MALCOLM X: THE LAST SPEECH – AFTER THE FIREBOMBING (Feb. 14, 1965) – YouTube

Response To “It’s Time We Believed Warren. She’s Not Running.”
| February 22, 2015 | 4:19 pm | Analysis, Bernie Sanders, National, political struggle | 1 Comment
by A. Shaw
So, according to the article, Elizabeth Warren is the choice of “progressives” because she warns us about the threat to democracy posed by the concentration of capital in the hands of a small group of people. Apart from Bernie Sanders, the article alleges, no other high-profile politician warns us about this threat to democracy. But Warren is not running and it’s time to accept that fact. Last week, Warren and Clinton met before the big bourgeois media so that Warren could effectively endorse Clinton, attempting to lead Warren’s supporters into Clinton’s camp. Warren didn’t decide against running, the article argues, because Clinton has a big lead in the polls and a lot of money. Warren isn’t scared of Clinton, the article finds.Warren decided against running because she simply isn’t interested in the presidency, the article concludes.
When the article finds that Warren isn’t running, it stands on solid ground. But when the article speculates about Warren’s motive for not running, it skates on thin ice.
What is the likely effect caused by Warren’s decision not to run?
Recent polls in Iowa and NH average out as follows:
Clinton …… 38%
Biden……….15%
Warren …….  7%
Sanders ……  5%
Clinton leads Warren by 31 points in the chart above.
But in a head-to-head Clinton-Warren matchup in Iowa, Clinton ran 15 points ahead of Warren, at 51%-36%, a Jan 13-15 poll by Douglas Schoen shows.
The 15 point difference between the poll of the field and the poll of the head-to-head matchup implies that there is something illusory about Clinton’s big lead. We saw something like this in 2008 when Clinton suffered a meltdown after holding a big lead for over a year.
Who gets the mass of Warren’s 7% now that Warren is out?
Clinton’s appeal to Warren’s 7% rests mainly on Warren’s implied endorsements of Clinton even though Clinton says little or nothing about the threat to democracy posed by the concentration of capital.
Biden seems to have very little appeal to Warren’s “progressives.”
Sanders appeals to Warren’s “progressives” because he and Warren talk about the same things in the same way. But Clinton has to expose herself as laissez faire and a warhawk before the whole country takes a real close look at Sanders.
Most likely, the mass of the electorate will go for Sanders.
It’s Time We Believed Warren. She’s Not Running.
| February 22, 2015 | 4:12 pm | Analysis, Bernie Sanders, National, political struggle | Comments closed
Saturday, February, 21st, 2015
Source: PoliticusUSA
Sure, the thought of Sen. Elizabeth Warren running for President of the United States got me excited there for awhile. Warren is a progressive’s progressive, and I’ve said before right here on PoliticusUSA that in many ways this woman is my hero. Anyone who isn’t afraid to go toe-to-toe with the big banks in the way that she has is someone who deserves a monument erected in their honor right on the front lawn of the White House. Or maybe even a great big cast iron middle finger stretching toward the sky on Wall Street. Warren has identified and doggedly challenged the same threat to democracy that Teddy Roosevelt took on at the turn of the 20th century when  he made it his business to bust the trusts. All that power and influence in so few greedy little hands was  perhaps the biggest threat to the sustainability of democracy during Teddy Roosevelt’s time, and now here we are over a century later caught in that same trap. And the only high-profile politician making any real noise about this threat, apart from Bernie Sanders, has been Elizabeth Warren.
So sure. How could I not get excited that someone like this would run? Hell, after being alive to witness the election and two-term presidency of Barack Obama, I don’t know if my poor widdle heart would be able to withstand all that joy to follow up eight years of President Obama with another eight of President Warren. It would have been a blast to watch her use Jeb Bush for firewood during the debates.
But Warren is not running. It is not going to happen, and I think it’s time to accept that fact. As my colleague Jason Easley pointed out in his post earlier this week, if Warren had any intentions of running then it’s highly unlikely she would have accepted Hillary Clinton’s personal invitation to come on by the house and chat awhile. I think it’s safe to say they probably weren’t knitting. Clinton wanted to get Warren’s ideas, but she also wanted to clear the field and broadcast the none-too-subtle message nationwide that Warren will not be a factor, nor does she want to be. Warren is not being bullied because, well, good luck with that one. Warren is being courted, and she is being asked in as polite a way as possible if she wouldn’t please oh please mind playing the role of team player for Team Hillary. And by accepting Hillary Clinton’s invitation – combined with every other flaming denial she has issued time and time again – she effectively said that this was fine with her. If there could be a headline attached to that meeting between the two, it could have been, “Warren to Hillary: I’m not your roadblock.”
Because in the end this doesn’t come down to how far ahead the polls say Hillary is over Warren at this early stage of the game because it doesn’t even matter. Hillary hasn’t even formally announced and Warren has done everything short of shoot her supporters in the face to convince the electorate that she’s sitting this one out. So exactly how reliable could such a poll be? Warren wasn’t scared away by those polls any more than she was scared away by the money behind Hillary. It takes more than that to scare Warren. Warren is kinda like Omar in “The Wire” once she sets her sights on something; Warren don’t scare.
What this is about is Warren really not being interested in the presidency, possibly because she doesn’t want the massive headache and has never really had designs on running an entire country, but also because she believes she’s more effective where she is right now. What this is about is acknowledging Hillary’s glaring shortcomings – at least to progressives – but then looking around the room to see who else we (realistically) got. What this is about is acknowledging that not only is Hillary a far better option than any Republican candidate, she just might make a really good president.
Film review: “Pride” (2014)

Film Review: “Pride” (2014)

Feb 20, 2015 07:48 pm | drew

by Róisín Lyder

Pride is a dramatized version of a series of events that took place in England and Wales during the 1983-5 miner’s strike, which was brutally crushed by Margaret Thatcher and her Tory government as part of their efforts to break the British trade union movement. The movie opens with the song ‘Solidarity Forever’ playing overtop of historical images of the strike and the song punctuates the rest of the film. Indeed solidarity is the real theme of Pride, a film that is a light-hearted meditation on the possibilities created when members of the working class overcome what may seem like insurmountable differences.

At the 1984 gay pride march in London we are introduced to Mark Ashton as he begins taking up a collection for the striking miners. It is at this march that the group Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners (LGSM) is formed. Ashton persuades the others to join by asking: “Who hates miners? Thatcher, the police, the public and the tabloids. Sound familiar?” The young queer people see the parallels; one suggests that the usual police harassers have been absent from the gay nightclubs lately because they have been too busy harassing the miners. The group sets about fundraising and eventually finds a mining town reluctantly willing to accept the cash. Following the usual practice of thanking solidarity groups, the LGSM are invited to the small Welsh town of Onllwyn where they meet an assorted cast of characters ranging from those who effortlessly lack prejudice, to the mildly uncomfortable, to the outright and staunchly homophobic. A series of predictable yet entertaining moments of bigotry and acceptance ensue.

Pride is not your average historical film; it is more glitter than grit. Reflection on the significance of LGSM to the history of the British left probably should not end here. Pride is silly, irreverent, tongue-in-cheek and will leave you laughing out loud the whole way through. In between the disco dancing and occasional outbreak of song, however, the film does manage to be thought provoking; raising a series of questions about what working class solidarity means.

The question that seems to linger most is what the members of LGSM receive in exchange for their unrelenting, unwavering commitment to the needs and the struggle of this mining town. How does solidarity emerge? One young gay man asks: “When did the miners ever come to our aid? Those bastards kicked the shit out of me every day.” However, the group is clearly touched by the kindness they receive from members of the mining community and for some of them the experience is an opportunity to work through their own difficult relationships with the small towns and families that raised them, but the real political exchange of solidarity only becomes clear at the end of the movie. It is here that Pride manages to pull off the happy ending the genre requires despite the obviously grim crushing of the strike movement. The film closes exactly one year after it starts at the 1985 gay pride march with dozens of buses filled with miners and their families descend upon London unannounced to march in support of the queer community.

As heartwarming – and truthful – as the ending is, Pride comes up short in explaining the motivations of LGSM. The film would have benefited from a more fully developed articulation of class politics. The inspiring commitment of LGSM to the strike cause comes off, at worst, as an odd and slightly masochistic hobby and, at best, as a result of a vague understanding of the shared experiences of groups targeted by the state. The real and more convincing explanation comes from the class-consciousness of the leadership of the LGSM. It is Mark Ashton who pushes forward with almost unfailing confidence in both the ability to the miners to overcome their prejudices and the absolute necessity of supporting the strike. Ashton was, in fact, a communist organizer and the leader of the YCL-Britain during the strike and before his untimely death of HIV AIDS at the age of 26. The only nod to Ashton’s political commitments happens when he is on stage at a nightclub in London someone in the audience yells ‘commie’. Clearly Ashton and other key members of LGSM had a deep commitment to revolutionary politics and the interests of the working class as a whole but the movie leaves this part of the story untouched.

Some have suggested that Ashton’s political background was left out in an attempt not to alienate audiences. If true, the irony is palpable. For a film clearly articulating the lessons that we should be proud of who we are when we participate in the struggle (“this is a gay and lesbian group and we are unapologetic about that”), and that we shouldn’t take heed of what our enemies say about us (“I don’t believe what they say about us miners, why should I listen to what they say about the gays?”), the choice to skirt Ashton’s revolutionary politics seems a shame.
This and other great articles will be in the next print issue of Rebel Youth! It’s a special issue on the struggle for full equality to be released for International Women’s Day 2015. Be sure to check it out!

Statement from the Communist Party of Ireland.
| February 21, 2015 | 8:27 pm | Analysis, Communist Party Ireland, Economy, Greece, International, Party Voices, political struggle | Comments closed

21st February

The crowing from the establishment and its tame media about forcing a climb-down by SYRIZA over the Greek debt and the continuing austerity programme barely disguises the complete contempt that they have for the people.

It matters little whether one thought that SYRIZA would inevitability have surrendered to the demands of the European Union or had hoped they would stand up and challenge it and defend the Greek people and blaze an alternative direction from within the European Union and oppose the IMF. Those who are anxious to advance the people’s interests need to reflect more seriously about what these past few weeks have demonstrated.

One of the lessons must be that the treaties governing European Union have in effect outlawed not only a radical people-centred solution but have effectually outlawed even tame Keynesian policies, and that the controlling forces are determined to solve the crisis of capitalism at the expense of the working people.

A second thing is clear: that people can vote at the national level for whoever they like, but this is not decisive, as the European Union will impose TINA (“There is no alternative”) and the economic and political straitjacket of what is in the interests of capitalism.

The debt is still the weapon of choice to be used against the people; democracy has been trumped by the overriding needs of European monopolies and the big finance houses and banks.

Those in Ireland who still labour under the illusion that the European Union can be transformed into something that it is not, need to look long and hard at the events of the last few weeks. The blocking minority that is built in to the EU decision-making process means that the big powers—those with real economic power and therefore real political power—can block anything that is not in the interests of the monopolies and finance houses.

The Irish government, once again demonstrating its abject servility towards imperialist powers, did nothing to support the Greek people apart from expressing a vacuous sympathy, and voted to defend the interests of the ruling class.

Those who continue to peddle the illusion, whether here in Ireland, in Greece or in Spain, that they can solve the people’s problems within the confines of the European Union and controlling mechanisms such as the euro are only leading our people down a blind alley. There are simply no solutions to be found to debt or austerity within the European Union.

The struggles of the Greek people have exposed the true class nature of the EU and its institutions. They have shown that it can be resisted – a lesson that needs to be learnt by working people throughout Europe.

Ukraine: Time to step back from the brink
| February 21, 2015 | 8:08 pm | Analysis, International, political struggle, Ukraine | Comments closed

Western States Legal Foundation

Over the past month, the Ukraine conflict has exploded once again. Now the warring
parties have agreed to a ceasefire, and to an approach to further negotiations towards a
political solution. It is time for the countries that are providing support from outside
Ukraine to halt and reverse all actions that contribute to this war, and that also are raising
tensions in the region to levels not seen since the Cold War….


Read the full commentary at http://www.wslfweb.org/docs/wslfukrainecommentary-2-15.pdf

Safe refineries save lives: Support USW refinery workers on strike
| February 21, 2015 | 7:57 pm | Action, Economy, Local/State, National, USW | Comments closed

http://www.usw.org/act/oilsafety

Safe Refineries Save Lives

USW oil workers have been forced into an unfair labor strike against the oil industry. These brave sisters and brothers are fighting for safe workplaces and communities. The companies’ bad faith bargaining, including refusal to bargain over mandatory subjects and undue delays in providing information, impeded bargaining and led to the strike. You can help stand with our brothers and sisters by clicking http://www.usw.org/act/oilsafety to sign our petition telling oil industry management and federal, state and local officials that we all want safe refineries. Safe workplaces don’t just protect workers, but also the communities where we live and work.