn't think it worth­while to republish his earliest writings, because he considered them to have been largely self-clarification.

The early Marx rejected communal experiments and the notion of barracks communism which was prevalent at the time, promoted, for example, by Cabet and Weitling. Communism is not mechanical equality; it is not modelling society on the Prussian army. Com­munism is the full realization of in­dividual potential based on the highest development of society. Marx adhered to this vision from the day he became a communist until his death. But again, he was not unique in rejecting primitive egalitarianism: Karl Schapper, Julian Harney and also Auguste Blanqui shared a similar vision of communist society.

The essential element of utopianism which Marx shared with contemporary communists in 1843-45 was the belief that the triumph of communism was based on the triumph of the communist idea. An objective reading of the early Marx shows a belief in the imminence of communism arising from its growing support among the masses. Marx did not reject violent revolution against the state. But he believed that with the mass acceptance of communism, such a revolution and the creation of a com­munist society would follow necess­arily—easily and quickly.

Hegel and the Origins of Marxism

In 1844 one could not have been a follower of Marx; it wouldn't have meant anything. In 1846 one could, and there were "Marxists."- By 1846 Marx had developed a unique conception of history and derived from this a distinct revolu­tionary strategy for Germany.

To understand this, it is necessary to digress on the relation of Hegel to Marx. In developing what later came to be called historical or dialectical mater­ialism, Marx in some ways went back to Hegel. He turned the weapons of Hegel against the naturalistic human­ism of the Young Hegelians, whose greatest spokesman was Feuerbach.

Generally speaking, the world view of early nineteenth-century communism was derived from the Rousseauean concept of natural "rights. Marx incorporated Hegel's criticism of Rousseauean naturalism and of En­lightenment rationalism. The core of Enlightenment rationalism was be­lief in the sovereignty of the intel­lect and its capacity to master external reality. From this certitude derived a particular' and extreme form of pol­itical voluntarism—the belief that so­ciety could be made to conform to an ideal model. All tendencies of early nineteenth-century socialism were based on intellectual constructs ap­pealing to natural rights, primitive pre-class society, scientific rationality or early Christianity.

In one sense Hegel's philosophy is an attack on the notion of the autonomy of thought, on the free-wheeling play of the intellect. He asserted that at any given time consciousness is shaped, limited and constrained by a long his­torical development. New ideas arise from the contradictions embodied in existing consciousness and, therefore, have a definite progression.
Marx accepted this conception and used it to attack the voluntarism of
contemporary communism. As Marx put it some years later:

"Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under con­ditions directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living." —The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis
Bonaparte (1852)

In the dispute over "the young Marx" versus "the old Marx," we support the mature, more Hegelian and less Feuerbachian Marx. However, both the pre-1914 Social Democratic and Stalinist traditions have transformed the Marx­ist dialectic into a crude, mechanical evolutionism associated with a two-stage theory of revolution. On the other hand, the New Left cult of the early Marx, & la 'Marcuse, is- a reversion to moralistic utopianism and the belief in the immediate realization of human liberation through petty-bourgeois intellectualism.

The new Marxist strategy was first sketched out in "The State of Germany" by Engels, published in early 1846 in the Chartist Northern Star:

"The political dominion of the middle classes is, therefore, of an essentially liberal appearance. They destroy all the old differences of several estates co-existing in a country, all arbitrary privileges and exemptions; they are obliged to make the elective principle the foundation of government—to recog­nize equality in principle, to free the press from the shackles of monarchical censorship...

"The working classes are necessarily the instruments in the hands of the middle classes, as long as the middle classes are themselves revolutionary or progressive.... But from that very day when the middle classes obtain full political power... from the day on which the middle classes cease to be progressive and revolutionary, and become stationary themselves, from that very day the working-class movement takes the lead and becomes the national movement." [emphasis in original]

The year 1846, then, is when Marx­ism comes into being as a distinct communist tendency. That year saw the creation of the first Marxist organiza­tion—the Communist Correspondence Committee in Brussels;/ the compre­hensive exposition of the newly de­veloped Marxist worldview in a polemic against Young Hegelian naturalistic humanism—The German Ideology; and the first statement of a new revolution­ary strategy for German communism— "The State of Germany."

The Communist Correspondence Committee was a very small circle created to propagate the new Marxist doctrines, centrally but by no means exclusively among the German left. At one time or another, the Committee attempted to contact virtually every prominent socialist in Europe. This first Marxist organization was unsuc­cessful except in England, where Engels had long-standing ties to the left Chart­ist Julian Harney and through him to the Schapper wing of the League of the Just.

The Schapper group had not yet broken from its passive and pacifistic propagandism. However, Harney stood programmatically quite close to Marx and Engels. Harney had great respect for Schapper as a tested and heroic workers' leader, while remaining had not yet traversed the same path as Marx. Marx's belief that communism was the logically necessary outcome of naturalistic humanism comes through clearly in his letter to Feuerbach dated 11 August 1844. Marx says:

"In these writings you have provided— I don't know whether intentionally— a philosophical basis for socialism and the Communists have immediately un­derstood them in this way. The unity of man with man, which is based on the real differences between men, the concept of the human species brought down to earth, what is this but the concept of society'."

Marx's 1843-45 writings contained a defense of the general principles of communism against bourgeois criti­cism. They do not develop "or explicate a unique concept of communism. Refer­ences to prominent socialists are either uncritical or laudatory. Thus, both Weitling and Proudhon are praised to the skies in 1843.

I will argue that between 1843 and late 1845 Marx had not yet broken with the Utopian aspects of con­temporary communism. This statement requires further clarification, since Marx did have fundamental differences with some contemporary socialist schools. What we need is greater pre­cision about the Utopian aspects of early communism—a term I much prefer to Utopian socialism, which implies a too-great doctrinal coherence.

Utopian socialism is sometimes identified with the rejection of class struggle in favor of a trans-class so­cialist movement. Some socialist lead­ers in the 1840's, notably Robert Owen and Etienne Cabet, were consciously class collaborationist and appealed to universal brotherhood.

In contrast, upon embracing com­munism Marx also adopted a working-class orientation. However, he cer­tainly was not unique in this. There was the workerist messianism of Weitling; and Julian Harney of the left Chartists and Karl Schapper of the league of the Just had been leading working-class struggles long before Marx came on the scene. Marx inher­ited his proletarian orientation. He did not develop it.

Toward the Leadership of German Communism

From his newly developed theory of history, Marx derived a unique revolutionary strategy for German communism. At that time the central tradition in German society was between the bourgeoisie and the 11 underdeveloped proletariat, her, it was between the economic-ascendant bourgeoisie and the sluggish state bureaucracy, which depended on the landed nobility, ''or the bourgeoisie to acquire governmental power required a demo­cratic revolution like the French Revolution of 1789-93, but more radical, given the advanced state of European society. Such a revolution was a neces­sary precondition for the economic and political ascendancy of the proletariat. Marx maintained that communists should not deny, ignore or abstain from the coming bourgeois-democratic revo­lution, but participate in it supporting its most radical tendencies.




They somewhat mistrustful of Marx and Engels as inexperienced, literary in­tellectuals, however persuasive their ideas might be. Thus, Harney refused to affiliate with the Communist Cor­respondence Committee until Schapper had been won over.

In early 1846, the workerist, re­ligious messianic Wilhelm Weitling, having been factionally defeated by Schapper in London, crossed the Chan­nel to Brussels. There he was smashed by Marx in a famous confrontation where Marx shouted at the veteran workers' leader and martyr, "Ignor­ance never did anybody any good." Common battles against the messianic, revolutionary phrase-mongerer Weitling drew Schapper closer to Marx.

In late 1846, Engels went on a re­cruiting mission to Paris, where he was unsuccessful, but managed to con­sole himself through physical pleasure. The Paris groupings of the League of the Just were Cabetian pacifists, and Engels made little headway among them.

When politics wasn't going so well, Engels still knew how to enjoy life. He wrote to Marx that he had become acquainted with "several cute grisettes and much pleasure," and in­vited Marx to join him in Paris. Now you know why Mrs. Marx never liked Engels that much.

What was the new doctrine which the Brussels-based Communist Cor­respondence Committee was propa­gating throughout Europe? In a report from Paris to the Brussels center (23 October 1846) Engels summarizes the pre-1848 Marxist line:

"So I therefore defined the object of the Communists in this way: 1) to achieve the interests of the proletariat in opposition to those of the bour­geoisie; 2) to do this through the abolition of private property and its replacement with a community of goods; and 3) to recognize no means for carry­ing out these objects other than a demo­cratic revolution by force.”

The first two points were not par­ticularly controversial and in no sense uniquely Marxist. It was the third point that really defined the Marxist tendency. Many contemporary socialists—for ex­ample, Schapper and Louis Blanc in France—considered a democratic gov­ernment a necessary precondition for the triumph of communism, but they rejected revolution. The prominent ad­vocates of violent revolution, like Weitling and the infinitely superior Auguste Blanqui, looked to a minority dictator­ship of the communist party. Marxism was unique in espousing a democratic government—a sovereign parliament based on universal suffrage and achieved through a popular revolution.

In 1847 the bourgeois liberal opposi­tions in both Germany and France became more aggressive. The King of Prussia got into financial trouble and had to call the Assembly to raise taxes. Everybody's mind leapt back to the •calling of the Estates General in France in 1789. Metternich in Vienna wrote to the Prussian monarch advising him to dismiss the Assembly and collect the needed taxes willy-nilly. He followed Metternich's advice and as a result drove the liberals into an anti-monarchical fury. In France one also had the beginning of a bourgeois liberal oppositional campaign, which eventually led to the toppling of Louis Phillipe. So Marx's strategy of an alliance with the bourgeois liberal opposition ap­peared more realistic and, therefore, more attractive to German communists.

The Communist League and Manifesto

During 1847 the Schapper group, prodded by Harney, came over to Marx. In early 1847 the London-based League of the Just sent an emissary, Joseph Moll, to Marx.

Moll said the League was in general agreement with the Marxist position, having at most secondary differences. He invited Marx to join the League and to fight for his complete program. Marx agreed. It was through this regroupment that Marx became a leader of the hegemonic organization of Ger­man communists.

That same year witnessed the trans­formation of the League of the Just into the Communist League and its accept­ance of Marxist principles. Marx maintained that between the victory of a democratic revolution in Germany and the creation of a communist so­ciety on a European scale, there must be a transitional period. In the begin­ning the German proletariat would be neither politically nor economically dominant. Consequently, the Communist League must ally itself with the bourgeois-liberal opposition, while maintaining its own organization—as public as real security precautions permitted—and its own anti-bourgeois propaganda and agitation.

The transformation of the League of the Just into the Communist League was symbolized by a change in its main slogan, "All Men Are Brothers." Marx objected to this slogan on the grounds that there were many men whose brother he did not wish to be ... like Metternich. So the slogan of the Communist League was, "Prole­tarians of All Lands, Unite." Inciden­tally, Marx did not author this slogan; we don't know who did.

In terms of strategic perspectives, Marx divided Europe into three parts and formulated radically different revolutionary perspectives for each. In Britain, and only in Britain, did Marx contend that a proletarian revo­lution was immediately possible and that a democratic government would lead directly to the rule of the workers party. Only Britain had a mass, working-class party: the Chartists.

In Germany and France, where the majority of the population were peas­ants, there would be a bourgeois-democratic revolution. A radical demo­cratic party might come to power, but
not the communists.

Then there was the Russian Empire, where a bourgeois-democratic revolu­tion was not possible; tsarist Russia could only be a counter-revolutionary force. A victorious democratic revo­lution in France and Germany would require a revolutionary war against the Empire of the Tsar. This was the Marxist strategic schema on the eve of 1848.

Pre-1848 Marxism insisted that the realization of communism had to pass through bourgeois-democratic rule. However, there were a number of dif­ferent reasons given for this assertion, which implied different periodicities in the transition to proletarian class rule. One argument was that bourgeois-democratic freedoms were absolutely necessary to organize a mass workers party. In Britain where such freedoms existed, there was a mass workers party, the Chartists. In the Germany of Metternich1 s Holy Alliance, the workers were passive and atomized, while the Communist League was small and largely in exile.

Another argument focused on the subjective development of the prole­tariat. As long as the bourgeoisie was' out of power, in opposition to monar­chical absolutism, the proletariat would have illusions in trans-class, popular democratic rule. Only when faced with bourgeois political rule would the work­ers in the mass recognize the funda­mentally hostile class antagonism.

Marx and Engels also indicated that they considered Germany and even France too economically backward to establish proletarian rule. This notion implies a relatively long transitional period between the bourgeois-democratic revolution and the prole­tariat's accession to power.

The Marxist strategic s c h e m a is most clearly stated in Engels' second draft for the Communist Manifesto written in October 1847 and later pub­lished under the title, "Principles of Communism." Composed in the form of a revolutionary catechism, Engels' draft makes explicit concepts which are only implicit in the Manifesto, and is therefore important in -understanding the strategic concepts underlying the latter.

Referring to the course of the revo­lution, Engels -writes:

"In the first place it will inaugurate a democratic constitution and thereby, directly or indirectly, the political rule of the proletariat. Directly in England, where the proletariat already consti­tutes the majority of the people. In­directly in France and in Germany, where the majority of the people con­sists not only of proletarians but also of small peasants and urban petty bourgeois, who are only now being proletarianized and in all their political interests are becoming more and more dependent on the proletariat and there­fore soon will have to conform to the demands of the proletariat. This will perhaps involve a second fight, but one
that can only end in the victory of the proletariat." \emphasis in original]

The Revolutions of 1848 ended in the greatest defeat for the proletariat and socialist movement in the nineteenth century. The defeated revolutions showed that the strategic conceptions expressed in the Communist Manifesto were, in a number of fundamental ways, wrong.

First, the German liberal bourgeoi­sie turned out to be far more cowardly than the English, much less the French. They capitulated to Prussian absolutism with hardly a fight.

Second, the French peasantry turned out to be far more reactionary than expected. Universal suffrage in France resulted in a reactionary bourgeois regime which slaughtered the vanguard of the Paris proletariat. After this ex­perience, Marx became more sympa­thetic to Blanqui's position that a vic­torious revolutionary Parisian proletariat should not give the peasants the vote until they had been "re­educated."

And third, the 1850's showed that the bourgeois revolution in an economic and social sense could proceed under a bonapartist government, namely, Louis Napoleon in France and Bismarck in Germany. The unification of Germany did not in fact require the overthrow of absolutism.

It is an indication of the real strength of Marxism that the Communist Mani­festo, despite specific flawed strategic conceptions, retained and retains to this day its validity. Marx and Engels were not the only, or even the most prominent communists to fight in the revolutions of 1848. However, they were among the very few "red 48ers" to remain faithful to the communist cause after this truly epochal defeat. As such, Marx and Engels were able to transmit their revolutionary experience and their wis­dom to a new proletarian generation when the pall of reaction began to lift in the early 1860's.

From The Pen Of Joshua Lawrence Breslin-Rock And Roll Is …, Take Two

 

Rock and roll was (is) big, sweaty cities, hot time summertime and the living is easy cities, New York-sized outlandish skyscrapers to the stars (if you could see them out on those lonesome canyon walls) cities, Chicago big windy, sloppy hog butcher to the world (reeking of stinks, animal stinks, vegetable stinks, two in the morning whiskey stinks) cities, seven hills rolling to the golden pacific wash and Japan seas great American west night San Francisco (visions of endless North Beach- City Lights Bookstore-Hungry Eye –black bereted, black stockings, black chinos, black, hell, black everything down to those midnight sunglasses worn 24/7/365 beat, beat down, beat around, beat six- ways-to- Sunday beat, but beatitude beat too, Kerouac on the road beatitude beat although undiscovered, Howl , beat)cities, sprawling sun-sweated, be-fogged, brown hills and all swish and swirl coreless arroyo Los Angeles ( searching for perfect Malibu waves, for Venice Beach muscle boys, for bikini-ed tanned golden girls, and, and Hollywood angst , Rebel Without A Cause angst, Blackboard Jungle angst, max daddy Asphalt Jungle angst, hell again, just cruising Saturday night Hollywood Boulevard (and Vine, okay) looking for a walking daddy cities.

Be-bop cities okay, kids be-bopping, doo-wopping, do-langing, sha-sha –sha-ing (if such a sound is possible) acting like king hell king long gone walking daddies and mamas (okay, okay chicks, twists, frails) sitting around Washington Square , Central Park, Union Square, Lincoln Park, Grant Park, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill, Golden Gate Park, Venice Beach, Santa Monica Pier, Malibu surf run, name your square, park, hill, beach, run, what the hell is a surf run (perfect wave, huh), or be square, be-bopping away, waiting, waiting impatiently, waiting out of their shoes, blue suede Carl Perkins stolen like a thief by Elvis shoes or not, maybe fearful Pat Boone, Pat Boone!!! white bucks, whatever, impatiently for the big freeze red scare (hell, no far away, big freeze red scare right down in big city New York Foley Square and dead commie Rosenburgs, stalinite jews for god’s sakes, why did they do it, Hollywood Ten cinematic villains writing up some Malibu nightmare scenes to scare young children, future golden boy perfect wave surfers, to death, Chi town Wobblies turned red never getting over Haymarket 1886 and doing hard time in Joliet, Longshoremen Harry Bridges and golden gate breach) cold war night to turn warm and provide some fresh air to breath, to breath a not parentcoppriestteacherauthority, not air raid shelter, head down, ass up breathe.

Clapping hands by twos and threes as some bopping horn, or better sexed-up sax (not some old time, teen old time, tenor or alto Johnny Hodges/ Lester Young/ Charlie Parker/Dizzy be-bopping thing but chained, chained hard and fast to that riffing guitar), parent wary too sexed-up sax that made junior toss in his bed at night and sis, well, made her, cool and collected, toss a few sweaty wet nights too, make of that what you will, always sax wails, whales, wales, away with that big beat, beat down, beat around, beat six- ways-to- Sunday (the day exactly), some guitar riff out of Les Paul or some jazz Charlie Christian saint, maybe some Ike Turner Rocket 88 turbo-blast, trying to make sense of that off-beat Bill Haley and the Comets Rock Around The Clock beat that framed, hell, beat to hell that silly Asphalt Jungle j. d. (juvenile delinquent for the clueless squares, jack-rollers, corner boys, whip chain-slashers for those in the know also looking for that freeze to thaw in their own coping way) movie seen down at the Majestic on that cool off Saturday popcorn afternoon.

Stag (stag, meaning no girl, not solo, but with full corner boy regiment, white shirted, maybe white tee-shirted, black chinos, some Thom McAn mother bought shoes, ugh, slick-backed hair, and wisp of Elvis king sideburns, (wisp, just like wisp beards, later, damn, and corner boy laughs and fag-baits) in tow, the crowd from 42^nd Street hangs, Division Street hangs, Post Street hangs, and yah, again Hollywood Boulevard hangs), later, intermission later, seeing she, Public School 63 (or name your school la, la, la, do I have to do all the work?) sweet Madonna and then to Eddie Cochran Sitting in the Balcony, Zooey (maybe jewish and no madonna, no frozen irish Catherine Madonna, Muffy wasp Madonna , Rita italian Madonna , Greta german Madonna thing, thank god but not caring not caring a fig just following that Zooey ivory bath soap, could it be perfume smell, that has hooked guys, smart guys too, guys who know up from down, since, well Adam), and off to private upstairs balcony screenings.

Later, maybe four o’clock later, strolling (got to learn how to get the hang of that damn thing, the stroll, no not the dance, jesus not the dance, the walking in such a way that it takes half an hour to get Zooey homeward rather than the ten real minutes it takes, if you want to hang on to Zooey, boy) off to Schrafft’s corner lunchroom ( Harry’s Variety, Doc’s Drugstore, Hayes-Bickford, Friendly’s, Brigham’s, Howard Johnson, okay) and quarters for jukebox, endless cadges; play this and that six, twelve, infinite times. And our father, Elvis, Elvis, all shakes, shiver, making girls, making Zooey (he heard, heard from the corner boy grapevine, really the corner boy Be-Bop Kid’s sister who overheard that blessed news at one Monday morning before school girls’ “lav” talkfest when they were discussing, ah, discussing what made them “wet”) sweat (and Zooey, cool fragrance bath soap smell Zooey does not sweat even in sweaty New York/Chi Town/Frisco/LA LA land cities) and do things up in cloistered rooms (so he heard, a separate corner boy sister’s wisdom as source) while they (boys “they” in case you didn’t figure that out) ran the clerks at Mr. Sam’s clothing store ragged looking for just the right look, and old Mr. Mack at Doc’s Drugstore too benefited selling combs, gels, and six other things, except correctives for two left feet.

Rock was (is) small Podunk towns, every boy knows every girl (and maybe desires each and every one and the reverse too although that would cause a scandal in monogamous protestant-driven podunk), small , sweaty towns and villages, hell, one street main street crossroads down in dusty Texas, pass throughs for Greyhound buses and oil tankers, summertime and the living is easy crossroads, Podunk outlandishly named towns, Boise (big, two-hearted rivers and endless forests between jukebox locales, jesus, and those bad ass city corner boy thought they had it tough), Helena (and old time whiskey dreams filled with unfulfilled gold dust dreams), Ponticello (big-hearted in its own way), Big Sur (sleepy town before the invasion), Olde Saco filled with raven-haired, smooth-cheeked French-Canadian boys calling out the songs in patois French (no Arcadia here), be-bop (okay, half be-bop towns, dusty old towns soon, how soon, to be de-populated by every boy and girl and off to the big sweaty rock and roll cities). Kids sitting around the village green, the fourth of july bandstand, the monument to the civil war, maybe on ocean edge towns down some salty beach fighting off King Neptune for some sea wall space or some hidden Seal Rock lovers’ lane fighting off some enterprising corner boy (senior set) in his father’s passed- on car, be-bopping away, waiting, waiting just like big sweaty city waiting ,for the big freeze red scare (hell, no far away, they ran those pink, red NAACP guys, white guys, students making strange noises about black was right if white was right, right out of town, right onto those Trailways buses, one way, pronto) cold war night to turn warm and provide some fresh air to breath to breath a not parentcoppriestteacherauthority, not air raid shelter (or under old time mahogany inkwell desks for real Podunk towns), head down, ass up breathe.

Clapping hands by twos and threes as some bopping horn, or better sexed-up sax (not some old time, teen old time, tenor or alto Johnny Hodges/ Lester Young/ Charlie Parker/Dizzy be-bopping thing but chained, chained hard and fast to that riffing guitar), parent wary too sexed-up sax that made junior toss in his bed at night and sis, well, made her, cool and collected, toss a few sweaty wet nights too, make of that what you will, always sax wails, whales, wales, away with that big beat, beat down, beat around, beat six- ways-to- Sunday (the day exactly), some guitar riff out of Les Paul or some jazz Charlie Christian saint, maybe some Ike Turner Rocket 88 turbo-blast, trying to make sense of that off-beat Bill Haley and the Comets Rock Around The Clock beat that framed, hell, beat to hell that silly Asphalt Jungle j. d. (juvenile delinquent for the clueless squares, jack-rollers, corner boys, whip chain-slashers for those in the know also looking for that freeze to thaw in their own coping way) movie seen down at the Bijou (imitation big city Majestic, really doubling for Sunday morning pancake all you can eat, bring the family socials too, doors open at eight, eight in the morning, jesus), on that cool off Saturday popcorn (popcorn addicted same as in sweaty cities) afternoon. Stag (ditto, cities, maybe corner boys, maybe from some innocent when you dream Mama’s Pizza Parlor corner, closing when main street closes at 9:00 PM , maybe no), but later, intermission later, seeing she, Olde Saco South Junior High School, for example, she (no blank big city Public School X number here) sweet Madonna (same as big city on that) and then to Eddie Cochran Sitting in the Balcony,Betty (or Jane, Mary, nothing as exotic as big city, maybe jew, big city Zooey) and off to private upstairs balcony screenings.

Later, maybe four o’clock later, strolling (got to learn how to get the hang of that damn thing, the stroll, if you want to hang on to Betty/Jane/ Mary, boy) off to Doc’s corner drugstore and quarters for jukebox, endless cadges, play this and that six, twelve, infinite times. And our father, Elvis, Elvis, all shakes, shiver, making girls, making Betty (he heard) sweat (and Betty, Zooey-like, cool Betty does not sweat even in sweaty summer midday corn-picking fields) and do things, universal do things, private girl things, up in cloistered rooms (so he heard, though that same universal Monday morning before school “lav” talkfest- and lie-fest) while they (boys “they” in case you didn’t figure that out) ran the Sears catalogue (and Ma) ragged looking for just the right look, and old Doc (Doc Andrews and no doctor but just a guy who crushed pills and sold liquor as medicine for what ailed people to get by) and his fuddy-duddy drugstore with odd medicines for sick people what-a- drag- to-be-old-and- it- ain’t- never- going- to- come- to- that- for- me benefited selling combs, gels, and six other things, except correctives for two left feet.

Rock was (is)…

Valls extradita a Aurore Martin-¡Abajo la orden de detención europea! ¡Libertad inmediata a Aurore Martin! ¡Abajo todos los cargos!

Suscríbete a Espartaco Archivos 2 de noviembre de 2012 Valls extradita a Aurore Martin ¡Abajo la orden de detención europea! ¡Libertad inmediata a Aurore Martin! ¡Abajo todos los cargos! 2 DE NOVIEMBRE—El CDDS (Comité de Defensa Social) condena la extradición, llevada a cabo por el estado francés, de Aurore Martin a España, donde enfrenta hasta 12 años de cárcel. Apenas unos días antes de la detención de Martin, sucedida ayer, otros dos militantes vascos, Izaskun Lesaka y Joseba Iturbe, fueron también arrestados en una operación conjunta dirigida por la unidad policiaca de élite francesa RAID al lado de la Guardia Civil española cerca de Lyon. Presuntamente, tanto Lesaka como Iturbe pertenecen a ETA, el grupo independentista vasco, y se afirma que Izaskun Lesaka fue una de los tres militantes que leyeron la declaración que anunció el fin definitivo de la actividad armada de ETA en octubre de 2011. A pesar de la renuncia etarra a la lucha armada, los estados capitalistas francés y español no tienen intención alguna de abandonar su violenta venganza contra los nacionalistas vascos. Las burguesías francesa y española utilizan como espantajo multipropósito a los vascos y a otras minorías nacionales como los catalanes y los corsos, y especialmente a la población musulmana. En el contexto de la peor crisis económica en décadas, se les utiliza para tratar de dividir y debilitar a la clase obrera en aras de imponer cada vez más ataques de austeridad patronales y justificar la larga lista de nuevas leyes que incrementan la represión estatal, y cuyo blanco es también, a fin de cuentas, la lucha obrera contra la opresión capitalista. Y todo ello sin mencionar las opacas maniobras y rivalidades en juego en la Unión Europea, donde las vidas de los militantes son monedas de cambio en un cínico comercio para favorecer intereses imperialistas. El caso de Martin y la orden de detención europea muestran vívidamente en torno a qué está forjada la Unión Europea, en la medida en que existe tal “unión”: la opresión de las minorías y del movimiento obrero. ¡Abajo la UE! En lo que va del año, 24 supuestos etarras han sido arrestados en total: 16 en Francia, tres en España y cinco en otros países. Exigimos el retiro inmediato de todos los cargos contra Aurore Martin, Izaskun Lesaka y Joseba Iturbe, así como su libertad inmediata de manos de los estados francés y español. ¡Exigimos también la libertad de los cientos de activistas nacionalistas vascos encerrados en las mazmorras francesas y españolas! La extradición de Aurore Martin: Valls termina el trabajo que Sarkozy y Guéant iniciaron Aurore Martin, militante vasca francesa, fue objeto de una orden de detención europea emitida por el estado español desde octubre de 2010, la cual exigía su extradición sobre la base de su supuesta “pertenencia a organización terrorista”. La “evidencia” citada en su contra fue el haber asistido a seis reuniones públicas de Batasuna, cuatro en España y dos en Francia, durante los años 2006 y 2007. Batasuna, proscrito en España, es un partido enteramente legal en Francia. A Martin se le acusa además de haber escrito un artículo para el periódico legal vasco Gara y por haberse relacionado con el Partido Comunista de las Tierras Vascas (EHAK), proscrito en España desde 2008. Ni el estado francés ni el español han hecho el menor intento de presentar pruebas que la vinculen con actividad armada alguna; el policía en jefe Valls extraditó a Martin, una ciudadana francesa, por sus opiniones y su solidaridad política con la causa de la independencia vasca. Martin se encuentra ahora recluida en una celda española. Su extradición con base en cero evidencia ha provocado airadas protestas contra Valls por parte de prácticamente todos los diputados de la región, incluso los más “republicanos”. Tras la orden de detención de 2010, Aurore Martin primero había pasado a la clandestinidad, pero seis meses después, a principios de junio de 2011, expresó su deseo de “reiniciar una vida pública normal” y asistió a un coloquio en Biarritz sobre la orden de detención europea. Unos días después, el 21 de junio, Claude Guéant, ministro del interior de Sarkozy, envió a sus policías a arrestarla en Bayona; vecinos y militantes del lugar literalmente echaron atrás a los policías, y Martin eludió el arresto. En aquel entonces, Guéant declaró que Francia cumpliría con su “deber” y se impondría su extradición; sin embargo, tras una marcha de 3 mil personas en Bayona que exigía la revocación de la orden de detención, el estado francés desistió de sus intentos de arrestarla —hasta que Valls y el gobierno de frente popular de Hollande llegaron para terminar el trabajo—. En una entrevista reciente en El País, Valls elogió la “ejemplar” colaboración de los gobiernos español y francés y afirmó que el estado francés ayudaría “al 100% a España” al proseguir la lucha contra ETA “con toda firmeza”. Estas acciones encajan perfectamente en la tradición de la sucia cruzada contra los nacionalistas vascos emprendida por los predecesores socialistas de Valls y Hollande. Como escribimos en una breve declaración en denuncia de la orden de detención europea contra Aurore Martin en marzo de 2011: “Denunciamos la colaboración policiaca entre Francia y España: desde los años 80 —con los terroristas de estado de los GAL bajo Mitterrand y el gobierno del PSOE de Felipe González— hasta hoy, esta colaboración ha cobrado las vidas de decenas de personas y conducido al arresto y encarcelamiento de cientos de militantes”. ¡El movimiento obrero debe protestar contra la extradición de Aurore Martin! ¡Por el derecho a la autodeterminación del pueblo vasco, al sur y al norte de los Pirineos! ¡Abajo la orden de detención europea! ¡Abajo la Unión Europea capitalista! * * * El CDDS es una organización clasista y no sectaria de defensa legal y social que toma casos y causas en el interés de todos los trabajadores. Este objetivo está de acuerdo con las concepciones políticas de la Ligue trotskyste de France.

More Strikes Rock Greece — But how can the struggle against austerity be won? Printer-Friendly E-Mail This Nov 20, 2012 By socialistworld.net An interview with Paris Makrides, Xekinima (Greek CWI) Yesterday was the first day of another 48 hours general strike. How big was the strike and protests of the Greek workers and youth? The strike paralyzed Greece completely. Athens was like a deserted city as nothing moved except the demonstration of the striking workers. Not only workers were on strike but small shopkeepers as well, even taxi drivers, who together with the strike in public transport paralyzed Athens entirely. The picture was similar in every other city of Greece. The numbers on the Athens strike demonstration however were not that big, due to the lack of transport; workers and youth had no means of getting to the center of Athens other than by foot. Despite this, we estimate that 30,000 to 40,000 people were on the streets of Athens. Today’s rally at Syntagma Square, which is intended to encircle the parliament building, where MPs will be voting on the new (third) Memorandum [new austerity measures at the behest of the Trioka] at 5.00pm, will probably be much bigger. But there is always an element of uncertainty, as the broad population, including workers and youth, know that most probably there will be violent clashes largely between anarchists and provocateurs (secret police agents), on the one hand, and the riot police, on the other hand. These clashes turn away the mass of the population from taking part in the demos. If this element did not exist, we can safely say that this afternoon one million people, if not more, would be on the streets of Athens surrounding Syntagma Square. What does the new, third ’Memorandum’ mean for the Greek people? The third Memorandum will be a disaster, added to an economy and society already devastated by the two previous Memorandums. According to estimations of the Troika [European Union, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund], Greece’s GDP will be reduced for a sixth consecutive year. And public debt, notwithstanding the austerity measures that have been adopted these last years and “haircut”, for 2013 will reach 346 billion € (189% of GDP) increased by 66 billion since last February! Over the last years, Greek people have paid much higher taxes, have see their wages slashed, unemployment has reached 24% and youth unemployment 55% (these are the official figures). Public health and education have been destroyed and public services and companies privatized and sold off for peanuts. But European and Greek capitalists have no interest in the terrible social effects their policies are having. The third Memorandum contains new cruel austerity measures, such as increase on the retirement age to 67 years, massive dismissals of public employees, more taxes, greater so-called “flexibility” concerning labor relations and privatizations. And it is clear this will lead to more social misery and catastrophe, just like the earlier Memorandums. How do you explain the fact that despite all this huge mobilizations of the Greek people, the Troika is still able to apply its anti-working class policies? The Greek people’s struggles over the last two years have been massive. People understand that they have to do something to stop the Troika’s policies. So they participated in general strikes, refused to pay taxes and occupied squares. People want to resist and fight. On the other hand, the trade union leaderships don’t. These leaderships don’t want to overthrow the government because they are tied with the government parties. The parties of the Left support people’s demands but do not have a plan about how the capitalist’s policies will be stopped and how the government will fall. SYRIZA (Coalition of the Radical Left) recently called for new elections. But elections are not the Left’s primary field of battle at this moment. What is necessary is an indefinite general strike which, of course, will raise the question of power in society – who decides, who controls and who manages the economy and society. This is the only way to go forward, to overthrow the government, and to pave the way for a government of the Left which will be based on worker’s power, through democratic rank and file committees and assemblies, in every workplace, neighborhood, university and school etc. Is the huge anger of the Greek working class reflected inside the trade unions? The role of the leaders of trade union is absolutely exasperating. But whatever they do they cannot stop the class struggle. People are outraged with the Troika’s policies. This anger has pushed several rank and file unions and union federations to call the GSEE and ADEDY (the private and public sector trade union centers) for an indefinite general strike, as the only reply that corresponds to the scale of government’s and the Troika’s vicious austerity attacks. However, the GSEE and ADEDY refused to call an all-out general strike (which was to be expected) and the unions calling for this action did not try to take the next necessary step, which is to co-ordinate actions between themselves; to prepare for and set a day of strike action and to call on the rest of the union movement to come out in coordinated, indefinite strike activity. We are convinced that such an initiative, given the explosive mood in Greek society, would trigger an avalanche of class action and would push aside the official union federation leaderships. Militant, mass industrial action, as described, could maximize workers’ mass pressure against the government and Troika and give society with a perspective to defeat the attacks. But what really infuriates working class people and drives them “mad” is that often breaks on the strikes movement are made by the parties of the Left. For example, a resolution for at least one week’s strike action was voted down on the Central Council of the ADEDY federation (civil servants’ union) because of the votes of the KKE (Communist Party) faction. The resolution for a week’s long strike had the support of 19 votes, with 17 votes against, but the KKE used its seven votes to defeat it. In the journalists’ union, two days ago, a similar role was played by the SYRIZA faction, which is the biggest faction in that union. The PASOK vote split, with half supporting the demand of the anti-capitalist Left for indefinite strike action. But SYRIZA voted, together with the conservative section of the union, to have only one 24 hour strike and some three hour stoppages. These examples show the extent to which the mass parties of the Greek Left are far behind the needs of the situation and the mood of the working masses. What impact do these developments have on the political landscape? Despite dissatisfaction with the Left, a big section of the population now regards a new government of the Left as the only hope on the horizon. There is thus a huge turn in favor of SYRIZA (although opinion polls reveal that Syriza’s support has not essentially grown, but it is the largest party because support for the New Democrats, the main party in government, has fallen). But this turn towards SYRIZA is not enthusiastic. This is not without reason. SYRIZA’s political platform is not clear. People do not know exactly what SYRIZA is going to do if it takes the power, and that makes them suspicious. On the other hand, the KKE (communist party) is continuously isolated from the bulk of the working class because of its sectarian tactics. The KKE speaks, in general, about the need for “revolution” and “socialism” but it refuses to link this call, in any way, to today’s reality and to mass consciousness. On the contrary, the KKE say that things are not ‘mature enough’ yet for system change. So, in practice, they have ‘maximum and minimum’ approach (i.e. make radical and general rhetoric for ‘socialism’ etc, while only putting forward minimum demands and without linking the two concretely), rather than a transitional approach (campaigning on the key class demands of the day, while linking this up with the need for a workers’ government and to change society). In reality, as we can see from the union votes mentioned above and other actions, the KKE leadership functions like a strike breaking force. Despite SYRIZA’s inadequacies, the struggle for a government of the Left is what the movement needs to campaign for and this is the approach of Xekinima. Of course, we link this struggle to the absolute need for a socialist programme and the need to base this on rank and file assemblies and committees of action. We emphasize that if a government of the Left, based around SYRIZA, fails to adopt a socialist platform this will represent a massive defeat for the Greek Left and the working class, particularly given the fact that the neo-fascist Golden Dawn received around 12% to 14% in recent polls. How is Golden Dawn being combated? The far right, anti-immigrant Golden Dawn is not invincible, however. Opposition to it is growing. There are many anti-fascist committees being set up. The mass parties of the Left do not really understand how to tackle the problem of rising fascism, which requires working class unity, combating the real danger and propaganda of the far right and also fighting for an end to cuts, and for jobs, decent homes, a living wage and for decent public services, health and education for all etc. But things are changing. In September, every proposal made inside SYRIZA to create anti-fascist committees (usually made by members of Xekinima who participate in local branches of SYRIZA) was voted down. In the course of the last week, however, the central secretariat of SYRIZA changed its stand and is now in favor of anti-fascist committees. The KKE, on the other hand, makes no such call but it has a sectarian, abstract approach towards resisting Golden Dawn and the need for a united front against the far right threat. The KKE continues to live on its own isolated planet, refusing to understand what is happening around it. How is the Left responding to the crisis? SYRIZA is not the only field where developments are taking place. In the rest of the Left important developments are taking place. It is correct to say that the Greek Left, in general, is in a state of crisis, which takes different forms for different parties of the Left. There are splits inside ANTARSYA (the anti-capitalist Left Alliance); there is a mass exodus from the KKE; there are major clashes inside SYRIZA as the leadership turns to the right; and the Left Current of SYNASPISMOS (the main constituent force making up SYRIZA) is reacting to this rightward turn but without clarity as regards what should be done; and, of course, the huge mass of Left voters remain outside the Left parties and formations. In this context, Xekinima (CWI in Greece), came together with other forces of the Left, from ANTYARSYA and the rest of the anti-capitalist Left and we have also linked up with forces inside SYRIZA, to create the ‘Initiative of the 1000’, as it has become known (1013 individuals signed the launching statement before it became public). This initiative bases itself on the need for a radical anti-capitalist programme, as the only way to come out of the devastating social and economic crisis. This includes calling for a repudiation of the debt, nationalization of the banks and the commanding heights of the economy, and for a planning of the economy, on the basis of social needs, and under workers’ control and management. The programme also calls for a united front of the parties of the Left and for support for a Left government i.e. a government based around SYRIZA. At the same time, this means fighting against the reformist programme of the leadership of SYRIZA. The majority of the leadership think they can manage the crisis better than the ruling class and do not prioritize fighting to get rid of the capitalist system and for a socialist society. The Initiative of the 1000 has only been publicly alive for a few days but it has already been noted by the whole of the Left. It is an entirely new innovation, uniting forces from all sections and parties of the Left, on the same programme and with similar aims for the mass movement in the immediate period ahead. Its development and potential are not yet clear. But it is certainly worth the attempt to build the Initiative of the 1000. We will be able to say more about its role and perspectives in the very near future.

Socialist Alternative, P.O. Box 45343, Seattle WA 98145 Phone: (206)526-7185 Comments? Suggestions for improving our web page? Please email info@SocialistAlternative.org

General Strike Movement Gathers Momentum Throughout Europe Printer-Friendly E-Mail This Nov 18, 2012 By SocialistAlternative.org Opening towards an all-European strike CWI Statement A powerful momentum is gathering around the trade unions’ call for a European day of struggle against austerity on November 14. In an increasing number of countries decisions are being made for strikes and protests on what will be a significant event, the first ever coordinated European strike action. Millions in different countries will join together in protest against the international drive to solve the crisis of the capitalist system at the expense of the working class, poor, youth and many sections of the middle class. In our last CWI statement on the European day of struggle we said that the announcement of N14, to include at least an Iberian-wide general strike, was an historic development, a potential turning point in the situation in Europe, and the fightback of the working class majority against the unfolding disaster. This immense importance of the announcement has been reflected and proven in the impact it has had, in the few days since its announcement. A catalyst throughout Europe We have seen how as well as uniting the explosive struggles of the Spanish and Portuguese workers in a powerful united blow, such international action can also serve as a catalyst to drive union leaders into action in other countries. The boost of confidence and militancy that the announcement of this, the most advanced expression of organised workers action seen for decades, has given an impulse to workers in numerous countries to push for serious mobilizations, in some cases with important results. In Italy, after initial hesitation by the majority CGIL confederation, it has come out for general strike action, although only of half a day, while the smaller CO.BAS confederation has come out for a 24 hour strike. In Greece, fresh from the immense paralysis of a 48-hour strike on 6/7 November, leaders of GSEE have also indicated that a general strike could be called. If realized, this would give way to a coordinated general strike of the South of Europe in all but name. However, as well as this, the call for European-wide action has had an impact outside of the "periphery". In Belgium, a series of job cuts including the complete closure of the Ford plant in Genk has produced a mighty surge of pressure from below has brought a general strike within reach. Regional and sectorial union organizations from all major federations have announced coordinated strikes, including a general strike of the Liege region, as well as important strikes in the transport and metal workers’’ sectors, with the late calling of a general strike not to be ruled out. In France, an united platform of unions including the CGT have announced a day of “mass mobilizations” although to which extent they are built for remains to be seen. Towards an all-European strike In many countries at least symbolic or limited actions are being planned for N14. Alongside these in Britain, the campaign set in motion by the British National Shop Stewards’’ Network for a 24 hour general strike, which the TUC is currently “considering”, is gathering momentum. In France, the Hollande government is turning towards its own austerity offensive, with the announcement of new tax rises and spending cuts. Even in the "AAA" countries, events are taking a turn. Along with the sudden upturn in struggle in Belgium, these developments, show how following N14, the path towards an intensification of coordinated action, with strikes taking place in more and more countries in a coordinated manner, would be opened up. As the CWI has previously outlined, the catalyst of international mobilizations, along with the extension of the misery of the capitalist crisis towards the core countries, opens the way for a general strike of the whole of Europe. However, for this to be made a reality, N14 needs to be followed up with a serious plan of sustained and escalating actions to both fight the attacks in each country and link them internationally. Following the mobilizations on November 14 plans needs to be laid now for follow up action. November 14 must only be the start. Pressure needs to be built now for calling a European wide 24 hour general strike in early 2013. The announcement of savage austerity packages in a series of countries means such a call is certain to get an echo. The ETUC has called this action which is to be welcomed. However, to struggle for it to be followed up with even bolder action workers need to establish direct links in the work places across the national boundaries especially in multinational companies like Ford to co-ordinate and organize solidarity action and struggles. The struggle of workers at home against the austerity packages also means, fighting for an intensification of the struggle following next week’s general strikes that socialists will strive to link to a programme to bring down the pro-capitalist governments, replacing them with left, genuinely socialist governments that will break with capitalism. At the same time the workers’ movement internationally must link these struggles up, work to escalate coordinated action, extend its geographical scope in future days of action building towards a European general strike of 24 hours. The CWI will work to ensure that such a plan is fought for, and linked to the struggle for a socialist Europe of the workers, youth and unemployed, over the bones of the capitalist EU and the rivalries of the competing European ruling classes.

Socialist Alternative, P.O. Box 45343, Seattle WA 98145 Phone: (206)526-7185 Comments? Suggestions for improving our web page? Please email info@SocialistAlternative.org