Admin

Fightback 2014 summer conference (report)

January 15, 2014 by Admin

On the 3rd to the 5th of January in Christchurch, Fightback held our 2014 summer conference. Over the weekend comrades participated in education and decision-making, that will inform our practice over the coming year.

In the 2014 General Elections, Fightback will be supporting the MANA Movement as a progressive, democratic oppositional force, maintaining the link between indigenous sovereignty and the struggle for an egalitarian society.

Fightback resolved to oppose any entry by MANA into a government with Labour. Instead we argue for the formation of a new workers’ organisation fusing MANA with community forces. Fightback also resolved to conduct a wider discussion on the class nature of the Labour Party.

Fightback participates in the global struggle against imperialism. At the 2014 summer conference, Fightback endorsed the global call for boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) on Israel, in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for self-determination.

Fightback also developed our industrial perspectives for the coming period. Service-sector unions such as Unite and FIRST Union have waged offensive campaigns against already existing casualisation and flexibilisation. The struggles at the ports and in the meatworks are defensive struggles against casualisation and flexibilisation which the bosses have sought to impose. We believe that to unify the working class in struggle over the next period, fighting unions should adopt a three-pronged slogan along the lines of ‘Secure Work, Secure Hours, Living Wage.’

Fightback endorsed eco-socialism, as defined in the 2008 Belem declaration:

[eco-socialism] aims to stop and to reverse the disastrous process of global warming in particular and of capitalist ecocide in general, and to construct a radical and practical alternative to the capitalist system. Ecosocialism is grounded in a transformed economy founded on the non-monetary values of social justice and ecological balance. It criticizes both capitalist “market ecology” and productivist socialism, which ignored the earth’s equilibrium and limits. It redefines the path and goal of socialism within an ecological and democratic framework.

Fightback is working to challenge rape culture and establish safer spaces on the left, as part of a broader struggle for gender and women’s liberation. To that end we are developing safer spaces guidelines within Fightback, and electing safer spaces contacts at a branch level.

Fightback also resolved to establish a website for publishing discussion documents, which are used to democratically develop perspectives within Fightback.

Fightback maintains our website and monthly publication, to counter capitalist propaganda & propagate our perspectives within wider struggles. In addition to that, Fightback resolved to publish new pamphlets reflecting our revised perspectives, beginning with Mike Kyriazopoulos’ The Treaty, the Foreshore and Seabed and Tino Rangatiratanga.

Finally, Fightback noted the absence and congratulated the work of comrade Mike Kyriazopoulos.

Filed Under: Revolutionary Strategy

Audio: ‘Young Activists’ interview

December 26, 2013 by Admin

Republished from Radio New Zealand National: A few weeks back we heard from three of the country’s youngest politicians, and this week we’re speaking to three young people who are no less passionate about bringing about change through political actions but have chosen to do so in quite different ways. Finlay talks to Unite Union regional organiser Heleyni Pratley, who is also a member of Fightback; Jordan Williams, executive director of the Taxpayers’ Union; and Paul Young, Solutions and Strategy Researcher for Generation Zero. Produced by Jeremy Rose.

‘Young Activists’ interview 15 December 2013

Filed Under: Audio

A young migrant woman’s experience of work in NZ

December 13, 2013 by Admin

Unite Burger King occupation: “Burger King has always remained to be the fast food company which pays the lowest wages.”

Wei Sun (Fightback, Christchurch)

After the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi (The Treaty of Waitangi) in 1840 anyone could immigrate to New Zealand, while most settlers in the nineteenth century came from the UK, substantial numbers of Chinese labours immigrated to work on the goldfields of Otago. These migrants faced discrimination from white migrants but were not discriminated against in law until 1881 when a ‘poll tax’ was introduced for Chinese entering New Zealand.

The 1920 Immigration Restriction Act allowed the Minister of Customs to exclude any people who were ‘unsuitable’. While not officially adopting the ‘White New Zealand’ immigration policy, the law was used in practice to restrict the immigration of Asian people, especially Chinese. The idea of a ‘White New Zealand’ was supported by the early Labour as well as the Liberal and Reform parties (forerunners of National, which formed when they merged).

While Asian students began coming to New Zealand to study under the Colombo Plan in the 1950s, some choosing to stay after completing study, the 1920 law was used to restrict Asian immigration throughout most of the twentieth century. From 1974 criteria for entry to New Zealand gradually changed from race or nationality to merits and skills, but it wasn’t until the 1987 Immigration Act that legal discrimination against some races and nationalities was ended.

Today migrant workers are still struggling for their equal rights. Burger King has always remained to be the fast food company which pays the lowest wages. Even some of those who have worked there for over ten years are still struggling on minimum wage. One of the biggest issues presented is the exploitation and bullying of migrant workers.

Many employers threaten their migrant workers by saying they might withdraw the workers’ work visa. Thus many migrants end up working under unreasonable working conditions and extremely low wages. While some unions still maintain a hostile attitude towards immigrants, Unite has made an impact organising in migrant workers in fast food, an industry which employs a large number of international students.

As an international student myself, I am currently holding a student visa and I am allowed to work up to 20 hours a week except for summer and winter holidays. In 2011, which was my first year in New Zealand, I had three jobs at different Chinese restaurants in Christchurch. Due to my lack of knowledge of New Zealand’s employment law and a strong English language barrier, I believed that it is ‘normal’ and ‘reasonable’ to work on nine dollars an hour in the first three-month trial period. At all of these restaurants I was getting paid cash.

I was being told off all the time. My bosses pointed at my nose and yelled at me almost every time I was on my shift, mostly because I was not moving fast enough or smiling enough to the customers. I had to cover all the ‘losses’ made by myself due to careless working. The worst times were when the till was fifty dollars short, or when customers ran away without paying the bills.

The first place I worked at was called Zest Noodle House. My bosses would tell me to leave when there were not enough customers so they could just work by themselves. Sometimes after a long commute to work they told me to leave after one and half or two hours because it was not ‘busy enough’.

I signed the date, my name, starting time and finishing time of the day on a notebook they had for all the staff, and they paid every one of us cash on our last shift of the week. Unsurprisingly, the cash was always short, sometimes 50 cents, sometimes a few dollars.

I ended up quitting the job, like all the other previous staff had. I never got time and a half pay on public holidays, or sick pay. As I heard from previous co-workers and Chinese friends, this sort of thing is a common experience, and a common response; leaving instead of reporting the employers or taking other action. It is a sad but ‘normal’ thing that we are all shy, scared, or confused and never tell anyone else or get help.

Now it has been over two years since I was employed by those Chinese restaurants’ owners, and I do regret not standing up for myself and the co-workers. Of course horrible things as such do not just happen to us Chinese girls. One of my Thai friends told me the situation is exactly the same at the restaurant she was working at. She was threatened that her visa would be withdrawn if she refused to get paid ten dollars per hour cash.

More recently I was employed at a dairy shop in south west Christchurch. I was extremely happy when they decided to hire me, because they agreed to pay me proper minimum wage and tax to the government rather than cash ‘under the table’, but I left after one year due to sexual harassment over the last two months at the dairy shop.

One shift I was doing the ‘end of the day settlement’ and closing the shop, my boss threw 50-dollar note at my face, ‘he said the camera was off and no one would ever know, plus I needed cash anyway’. I said there is no way I am going to do that, and then quit the job not long after.

I had a long talk with him. I said “Look, you’ve got a lovely wife and a 23-year-old daughter. If you stop doing this, I will not report you, because your wife (the other boss of mine) is the nicest boss I have ever had. But you have to promise to stop doing this, otherwise I really will go report you” He agreed.

A little over six months since I quit the job at the dairy, a young woman who works at a neighbouring shop (owned by the same people as the dairy shop) contacted me and told me that the boss attempted to harass another Chinese girl who works there, who then quit.

This time I will not let him go. We have agreed that the girl from the dairy, the girl from the neighbouring shop, and I are going to report this boss together.

At the beginning of last year, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies pointed out that Kiwi xenophobia has been growing. I have experienced Xenophobia myself. Some employers only seek for similar values and beliefs, and avoid ‘the others’.

Maintaining a work visa is of upmost importance to many migrant workers. To some of us, the most difficult condition we face is that we could be arrested and deported for militant action. But since we have the most to lose from militant action, sometimes we do know a lot about unionism and politics.

A Japanese friend of mine also told me that his previous boss promised to get him a work visa for his permanent residency if he agreed to work under certain wage and conditions. He worked for a year, but the work visa or residency never happened.

Migrant workers are part of the working class too. Regardless of our ethnicity, we do work and we contribute to New Zealand society. We bring our experiences from our home countries, and help the New Zealand working class to be more cosmopolitan and international. It is important to defend all workers against attacks, including the controls put on migrant workers that help maintain their oppression and exploitation. Capitalism exploits the global working class as a whole, therefore, the more we unite workers together, not divide workers along lines of race or nationality, the stronger we get, and the better we can fight against the system itself.

Filed Under: Immigration & Open Borders, Oppression & Liberation, Racism, The Workplace

“The People Shall Govern!” Nelson Mandela and capitalist distortion

December 11, 2013 by Admin

Ian Anderson, Fightback (Wellington).

Readers are probably aware that Nelson Mandela died at age 95, on Thursday the 5th of December 2013. His funeral is scheduled for December the 15th. As a leading figure in the African National Congress (ANC) which led the struggle to abolish apartheid in South Africa, Mandela has inspired many for different reasons.

Mandela was released from prison in 1990; awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993; elected to presidency in 1994. None of these events would be especially notable without the history – Mandela’s decades of imprisonment beforehand, the slogan “Free Mandela” and all it represented – the global and historic struggle against apartheid. Mainstream capitalist coverage papers over the complexities of this history, and its lessons for ongoing and future struggle.

Although this article does not intend to tell this story completely, we must unearth layers deliberately hidden or ignored by the powerful.

Dominant narrative: ‘Truth’ and Reconciliation

Since Mandela’s death, the dominant capitalist narrative has focused on ‘Truth and Reconciliation,’ in the words of the commission set up by Mandela and the ANC in 1995. Reconciliation is particularly celebrated; the peaceful resolution of conflict, the healing of wounds, peace between races. However, as peace is nothing without justice, reconciliation is nothing without truth; this capitalist narrative contains untruths, oversights, untold stories.

Widely circulated images and quotes from Mandela are largely drawn from the 1990s, not the half-century of struggle before that. Out of context, the quotes are inspiring in a vague way. For example, a USA Today piece listing “15 of Nelson Mandela’s best quotes” focused on the positive:

“Resentment is like drinking poison and then hoping it will kill your enemies” […] “Everyone can rise above their circumstances and achieve success if they are dedicated to and passionate about what they do.”

Capitalist media now portrays Mandela as a forgiving and peaceful figure. Articles even bear the headline “Nelson Mandela, South African icon of peaceful resistance, dies.” However, the decision by Mandela and the ANC to lay down arms was a tactical decision, in a situation where ending formal apartheid was now a political possibility – due in large part to a mass campaign of strikes and other militant action.

Mandela and the ANC never rejected armed struggle in principle. In fact, Mandela later stated his disagreement with the IRA decommissioning its arms, stating in an interview:

“My position is that you don’t hand over your weapons until you get what you want.”

Online, radicals have responded to dominant depictions of Mandela by circulating his revolutionary statements against capitalism, against US imperialism, and for armed struggle. Lenin’s words from The State and Revolution summarise this response:

“During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it.”

Reclaiming this revolutionary history is necessary, and illuminates the hypocrisy of imperialist leaders who now embrace Mandela. However, Mandela was romanticised before his death, from the 1990s onwards. Both the revolutionary Mandela and the cookie-cutter Mandela are half-truths.

Global struggle: Local impact

By definition, apartheid is divisive. Worldwide, the struggle against apartheid polarised political opinion, asking the old question “whose side are you on?”

Locally, leaders of the MANA movement, including John Minto and Hone Harawira, were active in the campaign of solidarity with South Africa. Famously, the Halt All Racist Tours boycott of the Springbok tour in 1981 (documented in Merata Mita’s film PATU!, available for free at NZ On Screen) sharply polarised public opinion. Tangata whenua in the movement also called attention to the links with colonisation in Aotearoa.

Now in the wake of this struggle, imperialist ruling class hypocrisy is galling. Even Barack Obama, who claims inspiration from Mandela, supports apartheid in Palestine.

British Prime Minister David Cameron, who paid tribute to Mandela after his passing, was aligned in the 1980s with the conservatives who circulated “Hang Mandela” posters – although Cameron himself was largely indifferent to politics at this point. Similarly, Aotearoa/NZ prime minister John Key has refused to state a clear position on the boycott campaign. When prompted on his views in a television interview, Key responded:

“Oh, I can’t even remember … 1981, I was 20 … ah … I don’t really know. I didn’t really have a strong feeling on it at the time. Look, it’s such a long time ago.”

Susan Devoy, Race Relations Commissioner in this country, did not support the boycott. In her autobiography, Devoy explains:

“I don’t think boycotting sporting contacts helped the situation over there. If it was going to help, I could have seen the justification in it.”

Recently when Te Papa held an exhibition about the 1981 Springbok tour, 56% of attendants said they thought the tour should have gone ahead. Apartheid, and tactics in opposing it, continue to divide political opinion. However economic, political and cultural boycotts – combined with struggle on the ground in South Africa – helped to isolate the apartheid regime.

John Minto on the Daily Blog reports on how the sporting boycott inspired Mandela and others in South Africa:

“In 1981 Mandela had been imprisoned on Robben Island for 17 years and he said that when the prisoners heard the rugby match between the Springboks and Waikato had been cancelled due to anti-apartheid protestors invading the field he said the prisoners grabbed the bars of their cells doors and rattled them right around the prison – he said it was like the sun came out.”

1955 Freedom Charter: Popular democracy

In the 1950s, the ANC with other groups developed the “Freedom Charter,” stating core principles in the struggle against apartheid. They sent out fifty thousand volunteers to develop ‘freedom demands’ in consultation with the people. The Freedom Charter was adopted by 3000 delegates at the Congress of the People, Kliptown, on 26 June 1955.

The Freedom Charter’s key slogan was “The People Shall Govern,” a far cry both from the capitalist system in South Africa in 1955, and today. Along with full rights for all citizens regardless of race, the charter demanded common ownership of land and industry. The charter also demanded the right to housing, jobs, fully-funded education for children and greater access to higher education.

The ANC was persecuted and driven underground by South Africa’s anti-communist laws. In 1964, speaking to the court before his imprisonment, Mandela explained that while he was not a Capital-C Communist, the cause of ending apartheid and the cause of communism are aligned:

“It is perhaps difficult for white South Africans, with an ingrained prejudice against communism, to understand why experienced African politicians so readily accept communists as their friends. But to us the reason is obvious. Theoretical differences amongst those fighting against oppression is a luxury we cannot afford at this stage. What is more, for many decades communists were the only political group in South Africa who were prepared to treat Africans as human beings and their equals; who were prepared to eat with us; talk with us, live with us, and work with us. They were the only political group which was prepared to work with the Africans for the attainment of political rights and a stake in society. Because of this, there are many Africans who, today, tend to equate freedom with communism. They are supported in this belief by a legislature which brands all exponents of democratic government and African freedom as communists and bans many of them (who are not communists) under the Suppression of Communism Act. Although I have never been a member of the Communist Party, I myself have been named under that pernicious Act because of the role I played in the Defiance Campaign. I have also been banned and imprisoned under that Act…

Today I am attracted by the idea of a classless society, an attraction which springs in part from Marxist reading and, in part, from my admiration of the structure and organization of early African societies in this country. The land, then the main means of production, belonged to the tribe. There were no rich or poor and there was no exploitation.”

The ANC was driven underground. However, when the mass struggle of the 1970s and 1980s revived the challenge against apartheid, the Freedom Charter and the demand to free Nelson Mandela found new global currency.

The Freedom Charter’s popular democracy (in both process and demands) contrasts sharply with capitalist democracy. In particular, the 1994 election which finally brought the ANC to power shows the dictatorship underlying capitalist democracy.

1994 ANC election: Capitalist dictatorship

The ANC’s betrayals of the Freedom Charter, and the majority struggling for justice, make the most sense in a global context.

During the Cold War, while South African apartheid was backed by US imperialism, the ANC was backed by the Soviet Union. The Soviet bloc, however bureaucratic and corrupted, acted as a global rearguard against imperialism.

The 1980s and 1990s saw a global shift towards ‘neoliberalism,’ a new global capitalist regime defined by privatisation, the gutting of the welfare state, attacks on union rights, and flexible organisation of work. This global assault on working class organisation was first trialed in Chile in 1973, before Western governments followed suit. In Aotearoa/NZ it was called Rogernomics, after Roger Douglas of the Fourth Labour government.

Then came the ‘End of History.’ The end of the Cold War, the imposition of neoliberalism in the former Soviet bloc, were seen as a final victory over socialism. For the ANC, this meant the loss of a major ally.

In the 1990s, with mass struggles bringing victory against apartheid into sight, the ANC was internationally isolated. They could choose to go it alone, confronting the South African ruling class while facing international isolation and sanctions, or accept imperialist backing and carry out neoliberal attacks on the working class.

In a 1993 speech to trade unionists, Mandela acknowledged the possibility of this betrayal, and said the workers must be ready to overthrow an ANC government as they had overthrown apartheid:

“How many times has the liberation movement worked together with workers and then at the moment of victory betrayed the workers? There are many examples of that in the world.

“It is only if the workers strengthen their organisation before and after liberation that you can win. If you relax your vigilance you will find that your sacrifices have been in vain.

“You just support the African National Congress only so far as it delivers the goods. If the ANC government does not deliver the goods, you must do to it what you have done to the apartheid regime.”

The following year, before the 1994 election, the ANC chose to accept a loan from the International Monetary Fund. The IMF loan carried the condition of adopting neoliberal policies, many against ANC policy. South Africa in the mid-late ‘90s joined the many countries in which the global ruling class took advantage of a crisis to carry out neoliberalism. Despite his words in 1993, Mandela went along with this shift.

In an article printed on the Black Agenda Report, former ANC Cabinet minister Ronnie Kasrils described the decision to accept the IMF loan as a “Faustian” pact, the ANC selling its soul:

“What I call our Faustian moment came when we took an IMF loan on the eve of our first democratic election. That loan, with strings attached that precluded a radical economic agenda, was considered a necessary evil, as were concessions to keep negotiations on track and take delivery of the promised land for our people. Doubt had come to reign supreme: we believed, wrongly, there was no other option; that we had to be cautious, since by 1991 our once powerful ally, the Soviet union, bankrupted by the arms race, had collapsed. Inexcusably, we had lost faith in the ability of our own revolutionary masses to overcome all obstacles. Whatever the threats to isolate a radicalizing South Africa, the world could not have done without our vast reserves of minerals. To lose our nerve was not necessary or inevitable. The ANC leadership needed to remain determined, united and free of corruption – and, above all, to hold on to its revolutionary will. Instead, we chickened out.”

Underneath capitalist democracy lies dictatorship. The ANC carried out an important part of the Freedom Charter in ending formal apartheid, but abandoned its demands for economic justice. In contrast to the Freedom Charter slogan “The People Shall Govern,” South Africa remains governed by a capitalist elite.

For conservative forces, Mandela changed from a “terrorist” to a beacon of hope. Imperialist rulers accepted, even celebrated Mandela not just after the defeat of formal apartheid, but the ANC’s Faustian pact with neoliberal capitalism. For those who care about ending oppression, Mandela is a contradictory symbol, representing both a victory and a loss.

Ongoing struggles

In August 2012, South African security forces massacred striking workers in Marikana. Workers are developing new organisations that can challenge the capitalist state. These new forces will be demonised, attacked and dismissed by the global ruling class, as Mandela was before.

South Africa’s struggle shows again that it’s not enough to struggle locally, only to be isolated when your struggle confronts the state; we need a global movement that can support struggles for justice and self-determination. National liberation struggles remain, including the fight against apartheid in Palestine.

In Aotearoa/NZ, Fightback supports the MANA Movement, whose stated mission is to bring “rangatiratanga to the poor, the powerless and the dispossessed.” In developing new organisations and new global connections, we must keep in mind the intimate connection between indigenous liberation and the fight for an egalitarian society.

Filed Under: Africa, International

December-January issue of Fightback online

December 1, 2013 by Admin

Welcome to the final issue of Fightback for 2013.

Fightback does not take money from the state or big business, and sustaining a monthly anti-capitalist publication during this period is no easy feat. For these reasons we thank our buyers, subscribers, and everyone who has contributed to Fightback over the last year.

In November, Aotearoa/NZ saw a nationwide day of action against rape culture, which Fightback supported because we see the struggle for gender liberation as essential to the struggle for socialism. Thousands gathered in Auckland and Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, Palmerston North and Hamilton to voice their opposition to both sexual violence, and the system that enables it/

In the lead-up to the rape culture rallies, the self-titled ‘Roastbusters,’ teenage boys who carried out a series of sexual assaults and then boasted about it on Facebook, had found mainstream media attention. Crucially, it transpired that not only had the police known about the boys for two years, and received four complaints, they did nothing to investigate the case; one of the boys was an officer’s son.

While the state and other reactionary forces used this opportunity to call for greater surveillance power, feminist, socialist and progressive forces highlighted how this was not an isolated incident. Rather, the police cover-up illuminated the wider problem of ‘rape culture,’ an ingrained system which justifies and denies sexual violence.

Sexual violence exists throughout society, even in nominally progressive organisations. Challenging this violence is necessary to human liberation. Fightback covers perspectives on rape culture, gendered violence and the Roastbusters case from pages 4-11.

Meanwhile in the USA, Socialist Alternative candidate Kshama Sawant was the first openly socialist candidate to win a Seattle City Council seat in decades. While this is a modest victory, it shows both a shift in consciousness in an environment historically hostile to socialist politics, and the benefits of sustained work in the community.

In her council position Sawant will have little power to implement her policies such as a $15 minimum wage, however she is using the platform to promote socialist politics. At her election night party, Sawant took the opportunity to call for workers’ control of factories owned by Boeing, which is the biggest employer in the state, currently threatening to move jobs out of the region. Fightback reprints more detailed coverage of Sawant’s campaign from pages 12-14.

We’ll be back next year.

Solidarity.

2013 December Fightback

Filed Under: Print edition PDFs