Labor Supports The Occupy Wall Street Movement

Labor is extending support to the Occupy Wall Street Movement. With arrest of hundreds of the protesters and their release, the protesters’ uninterrupted brave presence, increasing support to them from wider society, and spread of the movement to other parts of the US the Occupy Movement is facilitating widen public space in political life. The time, it seems, is vibrant with movements, and democratic spirits and aspiration.

Richard Trumka, AFL-CIO president said: “Wall Street’s out of control”. On the Occupy Wall Street Movement he said: “[I]t’s a […] valid tactic to call attention to a problem.” (John Nichols, The Nation, Sept. 30, 2011) Leo W. Gerard, international president of the United Steelworkers (USW) extended support to the Occupy Wall Street Movement. The USW is North America’s largest industrial union representing workers employed in metals, rubber, chemicals, paper, oil refining, atomic energy, airline, health care, service and public sectors with 1.2 million active and retired members in the US, Canada, and the Caribbean. In a statement on September 30, Leo W. Gerard said:

The United Steelworkers union stands in solidarity with and strongly supports Occupy Wall Street. The brave men and women, many of them young people without jobs, who have been demonstrating around-the-clock for nearly two weeks in New York City are speaking out for the many in our world. We are fed up with the corporate greed, corruption and arrogance that have inflicted pain on far too many for far too long.

Our union has been standing up and fighting these captains of finance who promote Wall Street over Main Street. We know firsthand the devastation caused by a global economy where workers, their families, the environment and our futures are sacrificed so that a privileged few can make more money on everyone’s labor but their own.

Wall Street and its counterparts on Bay Street (Toronto), The City (London) and across the world tanked our economy in 2008. They caused a crisis that we’re still suffering from - record job losses, home foreclosures, cuts to schools, public services, police, fire and so much more. They’ve gambled with our pension funds and our futures for far too long.

They should have gone to jail. Instead, they got bailed out, while we got left out. And now they want us to go down the same path.

The Occupy Wall Street Movement represents what most Americans believe: Enough is enough! It’s time to hold those who caused our economic crisis accountable, to ensure they don’t get away with it again, and to demand that everyone pay their fair share. It’s time to stand and fight for the creation of real wealth by focusing on making real things and creating family- and community-supporting jobs.

The USW is proud to join with the brothers and sisters of the Occupy Wall Street Movement as we continue this important fight for a more just economy and a brighter tomorrow.

According to Village Voice, the historically militant Transport Workers Union that primarily represents workers in the public transportation system and at some private bus lines in the New York City metropolitan area has unanimously voted to back, and provide food and services to the Occupy Wall Street Movement. The TWU plans to assemble on October 5 and march to Zuccotti Park, the place the protesters are staying. The union counts 38,000 active members and covers 26,000 retirees.

In a statement the union applauded the courage of the young people on Wall Street, and said: “the shared sacrifice preached by government officials looks awfully like a one-way street. Workers and ordinary citizens are putting up all the sacrifice, and the financiers who imploded our economy are getting away scot-free, increasing their holdings and bonuses. Young people face a bleak future with high unemployment, and minimum wage jobs. Public sector workers face Mayors and Governors who demand massive wage and benefits givebacks or face thousands of layoffs. That’s not bargaining. That’s blackmail.”

The statement said that the union’s Executive Board is united in their “determination that this state of affairs is dangerous for America and destructive to its citizenry. We support the Wall Street protesters and their goal to reduce inequality and support every American’s right to a decent job, health care, and retirement security.”

The TWU’s October 5-March is being co-sponsored by eight labor and community outreach organizations having a total membership of over 1 million. These are United NY, Strong Economy for All Coalition, Working Families Party, VOCAL-NY, Community Voices Heard, Alliance for Quality Education, New York Communities for Change and Coalition for the Homeless.

Terry O’Sullivan, General President of the Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA), on September 30 in a statement on Occupy Wall Street said: “The workers who build America – the half-million men and women of LIUNA – are united behind the fight against corporate tyranny and for economic prosperity for all and stand with the Occupy Wall Street Movement in New York City and across the United States.” It should be mentioned that the half-million members of LIUNA are on the forefront of the construction industry, a powerhouse of workers.

He said:

The most valuable asset in America isn’t Wall Street, it is working people. Yet in America today, millions of working people are jobless and are losing their homes, their hopes and their dreams. Meanwhile, corporations are making record profits and the most profitable among them pay no taxes, shifting more wealth from the working and middle class to the rich. This ill-gotten wealth is being used to finance an unprecedented assault on working people and unions in states across the country and in Washington, D.C. Wall Street caused our economic crisis, and yet corporations are attempting to force working people to pay for it. The only way to turn back the assault is to strengthen unions and build movements, such as Occupy Wall Street.

Professors at the City University of New York affiliated with the Professional Staff Congress union have taken a number of labor-oriented solidarity actions. Their group, Solidarity with OWS, is organizing demonstration against police abuse. Their academic allies include Frances Fox Piven, Christian Parenti, and Stanley Aronowitz. (Michelle Chen, “Labor Movement Rolls Into Wall Street Occupation”, In These Times, September 30, 2011)

Huffington Post informed: the trade union representing doormen, security guards and maintenance workers with about 70,000 members (New York Metro SEIU 32BJ) was “re-purposing a previously planned rally on Oct. 12 to express solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street protesters”. Kwame Patterson, the 32BJ spokesperson said: “The call went out over a month ago, before actually the occupancy of Wall Street took place.” Now, “we’re all coming under one cause, even though we have our different initiatives.”

Crain's New York Business informed: local unions are collaborating with community-based groups that include Make the Road New York, Coalition for the Homeless and Community Voices Heard. These organizations are involved with the struggles of the poor and working-class.

The movement is spreading. The main stream media (MSM) now inform this fact. ABC News said: “The protests have spread across the country, with events popping up in Boston and Chicago in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street. … [E]vents in Boston will continue with a ‘Take Back the Block’ festival. At least 1,500 have registered for the festival. Along with New York and Boston, an Occupy Chicago movement has emerged, with nearly 100 people gathering in front of the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank. The protests have been peaceful and no arrests have been reported. Occupy Los Angeles protests which have also been small in numbers, has called for a march today ...” (Oct 1, 2011) The Telegraph/UK carried news with the headline “Occupy Wall Street Protests Spread across US”. It said: “Inspired by the events in New York City, protesters begin assembling in several cities across the U.S. … [M]ore demonstrations began to spring up across the U.S. In Los Angeles, protesters gathered in front of City Hall and danced on buses with ‘peace’ emblazoned on the side. A smaller protest was held in Chicago’s financial district where protesters held placards demanding ‘Jobs Not Cuts’. Protesters also turned out in Denver, gathering downtown before marching into the city chanting, ‘Occupy the streets’.” (Oct. 2, 2011)

The protest organizers/sympathetic websites claimed that many events, demonstrations, and assemblies were held around the US including in Atlanta, San Diego, and San Jose in solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Around 200 protesters in Boston took to the streets. An Occupy Chicago event also began on Sept. 23. At least 52 cities in America are occupied or organizing as the protesters claimed. Web sites are cropping up in increasing number that reflects the expansion of the movement. Occupy Together is playing a role of broader banner.

Sister campaigns with names like Occupy Chicago, the protesters claimed, have emerged in Albuquerque, Arkansas, Austin, Binghamton, Birmingham, Boise, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Clarksville, Cleveland, Columbus, Colorado Springs, Columbus, D.C., Dallas, Daytona Beach, Durham, Eugene, Hartford, Houston, Indiana, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Knoxville, Las Vegas, Lexington, Los Angeles, Louisville, Maine, Memphis, Miami, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nashville, New Jersey, New Orleans, OKC, Orlando, Olympia, Omaha, OSU (Stillwater), Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Providence, Richmond, Rochester, St. Louis, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Diego, San Jose, Santa Cruz, Seattle, Spokane, Tulsa, Tampa, Tallahassee, Tucson, Vermont, Winston Salem, Wisconsin.

San Francisco: Occupy the San Francisco Financial District kicked off outside the Bank of America (BoA) building, also known as the “Wall Street of the West.” Approximately 150 people including members of US Uncut and the Revolutionary Poets Brigade, as well as people of all ages and students participated in the opening rally. After a couple of hours, one group marched through a street while the other met in a public assembly. Then, a small group of campers formed and stayed the night. A small camp came up. The camp is growing. There are now daily meetings at the camp and General Assemblies every Saturday.

Huffington Post reported Mayoral candidate and city Supervisor John Avalos initiated the San Francisco march with a speech: “[T]his [BoA] building right here is a symbol of the incredible greed and wealth that has accumulated into fewer and fewer hands. And how do they stay wealthy? They took our tax dollars. They got bailed out.” He urged the crowd to withdraw their money from national banks and invest in small, community-like banks. The demonstrators marched down to Charles Schwab, surrounding the building and chanting, “Charles Schwab, give us our money back”. The San Francisco protesters ended the day at Chase Bank. Six demonstrators walked into the branch and staged a sit-in in the lobby. They were arrested, and eventually released, after they refused requests to leave. (International Business Times, Sept. 30, 2011)

Portland: Occupy Portland, a nonviolent movement for accountability in the US government plans to assemble on October 6, 2011. The assembly will be in solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street, and the increasing “number of cities whose people will no longer sit back watching corporate and special interests run their government.”

Berkley: An AP news report datelined Berkeley, Sept. 22, 2011 said: Students occupied a building on the University of California, Berkeley campus to protest tuition hikes and state budget cuts. There was a confrontation between police and protestors. Later, the student demonstration dispersed. One protester was arrested. “Resistance Social,” a group, organized the protest. “Protesters say”, the news report cited, “the University of California is becoming increasingly unaffordable as the 10-campus UC system raises tuition in response to state cuts to higher education.” (“UC Berkeley Classrooms Occupied By Tuition Hike Protesters”)

Global: The Wall Street protesters pronounce: “This is really a global movement.” According to their claim there were more than 35 events around the world in solidarity of the movement. These include Occupy Brisbane, Occupy Frankfurt, Occupy Hamburg, Occupy Manchester, Occupy Melbourne, Occupy Perth, Occupy the London Stock Exchange, Occupy Toronto Market Exchange, and Occupy Vancouver.

Horizontally connected, broader coalitions are coming up through the movement. The coalitions include community, environment, youth and rights organizations. Organizations against predatory lending, and elder persons’ organizations are also joining.

Movement’s Media: The MSM tried to black out news of the movement. The protest was ignored. But the MSM-silence could not be sustained. Now, MSM is giving up space to the Occupy Movement. At the same time, the MSM’s unwillingness to accommodate the movement led the movement participants to devise their medium to communicate. Now, there is The Occupied Wall Street Journal. “It debuted on [October 1] with a print run of 50,000, after two independent journalists in New York started a campaign using the online fund-raising platform Kickstarter. The four-page broadsheet includes a story […] headlined ‘The Revolution Begins at Home’, an essay by the former New York Times war correspondent Chris Hedges urging people to participate in the protests, and a ‘Declaration of the Occupation’ approved at a meeting of protesters on Sept. 29.” The initiators of the newspaper raised more than $12,000 within eight hours. (New York Times, Oct. 3, 2011)

Communiqué: Communiqués of the protesters are disseminating hard facts. In their Fifth Communiqué the 99 percent cited the following information:

On September 21, 2011, the richest 400 Americans owned more wealth than half of the country’s population; about 80% of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track; about one-sixth of Americans did not have work; the same ratio lived in poverty; about 50 million Americans were without health insurance; the US had military bases in around 130 out of 165 countries; and the US was at war with the world.

With this background, the movement demands end of wealth inequality, poverty, joblessness, health-profiteering, political corruption, corporate censorship, modern gilded age, American imperialism and war.

It is true, the movement, a very smaller one in terms of number, is in its formative stage. It is also true, there are a lot of weaknesses and weak connections. Many factors are yet to be identified. It will be an illusion that the movement will provide people a full fledged public space, and compel capital’s greed to compromise within a short time. But it’s part of a learning process, which is essential for expanding people’s scopes. Already it has produced important lessons and learning “materials”. Even, societies far away can learn from the movement. Socially and politically, the movement is significant. Even, its mistakes will be valuable assets as these will act as teacher. The voice of the section of labor, a part of broader society, extending its support to the movement is significant also.

“The movements suggest”, Michelle Chen writes, “a general trajectory of grassroots organizing: a spark of protest led by younger activists, followed by the support of labor organizations, bringing up the rear and then moving to the fore.” “[T]he movement is organically structured, with no formal ‘list of demands’ yet […] Not everyone came to Wall Street knowing exactly what they wanted, but everyone there today knows they’ve had enough, and that they’re not the only ones. […] After decades of a one-sided class war, the fightback has begun.” (“Labor Movement Rolls Into Wall Street Occupation”, In These Times, September 30, 2011)

Jane Fonda And America’s Vietnam War

Jane Fonda is news again. The issue is America’s Vietnam War. Memories of the war still haunt many. The war memories are also bright in the brains of those who resisted and opposed the war.

The acrid memory is difficult to blank out for those who had to accept defeat. For those standing against imperialism, it is impossible to forget the war.

In mid-July, in a blog posting on show business website TheWrap.com, Jane Fonda wrote that she was scheduled to appear on home shopping TV network QVC to introduce her book Prime Time about aging and life cycles. But QVC reported receiving angry calls regarding her anti-war activism of the 1960s and ’70s, and it decided to cancel Jane’s appearance. She wrote at the website: “[T]his has gone on far too long, this spreading of lies about me! … I love my country. I have never done anything to hurt my country or the men and women who have fought and continue to fight for us.” QVC, a unit of Liberty Media Corp, acknowledged Fonda’s appearance was cancelled, but said it was because of a “programming change.” She described it as QVC’s caving in to “extremist” pressure to cancel her appearance.

Jane Fonda, daughter of late screen legend Henry Fonda, won Oscars for roles in the films “Coming Home” (1978) and “Klute” (1971). Her 1972 visit to Hanoi, the capital of erstwhile North Vietnam, angered Vietnam War mongers. They nicknamed her “Hanoi Jane”. She is still ridiculed by hawks as they fail to get rid of memories of defeat. During her North Vietnam visit, she posed for photos showing her sitting atop a Viet Cong anti-aircraft gun seat. She expressed regret about those images.

An Empire’s manipulation with its subjects’ minds, its power for the manipulation, and its confusing definitions get exposed with this incident. To it, aggression is patriotism, opposing war of aggression is synonymous to treachery. It turns indifferent to people making supreme sacrifices for independence, sovereignty, honor and dignity, and the right to self-determination. Its statements are made to appear authentic, although the authenticity stands on a void foundation of propaganda and media manipulation. It makes “truths”, and unmakes those when necessary; it hides truths and leads eyes and ears to its desired target that it intends to appear as stark fact although a single ingredient of fact is absent there. On behalf of the entire humanity, brave Vietnam stood for humane senses and duties. The Empire cannot provide an explanation to the supreme sacrifices the monks made on the streets of Saigon (now, Ho Chi Minh City), it cannot defend its action in My Lai, it cannot dissect the murder of Nguyen Van Troi.

That’s the reason the “American public”, as Jane Fonda writes about America’s Indo-China War (the war the Empire carried on in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia only a few decades back) in her My Life So Far, “did not yet know that the United States had been secretly bombing Cambodia since March 1969. Nor did we know that U.S. bombers, from 1964 through 1969, had secretly obliterated an entire civilization in the Plain of Jars in northeastern Laos.”

Jane tried to know the truth. Time keeps a role for itself in life. In many cases, age influences posture and type of action of individuals. So, Jane “mistakenly thought that the more militant [she] appeared, the more seriously [she] would be taken.” (ibid.)

That was not only a time of America’s war against peoples in Vietnam-Laos-Cambodia; that was a time “an America at war with itself…”; that was a time “antiwar sentiment was growing among active-duty servicemen”; that was a time “Master Sergeant Donald Duncan, a much decorated member of the special forces, the first enlisted man in Vietnam to be nominated for the Legion of Merit”, brought to Jane “newspaper articles about GI dissent and told stories about the ways servicemen were being denied their constitutional rights.” That was a time “soldiers questioned why, once they put on a uniform, they were deprived of the rights they had been conscripted to defend – the rights to speak freely, petition, assemble, and publish – and that when they claimed those rights, unjust punishments were meted out with no legal recourse.” That was a time “while the civilian anti-war movement was primarily white and middle-class, the GI movement was made up of working-class kids, sons and daughters … of farmers and hard hats, kids who couldn’t afford college deferments, and a preponderance of rural and urban poor, particularly blacks and Latinos.” “[W]hile dissent within the military had started in the mid-sixties mainly as random, individual acts, after the Tet offensive, things began to change. Dissident was no longer a matter of individual acts. GIs began to organize, not just around the growing antiwar sentiment in the military rank, but in response to the undemocratic nature of the military system itself.” (ibid.) That was a time, as Robert D. Heinl Jr., retired Marine Corps colonel and military historian, describes: “[O]ur army that now remains in Vietnam is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or having refused combat, murdering their officers and non-commissioned officers, drug-ridden, and dispirited where not near-mutinous.” (Armed Forces Journal, quoted in My Life So Far) That was a time she “had heard and read things that threw into question everything [she] believed about [her] country.” Jane felt she “couldn’t slow down while people’s rights were being violated, while people were being killed, while the war continued.” That was a time “the war had become an American tragedy…” That was a time in “a battle that pits bamboo against B-52, the victory for bamboo symbolizes hope for the planet.” (ibid.)

These incidents and senses took her to Hanoi. She watched from the aircraft window, before her plane made landing, her “country’s planes – bombing a city where” she was “about to be received as a welcomed guest.” (ibid.) She learns in Vietnam: “It is the long-term, cumulative effects of seemingly weak things that achieve the impossible.” During that trip, she innocently and mistakenly sat atop an anti-aircraft gun seat. “But the gun was inactive, there were no planes overhead…” (ibid.) Consequently, she was criticized, condemned, a call was made to boycott her films.

But the “story” doesn’t conclude there as it didn’t begin there also. As a flash back an editorial comment can be recollected that can help fill in the gaps of the war path: “And”, Paul M Sweezy, Leo Huberman and Harry Magdoff wrote editorial comment in June 1954 in Monthly Review, “if we send American forces into Indo-China, as Dulles and other high government spokesmen have repeatedly threatened to do in the last two months, we shall be guilty of aggression ourselves.” (“What Every American Should Know About Indo-China”)

But the aggression was made.

“It was June 14, 1965, and Johnson reached out to former President Eisenhower for his counsel on the Vietnam War. A decision was looming over whether to expand the U.S. troop commitment to the conflict. Eisenhower advised not only supporting South Vietnamese forces in action but also urged direct offensive action by American troops. ‘We have got to win,’ he said. … Meanwhile, the debate among Johnson’s advisors was growing. ‘In raising our commitment from 50,000 to 100,000 or more men and deploying most of the increment in combat roles we are beginning a new war -- the United States directly against the Viet Cong,’ Under Secretary of State George Ball warned President Johnson. ‘Perhaps the large-scale introduction of American forces with their concentrated fire power will force Hanoi and the Viet Cong to the decision we are seeking. On the other hand,’ he presciently cautioned, ‘we may not be able to fight the war successfully enough -- even with 500,000 Americans in South Vietnam -- to achieve this purpose.’ Ball confronted President Johnson with lessons from recent history. ‘The French fought a war in Viet-Nam, and were finally defeated -- after seven years of bloody struggle and when they still had 250,000 combat-hardened veterans in the field, supported by an army of 205,000 Vietnamese.’ Ball’s dissent was aggressively countered by the administration’s hawks. Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara strenuously argued that if South Vietnam fell, Thailand would be lost, too. Rusk envisioned a wave of falling dominoes – even India would collapse under the control of the Chinese communists.” (Gordon M Goldstein, former international security advisor to the strategic planning unit of the executive office of the UN secretary-general, Lessons in Disaster, 2008)

The number of the US forces increased. The war escalated as the years rolled on. The aggression experienced effective resistance unparallel in human history. The ruling classes in the Empire faced a critical time full with uncertain choices.

The resistance to the aggression and the significant resentment within the aggressor forces, as Jane Fonda mentioned, weakened the aggressor. They had to concede defeat that saved them from bigger and graver defeat.

But Jane is still being condemned for sitting atop a seat of an inactive AA gun.

And, the Lessons in Disaster are not being learnt in the Middle East, in Africa, in Latin America as empires deny learning from history, as that is a limitation of Naked Imperialism.

Libya Lumbers

Naked Imperialism is making Libya lumber. Intervention by petro-imperialism is poised to send Libya’s democratic struggle with seldom shown monarchist flag to limbo. France’s overt intervention and the Empire’s covert maneuvers under the shadow of an imperialism fuelled civil war are making Libya’s move to democracy difficult.

Gadhafi’s tactical advances push back his opponents’ reported resolve to stand till his fall while it fans external actors’ lust for direct intervention. The Arab League that many a times failed to stand above disunity is now having a single song: get rid of Gadhafi. But, for Europe, it is still difficult: “[H]aving 27 conversations”, as Time quoted a European leader, “around the table.” This sign of European incoherence can provide Gadhafi minute’s tactical opportunity. Intervention plan is facing problem from within the interventionist camp, and from a section of Gadhafi opponents, a reality beyond the plan of the interventionists.

As the rebels gradually lose control of the portion of land they sliced away from the authoritarian ruler section of the rebels is asking for “humanitarian” help that carries elements of direct imperialist intervention. There is every possibility of sending soldiers to guarantee safe delivery of aid. No-fly zone is on interventionist agenda, which is confused by its conflicting interests. Sex-scandal ridden Berlusconi has made available Italian military facilities to future operation in the North African country. However, Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy’s desire to intervene is facing obstacle from their internal reality: economic and political, crisis and competition, and limits of over-stretched power. One of the leading US intelligence officials has angered a section of US interventionists by publicly telling a truth: Gadhafi shall prevail because of supremacy of his firepower. Moreover, Gadhafi, as his son told during an interview, knows the game with lucrative oil deal.

“The preparation for a military intervention in Libya”, writes Yoshie Furuhashi, editor, MRzine, “will test the revolutionaries in bordering Egypt and Tunisia. The armed forces of their countries, the backbones of the regimes in power there, will be requested to provide support for any such intervention . . . that is, if they have not already privately pledged their cooperation. (“Imperialists Prepare for Military Intervention in Libya” MRzine, Feb.28, 2011)

Gadhafi with cracked legitimacy is trying to thwart imperialist military intervention. He initially blamed Laden and hallucinogenic pill filled teenagers for the revolt against his ruling system of centralized decentralization. Then, he pointed his finger to machinations by imperialists, his just-yesterday’s friends. He was having warm relation with his Washington and NATO friends, and his friends were feeding him with sophisticated arms. Even, his state of the art repression equipments were supplied by his friends from both sides of the Atlantic.

Sections of Libyans under the leadership of Gadhafi-cohorts-turned-“conscientious” guys are waving monarchy’s tricolor. “The tricolour of King Idris, the monarch Mr Qaddafi overthrew in 1969 … flies across the east...” (The Economist, March 7, 2011) “[T]he faces of the old detested regime”, writes As'ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus, “are now leading the so-called opposition.” (“The Libyan Uprising”, Angry Arab News Service, March 4, 2011) The claimants of having a seal of governance in the breakaway portion are unelected and unselected, with whom “democracy” designers are entering into oil stained deals. “Delegates to the new assembly”, The Economist report said, “have decked Beida’s parliament building in portraits of King Idris and his tricolour. … A secret ten-man military committee has been formed. …Jihadist groups have kept a low profile. A lawyer claimed that there is effort to a separation of religion and state.”

To shed of the despised identity of quisling or Marshal Petain Gadhafi opponents had to get hold a band of Anglo SAS commandoes and a junior diplomat. But the “transparency”- and “accountable”-democracy failed to provide an explanation. The secret diplomatic mission, press reported, was to smoothen out path of contact by a senior diplomat. A would-be Lawrence of Libya? The virtually broken away significant part of Libya with oil port and refineries is a landing ground for intervention, and the crises-ridden, budget-deficit burdened Empire, as it claimed, reaches “out to many different Libyans who are attempting to organize”. And, sections of revolting elements have dubious identities. Although a section of the opposition is aware that the external “friends” prefer oil than protecting Libyan lives.

Gadhafi, with his bizarre posture and macabre rhetoric, is trying to regain control of the ruling machine that relies on a mixture of utopian and retrogressive ideas and practices, and sows seeds of discontent. He once took anti-imperialist stance, then made appeasements with imperialism, and successfully failed to mobilize people. Its current cost, the costs now being charged by “humanitarian”- or “democracy”-imperialism, is unknown number of deaths, suffering of and hatred among the people, the regime’s significant diplomatic isolation and reduced credibility, and a divided country. His actions have lent credibility to imperialist propaganda, although Libyan TV showed Egyptian passports, CDs and cell phones purportedly belonging to detainees who had allegedly confessed to plotting terrorist operations against the Libyan people. On the other hand, facts hidden by the mainstream media blitzkrieg will surface later as have come out in many cases including Iraq and Darfur.

Pogrom

In localities controlled by anti-Gadhafi forces, migrant workers fleeing to Egypt, a British project manager and an Egyptian accountant reported scenes of mayhem as looters stormed their compounds, and looted cars and computers. Glen Ford, executive editor, Black Agenda Report, writes: “A vicious, racist pogrom is raging against the 1.5 million sub-Saharan Black African migrant workers who do the hard jobs in Libya, work that is rejected by the relatively prosperous Libyans. Hundreds of Black migrant workers have already been killed by anti-Khadafi forces – yet the U.S. corporate media express absolutely no concern for their safety. One Western report noted that large numbers of Black Africans were seized in Benghazi and were assumed to have been hanged. That is a war crime, whether these men were soldiers or migrant workers, but the Western correspondent seemed unconcerned. One suspects there are many atrocities occurring in the rebel-held areas of Libya, especially against people that are not members of the locally dominant tribe.” (“No Tahrir in Benghazi: A Racist Pogrom Rages On Against Black Africans in Libya”, Black Agenda Report, March 2, 2011) There is, The Economist report said, resentment against migrant workers as a third of Libyans are jobless. Resentment is also there against Western contractors reaping the benefits of Libyan oil wealth to the tune of millions of dollars.

A Portion of Background

The rapidly changing Libyan incidents need a closer look to its background. “As opposed to the situation in Egypt and Tunisia, Libya occupies first place in the Human Development Index within Africa and has the highest life expectancy rate on the continent. Education and health receive special state attention. The cultural level of the population is without a doubt higher. Its problems are of another nature. The population is not in need of food or basic social services. The country requires many foreign workers to implement its ambitious production and social development plans. Therefore it offers employment to hundreds of thousands of workers from Egypt, Tunisia, China and other nations. It has an enormous income and hard currency reserves deposited in the banks of rich countries, with which it acquires consumer goods and even sophisticated weapons, supplied by the very countries which now want to invade in the name of human rights. The colossal campaign of lies unleashed by the mass media has created much confusion in world public opinion.” (Fidel Castro, “NATO's inevitable war”)

Causes of indignation were there within the Libyan society, which has prepared ground for today’s civil war. Naked Imperialism (title of a book by John Bellamy Foster) could not miss the opportunity to take advantage of Libya’s internal conflict to advance its geostrategy. Libyan oil-industry operators, according to The Economist report, threatened to destroy pipelines, and cut supplies to Europe, if European states fail to intervene to end Gadhafi’s rule.

In the face of interventionist moves, Chávez, the Bolivarian leader of Venezuela, has taken a bold stand against intervention in Libya. Venezuela has proposed to “set up a Goodwill International Commission for the search for peace in Libya”, which has been accepted by the government of Libya, but has been rejected by the US, France, and the opposition Libyan National Council. Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba, and Nicaragua support Venezuela’s initiative to seek a negotiated solution. But, Gadhafi’s Arab brethren have said nothing about the Venezuelan proposal.

One of the tasks of democratic movements worldwide is to create an international movement that defends democracy, peace, human rights, and territorial integrity so that imperialist powers cannot subvert the movements, and cannot use democratic movements and famous personalities as covers for their intervention and plan for subjugation.

There is possibility of a long battle with implications on the entire region and the peoples’ journey to democracy there. “[T]he fundamental concern of the United States and NATO”, Fidel wrote, “is not Libya, but the revolutionary wave unleashed in the Arab world, which they wish to prevent at all costs.” (“NATO’s inevitable war”) A failure on the part of democratic forces to oppose intervention will charge a high price as forces standing against people are threatening that the next spring will be theirs. 
---------------------
This article was published at countercurrents.org , on 14^th March, 2011