Saturday, September 17, 2022

It's Time to Call It What It Is—A Capitalism-Induced Ecological Crisis

Capitalism as an economic system requires constant growth, constant profit, and endless extraction in order to achieve profit.



Demonstrators participate in an anti-capitalist protest in London on March 26, 2011. 
September 16, 2022

One-third of Pakistan is under water. Record heat waves blanket the globe driving up temperatures beyond what humans can survive. Polar glaciers are melting much faster than scientists predicted. Droughts, fires and floods are ravaging the planet, forcing the displacement of tens of millions of people. And this is just the beginning.

We're in this terrible predicament because of an extractive economy that requires constant environmental destruction in order to fuel economic growth.

It's time to tell the truth. We can't afford to wait any longer. We can't afford to pretend that the same political-economic system that has caused the most historic levels of ecological destruction in human history is the same system that is going to fix it. Here, in the United States— the country most responsible for the highest levels of carbon emissions in Earth's atmosphere— we have a very difficult task in front of us. We have to tell the truth about the Earth's thresholds, about the laws of physics, and about what's causing our ecosystems to collapse, if we are to have any chance of a habitable future for ourselves, our children and grandchildren. We have to tell the truth, if we have any hope of human civilization at all.

But in telling this truth, we are faced with a terrible political reality that few are willing to admit. Many of us understand the science. We know that Earth's ability to host humans depends on a very delicate balance of physical and ecological conditions that have only been present for a short time during the Earth's lifespan. The Earth has been around for billions of years, but modern humans, as we know them, have only been here for some 200,000. Humanity is just a blip in our planet's lifetime. The ecosystems that support human life are now in free-fall in terms of planetary time. We're in the middle of the Sixth Mass Extinction, but this time, it's because of human activity, fossil fuel extraction, and the unsustainable abuse of land, air and water. We're in this terrible predicament because of an extractive economy that requires constant environmental destruction in order to fuel economic growth.

And despite decades of scientific awareness and dire warnings, the world's most polluting and ecologically-destructive governments have done little to nothing, as they continue to build pipelines and wage global wars that enrich the one-percent, destroy the lives of millions, and drive up carbon emissions exponentially.

The same industries that benefit from ecological destruction- Big Oil, Big Agriculture, Tech Giants, the Military Industrial Complex– have for years tried to sell us a "greener capitalism" as a solution to the crisis. And they have been lying to us. Suggesting that individual consumption habits– light bulbs, electric cars, or the purchasing of carbon offsets– will somehow save us from disaster is a fairytale. It won't. These attempts at tinkering around the edges of capitalism ignore the very nature of capitalism.

Capitalism as an economic system requires constant growth, constant profit, and endless extraction in order to achieve profit. If capitalism stops growing, stops profiting, it collapses. It is not a system that can ever achieve stasis or balance with other interdependent systems around it. Capitalism is not a stable system. It has to expand, consume everything, create bigger and bigger profits, until it devours its host. Capitalism is like a cancer. Or as Karl Marx wrote in Capital, Volume I, Ch. 15: "Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original sources of all wealth — the soil and the labourer."

Capitalism can grow externally in terms of wars, foreign interventions and militarized accumulation. In fact, as UC Santa Barbara Sociologist William I. Robinson describes, global capitalism has become dependent on war-making to sustain itself. Or it can grow internally by intensifying privatization, destroying labor rights, human rights and environmental protections within existing capitalist markets in order to open up more avenues for profit. In this interview, Robinson describes it:

For 530 years now, since 1492, we've had outward expansion- constant waves of colonialism and imperialism, bringing more and more countries, more and more people into the system. Now every country- every community on the planet- is integrated directly or indirectly into global capitalism. There's no more room for what I call extensive enlargement or outward expansion. The other mechanism that capitalism has to expand is what I call intensive expansion, meaning that you turn more and more sectors and spheres of society into opportunities for accumulation. That's been privatization- you privatize education, healthcare, public infrastructure, and nature. You're not opening up new territories but opening up new areas.

In either case, capitalist growth is the growth of poverty, the growth of social and political inequality, of human suffering, and the destruction of the Earth's ecosystems. We can see it on a global scale— everywhere capitalism has gone, the ecological commons have been destroyed. Indigenous people have been killed or displaced. Workers are enslaved or become alienated from their labor and exploited. And poverty has been created for masses of people where there was none before, while the commons and the public wealth have been privatized and consolidated by the top tier of the economy.

Just look at global wealth inequality. Oxfam's 2022 Summary gives us a snapshot: "Since 1995, the top one percent [of humanity] has captured nearly 20 times more of global wealth than the bottom 50 percent of humanity. Over the last 30 years, the growth in the incomes of the bottom 50 percent has been zero, whereas incomes of the top one percent have grown 300 percent. Between 2020 and 2021, the wealth of the world's ten richest men has doubled since the pandemic began. And 20 of the richest billionaires are estimated, on average, to be emitting as much as 8,000 times more carbon than the billion poorest people."

These obscene levels of wealth, this vast sea of poverty, and all of the political repression, genocide, and endless wars that maintain it… All of this was born from capitalism— a system that privatized the commons, killing and displacing indigenous people from their homelands and forcing enslaved people to labor under conditions of torture, death and imprisonment. These are the origins of this political and economic system on this continent– a system that has metastasized all over the globe. It has become clearer and clearer that maintaining a habitable planet for humans, as well as meeting the material needs of the masses, is a global project that is incompatible with an extractive economy that requires constant economic growth.

There is no logical end to capitalism except the destruction of the earth itself. That is the nature of the beast. And no amount of tinkering around the edges of capitalism will change this fundamental truth. We can buy carbon offsets. We can put solar panels on our houses. We can plant more trees. We can bury carbon in the ground. But none of these strategies can match the scale of the destruction that has already taken place within every layer of the ecosystem. Constant economic growth requires constant extraction– This is not compatible with a living planet whose ecological thresholds are fixed and whose millions of interdependent ecosystems require balance. To understand this basic incompatibility is to understand that capitalism, itself, is at the root of our ecological crisis.




Here in the United States, these simple truths about capitalism are completely obfuscated and denie
d by the corporate media, the fossil fuel industry, and pretty much everyone in the government because if the truth were known widely, it would upend our political systems. It would pose an existential threat to global capitalists who are profiting from our ecosystem's destruction. It is no coincidence that the same governments in the world who refuse to do anything serious to halt climate collapse are full of politicians whose pockets are being lined by the same industries responsible for the destruction. The political-economic system causing ecological collapse is the exact same system preventing us from solving this crisis.

And viciously colluding with government and industry failure is a popular culture that has been discouraged from understanding what capitalism is and how it actually works. In truth, it is challenging and perplexing to try to describe a political, economic and cultural system that pervades every aspect of our lives. It is the air we breathe. It is not easy to step outside of capitalism in order to see it objectively, its logic, or the laws that govern it. To see clearly how capitalism works is akin to stepping outside of the matrix.

To make matters worse, ours is a country that has spent its entire history demonizing capitalism's alternatives— especially communism and socialism. This demonization began with the first US capitalists and colonialists in their attempt to destroy the communism of indigenous nations. The genocide of Native peoples across the Americas wasn't only motivated by the desire to capture their land base. It wasn't just about 15th-Century papal bulls that gave Christian nations the right to conquer non-Christian nations. It was also deeply rooted in destroying the idea of the commons, the model of communal landholdings, of communal governance and culture. So indigenous nations were seen by the US government as a threat to capitalism from the beginning. In the eyes of our settler-colonial empire, these nations had to be eradicated—not just for the seizure of their lands, but to eliminate the ideological, political and cultural alternative that they represented. These advanced societies had lived connected to and in ecological balance with the earth for thousands of years.

The US government labeled indigenous nations as "backward" and "savage" not only to justify state violence against them, but also as a way of reinforcing the colonial ideology of Western Expansion, Manifest Destiny, and capitalism to the US public. To allow indigenous cultures to live in peace and sovereignty was fundamentally incompatible with the expansive colonial project that was, and still is, the United States. As indigenous peoples are still laying their bodies on the line to stop pipelines like Keystone XL, DAPL, Line 3, and MVP (just to name a few), we can see how indigenous stewardship of ancestral and treaty-protected homelands, the respect for the common good of all living things, and the desire to protect future generations constitute a cohesive ideology of balance and sustainability— an ideology that is still posing a threat to capitalism today.

Is it any wonder that the United States— a country founded on genocide and built by slave labor— is still killing, caging and oppressing the same peoples on whose land and by whose forced labor all of this wealth was originally constructed? Today, under our system of racial capitalism, the United States imprisons more people (especially black and brown people) than any other country on earth. And by 1955, the indigenous land base had shrunk to just 2.3 percent of its original size.

The "discoverers," the slave masters, the robber barons, and the oil tycoons of the last few centuries are still with us. Their power has expanded exponentially, and they wear different clothes now. They are the US military and all its private contractors around the globe, police and arms manufacturers, global weapons manufacturers, digital technology CEO's, the world's largest bank and oil company executives, and a small handful of multibillionaires whose stockholdings pull the puppet strings of most national governments and dictate the direction of growth in the global economy. And they don't just dictate the direction of growth, they also dictate the social and political revolutions that must be crushed in order to achieve that growth.

In 1994, after the passage of NAFTA, Mexico's President Zedillo ordered the army to attack the EZLN (Zapatista)-controlled villages and tried to capture their leaders. Up to that point, Zedillo had been trying to find a peaceful solution to the Zapatista rebellion, but this sudden policy change came after he received an internal memo from Chase Manhattan Bank, which insisted that the Mexican government eliminate the Zapatistas. This is just one of hundreds of examples where Wall Street has dictated what social and political movements around the world must be crushed in order to open up capitalist markets.

In addition, any country or group that has tried to live freely and with any degree of sovereignty outside of capitalism's ever-expanding chokehold has faced CIA-backed coups, massive military invasions, political interventions, economic blockades and assassinations of its leaders. From the USSR, Libya, Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, Chile, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Bolivia (just to name a few) to the tiniest and poorest countries like Grenada and Laos, any attempt at an anti-capitalist government or political revolution on the smallest scale has been relentlessly attacked and subverted by US imperial forces working in tandem with global capitalists. These revolutions, these social and political experiments, constitute what Noam Chomsky once called, "the threat of a good example."

And inside the United States, any social movement that has attempted to organize movements or political parties advancing alternatives to capitalism/colonialism have been viciously attacked—starting in 1492 with the genocide of the indigenous peoples to the repression of slave rebellions from the 1600s onward. And beginning in the late 1800s, US socialist/communist political parties and labor movements were violently repressed. A few examples throughout US History: the Haymarket Massacre (1886), the Pullman Strike (1894), the Ludlow Massacre (1914), the Palmer Raids against the IWW (1917), the multiple imprisonments of Eugene Debs and attacks on the Socialist Party, the Battle of Blair Mountain (1921), the black lists under McCarthyism (1950s), the execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (1951), the relentless attacks against the Black Panthers and the American Indian Movement from the FBI's COINTELPRO in collaboration with state police; the imprisonment of Angela Davis, Assata Shakur, Bobby Seale, Huey P. Newton, the Chicago 7, the Panther 21, the assassinations of Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, and MLK.

So here we are, friends and comrades, inside the "Belly of the Beast," as Che Guevara once described the United States. And we are surrounded by layer upon layer of capitalist indoctrination, myths of US exceptionalism, white supremacist and colonial histories, and constant propaganda to prevent us from recognizing and questioning the basic idea that this this political-economic system might be the cause of so much global suffering, even as it has grown so big and powerful as to threaten our own species survival.





This is about building a revolution—an international solidarity movement big enough to take on and replace global capitalism.




As a young university student many years ago, I had the privilege of studying sociology under John Bellamy Foster- one of the most renowned Marxist sociologists in the United States, who has spent a lifetime documenting capitalism's relationship to ecological destruction. In his classes, I was often surrounded by other sociology students who, when discussing the ecological crisis, echoed the refrain of the dominant culture— "If humans weren't so greedy, we wouldn't be in this situation!"

While I understand the frustration that leads to this statement, human history does not back it up in any way. I can't count the times over the years that I have heard the "humanity equals greed" argument. I have many indigenous friends who would not take kindly to the white-supremacist idea that their resilient and time-tested cultures, which have lived in relative harmony with the Earth for thousands of years, are still not recognized under the popular definition of "humanity." For someone to describe the whole of humanity as greedy, without ever having researched or experienced any of capitalism's alternatives, represents a kind of self-reinforcing myopia that can only lead us deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole— into a tunnel that is rapidly narrowing and coming to an end.

Furthermore, this humanity-equals-greed myth is a mask designed to cover up the fact that capitalism rewards and reproduces only the worst qualities of human nature, while it starves and deprives our best qualities— our natural instincts toward caretaking each other, toward solidarity, mutual aid, and building community. Most of us, humans, possess these good qualities as well, but these cooperative human qualities are not financially or politically rewarded under capitalism. The volunteer work, the acts of kindness toward strangers— these activities can exist as hobbies inside of capitalism. They are socially approved, as long as they take place outside the hours of our wage labor, and as long as they don't threaten the power structures that maintain the system. Or in the words of Brazilian Archbishop Dom Helder Camara, "When I feed the poor, they call me a saint, but when I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist."

We must broaden our minds and our movements if we are to survive. Against all odds, against all indoctrination, we have to imagine a different future in order to create it. Even within this society that refuses to see beyond its own economic walls, its own self-constructed, capitalist paradigms, we must be brave enough and honest enough to seek the truth— to understand that capitalism is not inevitable. It is but one type of economy with distinct features and characteristics, and it can be replaced, just as it was instituted. It will not be easy. It will require nothing short of a global political, social and economic revolution. But if we cannot summon the courage and the international solidarity to embark on this journey together, then capitalism will devour us—all of us. If we cannot collectively envision and design a future beyond capitalism, then there will not be a future that includes us.

It starts by understanding the system we are living under and what the laws are that govern it. It starts with studying capitalism's alternatives (socialism, communism, and anarchism) in order to have the theory and the understanding of alternative political economies. We know why the "S" word and the "C" word have been so uniformly demonized throughout US History, why red-scare tactics are always a tool of the ruling class, and why these tools are resurging again at this moment, as more and more youth turn toward capitalism's alternatives. The ruling classes don't want us to see beyond the walls of our own cages.

Capitalism is not just an economic system, but a political system that has locked us into profit-driven political parties and political cycles that never allow us to structurally evolve out of our deepest and most existential crises. Let's be clear—this isn't about voting. This is about building a revolution—an international solidarity movement big enough to take on and replace global capitalism. We have to learn how previous anti-capitalist movements have been destroyed, neutralized and subverted and begin learning from that history before it's too late.

We must work together. We cannot stay in our silos. Silos are based on individual identity, and we must build collective, class-based, and international solidarity if we are to survive the chaos that is coming. No matter who we are, our struggles and our liberation are connected. Societies based on individualism cannot survive species-level extinction events. This is going to require all hands on deck— all of us working together.

We must make ourselves useful to the movements around us that are already taking the biggest risks and doing the hardest work— from indigenous movements like the Red Nation, who have already created revolutionary programs to address these overlapping crises, to land and water protectors, to labor unions, to abolition movements, to racial and economic justice movements, to anti-war and peace movements. We have the teachers and the leaders that we need.

We must build massive networks of support and care at local and community levels, while at the same time, build international political movements that can replace the most corrupt capitalist states. It's a long, hard road ahead and a multi-generational project, and it's not for the weak of heart. It's going to take all of our courage, all of our resilience, and all of our love for our children and grandchildren. And it starts with telling the truth about capitalism.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.



Erin McCarley is an independent photojournalist and writer based in Denver, Colorado. With a master’s degree in photojournalism from UT Austin, her still photography, videos and writing have been published by the Westword, teleSUR English, Free Speech TV in Boulder, CO, KLRU TV in Austin, TX, CounterPunch, Yes! Magazine, The Christian Science Monitor, the MIT Press, the Ford Foundation, Science Daily, The Daily Texan, and others.
Review of From Layton to Singh: the 20-Year struggle for the NDP’s soul

Matt Fodor analyzes the evolution the NDP has undergone through the course of three leaders, and one generation.

From Layton to Singh: The 20-year conflict behind the NDP's deal with the Trudeau Liberals
By Matt Fodor
James Lorimer & Co., October 1, 2022, 24.95

by Paul Weinberg
September 16, 2022

Jagmeet Singh in a surprise move emailed a public letter that placed the treatment of Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories at the level of an international crisis. It is the clearest statement on this issue from the federal NDP.


There is no chance that the minority Liberals government governing with the support of the NDP in Parliament will bend to any concerns about Israeli impunity.

And while I don’t have an insight into how the NDP leader made his decision it can be credited to the grassroots lobbying within the party membership and activist groups at large such as Independent Jewish Voices (IJV) (full disclosure, I am a member of IJV).

Does this signify a switch from top-down decision making on policy that expanded when Jack Layton served as NDP leader from 2003 to 2011?Time will tell. Writer, political strategist and PhD candidate in political science at York University, Matt Fodor delves into the weeds of leadership philosophy and styles in a new book, From Layton to Singh: The 20-year Struggle for the NDP’s Soul.


Layton emerged as an innovative and inspiring city councillor on the Toronto municipal scene. (As a writer for various local alt. weeklies I knew the man personally). At the NDP leadership convention in 2003, he won on the first ballot. Support came from across the spectrum. They included members of the party left, Libby Davies and Svend Robinson, as well as former leader Ed Broadbent, former Ontario NDP party president Janet Solberg and the United Steelworkers.

Layton’s decision to professionalize and expand the federal party bureaucracy in Ottawa with strategists and communications specialists (doing continuous polling and focus groups) made sense in the competitive partisan context. By 2015 the NDP party headquarters on Laurier Ave. employed 250 people on staff, a jump from 40 one year earlier.

The problem, says Fodor, is that the federal NDP became more highly centralized around the leader and the party operatives, the latter working on devising the political messaging and policy.

It was already the case that the primary function of the membership in the federal NDP riding associations was not to discuss policy at the grassroots or educate members on policy, but primarily to raise money and volunteers for political campaigns at election time.

Layton became the leader of the federal NDP in 2003 at a propitious time when Paul Martin, the business friendly and right leaning Liberal prime minster was heading the country and there was a perceived opening on the centre left.

As finance minister in the previous Jean Chretien Liberal government Martin gained high marks among elite circles for eviscerating the Canadian welfare state in areas like housing and unemployment insurance, the consequences of which we are experiencing today in 2022 in a more unequal Canada.

Fodor says the federal NDP, which had never held power was positioned within the party as a social democratic oasis true to its roots. This was in contrast to the provincial NDP counterparts governing Ontario, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Manitoba starting in the 1990s which emphasized market friendly Third Way policies.



Layton led the NDP through four federal elections, relying on advisors from the provincial wings.

In the high mark 2011 election Jack Layton sought to remove the so-called political stigma of a tax and spend party. No mention was made in the platform for new social programs. Indeed, the focus was on rewarding job creators through tax cuts for small business, the maintenance of Canadian corporate rates as “competitive,” and a more modest childcare plan (25,000 spaces annually) than what had been advocated in previous NDP platforms. There was also no call for pharmacare, criticism of international trade agreements was muted and unions were noticeably absent from the platform.

“Altogether, the NDP increasingly accepted the parameters of neoliberal capitalism,” writes Matt Fodor.

A rearrangement in national partisan fortunes seemed to be in the cards as the federal Liberals were mired in third place in the House of Commons under weak leadership following the 2011 election when Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were ushered in with their first majority government.

In the same election, the NDP had surged to second place under Layton after gaining seats in his native Quebec at the expense of the Bloc Quebecois which looked tired and a spent force (temporarily it turned out). The NDP had successfully pitched itself as a social democratic party in line with Quebec values.

Things still looked promising even after Layton’s untimely death from cancer following the 2011 election. His number one recruit in Quebec Tom Mulcair took charge of the federal NDP during a contentious 2012 leadership convention where he won after four ballots (his major opponent was Layton policy strategist Brian Topp.)

Previously a minister in the Quebec Liberal provincial government Mulcair had primarily left that allegiance because of differences over environmental policy, not as a dissident on the left.

Mulcair fitted well into a reconfigured neo-liberal federal party in the 2000s under Jack Layton who supported a balanced budget.

You know what happened next. Justin Trudeau and the Liberals came sailing into power after languishing in third place in the previous Parliament by running to the left of the Mulcair led NDP in support of increased government spending. The Conservatives followed in second place.

What struck some NDP activists as especially galling was that Mulcair in the 2015 campaign was calling for a balanced budget throughout the entire mandate of a first national NDP government, making it hard to imagine anything socially significant being enacted.

For all of the brain tissue supposedly resident at the federal party headquarters, the Liberals had a better understanding of the Canadian public mood.

The 2015 election also witnessed a resurgence of an intolerant white ethnic nationalism (Islamophobia disguised as secularism) in Quebec which helped spell the rapid decline of the NDP in the province. The Bloc Quebecois experienced a comeback after running ads mocking Mulcair’s opposition to the banning of niqab by the Conservative government at citizenship ceremonies. The Liberals also opposed the ban but managed to see its seats increase in the province

Is the Jagmeet Singh led NDP continuing the legacy of Jack Layton?

The decision on Israel and Palestine was a matter of the right thing to do policy-wise. I doubt the party here relied on focus groups.

And a Singh led NDP is less apologetic about its social democratic values in, for instance, supporting taxes on the wealthy and corporations – including specifically the oil sector.

Fodor still detects a certain level of caution in the federal NDP that can be hobbling.

It is back in its traditional national role as a smaller party trying to find space as the two big parties the centrist Liberals and Freedom Convoy loving Conservatives dominate the political conversation and duke it out.

Following the 2021 federal election a confidence and supply agreement was signed where the NDP promises to ensure the survival of the current minority government headed by the Liberals under Trudeau until 2025 in exchange for specific items such as a means tested public dental care plan for low-income people.

This is no formal coalition. Singh and the NDP can still criticize the Liberals in power.

What Fodor finds inspiring are the never-ending insurgent challenges to the party establishment within the NDP. Recent ones have focused on the environment and the climate emergency.

He includes Avi Lewis and the other authors of the Leap Manifesto or more currently, the longshot candidacy of Anjali Appadurai, up against the front runner, David Eby, in the BC NDP leadership contest.

Because of the volatile nature of politics in the post pandemic world nothing is absolutely certain and so From Layton to Singh offers important lessons for Canada’s major party on the left for when it’s time might arise again.

From Layton to Singh will be published this fall on October 18 by James Lorimer & Company.

NDP must withdraw from Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group

by Yves Engler
September 13, 2022

To condemn Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian’s is one thing, but is must be followed up with concrete action.

A screenshot of Jagmeet Singh addressing the media.
 Credit: CPAC

When challenging power, it’s imperative to celebrate victories. But it’s also important to understand the political dance is often two steps forward, one step back.

In a victory for thousands of party activists, Jagmeet Singh recently released a statement that sharpened the New Democratic Party’s critique of Canada’s contribution to Palestinian dispossession. The NDP leader’s email made 13 demands of the Liberals on Palestine. The first point implies Israel is committing the crime of apartheid while the last two points call on Canada to “suspend the bilateral trade of all arms and related materials with the State of Israel until Palestinian rights are upheld” and “end all trade and economic cooperation with illegal settlements in Israel-Palestine.”

Singh’s statement is important and should be applauded, as I did in “Supporters of Palestinian rights should praise NDP’s dramatic policy shift”. But the NDP has also been tentative with the statement. They didn’t publish it on their web site or post it to social media. It was only sent via email to a list of individuals they’ve (presumably) identified as backers of the Palestinian cause.

Still, Singh’s statement received significant attention. Canada Talks Israel/Palestine, Canadian Dimension, The Maple, The Orchard, Canadian Foreign Policy Institute, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, Independent Jewish Voices, National Council of Canadian Muslims and many others reported on or publicized the email. After it received significant attention in left circles, including NDP foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson defending it, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) published a press release and action alert criticizing Singh’s statement for “laying all blame at the feet of Israel”.

While the NDP must be defended from CIJA’s attacks, the apartheid lobby group shouldn’t control the agenda for progressives regarding the party’s Palestine policy. We must keep pushing from the left. That is why Just Peace Advocates and the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute released a public letter calling on the NDP to withdraw from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group. Signed by 40 groups and 200 individuals, including Noam Chomsky, Svend Robinson, Linda McQuaig and Roger Waters, the letter reads:

NDP must withdraw from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group

Over the past eighteen months Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B’tselem and the UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinians have all concluded that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid.

In recent months NDP foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson has repeatedly asked foreign minister Melanie Joly why the Liberal government rejects the conclusion of Amnesty’s 280-page report titled “Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel system of domination and crime against humanity”. A number of NDP MPs recently signed Independent Jewish Voices’ Together Against Apartheid pledge and others have voiced criticism of Israeli apartheid.

In April of last year NDP members overwhelmingly supported a resolution that called for suspending arms sales to Israel and “ending all trade and economic cooperation with illegal settlements in Israel-Palestine.”

While the party sharpens its critique of Israel’s subjugation of Palestinians, NDP MP Randall Garrison remains vice-chair of the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group. NDP MPs Lisa Marie Barron, Gord Johns and Bonita Zarrillo are also listed on the website of a group which has a mandate to promote “greater friendship” and “further co-operation” between Canada and Israel.

Four years ago 200 prominent musicians, academics, trade unionists and NDP members released “A Call for the NDP to Withdraw from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group”. Since that time the Israeli military has killed prominent Palestinian journalists, repeatedly bombed Gaza and Syria, assassinated individuals in Iran and expanded illegal settlements in the West Bank.

It is incoherent for the NDP to echo human rights group’’ finding of Israeli apartheid and simultaneously participate in a group promoting “co-operation” with Israel.

It’s time for Jagmeet Singh to formally disassociate the NDP from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group.

Whether Singh disassociates the NDP from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group in two days, two months or two years from now it’s unavoidable. The party can’t suggest a country is committing the crime of apartheid and simultaneously promote greater friendship with it.

Please take a minute to call on the NDP to withdraw from the Canada-Israel Interparliamentary Group
Chile Refuses Israeli Ambassador Over Killing of Palestinian Teen

"The fact that Gabriel Boric's extremely normal and reasonable actions in response to Israeli violence against civilians is seen as 'unprecedented' reflects incredibly poorly on the rest of the international community."



Chilean President Gabriel Boric leaves Congress after his inauguration ceremony in Valparaiso, Chile on March 11, 2022.
(Photo: Vanessa Rubilar Quintana/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

BRETT WILKINS
September 16, 2022

Human rights defenders on Friday welcomed a move by Chile's progressive president to put off accepting the new Israeli ambassador's credentials in response to the killing of a Palestinian teenager earlier in the day.

"All states should cut diplomatic relations with Israel for its continuing crimes against humanity. Enough is enough."

A spokesperson for the Chilean Foreign Ministry confirmed to Reuters that the decision to delay a meeting between President Gabriel Boric and Israeli Ambassador Gil Artzyeli was made "because of the death of a minor."

Israeli occupation forces fatally shot 17-year-old Odai Trad Salah in the head during a Thursday morning raid in the village of Kufr Dan outside Jenin in the illegally occupied West Bank of Palestine.

According to The Palestine Chronicle, Artzyeli was inside the Chilean presidential palace awaiting his scheduled meeting with Boric when Foreign Minister Antonia Urrejola informed him that his credentials would not be accepted that day, and that the formal ceremony would be delayed until next month.

Ahmad al-Deek, an adviser to Palestine's foreign ministry, said in a statement that "we welcome the Chilean president's position, which is in line with international law and resolutions, and we appreciate this position aimed at applying pressure on the Israeli government to stop its ongoing daily crimes against our people."

Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded by calling the snub "puzzling and unprecedented behavior" that "seriously harms the relations between the two countries."



Chile is home to the largest Palestinian community outside the Middle East. The advocacy group Comunidad Palestina de Chile published a statement Thursday saying it "highly values" the decision by Boric to postpone Artzyeli's credential ceremony.

"As long as the world continues to treat Israel and its diplomats with normality, while committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, human rights violations systematically, and subjecting the Palestinian population to an apartheid regime, the situation of the Palestinians will not change," the group added.

Michael Bueckert, vice president of the group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, tweeted that "the fact that Gabriel Boric's extremely normal and reasonable actions in response to Israeli violence against civilians is seen as 'unprecedented' reflects incredibly poorly on the rest of the international community."


The Palestinian BDS National Committee—part of the global boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement—thanked Boric for "courageously postponing the accreditation of apartheid Israel's ambassador."

"Israel is escalating its massacres, ethnic cleansing, siege, land theft, and colonization in broad daylight," the group added. "As with apartheid South Africa, there should be no normal relations with Israel's abnormal, decades-old regime of settler-colonialism and apartheid."



The Israeli raid that killed Salah targeted the home of cousins Ahmed Ayman Abed and Abdulrahman Hani Abed, who were killed on Wednesday after attacking an Israel Defense Forces checkpoint outside the Jenin refugee camp and killing IDF Maj. Bar Falah.

According to the anti-occupation news site Mondoweiss, six Palestinians, including four from the Jenin area, were killed by Israeli forces over the past week. Among those killed was 16-year-old Haitham Hani Mohammad Mubarak.

The Palestine Chronicle reports at least nine Palestinians—including an 8-year-old child—were injured Friday as Israeli occupation forces attacked demonstrators taking part in a weekly protest against the expansion of an illegal Jewish settler colony in the village of Kafr Qaddum near Qalqiliya. According to witnesses, IDF troops attacked the protesters with rubber-coated steel bullets and tear gas.



Sixteen children were among the 45 people killed last month during IDF attacks on Gaza in response to rockets fired at Israel by Palestinian resistance fighters.

Since the beginning of the century, more than 2,200 Palestinian children have been killed by Israeli military, police, and settler attacks, according to the group Defense for Children International Palestine (DCIP).

"Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian children with complete impunity," DCIP accountability program director Ayed Abu Eqtaish said last week. "With each killing, Israeli forces highlight their complete disregard for international norms, brazenly perpetrating war crimes over and over again, as the international community merely expresses concern."
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
NOT SO NEW AMERICAN FASCISM
Book-Banning Efforts Rising at Unprecedented Rate, US Libraries Report

"We're truly fearful that at some point we will see a librarian arrested for providing constitutionally protected books on disfavored topics," said one free speech advocate.


Emilie Matthews helps Maddison Morgan, 5, pick out a book at
 Belmar Library on June 6, 2017, in Lakewood, Colorado. 
(Photo: Seth McConnell/The Denver Post via Getty Images)

JULIA CONLEY
September 16, 2022

Right-wing attempts to ban books are showing no sign of slowing down, according to a report released Friday by the American Library Association—and in fact have reached an unprecedented level, with libraries and bookstores increasingly facing legal threats over the materials on their shelves.

The organization, which has been tracking book-banning efforts for more than 20 years, found that so far in 2022, parents and other community members have "challenged" 1,651 different books and have issued 681 complaints across the country.



In 2021, 1,597 individual books were the subject of challenges, which can include written complaints, forms provided by and submitted to a library, or social media posts in which people demand books be removed from a library's collection.

Friday's report showed that right-wing groups like Moms for Liberty have escalated their attacks on library patrons' right to access certain books, with 27 police reports having been filed so far this year over accusations that librarians are providing inappropriate or "pornographic" material to children.

"Efforts to censor entire categories of books reflecting certain voices and views shows that the moral panic isn't about kids: It's about politics."

"We're truly fearful that at some point we will see a librarian arrested for providing constitutionally protected books on disfavored topics," Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the Office of Intellectual Freedom at ALA, told The New York Times.

Book challenges this year have mainly focused on titles that center Black or LGBTQ+ characters, according to the Times.

The graphic novel Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe, a memoir about the author's coming of age as a nonbinary person, has been the most frequently targeted book so far this year.

The book was at the center of a vote in Jamestown Township, Michigan last month in which residents rejected essential funding for the town's library, prompting concerns that the library will be forced to close within the next year.

Parents in a town in Washington also filed police reports against the school district for including Gender Queer in a school library's collection, and a Republican lawmaker sued Barnes & Noble to prohibit it from selling the book to minors—a lawsuit that was dismissed last month.


ALA president Lessa Kanani'opua Pelayo-Lozada said the group's report "reflects coordinated, national efforts to silence marginalized or historically underrepresented voices and deprive all of us—young people, in particular—of the chance to explore a world beyond the confines of personal experience."

Banning books that discuss racial inequality or LGBTQ+ issues "denies young people resources that can help them deal with the challenges that confront them," added Pelayo-Lozada. "Efforts to censor entire categories of books reflecting certain voices and views shows that the moral panic isn't about kids: It's about politics."



Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

It Can't Happen Here is a 1935 dystopian political novel by American author Sinclair Lewis. ... It describes the rise of a US dictator similar to how Adolf Hitler ...
Publication date: October 21, 1935
Pages: 458 pp

Jan 17, 2017 — The protagonist of Sinclair Lewis's 1935 novel “It Can't Happen Here” sees something dark brewing in American politics.
Oct 19, 2016 — It Can't Happen Here,” which came out in 1935, was a frightening book written for frightening times. Sinclair Lewis published the novel as ...

Falck will forgive me, is 'the hell it can't!' Why, there's no country in the world that can get more hysterical—yes, or more obsequious!—than America. Look how ...

THIRD WORLD U$A
Railway Workers Fight Shows Need for Paid Sick and Family Leave, Says Economist

"It staggers the imagination that in September 2022 the workers who keep the trains running did not have even one sick day to care for themselves."


Advocates for paid leave and government investments in programs including homecare, childcare, and expanded tax credits protest outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. on October 21, 2021.
 (Photo: Paul Morigi/Getty Images for MomsRising Together)

BRETT WILKINS
September 15, 2022

With paid time off for family and medical leave—and the glaring lack thereof—taking center stage Thursday as the Biden administration announced a tentative agreement to avert a crippling railway strike, a leading progressive economist underscored the need for paid leave in the only country in the developed world that doesn't guarantee it.

"Top brass at the railroads were willing to have a strike and plunge the nation back into supply chain hell."

"It staggers the imagination that in September 2022 the workers who keep the trains running did not have even one sick day to care for themselves," Eileen Appelbaum, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said in a statement.

"Railroad management was intransigent on this point, a key union demand, until President [Joe] Biden got involved in the negotiations," she continued. "Top brass at the railroads were willing to have a strike and plunge the nation back into supply chain hell, rather than grant this reasonable request."

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Wednesday blocked a Republican effort to force 115,000 rail workers to settle for a contract pushed by a nonpartisan presidential panel, an agreement that did not include a single day of paid sick leave.

"The details have not been made public yet," said Appelbaum, "but it appears that railroad workers will get one—let me repeat that—one paid sick day a year."

They had asked for 15. The average among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations is nearly 45 days of paid family leave per year, while paid time off for illness generally runs from five to 15 days, "but can be several weeks or months, as in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland, and even up to two years in the Netherlands," according to the OECD.



Calls for national paid leave grew during the Covid-19 pandemic as workers—especially lower-income ones—faced the stark choice of staying home without pay at the risk of losing their jobs or reporting to work and possibly infecting colleagues and customers.

"Even in the face of this pandemic, Congress is reluctant to permanently mandate a paid sick leave program," said Appelbaum. "According to the most recent data, there are about 540,000 workers still out due to Covid-19."

"It is very disappointing that the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act left the provisions addressing the care economy on the cutting room floor," she added. "The U.S. came very close to joining the rest of the industrialized world by enacting a national paid family and medical leave program."

Unlike the Build Back Better Act from which it was born, the IRA was largely stripped of its progressive social programs and policies in order to win the support of conservative Democrats like Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.).

Paid sick and family leave, universal pre-kindergarten and childcare, free community college—and the tax hike on wealthy individuals that would have paid for it all—were excluded from the package that was passed by Congress and signed by Biden last month.



Appelbaum emphasized "the need for the U.S. to guarantee sick workers some form of paid sick days and paid medical and family leave legislation."

"Not including a robust paid leave program as the nation continues to struggle with public health crises places unreasonable burdens on all workers," she added, "and not just the millions of low-income workers unlikely to have access to benefits through their jobs."



Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
From Omar Khadr to Shamima Begum: CSIS’s trail of mistakes
by Monia Mazigh
September 14, 2022

Canada claims to stand against the trafficking of women and girls. So why is it when it comes to Shamima Begum’s case, our Prime Minister averts his gaze and praises CSIS’s operation? Didn’t we learn anything from the mistreatment of Omar Khadr’s case?
   
Protest in front of the White House on the 17th anniversayr
of Guantanamo Bay, January 11, 2019. 

When Omar Khadr was held in Guantanamo Bay, the Canadian government sent two CSIS agents to the island prison. Their objective was not to repatriate the teenager but rather to interrogate him.

Years later, in January 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that Omar Khadr’s constitutional rights were violated and that the agents who led the interrogations “offended the most basic Canadian standards of detained youth suspects.”

In 2012, with Senator Roméo Dallaire’s efforts, thousands of Canadians signed a petition to pressure then Public Safety Minister Vic Toews to repatriate Omar Khadr, who many human rights organizations considered a child soldier.

Toews insisted that Omar Khadr was not a child soldier but a terrorist.
Stigmatizing and scapegoating Khadr

According to international law, Khadr was a child soldier who should have been treated as a victim. He was arrested at the age of 15 after a July 2002 firefight in Afghanistan, in which U.S. special forces stormed the compound where he was living. Without credible evidence, the U.S. government labeled him an ‘enemy combatant,’ kept him in Guantanamo and charged him with ‘war crimes’.

Canada— his birthplace and the only home he knew— watched quietly, occasionally peaking its head from the sand to call him a terrorist.

Whether Khadr was a child soldier isn’t the central issue. When human rights advocates or lawyers highlighted a caveat that would humanize Khadr and described the horrible experiences he had been subjected to, in an attempt to rally some support around his cause, these efforts were squashed and even denied by many politicians.

For years, Canada claimed to be an international leader defending child soldiers, particularly in African countries. When it came to rescue one of its own children caught in a war zone, Canada miserably failed the test. Many politicians distanced themselves from Khadr’s case. Worse, many, including then Prime Minister Harper and his public safety minister, refused to use the term child soldier and kept calling him a terrorist, in an effort to deny him any form of justice and further stigmatize him.

In 2017, after a decades long ordeal, Omar Khadr received a settlement from the Canadian government for all the damages and trauma he was forced to endure.

You’d assume the Canadian government Canada learned from its past mistakes. But that’s clearly not the case.
Brits recruited online by ISIS, trafficked into Syria

Last week, Canadians learned that Shamima Begum, a young British woman, aged 15 in 2015, was smuggled into Syria by a man who worked as a spy for the Canadian Embassy in Jordan. During the height of ISIS recruitment efforts to draw vulnerable Western youth to their ranks, Begum flew to Turkey where she met up with a man who trafficked her into ISIS territory.

This news wasn’t a scoop.

The Canadian involvement in this case was already established by some media reports as early as 2015. However, nobody cared and it went mostly unnoticed. In fact, some media sources discredited Turkish authorities who revealed the connection between the British teenager and Canada.

Former Sunday Times correspondent, Richard Kerbaj, recently published a book and brought this story back to the limelight.

According to Kerbaj’s account and other reports, Mohamed Al Rasheed is a Syrian who asked for asylum status at the Canadian Embassy in Jordan. The Embassy asked him to become an informant and run a ‘counter-intelligence’ operation as part of a mutually beneficial deal. Speaking about the Canadian Embassy in Jordan, Al Rasheed said: “they told me they were going to grant me my Canadian citizenship if I collect information about the activities of ISIS.” From facilitating the travel of young British women, to copying their passports, to driving them around and delivering them to ISIS territory to their prospective ‘husband’s, Al Rasheed did it all.

In 2013, then Prime Minister Stephen Harper appointed his personal bodyguard, Bruno Saccomani, as an ambassador to Jordan, despite facing many criticisms about this unusual choice.It is believed that it was under Saccomani that the counter-intelligence operation was conducted.

Who ordered and authorized this Canadian operation? It is important to determine Canada’s exact involvement and implication.
Call this what it is: a case of human trafficking

This case lies squarely at the intersection of human trafficking and the unethical actions of intelligence agencies.

Years ago, Begum tried to re-enter Britain, but in 2019 she was stripped off her British citizenship.

Today, she is still in a Syrian camp waiting to go back to her home country, where she was born and raised and where she should have been protected from online recruiters, intelligence agencies, human traffickers and spy operations.

Last week, CSIS refused to comment on this case. Prime Minister Trudeau congratulated CSIS for using “creative” and “flexible” tools to manage the case. As if brainwashing young girls and promising them some sort of a paradise as brides in a war zone is creative or flexible.

From some British and Canadian media, we learned that CSIS didn’t even share details of this operation with the London Metropolitan Police until much later, after the matter became known and they feared public scrutiny. In in one exchange with their Turkish counterparts, CSIS sent a high-level official to Ankara “to beg forgiveness for failing to inform Turkish authorities they had been running a counter-intelligence operation in their territory.”

Shamima Begum isn’t Canadian. Her British lawyers describe her case as one of blatant sex trafficking, and they are trying to convince the British authorities to reinstitute her British citizenship so she can go back and live with her family in Britain.
As Canadians, why should we care?

As a country we claim that our values are to stand against the trafficking of women and girls. We have a national plan to combat human trafficking.

So why is it when it comes to Begum, our Prime Minister averts his gaze and praises the operation? Didn’t we learn anything from the mistreatment of Khadr’s case?

It is not the first time that Canadian intelligence services pressured refugees or immigrants, particularly from Muslim countries, to become spies against their own communities.

What CSIS and. by extension the entire Canadian government did, is unethical and dangerous. Some claim that this is what spies are supposed to do.

Perhaps.

But how about transparency? Public accountability?

How can Canadians know that our country didn’t commit crimes by helping Shamima Begum, and others, travel to ISIS territory? Without this spy, it’s possible she wouldn’t have entered Syria.

We need answers.

I don’t think we can plead ignorance and say that we didn’t know about Shamima Begum or the sex trafficking or the complicity of Canadian agencies. We can’t make the same mistakes we did with the Omar Khadr case.
Begum isn’t the first, or the last

Finally, we shouldn’t forget the 43 Canadians who remain in Northern Eastern Syrian camps of Al Hol and Al Roj. Among them, are 23 Canadian children. What do we know about them? How many of them were enabled by Canadian agents? How many of them were trafficked into those dangerous territories?

Canada is still hiding its head under the sand. It is time to repatriate these Canadians and open an investigation into what CSIS has done in the case of Shamima and many others.
PSAC says public-sector investment will fight inflation

by Gabriela Calugay-Casuga
September 13, 2022
RABBLE.CA

A new report shows investing in the public sector puts more money back into the economy than private sector spending and helps fight inflation.
A photo of the PSAC flag Credit: PSAC / Twitter

Inflation pressures have been tough on workers for months, and as the Bank of Canada hikes up interest rates as a response, members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) are concerned about a potential looming recession.

According to an August publication by l’Institut de recherche et d’informations socioéconomique (IRIS), higher interest rates are not the solution, investing in the public sector is.

PSAC said the findings of the IRIS’ research reinforces their demands for higher wages for public service workers. The report said that indexing public sector wages will help maintain a strong middle class.

The IRIS report found that money invested in the public sector reaped higher returns for the Canadian economy. For every dollar spent in the public sector, $1.09 to $1.28 is added to the country’s GDP, compared to returns of $0.93 to $1.10 from private sector investments.

Based on these figures, the report reframed public sector investment as income instead of expenses, supporting the case for indexed wages for workers.

Despite calls for indexed wages, which have spread to many workplaces across Canada, the Bank of Canada has said they are concerned about a “wage-price spiral” being set off when wages match inflation.

“This is a situation where companies pay higher wages and pass those costs on through prices,” a Bank of Canada spokesperson has previously explained in an email to rabble.ca. “This raises workers’ cost of living and they seek further wage increases to compensate. If that cycle repeats itself, prices continue to rise and workers constantly strive to keep up.”

The IRIS report outlined that indexed wages are unlikely to exacerbate inflation because wages are only a small part of what determines prices.

“Cost-of-living adjustments to wages have no amplifying effect on inflation, as wages are only one factor in product pricing,” the report reads, “alongside raw materials and components, capital financing, profit margins and productivity.”

Chris Aylward, PSAC’s national president, said that while wages have stagnated, companies are posting record profits. This claim has been backed by another IRIS report. Instead of putting inflation on the backs of workers, the report says it is important to hold corporations accountable as they use high levels of inflation to up prices and bring in profits.

Aylward said that putting this money into compensation for workers will ensure that the money goes back into the economy, instead of into the pockets of a wealthy few.

“What workers are doing is, with every extra dollar they have in their pocket, they’re going out and actually spending that in the community,” Aylward said in an interview with rabble.ca.

PSAC is in the process of mediation with the Treasury Board as they continue to bargain for a fair contract for more than 165,000 federal public service workers. With the next meetings on the horizon, Aylward said the IRIS findings serve as a reminder of why PSAC is fighting for the wage increases they want. He says he hopes that, in light of these findings, future negotiations will not take on the same shape as they did when PSAC declared an impasse.

“The reactions that we’ve seen so far from the Treasury Board have been nothing but disrespectful,” Aylward said. “There’s total disrespect for their employees by saying no to everything that we have on the table.”

Aylward said that to address inflation, the government must tax the rich rather than offer subpar wage increases to workers.

“If workers don’t start standing up and pushing back, we’re just gonna keep falling further and further behind,” Aylward said. “We can’t allow that to happen when corporations, financial institutions and oil and gas industries are making record profits. If the government truly wants to fight inflation, then they need to pay all workers fairly.”