Month: March, 2017
20ο ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΤΟΥ ΚΚΕ
| March 30, 2017 | 9:40 pm | Communist Party Greece (KKE) | Comments closed

Liberia: Mining, Displacement, and the World Bank
| March 28, 2017 | 11:46 am | Africa | Comments closed

AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 28, 2017 (170328)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“The roots of the New Liberty Gold project stretch back before 1995,
when a resource extraction license was issued by former warlord
turned president Charles Taylor to a mysterious company called
KAFCO. The permit changed hands a few times and, today, Avesoro holds its
permit via a wholly-owned subsidiary, Bea Mountain Mining Corp – a
company created in 1996 by Keikurah B. Kpoto, one of Taylor’s
closest associates.  In 1998, foreign interests bought Bea Mountain
Mining. The beneficiaries of the sale were well hidden. According to
a document IRIN procured, three quarters of its capital belonged to
a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. The rest was
held by owners of bearer shares.” – IRIN investigative report, March
21, 2017

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/lib1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/lib1703.php

This investigative report on the largest gold mine in Liberia begins
with the mining company’s failure to reimburse displaced Liberians,
and the World Bank’s failure to hold them to account. But the lack
of accountability extends to basic questions about the ownership of
the company and the use of tax havens. As such, it is one striking
illustration of what seem to be pervasive characteristics of
projects financed by the IFC, the World Bank’s arm for working with
private sector companies.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains two short articles by journalists
who have been investigating the project, and a short press release
from Oxfam on a study of IFC projects last year.

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on Liberia, visit
http://www.africafocus.org/country/liberia.php

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on economic development issues,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/econexp.php

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

A Tip for AfricaFocus Bulletin

If you appreciate AfricaFocus Bulletin, you can help support this
work by leaving a small tip. For example, 10 cents per issue for the
last 50 issues would be $5. Every contribution helps no matter how
small. You can give a tip on your computer or smartphone at these
two secure sites:

https://cash.me/$africafocus – to pay with debit card from a U.S.-
based bank.

https://paypal.me/AfricaFocusBulletin – to pay with PayPal
account

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

How a gold mine has brought only misery in Liberia

Emmanuel Freudenthal and Alloycious David

Kinjor, Liberia, 21 March 2017

http://tinyurl.com/mzgdjcb

(This investigative report is being jointly published by
100Reporters, IRIN and Le Monde Afrique. 100Reporters is an award-
winning investigative news organisation based in Washington, DC. Its
objective is to reveal untold stories on corruption, transparency
and accountability. IRIN delivers unique, authoritative and
independent reporting from the front lines of crises to inspire and
produce a more effective humanitarian response. Le Monde Afrique is
a pan-African francophone media for news, reporting, analysis and
debates.)

[Article in French available at http://tinyurl.com/m72pjnd]

The maths was merciless. Siah (name changed) had the equivalent of
$5 in her pocket but needed $15 to treat her youngest son Joseph’s
malaria. She had travelled an hour to the nearest clinic only to
discover she couldn’t afford the medicine. Joseph died that day, as
she cradled him in her arms.

Siah lives in Kinjor, a small town in the lush forests of western
Liberia. Just a few steps from her home, Liberia’s largest
commercial gold mine, New Liberty Gold, plans to dig out a billion
dollars-worth of the precious metal.

The Liberian government and its multilateral funding partners see
commercial mining as a path to development in a country still
recovering from the impact of 11 years of civil war.

Under the law, communities are obliged to give up their land rights
and move, in return for compensation. But IRIN’s months-long
investigation can reveal that financial reward isn’t always
forthcoming from the foreign mining operations.

To make way for New Liberty Gold, 325 families in two villages,
Kinjor and Larjor, had to abandon their homes, farms, and artisanal
mines that had provided some income. In return for their move to a
new village, also named Kinjor, and carved out of the forest near
the mine, the company promised to make life better: new houses, a
school, hand pumps – and what could have made all the difference to
Joseph – a clinic.

Construction began on the mine in 2014, and the first gold sales
came a year later. Even though the company describes the operation
as a “key asset”, the promised better amenities are yet to
materialise years later, and there has already been one major
chemical spill that has polluted the environment.

New Liberty Gold has the backing of the World Bank’s International
Finance Corporation, which since 2014 invested $19 million and
became a key shareholder. That support was predicated on a 155-page
Resettlement Action Plan by the company, which listed its planned
$3.9 million investments in the new Kinjor.

During the IFC board meeting that approved the mining project, the
US delegate formally raised “serious concerns” regarding “the
environmental and social risks posed”. The US urged the IFC “to work
with the company to ensure that all appropriate funds are set aside
for this [resettlement] plan”.

A history of displacement

Projects funded by the World Bank have displaced more than three
million people between 2004 and 2013 in 124 countries, according to
data published by the International Consortium of Investigative
Journalists (https://www.icij.org/project/world-bank).  Those
shortcomings were acknowledged by Bank president Jim Yong Kim in
2015, after an internal review found “major problems” that caused
him “deep concern”.

But the Bank and the IFC do not appear to have held New Liberty Gold
accountable for failing to meet its basic obligations, despite a
commitment made by the IFC on its website to help the company
“implement best practice standards” in Kinjor.

“I’m really disappointed to say that [this case] is one amongst
many,” said Jessica Evans, a senior researcher at Human Rights
Watch. “We’ve seen time after time serious failings by the World
Bank and the IFC when it comes to resettlement.”

That is little comfort for Siah. Outside a neighbour’s house in
Kinjor, she fought back the tears to speak about her son’s death.
Her voice rose in anger when she listed the failings of New Liberty
Gold: “no hospital here, no safe drinking water”.

“There are toilets right next to the water pump. It makes us sick,”
she added. “We are suffering.”

The owner of the mine, Avesoro Resources Inc. (previously called
Aureus Mining), has built a school and installed some water pumps.
But the rest of the action plan, the compensation due for uprooting
people against their will, remains little more than a wish list.

Still waiting

Controversy at mining projects like New Liberty Gold is not new in
Liberia. For nearly 100 years, natural resource extraction – from
rubber to minerals – has been steeped in violence and corruption.
Opaque investments carry a tremendous risk in the context of such a
fragile state as Liberia.

In one of Kinjor’s narrow alleys flanked by mud huts, Yarpawolo
Gblan, an old man in a faded black polo shirt, stepped forward: “Are
you a journalist? Come and see my house!”

We sat on a bench, our backs to the wooden wall of a hut scrawled
with the phone numbers of Gblan’s children. Three years ago, Avesoro
had forced him to move from what had been his home for a decade,
into “temporary” accommodation, to make way for the mining project.

The huts the company provided have just two small rooms: not nearly
big enough to house Gblan’s family of eight. He extended the
original structure as best he could, using his own resources.

The huts were meant to be a stopgap measure, until the displaced
families could move into 325 “improved houses” promised by the
company. The unfinished shells of those houses stand in ordered
rows, just a few hundred metres away.

But construction stopped longer than a year ago. Weeds now grow
between the brick walls, and slimy bright-green algae thrive in
puddles fed by rain falling through where roofs should be.

The company man

Half a day’s drive from Kinjor, in a wealthy suburb of Liberia’s
capital, Monrovia, a striking white-walled villa serves as the
headquarters of New Liberty Gold.

Debar Allen is the company’s general manager, a physically imposing
man who fills his generously appointed office. From behind a large
wooden desk, he explained in a calm baritone that people like Gblan,
who were supposed to have been resettled, “do not want to move from
where they are”.

He offered two reasons for the construction delay: the need “to get
going with the mining project because we were running out of funds”,
and the desire of those being resettled to build their own permanent
houses where they are now. “Rather than bringing contractors from
Monrovia, we have to team up with them,” he said.

The World Bank, via email, offered a different explanation. With
“the Ebola outbreak, the company faced significant construction
delays. As a consequence, the project experienced some significant
challenges that impacted its financial/cash flow position.”

The result was that “the full implementation of several aspects of
the project had to be postponed, and some of the permanent houses
have not yet been completed.”

But in February 2015, the IFC provided a $5.3 million cash injection
for New Liberty Gold to help the company “cope with additional
costs” as a result of the Ebola outbreak, and to “support the
company’s ongoing work in Liberia”.

In reality, the company should have finished the resettlement houses
several months before Ebola hit Liberia. Moreover, the outbreak was
brought under control more than 18 months ago, yet the new housing
construction will not be completed any time soon.

Allen explained: “We signed with the [local] leaders a memorandum of
understanding that postpones the completion to the end of next
year”. That means December 2017.

Community representatives told IRIN that the company had asked them
to sign numerous times, accepting the new deadline, and that they
eventually gave in. They had reasoned that whether they signed or
not, the houses would not be built any faster.

The World Bank did not reply to IRIN’s requests for more details on
the resettlement timeline and the mine’s failure to make good on its
promises to the community.

Dead fish and rashes

In March 2016, an accident at New Liberty Gold mine released cyanide
and arsenic, byproducts of the mining process, into a nearby river
that serves villages downstream. In Jikando, where people use its
water to fish, bath and wash clothes, they began to see dead fish
floating. Soon, they started developing skin rashes themselves.

A slim teenager lifted his t-shirt to show a rash he has had since
shortly after the spill. He told IRIN it still itched but said: “it
doesn’t worry me all the time”. Several mothers confirmed their
children were still afflicted by similar rashes. No medical tests
have been conducted on villagers who’ve reported similar effects.

Avesoro’s Allen said the company found out about the leak in April,
after a phone call from the local chief in Jikando. He noted that
the company now regularly delivers frozen fish to replace the
poisoned ones, as the community’s “source of protein was from the
creek”.

On 14 April, shortly after the leak, the Liberian Environmental
Protection Agency fined the company. On 10 May, Avesoro publicly
disclosed the spill to shareholders, stating that its
“investigations to date indicate no adverse impact on any human
settlement”.

It’s difficult to pin responsibility for the mine’s failures on any
individual because it’s hard to identify the successive true owners
of New Liberty Gold. Aureus is part of a long list of shell
companies named in the Panama Papers leak, many of them registered
in opaque jurisdictions.

The latest twist in the ownership trail came at the end of 2016 when
MNG Gold, headquartered in Turkey, took over Aureus and changed its
name to Avesoro Resources Inc.

The warlord

Investing in companies with complex ownership is not unusual for the
IFC. A recent report by Oxfam found that 84 percent of the IFC’s
investments in sub-Saharan Africa in 2015 used “secrecy”
jurisdictions.

But the roots of the New Liberty Gold project stretch back before
1995, when a resource extraction license was issued by former
warlord turned president Charles Taylor to a mysterious company
called KAFCO.

The permit changed hands a few times and, today, Avesoro holds its
permit via a wholly-owned subsidiary, Bea Mountain Mining Corp – a
company created in 1996 by Keikurah B. Kpoto, one of Taylor’s
closest associates.

The exploitation of Liberia’s gold and diamonds allowed Taylor,
convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the
International Criminal Court in 2012 and now serving a 50-year
prison sentence in the UK, to fund his war effort.

In 1998, foreign interests bought Bea Mountain Mining. The
beneficiaries of the sale were well hidden. According to a document
IRIN procured, three quarters of its capital belonged to a company
incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. The rest was held by
owners of bearer shares.

Bearer shares are the vehicles of choice for the corrupt because
they are owned by whoever holds the paper certificates, just like
cash. There is no trace of their owner in company records and they
can easily become covert payments for pretty much anything.

The World Bank nevertheless wrote that it had undertaken due
diligence on New Liberty Gold, an investigation that included
“desktop reviews, several meetings with Aureus management and a site
visit”.

Over the past decade, the IFC has spent more than $200 million on
projects like New Liberty Gold. It has a seemingly unshakable faith
that commercial mining can deliver development that will trickle
down to communities like Kinjor.

As for Siah: Her last-born is now buried. If she once believed the
promises of New Liberty Gold, that is certainly no longer the case.
“The company is doing nothing for us,” she told IRIN. “If the
company had built a hospital here, [his death] would not have
happened.”

********************************************************************

Aureus Mining: A Promise Betrayed; World Bank Funded Project Dashed
Hopes

Monrovia – Liberia’s first industrial gold mine failed to hold its
promises, dashing the hopes of local residents of Cape Mount County.

Report by  Alloycious David and Emmanuel Freudenthal

FrontPage Africa, March 20, 2017

http://tinyurl.com/lyxoff3

[Emmanuel Freudenthal is a freelance reporter investigating
businesses in Africa, while Alloycious David is an award winning
Liberian investigative journalist]

Contrary to President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s assurance that the New
Liberty Gold Mine will positively impact the lives of Liberians, the
325 families displaced by the mine have not yet moved into the
houses they had been promised.

The World Bank injected over US$ 19 million into the project with
the aim of bettering the lives of Liberians.

The houses should have been finished three years ago and now lie in
ruins, overtaken by grass. In the resettled town, called Kinjor,
residents still live in the inadequate structures that were meant to
host them temporarily.

There is no sign that their construction works will resume soon.

The company in charge of the project, Aureus Mining, now renamed
Avesoro, has also failed to construct a health post in Kinjor, as
required in an agreement between local residents and the company,
known as the ‘Resettlement Action Plan’.

Residents claimed that the absence of a health center is
contributing to untimely deaths.

Residents also complained that they did not receive adequate
compensation for the crops they lost when their farms were destroyed
to make way for the mine.

Gbaley Dorley, 32, alleged that his farm was completely destroyed by
the company. In exchange, he got less than a hundred United States
dollars in compensation for the cassava, coconut, and pineapple he
cultivated.

Another problem being experienced in Kinjor is safe drinking water.

Residents said the community, has less than five functional hand
pumps and that many of them do not work during the dry season.

The company’s operations, according to some residents poses health
hazard. Kulah Dassin, a 36-year-old mother of eight explained that
in March 2015, the company polluted their river with cyanide, which
killed all the fish.

The children, who usually bath and wash in the river, suffered from
rashes, which look like ringworm, she said.

Dassin disclosed that the application of traditional medicine has
helped to cure the rash, but that it is still visible on children.

The Town Chief of Jikandoh, called Pa Jimmy, corroborated that
hundreds of fish died, and related “I immediately placed a call to
the company’s management when we noticed that the fish were dying.”

Pa Jimmy explained that Debar Allen, the company’s manager, and a
team came quickly to collect water samples in the river and took
some of the dead fish back to their office.

Debar Allen, admitted that the company accidentally dumped cyanide
in the river but said the company has taken action to advert the
situation.

The company’s General Manager instructed them to stop using the
water.

In restitution for the pollution of their river, Aureus Mining
constructed two hand pumps to provide community members with safe
drinking water.

The company is compensating residents by providing them with cartons
of fish.

Although, the company or the Liberia Ministry of Health has not
provided official statement on the safety of the river, and no one
was examined by a doctor, community members have resumed bathing and
washing their clothes in the river.

The Liberia Environmental Protection Agency attempted to investigate
the leak, but said that the company obstructed its investigation,
which led to a US$ 10,000 fine for the company.

Allen further stated that construction work on the houses were
halted to focus more on the mining, because the company was running
out of funding, but contradicted himself and said individuals
resettled in new Kinjor were satisfied with where they staying and
that the company was thinking about what to do with the units when
they are completed.

The company’s ownership remains sealed in secrecy, Aureus Mining is
part of several shell companies registered in secrecy jurisdictions
and named in the Panama Papers.

The NEWS also unearthed that it has links to former President
Charles Taylor, who is currently serving a 50 year jail sentence for
war crimes committed in neighboring Sierra Leone.

Taylor’s former associate, the late Senator Keikurah B. Kpoto
created the Liberian subsidiary of Aureus Mining, the Bea Mountain
Mining Corp. This company was given a mining license under Taylor’s
government.

The World Bank and Aureus Mining failed to provide information on
inquire whether Taylor’s associates or some of his ex-officials
still hold shares in New Liberty Gold Mine and whether they are
aware that the project had link with Taylor.

Aureus Mining has not only failed to meet the aims for which the
World Bank infused over US$ 19 million into New Liberty Gold Mine,
but has created more sufferings, inflict pains and enriched
shareholders at the detriment of Liberia.

Via email, the bank disclosed that it conducted desktop review of
the project and held several meeting with Aureus Mining, but refused
to provide further information, because it entered a confidentiality
agreement with the company that prevents it from providing more
information on the project.

********************************************************************

84% of World Bank’s private investments in Sub-Saharan Africa go to
companies using tax havens

Oxfam International

11th Apr 2016

http://tinyurl.com/n2rpthk

Fifty-one of the 68 companies that were lent money by the World
Bank’s private lending arm in 2015 to finance investments in sub-
Saharan Africa use tax havens, Oxfam revealed today.

Oxfam’s new analysis focused on International Finance Corporation’s
(IFC) investments in Sub-Saharan Africa. It shows that together
these 51 companies, whose use of tax havens has no apparent link
with their core business, received 84 percent of IFC investments in
that region in 2015. It also reveals that the IFC has more than
doubled its investments in companies that use tax havens in just
five years – from $1.2billion in 2010 to $2.87billion in 2015.

The findings come ahead of the annual IMF-World Bank Spring meetings
starting on Wednesday in Washington DC, and in the wake of the
Panama Papers scandal which revealed how powerful individuals and
companies are using tax havens to hide wealth and dodge taxes. The
issue of tax havens is also expected to be high on the agenda at the
UK government’s Anti-Corruption Summit in London next month.

In Oxfam’s study, the most popular haven for IFC’s corporate clients
was Mauritius; 40 percent of IFC’s clients investing in Sub-Saharan
Africa have links there. Mauritius is known to facilitate “round-
tripping.” This is where a company shifts money offshore before
returning it disguised as foreign direct investment, which attracts
tax breaks and other financial incentives.

Sub-Saharan Africa is the poorest region in the world. It
desperately needs corporate tax revenues to invest in public
services and infrastructure. For example, the region lacks money to
provide enough skilled birth attendants, clean water or mosquito
nets, resulting in high rates of child mortality; one child in 12
dies before their fifth birthday.

Oxfam’s Head of Inequality, Nick Bryer, said: “It’s crazy to be
giving with one hand and taking away with another – the UK
government donates to the World Bank to encourage development, but
by allowing investments in tax havens the World Bank’s lending arm
is ultimately depriving poor countries of much-needed revenues to
fight poverty and inequality.”

“The World Bank Group should not risk funding companies that are
dodging taxes in Sub-Saharan Africa and across the globe. It needs
to put safeguards in place to ensure that its clients can prove they
are paying their fair share of tax.”

The IFC invested more than $86billion of public money in developing
countries between 2010 and 2015; 18.6 percent of it spent in Sub-
Saharan Africa. The IFC has a significant focus on financial
markets, infrastructure, agribusiness and forestry, among other
sectors.

While the IFC arguably leads the private sector with its disclosure,
environmental and social standards, the public still has no access
to information about where over half of the institution’s financing
ends up, because it is done through opaque financial intermediaries.
It also continues to face major challenges in measuring its overall
development impact, and ensuring that the projects it funds do not
harm local communities. This latest Oxfam research shows that the
organisation also has a long way to go in ensuring that its clients
are responsible tax payers.

Oxfam is calling for the IFC to develop new standards to ensure it
only invests in companies that have responsible corporate tax
practices. For example, companies should be transparent about their
economic activities so it is clear if they are paying their fair
share of tax where they do business.

The international agency is also calling on David Cameron to show
strong leadership in tackling tax havens, beginning by intervening
to ensure that the UK’s Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies
publish public registers revealing the true owners of companies
based there, ahead of the Anti-Corruption Summit in May.

Oxfam is urging the World Bank and IMF to work with governments
around the world to further reform the international tax system and
help prevent tax dodging by wealthy individuals and companies,
including action to end the era of tax havens. Tax dodging using tax
havens is estimated to cost poor countries $100billion in lost
revenues every year.

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

Everyone Seems Astounded That the Trump Administration Has Derailed

What could go wrong if you put the fox inside the chicken house?

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” Matthew 19:24

By James Thompson

The MSM seems to be beside itself and is twittering and blasting out its astonishment that something has gone wrong in the White House since Donald Trump has assumed the throne. People are talking treason and/or impeachment of this president who was elected by a minority of the voters in the US democracy.

How could this be? What could the voters be thinking of?

People in the US have been dumbed down for many years now. They have been trained by a massive brainwashing campaign carried out by the government on behalf of the bourgeoisie which it serves.

Most people in the US believe that Karl Marx, V. I. Lenin, Frederick Engels, Joseph Stalin and communists in general are villains. However, Marxists have some important lessons to teach. Communists have a long history of fighting for the interests of working people.

For those that listen, Marx taught us that capitalism can only be sustained by theft of the value produced by the workers’ labor. Marx taught us that capitalism is theft and capitalists are thieves.

Nevertheless, the US people persist in their uncritical worship of wealthy people. It is generally believed that wealthy people are superior to working people. They believe that the wealthy have mysteriously earned their income. Few people seem to understand that wealthy people gain their wealth the old-fashioned way, they steal it.

Now, if people will just open their eyes, they will see Donald Trump on the throne, and he has no clothes on. In other words, his ignorance has been projected out for all the world to see. His history of exploiting people to increase his own wealth is visible to all. His disregard for other humans is obvious. He is the same man that bragged that if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue, people would still support him. He is the same man that talked of grabbing women in inappropriate ways just because he could.

People are astounded that Trump may have been mixed up with Russian mobsters and bankers. They are astounded that the healthcare act he proposed was obvious thievery from working people to further enrich the wealthiest people in the country. Perhaps working people will finally get it that wealthy people will always steal working people blind if given the opportunity. Maybe working people will decide that it is time to fight for their own interests instead of licking the boots of the capitalists.

Trump is a dirty politician
| March 25, 2017 | 5:00 pm | A. Shaw, Analysis, Donald Trump, political struggle, Russia | Comments closed

By A. Shaw

“The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly.  It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them.  Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment, ” the Federal Election Commission says on its website.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) statement of the law, cited above, applies to “ANY FOREIGN NATIONAL.”

In the current investigation of Donald Trump and his campaign for treason or high crime, two Russian banks — SBV Bank and ALFA Bank — appear to be foreign nationals relevant to the investigation.

The FEC statement of the law also deals with ” funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly.”

The FBI is the lead agency investigating the treason or high crime case against Trump and his campaign.

Since Oct. 2016, the FBI has conducted electronic surveillance of the relationship between a Russian computer firm, located in Trump Tower, and the two Russian banks mentioned above.  The FBI has further watched the relationship between this Russian computer firm in Trump Tower and high-ranking individuals in the Trump campaign, including among others, Donald Trump, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Ivanka Trump, and Roger Stone. The FBI watched the relationship between these five above-named individuals involved in the campaign and financial vehicles connected to the Trump campaign, such as PACs and SUPER-PACs.

Money flowed from the Russian banks to the Trump campaign.

The money flowed “directly and indirectly.”

A presidential campaign is a “federal election.”

The phrase “in connection with” includes a wide range of relationships between the things connected.

“Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment” the FEC statement says.

Article II, Section Four of the US Constitution says “The president … shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason … or other high crimes and misdemeanours.”

Fixing an US election in collusion with a foreign country is treason or, at least, a high crime.

There is now probable cause to impeach Trump, the so-called president.

Africa/Global: Scaling Up Solar
| March 21, 2017 | 8:12 pm | Africa, environmental crisis | Comments closed

Africa/Global: Scaling Up Solar

AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 21, 2017 (170321)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

Even in the United States, where action on climate change is under
aggressive assault by climate deniers in the Trump
administration and Congress, renewable energy is projected to
continue to advance rapidly, on the basis of its still rapidly
growing cost advantages over fossil fuels. According to a report
just released by GTM research, the US total solar market, already
supplying the largest share of new power production, is poised to
triple over the next five years. The prospect for renewable energy
to power increased access to electricity in Africa is also dramatic,
according to a new report from the Africa Progress Panel.

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/clim1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/clim1703.php

In both developed countries and in regions where hundreds of
millions lack any access at all to electricity, the technical
capacity for rapid massive expansion of renewable energy supplies
has already been demonstrated. Scaling up, however, requires
financial innovation as well, and that still depends in large part
on public policy as well as private sector financing. Fortunately,
in Africa as well as at the global level, recognition of the
potential benefits is growing almost as fast as technical
innovation.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains opening remarks by Kofi Annan on
the launch of a new report by the Africa Progress Panel: “Lights,
Power, Action: Electrifying Africa.” The full report stresses the
central role of off-grid and mini-grid systems in providing access
to electricity for the estimated 620 million Africans currently
without such access. The report, too long and complexly formatted to
be excerpted here, is available in pdf format (http://tinyurl.com/jr8g7q8).

While acknowledging the role of extending the grid and some
continued reliance on large-scale power-production projects, the
report’s emphasis is the demonstrable untapped potential for scaling
up both small-scale household systems and community-level mini-
grids, both of which have been demonstrated in practice as cost-
effective.

Also included is the executive summary of a World Resources
Institute study published in December 2016, focusing particularly on
the remarkable success and even-greater potential of “pay-as-you-go”
solar systems, using the case studies of Kenya and Tanzania. The
principal obstacle to scaling up, the study concludes, is not
technical but rather financial. New forms of financing and seed
funds have enormous potential for expansion.

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on climate change and energy,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/intro-env.php

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

Opening remarks by Kofi Annan, Chair of the Africa Progress Panel,
at the launch of “Lights, Power, Action: Electrifying Africa” in
Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire on 13 March 2017.

Africa Progress Panel

http://tinyurl.com/k7t9cdl

Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to be with you in Abidjan this morning.

Achieving universal access to modern energy is critical to Africa’s
transformation.

The Africa Progress Panel, which I chair, welcomes the opportunity
to collaborate with the African Development Bank and other key
stakeholders in pushing for the changes we need to see.

It was in that spirit that I gladly accepted President Adesina’s
invitation last year to serve as a lead champion of the New Deal on
Energy in Africa. His leadership in positioning the AfDB at the
forefront of the New Deal process is precisely what is needed to
change the game for Africa.

The Africa Progress Panel first drew attention to the need for
bolder action to electrify Africa faster in our 2015 Report: “Power,
People, Planet: Seizing Africa’s Energy and Climate opportunities”.
Two years later, this need remains as urgent as ever.

Nearly two-thirds of Africans – 620 million people – still do not
have access to “affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern
electricity”, the energy goal that is central to Agenda 2030.

Africa’s energy deficit continues to stifle economic growth, job
creation, agricultural transformation, and improvements in health
and education. Meeting Sustainable Development Goal 7, the energy
goal, is a pre-condition for achieving many of the other goals.

The good news is that we are no longer in the dark, so to speak,
about how to tackle this challenge.

In several countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco and South
Africa, renewable energy makes up an increasingly important share of
national power generation.

There are also a number of promising initiatives aimed at providing
electricity across borders, mostly drawing on renewable resources
such as solar, wind and hydro power.

We now need to see more of them deployed at far greater scale to
bring power and light to Africans who still lack modern energy.

That is the core message of the APP’s new report, Lights, Power,
Action: Electrifying Africa, which is launched today.

Traditional approaches to extending the grid are no longer viable as
the main option for African countries. They take too long and do not
meet the needs of our growing economies and societies. Instead,
governments and their partners need to re-imagine their energy
future.

We are not saying countries should immediately stop using fossil
fuels and switch to renewable sources of energy. As our report
clearly states, the cost of transitioning to renewables may be
prohibitively high in the short term – especially for countries that
use their sizeable endowments of coal and other fossil fuels to
generate energy.

What we are advocating is that African governments harness every
available energy option, so that no one is left behind. Each country
needs to decide on the most cost-effective, technologically
efficient energy mix that works best for its own needs.

To meeting rapidly growing demand, that energy mix will gradually
progress towards greater use of off-grid household systems and mini-
grids. It should also lead to the emergence of more flexible, hybrid
national energy systems that link grids to off-grid generation.

Mobile phone technology has already helped Africa to leapfrog over
conventional technology and to improve financial and social
inclusion. In the same way, we foresee that innovation will bring
millions of Africans into the energy loop, leading to better health,
better education, better access to markets, and better jobs.

Off-grid electricity generation used to be regarded in Africa as a
stop-gap measure – a way to power a few lights during the long wait
for a grid connection. In recent years, the number of households
connected to off-grid power has soared, improving millions of lives
while relieving a chronic shortage of power.

Some of these home systems may in future connect to grids through
buy-back schemes, enabling households to earn extra cash from the
power they generate. Such arrangements are already working in
Australia, some parts of Europe and the United States. Overall,
however, policy and regulatory environments in Africa need to
improve considerably to make such linkages reality.

As we document in our new report, off-grid solar products can act as
rungs on an “energy ladder”, providing a range of energy services to
households and enterprises with different energy needs and incomes.

Mini-grids can also offer sustainable permanent alternatives to
connecting to the grid, especially as reliable and affordable
products come on-stream that are attractive to small and medium-
sized enterprises as well as communities operating far from the
national grid.

The agenda is clear and the challenges are well known.

As well as leading the way in promoting wider use of off-grid and
mini-grid technology, African governments must continue to work hard
to transform national energy grids that are often unreliable and
financially fragile.

Many energy utilities are mismanaged and inefficient. A lack of
accountability and transparency in their governance also nurtures
corruption.

Electricity theft at staggering scale is often the result of this
malpractice; rolling black-outs are the result of mismanagement. All
continue to feed a deep sense of frustration among citizens.

They also highlight why power provision has become a highly
political issue in several countries.

Poor energy governance reflects the wider governance deficit that
threatens to derail development efforts in a number of countries.

So what do African governments and their partners need to do to make
this vision of an empowered Africa a reality?

Africa’s leadership, in both public and private sectors, needs to
step up and champion the “energy for all” agenda.

Governments need to intensify their efforts to put in place
regulatory environments that give the energy sector incentives to
deliver on its transformative potential.

The private sector, African and non-African, should be encouraged to
enter energy generation, transmission and distribution markets,
deepen linkages throughout the value chain, and build the investment
partnerships that can drive growth and create jobs.

While the onus is on African leadership and ownership of this
agenda, Africa’s energy future is also an issue of global relevance.
Although Africa only accounts for a tiny fraction of global
emissions, it wholeheartedly embraced the Paris climate agreement’s
overarching ambition – limiting global warming through unshakeable
and progressive commitment to a low-carbon planet.

The Paris commitment has led the industrialized countries to pledge
billions of dollars to supporting the low carbon transition, in
Africa and elsewhere. However, and as we have repeatedly highlighted
in our reports and our public advocacy, very little of that money is
moving yet.

Ladies and gentlemen,

As our new report shows, where there is good leadership, there are
excellent prospects for energy transition, and leaders in a number
of countries are demonstrating the levels and intensity of political
will needed to address these serious and persistent problems.

We urge governments to put in place the integrated plans and
policies that can scale up Africa’s energy transition. The success
of countries such as Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Morocco, Rwanda and
South Africa shows what can be achieved.

Achievements at the national level are essential but only part of
the solution. To fully address the energy challenges, governments
must collaborate more closely on a continental scale. Improved
cross-border power trade is crucial to realising Africa’s energy
potential. Yet less than 8 per cent of power is currently traded
across borders in Sub-Saharan Africa.

There is a glaring need to adopt a more continental approach to
power infrastructure development and management in order to
accelerate regional power integration.

This must involve a greater pooling of electricity resources and
harmonisation of national grids. Massive increases in investment in
regional transmission infrastructure and the development of new
power trading arrangements are also essential.

The ultimate goal should be to interlink Africa’s numerous and
fragmented power initiatives to create a single pan-African power
grid.

We know what is needed to reduce and ultimately eliminate Africa’s
energy deficit. Now we must focus on implementation.

The time for excuses is over.

It’s time for action.

**********************************************************

Stimulating Pay-As-You-Go Energy Access in Kenya And Tanzania: The
Role of Development Finance

World Resources Institute

Issue Brief

December 2016

Sanjoy Sanyal, Jeffrey Prins, Feli Visco, and Ariel Pinchot

http://tinyurl.com/mhsps2l

Executive Summary

Nearly 620 million people in sub-Saharan Africa lack electricity
access. Improving access to affordable and reliable energy is
critical to reducing poverty and improving quality of life (IEA
2011). To improve energy access, it is important to develop
financing and payment schemes that fit consumer energy budgets.
“Pay-as-you-go” (PAYG) business models harness technology to provide
a “one-stop-shop” solution for consumer finance and energy products.
The PAYG model originated in Kenya, and addresses the key challenges
of extending end-user finance and collecting payments from remote
customers who often have erratic and limited cash flow. PAYG
companies, at this point, typically provide basic lighting and
mobile phone charging services. The technology can play an important
role in expanding access to electricity services to remote and low-
income populations.

This issue brief draws on findings from desk research, workshops,
and inter views with PAYG companies, donors, and development finance
institutions (DFIs) active in energy access in East Africa to assess
how PAYG companies have stepped up to serve the approximately 35
million people in Kenya and 36 million people in Tanzania who lack
access to electricity, as well as additional millions who are
underserved. Our paper also draws on interviews with stakeholders
involved in Bangladesh’s IDCOL program to provide insight into how
DFIs and donors supported the Bangladesh program, in order to elicit
lessons relevant to the Kenyan and Tanzanian contexts. We chose
Bangladesh’s IDCOL program as a reference point for two reasons: the
energy enterprises in Bangladesh perform the same one-stop-shop role
as the PAYG companies, and IDCOL provides an example of where DFIs
have played a significant role in channeling finance (US$750
million) to achieve substantial energy access goals (three million
solar home systems).

Given the nascent stage of most energy access markets, much of the
existing PAYG literature focuses on analyzing the innovative
variations of business models as well as factors that could improve
the enabling environment. However, market players in both Kenya and
Tanzania have evolved beyond an early-stage pilot phase. These
pioneering companies have successfully raised grant, equity, and–
more recently– debt finance to pilot, develop, and scale their
businesses. According to our estimates, they have reached more than
half a million households through rapid sales growth. The market
overall is also evolving, as suggested by the participation of 52
international private sector investors–ranging from foundations  to
large companies–and five debt deals struck in 2015, the largest of
which was a US$45 million raise by one company. Market leaders such
as M-KOPA, Mobisol, and Off-Grid Electric have begun expanding into
regional markets.

While encouraging progress has been made, the addressable markets in
Kenya and Tanzania are much larger than those reached by existing
companies so far, and the products they offer need to be larger in
capacity if they are to provide more than basic lighting and mobile
charging. PAYG companies will require about one billion dollars
across these two countries to scale for broader impact. Therefore,
this issue brief focuses on how this broader impact can be created.
We look at how successful PAYG businesses operating in Kenya and
Tanzania have raised finance and the constraints faced by the
industry, and we propose recommendations for how donors and DFIs can
continue to support the development of these markets.

Currently, the various types of capital (debt, impact equity
capital, grant) that PAYG companies need are available almost
exclusively from international investors. Local financial
institutions in Kenya and Tanzania have been hesitant to provide
financing to PAYG customers: they perceive PAYG companies as early-
stage, risky businesses and are unfamiliar with the technology as
well as the creditworthiness of rural consumers. The absence of
local capital sources to some extent explains the fact that almost
all the successful PAYG companies are foreign owned and foreign
managed. Local companies often lack the initial resources, as well
as the networks and skills, to raise both early-stage capital and
develop complex financial structures to raise debt capital from
international markets. Local companies are also hesitant to take on
foreign currency risk.

Technological barriers to the PAYG business are falling, and the
sector is likely to see the entry of a larger number of companies.
This is not yet happening, because access to finance remains a key
entry barrier, particularly for locally owned and managed companies.
Finance is most critically needed to build out marketing, sales, and
service infrastructure and to provide customers with financing. The
relative lack of access to finance results in fewer companies and
less competition in the PAYG sector.

DFIs and donors have a role to play in supporting local financial
institutions to extend local currency debt. In Bangladesh,
international DFIs and donors channeled funds for energy access
through IDCOL, a government-owned financial intermediary. IDCOL also
played a strong role in market development. The market support roles
played by IDCOL can be adapted to the Kenyan and Tanzanian contexts.
The debt- financing role in Kenya and Tanzania can be played by
commercial banks from the very beginning. Involving commercial banks
would have the advantage of ensuring that funds are available to the
sector even after donors withdraw. …

Drawing on the success of the IDCOL program and the unique needs of
PAYG companies, we offer recommendations targeted primarily to DFIs
and donors regarding how they can support local financial
institutions in their efforts to expand energy access in Kenya and
Tanzania.

* International DFIs and donors can leverage their long relation-
ships with local financial institutions in Kenya and Tanzania to
stimulate local finance for the PAYG sector. DFIs and donors can
provide guarantee schemes and lines of credit to local banks. This
support would help banks develop a deeper understanding and
familiarity with PAYG business models, and make finance more
accessible to local companies. International DFIs and donors can
“crowd in” private sector investment in PAYG by channeling their
investments through fund of funds run by professional impact
investors and incentivize PAYG companies to invest in targeted
marketing and distribution infrastructure through results-based
financing. DFIs and donors can also provide technical assistance to
public organizations to support capacity building in monitoring and
verification.

* Local commercial banks can begin to explore the PAYG sec- tor, and
understand company cash flow patterns, through the provision of
short-term trade finance. They can also explore mechanisms such as a
debt ser vice coverage account to partially cover for default risks.

* National governments can provide support through a suite of policy
and regulatory measures to unlock domestic commercial financing for
distributed renewable energy including, for example, the development
of mechanisms to coordinate roles of institutions in this space and
encourage private sector activity by setting clear national
priorities and releasing grid extension plans to the public.

* Private sector investors can help companies to access different
types of capital and partnerships in response to evolving business
needs. This may include support for raising capital from local
commercial banks. Foundations and family offices can provide loss
guarantees to local banks.

* Private sector PAYG businesses can adopt standardized accounting
standards to assist in transactions with local banks.

The scope of this issue brief is confined to analysis of financing
in support of PAYG solar home system companies. While we recognize
that PAYG products providing lower-level energy services are not
comprehensive solutions to the energy access challenge, we believe
that our recommendations will also support the broader energy access
sector, including mini- and micro-grids.

Introduction

The Imperatives of the Electricity Access Challenge

Nearly 1.3 billion people, or 18 per cent of the world’s population,
still lack access to grid electricity (IEA 2014a). An additional one
billion are “under electrified,” a status charac terized by unstable
grid connection with regular power outages (A.T. Kearney and GOGLA
2014; IEA 2013). Sub-Saharan Africa bears a disproportionate share
of this burden. Over 620 million people, nearly two-thirds of the
region’s population, are without electricity access (IEA 2014b).
Increasing access to afford- able and reliable energy services is
fundamental to reducing poverty and improving other human
development indicators (IEA 2011).

Electricity access has long been measured by the physical connection
of a household to grid electricity or the presence of a nearby
electric pole. This binary definition of electricity access has
increasingly come into question in recent years, because it fails to
capture the quality of electricity services received by end users.
In response, the World Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance
Program (ESMAP) has developed a multi-tier framework for defining
and measuring levels of energy access. Under this approach, access
to electricity refers to the ability to obtain electricity that is
characterized by the following attributes: “adequate, available when
needed, reliable, of good quality, affordable, legal, convenient,
healthy and safe for all required applications across households,
productive enterprises and community institutions” (Angelou and
Bhatia 2015).

The framework measures electricity access across five tiers; each
tier reflects a specific level of performance of an electricity
supply system defined by the attributes. Tier 1 and Tier 2 are the
low-power capacity levels (minimum 3W and 50W, respectively). At
Tier 1 level, electricity access is defined as providing lighting
and mobile charging for a minimum of four hours per day. At Tier 2
level, access additionally includes the ability to power a fan
and/or television for four hours (see Annex II).

The PAYG businesses that we study in this issue brief provide
electricity access mainly at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels through
standalone solar home systems (SHSs). The standalone solar system
comes with a battery, a charge controller, a solar panel and LED
(light emitting diode) bulbs, and a mobile charger. Larger systems
(typically 50W and above) can potentially connect direct current
(DC) appliances such as a television. Even at lower tiers of
electricity access, there are numerous household-level benefits.
These benefits stem from the fact that the SHSs replace alternate
sources, which are often very expensive.

Previous WRI research conducted in collaboration with the
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis indicates that
household kerosene use is significantly lower for house- holds with
SHSs, even when compared with grid customers. While 80 percent of
households with access to grid electricity continue to use kerosene,
only about 25 percent of homes with SHSs use kerosene. The
reliability of SHS electricity supply may explain this finding (Rao,
Agarwal, and Wood 2016). Other research indicates benefits such as
prevention of GHG emissions (both carbon dioxide and black soot)
(Kaufman et al. 2000; Wang et al. 2011), increased household
disposable income because of reduced spending on kerosene and
candles (Mills 2005; Tracy and Jacobson 2012), health benefits such
as reduced accidents and indoor pollution (Mills 2014; Samad et al.
2013) and social benefits such as increased evening study hours for
children (A.T. Kearney and GOGLA 2014; Khan and Azad 2014; Samad et
al. 2013).

The Importance of “Pay-as- You-Go” (PAYG)

Previous WRI research has underscored the importance of designing
financing and payment schemes that fit consumer energy budgets. The
research notes that energy enterprises have to design innovative
financing and payment schemes to encourage consumers to purchase
their products, because customers are accustomed to buying energy in
small increments (Ballesteros et al. 2013). …

PAYG is a technology-driven method that allows consumers to pay the
lease amount for a given energy system or pay a fee for the service
of using the system. It uses information technology to enable remote
activation with payment receipt (Alstone et al. 2015). PAYG includes
a range of business models, which differ as to how payments are
accepted and to whom the ownership of the system ultimately
devolves. From the consumer’s point of view, the PAYG model offers a
one-stop shop, where the product and the financing are available
from the same source. The willingness of companies to finance
products gives customers confidence in the new technology. Indeed,
energy companies have tried to partner with microfinance
institutions (MFIs) but often with limited success. The energy
service companies have typically been smaller than their counterpart
MFIs, and partnerships have been hard to manage given the differing
expectations of the two parties. In Kenya, for example, consumers
could not access technical maintenance services from the energy
companies, which were limited in their geographic outreach. The poor
after-sales service left many customers dissatisfied with their
products, which in turn led to a refusal to repay loans (Rolffs,
Byrne, and Ockwell 2014).

The benefits of the PAYG model in providing a one-stop-shop solution
to customers are several. As we have already noted, the offer of
finance by the energy company instills trust in consumers regarding
the quality of the product. Operational efficiency is improved
because there is no need for coordination between finance providers
and technology providers. With PAYG, the companies are able to
provide longer-term loans than those usually offered by MFIs. PAYG
models also allow the provision of relatively large credit amounts
(to cover the cost of the renewable energy system) to consumers
whose credit worthiness may be unknown. The credit risk is partially
mitigated by the incentive system that links payments to service
provision. PAYG approaches, which use mobile communication
technologies, also reduce the costs associated with collecting
repayments (Rolffs, Byrne, and Ockwell 2014). Finally, PAYG enables
significant data collection. This gives enterprises the advantage of
understanding product performance and consumer behavior (Alstone et
al. 2015).

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

RESPONSE TO: Bernie Sanders Rightfully Refers to Democratic Party as a Sinking Ship
| March 19, 2017 | 11:47 am | A. Shaw, Analysis, Bernie Sanders, political struggle | Comments closed
John Bachtell divides the working class by splitting the CPUSA: Whatever happened to “Unity, the only way!”?
| March 16, 2017 | 9:04 pm | About the CPUSA, Party Voices, political struggle | Comments closed

John Case’s view of the CPUSA under John Bachtell’s leadership via the Socialist Economics listserv:

With the best of intentions and sentiments, CP leader Bachtell delivers a typically impotent CP rebuke to fascism. The fascist threat will be rebuked when its driving cause, 40 years of Austerity, is directly addressed and reversed. Not before. Bachtell does not even mention that. Doing that would mean raising, not burying, effacing, minimizing or damning with faint praise, class politics in the midst of reveling in the abundance of “resistance” movements. Hat tips from “Communists” to these movements are no doubt elevating to the tipper. But who in the movements cares? the CP represents no class, none, Airy speculations about all-peoples fronts and such from those with no base, and no prospects of one, are just that: hot air.

I suspect the faction online advocating that the whole Trump affair, and now the fate of democracy, is mainly about race and not class is loud in party ranks. I guess THEY won’t be contending, like Sanders, “the new center” — Joe Manchin— in the coalfields of West Virginia. Or engaging the gas fields either, with those evil pipeline workers and their building trades unions  begging Trump — not the “multi-class allies” — for jobs at a living wage.

Bachtell offers this, for those who might be tempted to criticize, like Sanders, the new “center”: Senator Joe Manchin, of West Virginia: “These approaches [that] advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary…”
 
Unity on what? Does the “unity” include — first — reversing austerity, which, by the way, does NOT require overthrowing capitalism, but does require a determined class struggle against the rights and prerogatives of billionaires? If not, it won’t amount to dogshit in repairing working class disunity. And if that is not repaired, all the “multi-class” coalitions in the world won’t remove the fascists, and the fetid petri dish of austerity in which they thrive and are reborn. If you do not use a class approach — who are YOUR people, YOUR way of life — if ordinary people are not drawn into motion in the millions, you wont ever know what the basis of popular unity really is. For example — you might find that fixing austerity HAS TO COME BEFORE bathroom rights in North Carolina, if you were listening to millions, not the “left”.
 
Of course this discourse is all a waste of time with the CP and some similar orgs — orgs with no base have no real way of politically verifying their positions, and thus can remain firmly planted in mid-air for lifetimes. It was effectively liquidated in the 50’s by a combination of repression and sectarianism. It revived a half Zombie existence in the sixties at the pleasure of the  CPSU and a quid pro quo with the Kennedy Administration. It’s leaders got out of jail. It succeeded in getting Angela Davis out of jail — its singular post-war actual accomplishment, beyond a repository of militant memories. Soviet cash helped pay for the paper and presidential campaigns of Gus Hall. Which makes the CP going after Trump for foreign interference a bit, well, compromised to say the least.
But I offer it as an example of what not to do as the resistance goes forward.
Stay away from sectarian outfits with “profound world-scale views” but no legs, and giant suitcases of dead weights they will ask you to carry for them on the way to “liberation”.
jcase
Joes Sims response to John Case’s view of John Bachtell via the Socialist Economics listserv:

I was surprised and dismayed by John Case’s recent rebuke of John Bachtell’s article and more broadly the Communist Party.  Allow me a brief personal reply.
First it is absolutely untrue that the Communist Party downplays austerity now or in the past. I, for example, essayed an extended critique of this very subject, its influence on GOP and Democratic neoliberal politics and on the Clinton’s in particular. Combating the fascist danger as Case correctly emphasizes was its point of departure. So too with various articles in peoplesworld.org by many writers including Bachtell.  His most recent, taken to task by John Case, is no different, albeit its consideration of how to conduct this fight in the current dispensation, an issue that’s ignored at our collective peril.

What’s the basis of this fight? Clearly it will not be giving up on the fight for 15, Obamacare, acceptance of national stop-and-frisk, approval of right to work, etc.  In a phrase, we cannot stop saying no to neoliberal austerity.  These demands have had much room for initiative and setting the agenda – even for the most advanced elements of the political center.  This fact is suggestive of the danger of getting stuck in the middle of constricted phrases and formulas. My own view is that we’ve entered an unprecedented period where the defeat of fascism may well require radical radical reforms: or as John Case puts it, a defeat of austerity, a moment when for a time, Â the anti-right and anti-monopoly stages of struggle could combine.

It’s all the more curious then why John Case critiques  challenging the basis for Trump vote. Doing so does not necessarily undermine the anti-austerity motives behind sections of the vote.  An understanding of this vote is not written only in black and white, but also in many shades of grey.  A denial of one leads necessarily to a misunderstanding of the other. Not seeing the greys may obscure all.  Hence my complete disdain for the “identity politics” critique as if people of color, women, lgbtq people do not have the same economic claims and anxiety as working-class whites. In fact we have more. John Case knows that and in fact has written eloquently on it himself, which makes me wonder as to why the tenor, tone and content of his attack, a fusillade that goes beyond the present moment but dates a half a century back into the dark corners of the Cold War.

Speaking now as the son of a steelworker at Youngstown Sheet and Tube and coming of age in the direct shadow of Joe McCarthy and Roy Cohn I have to directly challenge Case’s allegations about the Communist Party, its working class influence and its source.  Coming from a party family in a  small industrial town in the 60s I witnessed the daily work of my mom and dad from a unique vantage point. I saw first hand their daily work on school reform, model cities, welfare rights, police violence, union rights, even questions of war and peace. I heard the phone ring and watched their grassroots defense of our class, work which won them respect and even election to community organization and union positions. And all of this was after having been twice hauled before HUAC. Dad was a grievance man for Local 2163; mom an activist and trustee in AFSCME, both members of the NAACP, CBTU, SANE FREEZE and many other organizations. When dad died the then USWA sent Oliver Montgomery from the Pittsburgh International to speak at his funeral. Montgomery reflected on dad’s work on the consent decree and importantly on the issue of black white unity urging him at a difficult time not to give up on his white union brothers.  Tributes were also brought from other community and religious leaders, including Ron Daniels. The same can be said for my mom, who twice ran for city and countywide office and was an elected leader in her union. Even today when dining out her lunch and dinner are bought by community figures who on occasion happen upon us – an offering of admiration and respect.

Here’s what I came here to say: this respect was not bought with Moscow gold. Not in Youngstown, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago or any other town were communists worked and struggled. And these tales are not unique but are the stories of Frank and Bea Lumpkin, George and Denise Edwards, Wally Kauffman, George Meyers, Lorenzo and Anita Torres and hundreds if not thousands of communist trade unionists who labored in the factories and mines of our country.

So no John I can never agree with your charge that the U.S. working class doesn’t give a damn about the Communist Party.

No, respect cannot be bought. This I know. But I’ve learned something else. Lies come cheap, especially big ones.  And that’s what troubled me more than anything else when reading your critique.  We live in an age of the Big Lie, in a time when facts give way to unbelievably dangerous flights of fantasy. We cannot in any way accommodate them.  The facts I offer instead are small ones, grains of truth really, anecdotal sure, but taken together they weave an undeniable pattern of struggle, one that challenges your narrative John, then and now. These same truths obtain today as the CP experiences an uptick in membership brought about in response to the Trump election. Just last weekend we phoned some 5000 of them several hundred of whom joined since November 8th.

Winter is here and we must huddle together to avoid the cold. And for that reason I will end by reminding of you of my father’s lesson upon dying learned through the tears of Oliver Montgomery’s eulogy: no matter how difficult the time or how low the blow I will not give up on you my erstwhile comrade but remaining class brother.  Let’s not give up on each other.

Joe Sims