Monday, January 30, 2023
Part of history of Republicans trying to steal Social Security funds for the Bourgeoisie and impoverish and kill millions among wage laborers
President George W. Bush flanked by Democratic congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Image
The 2004 election gave President George W. Bush a second term in office and expanded Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. So soon afterward, he pledged to spend the “political capital” he said he’d earned on a longtime conservative priority — the partial privatization of Social Security.
The effort failed. Despite those sizable GOP majorities and the president’s own barnstorming across the country to sell his proposal, creating private accounts for Social Security became so toxic that it was never brought to a vote in either the House or Senate.
Rather than ushering in a new era of Republican dominance, the fight rejuvenated the Democratic Party’s fortunes and helped pave the way to its takeover of Congress in the 2006 midterms.
So as both parties prepare for two years of unified Republican control of Washington — with a battle over Obamacare repeal looming, as well as a potential effort by House Speaker Paul Ryan to slash social welfare spending — everyone involved, from the Democratic opposition to President-elect Trump, could learn some lessons from the Social Security reform fight of 2005.
Those lessons include: an election victory is in no sense a blank check for the winning party, unified partisan opposition can work — and fighting to preserve safety-net programs can be very good politics indeed.
President Bush misjudged — or misrepresented — his mandate
President Bush declares victory on election night, 2004. Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty
Almost every victorious presidential candidate claims to have earned a “mandate” to enact their respective policy agendas, as Julia Azari has written. Those claims are often exaggerated, and they can evaporate fast.
Bush proposed incorporating private accounts into Social Security during both his 2000 and 2004 campaigns. But those proposals contained few details and rarely rose to the top of his agenda. In 2004, the Iraq War, fears of terrorism, the state of the economy, same-sex marriage, and discussion of both candidates’ character dominated far more public attention. A Gallup poll shortly after the election found that a mere 1 percent of voters said Social Security was one of top two most important issues affecting their votes.
So Bush’s rapid decision to make Social Security reform his top domestic priority was quickly greeted with raised eyebrows. “For reasons that continue to confound me,” former Harry Reid aide Jim Manley says, “both the president and [his top political adviser] Karl Rove concluded after the election that they had a mandate” on Social Security.
Privatization appealed to the president’s desire to make a major historic impact — “[Bush] and Rove thought it would be the defining domestic legacy of his second term,” Peter Baker writes in Days of Fire, his history of the Bush presidency. And since they had won several difficult legislative victories in his first term — two big rounds of tax cuts, a Medicare prescription drug benefit, and authorization for the Iraq War — the Bush team thought they could pull it off.
Democrats decided to oppose Bush rather than make a deal — and it paid off
Max Baucus, Harry Reid, and other congressional Democrats at a rally opposing Bush’s Social Security plan. Scott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly/Getty Images
Bush’s team quickly set about trying to convince the public that they wanted these reforms too. The chief argument the president pitched was that Social Security was facing an imminent funding “crisis” requiring major reform. He made the case in his State of the Union in February 2005, and immediately afterward, he barnstormed the country trying to drum up support, campaigning particularly in red states represented by Democratic senators.
But despite their defeat, Democrats were in no mood to play ball. The new Democratic Senate leader, Harry Reid — coming to power in a state Bush won, after the previous leader, Tom Daschle, lost his own reelection — quickly concluded that Bush’s proposal so struck at the social welfare state that, as Manley puts it, “There was no other option but to fight it.”
So Democrats pushed back. In think tanks, on blogs, in activist groups, and in Congress, they sought to rebut the president’s case — arguing that there was no imminent crisis, that private accounts would in fact worsen the program’s financial situation, and that privatization meant putting much of the public’s retirement savings at the mercy of the markets.
As the debate played out, even moderate red state Democrats temperamentally inclined toward bipartisanship, like then-Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, took the temperature of their constituents and decided that privatization was a loser. According to Reid’s recounting in his memoirs, the president’s campaigning in Montana only annoyed Baucus and cemented his commitment to the Democratic opposition.
Democrats also resisted calls from the press and centrist policy advocates to commit to their own Social Security reform. “When Dianne Feinstein of California, who was also sympathetic to the White House’s position, signaled that she might propose an alternative plan, Senator Baucus quickly convinced her to abandon the idea,” Reid writes. And an aide to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in the House, told the Boston Globe that, when asked when Democrats would release their own plan, she often gave the same response: "Never. Does never work for you?"
Even by early February, New York Times reporter Robin Toner could report on “a general anxiety attack in the Republican center over Social Security.” She wrote that there was “no real consensus on how to achieve the president's domestic goals or even, perhaps, whether doing so is worth the price.”
Bush’s public campaigning failed to win voters to his side. A Washington Post/ABC poll showed that in January, 55 percent of respondents disapproved of his Social Security handling — and by April, 64 percent did.
There was no particular moment when the initiative died, but the issue receded from the public agenda as all the major players became convinced it could not pass. In the end, the centerpiece of Bush’s second-term domestic agenda was never even brought to a vote. “Leader Pelosi and Sen. Reid have a lot of legislation to celebrate, but they take a particular pride in defeating this,” says Manley. “This was for all the marbles.”
The bigger picture: Screwing around with people’s benefits just isn’t popular
There’s an even more intuitive reason why Bush’s Social Security reform failed. As Talking Points Memo founder Josh Marshall, who extensively covered the debate in 2005, puts it: “The biggest thing was simply that it was really unpopular.”
Bush’s two rounds of tax cuts and Medicare Part D involved giving voters stuff — Social Security privatization instead was about changing benefits voters were already slated to get. “It was taking something that was working and making it something that was very risky, inherently risky and could have very negative consequences for individual people,” Marshall says. “And the more people found out about it, the more people were opposed to it.”
Interestingly enough, as the GOP prepares to assume unified control of Washington, the Republican who seems most cognizant of that decade-old lesson is Trump himself.
Trump’s policy preferences on many issues appear malleable, but his instincts on big-picture political questions are reasonably consistent. Throughout the primaries, he set himself apart from the rest of the Republican field by adamantly refusing to cut benefits, saying he wouldn’t let people “die on the streets” and that he’d replace Obamacare with “something terrific.”
Yet the Republican majorities in Congress may have other ideas. The GOP leadership currently supports pushing through a time-delayed repeal of Obamacare before agreeing on any replacement. House Speaker Paul Ryan has long pushed for restructuring Medicare and Medicaid.
Democrats who remember the failed Bush effort in 2005 are eager for the GOP to tackle those issues. “Make our day,” Chuck Schumer said in December, in reference to Ryan’s Medicare plan. That’s not a mandate. It’s an invitation.
Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?
Millions turn to Vox to educate themselves, their family, and their friends about what’s happening in the world around them, and to learn about things that spark their curiosity. Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all. Please consider making a one-time contribution to Vox today.
1992: t: Tragedy of overthrow of socialist revolution in Afghanistan
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Tragedy of overthrow of socialist revolution in Afghanistan
https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2021/09/05/woke-imperialism-womens-liberation-and-afghanistan/?fbclid=IwAR2CO3onGn9_6XdRrXun5OJV5v3AO0NZK5petNt97X0G4Aw8cuRkzZsKFc8
Afghanistan’s socialist Vice President Anahita Ratebzad, standing at right, speaks with a group of activists. Ratebzad said, “Privileges which women, by right, must have are equal education, job security, health services and free time to rear a healthy generation.”
There is no greater hypocrisy than the deceitful lies of imperialist propaganda. One of the most damaging, since it rests on 20 years of destructive war and occupation, is that the U.S. war on Afghanistan was about liberating Afghan women.
U.S. imperialist involvement — a euphemism for war and terror — actually began 42 years ago, when the CIA’s Operation Cyclone launched in 1979 under Jimmy Carter’s presidency. It continues today in the form of sanctions and even bombings, as witnessed by the recent drone strike that killed at least 10 people, eight of them children, as young as two years old.
The real fight for women’s rights
U.S. terror and intrigue began following the 1978 Saur Revolution that brought the socialist and progressive People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) to power, decisively toppling the old Kingdom of Afghanistan.
The April Revolution, led mostly by young women and men of Kabul, ushered in major changes that included women’s rights in education and participation in government. Debts owed to cruel feudal landlords were abolished. Women were trained as teachers and books were published in all of the Indigenous and minority languages.
1978 Saur Revolution that brought the socialist and progressive People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) to power, decisively toppling the old Kingdom of Afghanistan.
The April Revolution, led mostly by young women and men of Kabul, ushered in major changes that included women’s rights in education and participation in government. Debts owed to cruel feudal landlords were abolished. Women were trained as teachers and books were published in all of the Indigenous and minority languages.
Brigades of women spread out across the country to teach and provide medical services, similar to the Cuban Revolution’s “literacy brigades” of mostly young women that went into the countryside and mountains to teach the poor.
The marriage age was raised from 8 years to 16. Maternity leave with a three-month’s salary was established. By the end of the 1980s, half of the health and education workers in Afghanistan were women.
The story of Afghanistan’s women and their struggle for liberation is remarkable. But it’s seldom told in the capitalist West, whose propaganda is filled with distortions and bitter lies.
First woman vice president
Dr. Anahita Ratebzad was an Afghan socialist, a founding member of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan and a member of the Revolutionary Council. She was also the first woman vice president of Afghanistan from 1980 to 1985 — decades before the United States could boast about the election of Kamala Harris.
In the 1960s, she founded the Democratic Organization of Afghan Women (DOAW), and in 1965, Ratebzad and other Afghan women organized the first International Women’s Day March in Kabul. Earlier in 1963, Dr. Ratebzad graduated as a medical doctor.
There is vast documentation that the imperialist bourgeoisie knew full well that the Soviet Union had not planned, let alone carried out, the April Revolution.
It was Afghans led by the PDPA that requested assistance from the Soviet Union, whose borders bounded with Afghanistan, to help in the growing civil war promulgated by reactionary and corrupt warlords bent on overturning the new government.
What is not well understood is that the U.S. was deeply involved in the Afghan civil war, not on the side of the new government, but on the side of the reactionaries who were bent on the destruction of the progressive gains, which foremost included women’s rights.
In 1979, the CIA began arming and financing the Afghan mujahideen — murderous warlords — and later conspired with both Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban. The CIA operation, dubbed “Operation Cyclone,” was the longest and most expensive in U.S. history. It continued after the Soviet army withdrew in 1989.
Later, the CIA ran death squads that terrorized Afghan villagers and murdered children.
U.S. war and occupation
In 1992 the Taliban, backed by the U.S., finally succeeded in overthrowing the PDPA government. Socialist leaders were lynched and their bodies hung from posts in Kabul. At the time, Western governments celebrated this as a “victory against Soviet tyranny.”
In 2001, the Taliban made a convenient first target for the U.S. “war on terror” after the 9/11 attacks. In two decades of U.S. war and occupation since then, only a tiny percentage of women and girls were able to advance themselves, inadvertently becoming show pieces for Western NGOs and the media. But the vast majority of Afghan women have remained in the worst possible conditions.
Business Insider, certainly not a revolutionary source, documents Afghanistan among the 25 poorest countries. Afghanistan is listed as the 7th poorest, with a gross domestic product of $499.44 per person, just ahead of war torn Yemen. It was more likely that an Afghan woman or girl would be blown up by a landmine or starve to death than have the opportunity to go to school.
Wherever imperialism goes, it creates misery and backwardness, stunting and distorting the development of the colonized, occupied and even the neocolonial world.
Class roots of women’s oppression
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, the founders of scientific socialism, advanced a materialist conception of history. Included was the thesis that the development of private property during the period of prehistory led to the first division among humans — the overthrow of matrilineal society and the consequent oppression of women.
While they rested that conclusion on anthropological studies that were available in the 19th century, their conclusions have now been more fully documented. (See Engels’ “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” and Bob McCubbin’s “The Social Evolution of Humanity.”)
The materialist view of history explained that the development of society was based on changes in the mode of production from slavery (refering to the slavery of antiquity), feudalism and capitalism to socialism and what lies in the future, communism.
It is the struggle of classes that drives this process forward.
Marx and the thinkers that followed him did not view this process as stagnant and linear but rather one that was ruptorous, chaotic and revolutionary. Sometimes different modes of production existed side by side for a period of time before contradictions gave way to change.
The role of religion and culture is a product of the dominant economic system. Ideas do not abstractly exist somewhere in the stratosphere; they are deeply connected to all human society. That includes the ideology of patriarchy.
The modern-day women’s liberation movement in the United States is not exempted. It emerged and was influenced by the great struggles against imperialism, including the Vietnamese liberation struggle, and domestically, the Black liberation movement.
Dorothy Ballan explains in the pamphlet “Feminism and Marxism” how the development of the birth control pill, which gave women some modicum of control over their bodies, buttressed the movement.
Socialist revolutions
The Russian Revolution of 1917, which established the Soviet Union, was the very first revolution that shook off both the chains of capitalism and feudal relations, and others followed.
In 1949, the Chinese Revolution threw off the shackles of feudalism. Chinese women, who “hold up half the sky,” participated in bringing about a new China that abolished child brothels, concubinage and arranged marriages in the revolutionary Marriage Law of 1950. Foot binding, a cruel process of mutilating girls and a product of feudal China, was banished.
What the revolutionary socialist women and men of Afghanistan were able to accomplish from 1978-1992, prior to their revolution’s destruction and losses, was nothing short of heroic.
The grinding poverty and the existence of feudal conditions mitigated against everything they were trying to accomplish. Yet they fought.
Their struggle took place in the shadows, both literally in proximity and figuratively, of the great Bolshevik Revolution that brought innumerable gains to women and all of the Soviet people. The Soviet revolution could not have helped but raise the expectations of the Afghan people.
Ironically, it was the retreat of the Soviet leadership during this period, leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union, that would also figure negatively into the equation.
While today it is the oppressor’s history that dominates our capitalist culture with slanders and self-righteous criticism, none of it can change the heroic character of those women and men who fought for genuine social change.
Reparations needed for Afghan people
At present the Afghan people are suffering from staggering inflation. It’s not just burqas rising in price, as the media snidely reports, but food and many other necessities. The New York Federal Reserve and other banks are blocking Afghanistan’s nearly $9.5 billion in assets.
U.S. imperialism and its banker rulers owe reparations to the people of Afghanistan who have suffered pillage, death and destruction for the last four decades.
Our role as women in the Western capitalist world is to end imperialist war, occupation and sanctions — the only sure route to the liberation of women worldwide. Regardless of twists and turns, self-determination for the people of Afghanistan will ultimately bring progress.
U.S. out of Afghanistan — reparations now!
Related
U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan doesn’t mean peace
Afghan resistance ends U.S. occupation
Friday's news links - August 20, 2021
Republicans: Let them eat cake
Why don’t Republicans want tax the rich ?
“All Americans should pay some income tax to have skin in the game, even if a small amount,” reads Scott’s 11 point plan. “Currently over half of Americans pay no income tax.”
While it’s true that about half of American households typically don’t pay income taxes, this is because their incomes aren’t high enough to pass the threshold for income tax liability; lower-income households also sometimes receive tax credits. Many low-income people still owe payroll taxes, however.
A new tax on the bottom half of income earners could have severely deleterious effects on the people already most in need of financial help, especially in a time when the wealth gap in the U.S. is multiplying. Such a measure would likely be extremely unpopular, and has already garnered criticism from top Democrats, who have pointed out that Republicans want to raise taxes on over half of Americans.
Scott denied on Fox News that his plan would implement new income taxes on over half of the country, despite the fact that this proposal is clearly outlined in his “Plan to Rescue America.” Other Republicans defended the 11-point plan. “He’s at least raising important questions over, ‘Should every American have some stake in the country?’” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
l While he is advocating to raise taxes on lower-income families, Scott is also attempting to give the rich even more opportunities to dodge taxes. If Republicans retake power, the plan reads, “We will immediately cut the IRS funding and workforce by 50 percent.”
This would have an enormous impact on tax enforcement in the country. Republicans have already gutted the IRS over the years; in fact, the agency is so underfunded that it’s warned that this year’s tax season will be challenging because it is still catching up with last year’s tax filings.
As a result, the IRS hasn’t had the resources for years to go after wealthy tax dodgers, who can use sophisticated methods of tax dodging that are too complex for the agency to be able to track. Rather, with an insufficient budget and workforce, the IRS disproportionately audits low-income people who benefit from the Earned Income Tax Credit. Meanwhile, the nation’s wealthiest people get away with paying little to no federal income taxes at all, allowing them to continue to accumulate unfathomable amounts of wealth.
The plan gives no real reason for gutting the IRS, though Republicans often argue for less punitive regulations for corporations and the rich, while advocating for more regulations for the poor. Democrats have proposed increasing IRS funding, but Republicans shot down a plan to increase the agency’s funding in negotiations for last year’s infrastructure bill, as corporations lobbied hard against the proposal.
If implemented, the GOP’s plan would raise taxes on the poor while providing even more tax loopholes for the rich. It’s ironic that the GOP is arguing that this plan would ensure everyone in the U.S. has “skin in the game” in order to benefit from public services or contribute to society, when it is largely the wealthy who get undue tax breaks despite not needing the extra funds to survive.
Scott’s plan also includes numerous extremist proposals that could actively harm the government and the public. The plan contains attacks on transgender people, leftists, schools, people of color, and much more. As part of the political right wing’s fascist attacks on education, the plan would shutter the Department of Education entirely. It would also bar any increases to the debt ceiling. Republicans have advocated for such limits to demonstrate their so-called fiscal responsibility, despite the fact that not allowing raises to the debt ceiling could be calamitous.
SHARON ZHANG Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering politics, climate and labor. Before coming to Truthout, Sharon had written stories for Pacific Standard, The New Republic, and more. She has a master’s degree in environmental studies. She can be found on Twitter: @zhang_sharon. RELATED STORIES Sen. Rick Scott asks questions during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on December 16, 2020, in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Sen. Rick Scott Blocks Vote on USPS Reform Bill Alleviating Billions in Debt The bipartisan bill to help dig USPS out of debt will now likely be delayed for at least several weeks. By Sharon Zhang , TRUTHOUT February 15, 2022 Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell speaks at a news conference at the U.S. Capitol Building on December 16, 2021, in Washington, D.C. OP-ED | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Mitch McConnell Is Now at Odds With Trump. That Doesn’t Mean Mitch Is Good. The enemies of our enemies aren't always our friends. Case in point: McConnell's stealth battle against Trump. By William Rivers Pitt , TRUTHOUT February 14, 2022 LATEST STORIES An election woker wearing a face sheild and visibility gear holds out a pamphlet urging people to vote NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Some States Eye New Protections for Election Workers Ahead of 2024 An estimated 19 states introduced bills last year to protect election officials, with six successfully passing new laws. By Barbara Rodriguez , THE19TH January 30, 2023 George Santos NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Top George Santos Donors “Don’t Seem to Exist,” According to Investigation The DOJ reportedly asked the FEC not to take action against Santos while prosecutors conduct a criminal probe. By Jessica Corbett , COMMONDREAMS January 30, 2023 Rep. Jared Golden is seen during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on March 6, 2019 in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Lone Democrat Jared Golden Joins House GOP in Passing Massive Big Oil Handout Climate groups said the legislation "could lock in at least a century of oil drilling." By Jake Johnson , COMMONDREAMS January 28, 2023 Rep. Ruben Gallego questions Gregory Monahan, acting chief of the U.S. Park Police, during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on July 28, 2020 on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Sinema’s Democratic Challenger Ruben Gallego Opposes Cutting Pentagon Spending Rep. Gallego, a member of the Progressive Caucus, took donations from weapons manufacturers and Israel lobbying groups. By Donald Shaw , SLUDGE January 28, 2023 Beto O'Rourke speaks to supporters at Paso Real Hall on November 1, 2022 in Harlingen, Texas. NEWS ANALYSIS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Billionaire’s Lawsuit Against O’Rourke May Stifle Criticism of Money in Politics The lawsuit shows the oligarchic desire to wield political influence without being subject to public accountability. By Andy Lee Roth & Steve Macek , TRUTHOUT January 28, 2023 Contractors working for Cyber Ninjas, who was hired by the Arizona State Senate, examine and recount ballots from the 2020 general election at Veterans Memorial Coliseum on May 8, 2021, in Phoenix, Arizona. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Arizona Republicans Exempt Themselves From Open Records Rules The new standard "benefits lawmakers who want to hide the truth," one open government advocate said. By Chris Walker , TRUTHOUT January 27, 2023 Rep. Ilhan Omar, center, joined by Reps. Eric Swalwell, right, and Adam Schiff, speaks at a press conference on committee assignments for the 118th U.S. Congress, at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 25, 2023, in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Omar, Schiff and Swalwell Blast McCarthy for Stripping Them From Committees In an op-ed, the lawmakers wrote that McCarthy’s move is nothing more than a “partisan political stunt.” By Sharon Zhang , TRUTHOUT January 27, 2023 Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene talks to reporters following House Republican Conference leadership elections in the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center on November 15, 2022, in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Greene Eyes Trump 2024 Ticket After Securing Spots on Key Committees Greene landed coveted seats on three House committees poised to become echo chambers of the right-wing media. By Mike Ludwig , TRUTHOUT January 27, 2023 A view of the U.S. Capitol at sunset reflected in a car window on January 5, 2022, in Washington, D.C. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS House GOP’s Natural Resources Chair Has a New Chief of Staff: An Oil Lobbyist A former fossil fuel lobbyist could have huge sway over the House’s energy policy priorities. By Sharon Zhang , TRUTHOUT January 26, 2023 Rich Kuntz, also known as Gidget, reads to children during Drag Queen Story Hour on March 21, 2019. NEWS | POLITICS & ELECTIONS Oklahoma Republican’s Bill Would Fine Drag Performers $20K Over Shows for Kids The proposal places "a target [on] drag performers," one LGBTQ advocate said. By Chris Walker , TRUTHOUT January 26, 2023 Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene talks to reporters following House Republican Conference leadership elections in the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center on November 15, 2022, in Washington, D.C. Truthout white t logo EXCLUSIVE NEWS Greene Eyes Trump 2024 Ticket After Securing Spots on Key Committees Greene landed coveted seats on three House committees poised to become echo chambers of the right-wing media. By Mike Ludwig, TRUTHOUT Published January 27, 2023 NEWS Culture & Media Economy & Labor Education & Youth Environment & Health Human Rights Immigration LGBTQ Rights Politics & Elections Prisons & Policing Racial Justice Reproductive Rights War & Peace Series & Podcasts SERIES Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19 Human Rights and Global Wrongs The Road to Abolition The Public Intellectual Movement Memos Voting Wrongs Religion’s Role in the Struggle for Justice Covering Climate Now Climate Front Lines MORE About Donate Manage Your Donation Subscribe Submission Guidelines Financial Information Privacy Policy Job Openings Report an Issue Contact Us Facebook Twitter Flipboard Instagram RSS Never Miss Another Story Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day. Email © 2023 Truthout Toggle Donation Bar WE URGENTLY NEED YOUR SUPPORT — CAN YOU SPARE $5 TO HELP? We didn't reach our January fundraising goal, and don't have much time left to make up the shortfall and raise the critically-needed funds to ensure our survival. Will you chip in $5 to help keep Truthout online?
Russia told the United States on Monday that the last remaining pillar of bilateral nuclear arms control could expire in 2026 without a replacement due to what it said were U.S. efforts to inflict "strategic defeat" on Moscow in Ukraine
LONDON (Reuters) - Russia told the United States on Monday that the last remaining pillar of bilateral nuclear arms control could expire in 2026 without a replacement due to what it said were U.S. efforts to inflict "strategic defeat" on Moscow in Ukraine.
Both Russia and the United States still have vast arsenals of nuclear weapons which are currently partially limited by the 2011 New START Treaty, which in 2021 was extended until 2026.
What comes after Feb. 4, 2026, however, is unclear, though Washington has indicated it wants to reach a follow-on agreement with Russia.
Asked if Moscow could envisage there being no nuclear arms control treaty after 2026, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told the RIA state new agency: "This is quite a possible scenario."
Ryabkov, Russia's top arms control diplomat, said the United States had in recent years ignored Russia's interests and dismantled most of the architecture of arms control.
"New START may well fall victim to this," Ryabkov told RIA. "We are ready for such a scenario."
His remarks constitute a warning to Washington that its continued military support for Ukraine could scupper the final major post-Cold War bilateral arms control treaty with Russia.
Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. (Reuters) Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. (Reuters) The United States has supplied more than $27 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since Russia invaded the country on Feb. 24, including over 1,600 Stinger anti-aircraft rocket systems, 8,500 Javelin anti-tank missile systems and over 1 million 155mm artillery rounds.
"The entire situation in the sphere of security, including arms control, has been held hostage by the U.S. line of inflicting strategic defeat on Russia," Ryabkov said.
"We will resist this in the strongest possible way using all the methods and means at our disposal."
U.S.-Russia talks on resuming inspections under the New START treaty were called off at the last minute in November 2022. The sides have not agreed on a time frame for new talks.
Russia and the United States, which during the Cold War were constrained by a tangle of arms control agreements, still account together for about 90% of the world's nuclear warheads.
The United States said in its 2022 Nuclear Posture Review that Russia and China were expanding and modernising their nuclear forces, and that Washington would pursue an approach based on arms control to head off costly arms races.
The New START Treaty limited both sides to 1,550 warheads on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. Both sides met the central limits by 2018.
"Expiration of the Treaty without a follow-on agreement would leave Russia free to expand strategic nuclear forces that are now constrained, as well as novel intercontinental-range and regional systems that are not currently limited by the Treaty," according to the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review.
"Russia is pursuing several novel nuclear-capable systems designed to hold the U.S. homeland or Allies and partners at risk, some of which are also not accountable under New START."
Trumpy losing support; more GOP splits
WEARE, New Hampshire (Reuters) - When Donald Trump trounced his Republican rivals in New Hampshire's 2016 primary, the stunning win announced to other states the reality TV showman was a serious contender. Trump went on to capture the Republican nomination and then the White House.
But as the former president kicks off his bid to recapture the White House in 2024 with a speech in New Hampshire on Saturday - his first event in an early primary state - he will find the political landscape more treacherous than he did six years ago, according to party activists, members and strategists in the state.
In interviews with 10 New Hampshire Republican Party officials and members, some of whom worked on Trump's 2016 primary campaign and all of whom have been staunch Trump supporters in the past, Reuters found only three who were sticking with him this time around - including the state chair, an influential Republican figure who is so enthusiastic about Trump he is stepping down on Saturday to help his campaign.
The rest cited exhaustion with Trump's controversies, exasperation at the constant drama, and a desire to move on from Trump's loss in 2020 with a fresh face who they thought would have a stronger chance of winning in 2024.
Trump's campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
The public souring on the former president is a troubling development for Trump. A defeat could complicate his chances of winning the party nomination for president, analysts say, because New Hampshire often gives a candidate momentum as they head to other primary states.
A lack of enthusiasm for the former president and his prospects for winning in 2024 could hurt Trump because party activists do vital groundwork for candidates, such as knocking on doors and making phone calls to raise money and boost turnout.
Most of the New Hampshire party members who had cooled on Trump said they would prefer Florida Governor Ron DeSantis as the party's standard bearer, although DeSantis has not yet said if he will launch a White House bid.
"Donald Trump right now is a distraction for the Republican Party in trying to go forward. Donald Trump has run his course," said Brian Sullivan, 60, a Hillsborough County Republican Committee member who backed Trump in the 2016 primary.
"I would rather see someone else, like Ron DeSantis, in the race," Sullivan said.
While he likes Trump's policies and applauds his achievements in office, "he's got so much baggage. I just don't think he has what it takes to win the White House again," Sullivan said.
The three Republicans still backing Trump said his voting base in New Hampshire remains enthusiastic, he has formidable name recognition, and that many Republican voters like his policy achievements while in office, giving him a strong record to run on, unlike other potential candidates.
The Trump campaign, in an email to supporters, touted a Jan. 24 poll from Emerson College Polling showing the former president leading DeSantis nationally among Republican voters, 55% to 29%.
Yet the willingness of Republican party members to criticize Trump in conversations with Reuters is striking. Some Republican party officials and members who have broken with Trump in the past have been subjected to blowback and online trolling from his supporters.
Lori Davis, 67, got into grassroots Republican politics because of Trump. Back in 2015 when he announced his candidacy, she was inspired. She worked on his New Hampshire primary campaign, knocked on doors for him, urged anybody she met to vote for him.
Not this time.
"I like Donald Trump. But he has gone too far polarizing. It's going to be an uphill battle for him in this primary because of his divisiveness. People are tired of the drama," Davis said at her home over a meal of burgers.
“I’m seeing that people want DeSantis. He has a lot of the Trump philosophy, but is not as bombastic, he’s not attacking people 24/7. People are tired of that. It gives them headaches," Davis said.
`PEOPLE WANT A WINNER`
It is not just in New Hampshire where Trump faces potential headwinds. Some billionaire donors who helped fund his previous campaigns have not yet donated. They include hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer and his daughter, Rebekah Mercer. She has already donated to DeSantis's political committee.
New Hampshire has an outsize role in choosing presidential candidates because it is the second nominating contest after Iowa's caucuses.
While the winner of New Hampshire's Republican primary has not won the state in a general election since George W. Bush in 2000, it is still viewed as a critical test in the nominating process.
Chris Maidment, chairman of the Hillsborough County Republican Committee, described the mood among many members as "Trump fatigue," adding: "I'm definitely open minded this time round. There's a lot of exciting potential candidates out there."
A majority of candidates Trump endorsed in competitive races in November's congressional elections lost to Democrats. During Trump's four years as president after his 2016 victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton, Republicans lost control of both chambers of Congress, before he lost the 2020 election to his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden.
"People want a winner and the elections are about the future. Republicans want someone who can win and who is not going to be a pushover for the Left. Trump represented that before but I'm not sure he represents that now," said Neil Levesque, executive director at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College.
In a poll conducted of likely Republican primary voters in New Hampshire by Levesque just before last November's election, Trump trailed DeSantis by 38% to 47%. Overall, 50% of the state's voters had a "strongly unfavorable" impression of Trump, with just 22% a "strongly favorable" one.
Another complicating factor for Trump this time round is that independents can vote in New Hampshire's Republican and Democratic primaries. If Biden runs again, the Democratic primary will likely be uncontested, and many independents may choose to vote in the Republican primary where their vote will have a bigger impact.
"Independents go where the action is. A lot of independents will vote against Trump. And that's not good news for him", Tom Rath, a Republican strategist in New Hampshire, said.
Polls in New Hampshire and elsewhere show Trump is unpopular with a majority of independents.
Despite signs of weariness with Trump, he will still be a formidable candidate in the New Hampshire primary, some party strategists said.
"He still starts 2023 as the frontrunner. He's got name ID, a strong base of supporters. His influence is still fairly significant," said Jim Merrill, a veteran New Hampshire Republican strategist.
Trump is the only Republican to declare his candidacy so far, although it is likely the field of rivals will grow this year. Others expected to jump into the race include DeSantis, Trump's former vice president, Mike Pence, and Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor.
STICKING WITH THE REAL DEAL
For Steve Stepanek, a former state representative who was the first elected official in New Hampshire to endorse Trump in 2015 and is chairman of New Hampshire's Republican Party, those potential contenders would be pale imitations of the real thing.
He remains a staunch supporter of the former president and is about to step down as the party chair because he wants to be involved with Trump's latest campaign, he told Reuters.
A replacement will be elected at a party meeting on Saturday, where Trump will be the keynote speaker. It is not yet clear if Stepanek's departure will loosen Trump's grip on the party machinery.
? Stepanek accused the Republican Party naysayers of being Republican insiders, not the ordinary voters who decide primary elections.
"Are you going to believe a candidate who says I'll continue the Trump policies - or the man who is the Trump policies?"
(Reporting by Tim Reid in Weare, New Hampshire; Editing by Ross Colvin and Suzanne Goldenberg)
Sunday, January 29, 2023
From: "Charles Brown" (via marxism-thaxis Mailing List)
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [marxism-thaxis] Aptheker founding C of C
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 19:04:01 -0400
Herbert Aptheker>
http://garnet.berkeley.edu:3333/.left/CoC/.conference/.plenaft/aptheker.html
We meet not to mourn but to organize by Herbert Aptheker We have experienced
devastating blows to the Left. The incessant attacks from the imperialist world were
damaging but not decisive. The anti-humanist qualities of that world made resistance...
We meet not to mourn
but to organize
by Herbert Aptheker
We have experienced devastating blows to the Left. The
incessant attacks from the imperialist world were damaging but not
decisive. The anti-humanist qualities of that world made
resistance inevitable. That resistance was embodied in the
socialist vision. Alas, it helped produce not a fulfillment of that
vision but finally the nightmare embodied in the term "Stalinism."
The nightmare was a distorted response to the horrors of
imperialism _ its wars, with mountains of dead, its colonialism, with
oceans of insults and tears, its intensified racism with its fearful
suffering.
The anti-human system remains, but it is senile. Here at the
capstone of that system, in 1990, the 20 percent of the population
of the world's richest countries had 80 times greater wealth than
the 20 percent of the poorest. If one compares the richest and
poorest 20 percent of the world's people, the income differential is
150 times greater.
This inequality is at the root of the turmoil characterizing the
globe.
That turmoil, resulting from exploitation, will end only when
the exploitation is terminated. Reactionary policies, from
Reaganism to fascism, do not resolve the contradiction; rather,
they intensify it. Liberal policies, while preferable in human terms,
at best palliate the crisis; at best they postpone grappling with the
roots of the crisis.
Only radical policies confront the root of the crisis; indeed,
radical means getting to the sources.
Awareness of the human suffering induces a radical
therapy. From Joe Hill to Debs to Gurley Flynn, to Robeson to Du
Bois, this has been the clarion call _ don't mourn, organize.
For this reason we meet. And we meet with experiences
behind us. These experiences have included matchless heroism
and accurate diagnoses and important _ if partial _ advances
They have included also, alas, dogmatism, sectarianism, rigidity,
even fanaticism. The goal, let us never forget, is a humane social
order; it cannot be reached by rigidity, not to speak of cruelty.
I believe that all with a common goal of a society
characterized by the absence of poverty, racism, divisiveness
and the presence of sufficiency, dignity and beauty must
comprehend that such a goal requires radical therapy.
Attempts to maintain exploitative and inhuman social orders
in the name of conservatism eventually end in fascism. Attempts to
alleviate the worst excesses of such a social order may reduce
them but will never remove them. Eventually, they, too, because
they do not succeed, may yield to a policy of blood and iron.
Only a commitment to transform such a social order can
really succeed in that goal. Such a commitment requires unity
among those committed to the goal. Such unity, in turn, requires a
repudiation of dogmatism, a welcoming of allies, a democratic
practice. Only a democratic practice can eventuate into a
democratic society.
That society will mean an absence of exploitation and
domination; equality not domination; equality of all, both sexes, all
nationalities, all religions and no religion. Such a society will
consider violence _ let alone war _ as anachronistic. Such a
society will witness the flowering of the arts, of science, of
humanistic behavior. Such a society will be civilized living
together of liberated women and men.
Such a society is worth a lifetime of commitment. Such a
society should be our goal. Our behavior in striving for such a
society must coincide with the quality of life we collectively seek
to create.
To participate in the effort to reach such a goal is the
ultimate purpose of life. Let us vigorously, joyously, incessantly,
defiantly, help create a truly human social order.
Address of Herbert Aptheker, historian, author and
organizer.
Critique of identity politics and male homosexual “liberation “
https://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/marxism-thaxis/2020-08/msg00023.html
From: "Charles Brown" (via marxism-thaxis Mailing List)
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.riseup.net, a-list@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [marxism-thaxis] Critique of identity politics and male homosexual “liberation “
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:44:51 -0400
Use of the terms “identity politics “ to include anti-white supremacist and anti-male supremacist struggles is the most anti-working class talk on the “left.” Basically it’s self-kicking whoever does it out of the left , out of the Party .
Also , in Grouping homosexual so-called liberation with anti-sexist and anti-racist struggles it is anti-working class , because in Western historical societies , Greeks , Romans it was a high virtue; male homosexuals were largely ruling class and boss status men , oppressors , not oppressed. In feudalism and capitalism , it was and is prevalent among upper class and high status men; And most of the rest of homosexuals are mainly oppressed and exploited by boss homosexuals . It is a phony liberation movement...
...actually male homosexual bosses are reactionary literally Ancient Greek.
not all bosses are equally reactionary in the sense that reactionary means social forms from earlier times and modes of production. Greek slave society bosses are the most reactionary back in time in the Western tradition.
Momina Makin yes this is the period of origin of male supremacy in Ancient Greece . Male homosexuality , males as superior sex partners to females _is_ a form of male supremacy; it adds to the anti progressive nature of Athenian society. Male homosexuality is a reactionary institution.
From: "Charles Brown" (via marxism-thaxis Mailing List)
Use of the terms “identity politics “ to include anti-white supremacist and anti-male supremacist struggles is the most anti-working class talk on the “left.” Basically it’s self-kicking whoever does it out of the left , out of the Party .
Also , in Grouping homosexual so-called liberation with anti-sexist and anti-racist struggles it is anti-working class , because in Western historical societies , Greeks , Romans it was a high virtue; male homosexuals were largely ruling class and boss status men , oppressors , not oppressed. In feudalism and capitalism , it was and is prevalent among upper class and high status men; And most of the rest of homosexuals are mainly oppressed and exploited by boss homosexuals . It is a phony liberation movement...
...actually male homosexual bosses are reactionary literally Ancient Greek.
not all bosses are equally reactionary in the sense that reactionary means social forms from earlier times and modes of production. Greek slave society bosses are the most reactionary back in time in the Western tradition.
Momina Makin yes this is the period of origin of male supremacy in Ancient Greece . Male homosexuality , males as superior sex partners to females _is_ a form of male supremacy; it adds to the anti progressive nature of Athenian society. Male homosexuality is a reactionary institution.
GOP self-abolition : — Ronna McDaniel has become the longest serving leader of the Republican National Committee since the Civil War. But now, she must confront a modern-day civil war within the GOP.
Frustrated Republicans from state capitals to Capitol Hill to the luxury Southern California hotel where RNC members gathered this week are at odds over how to reverse six years of election disappointments. And while there are many strong feelings, there is no consensus even among the fighting factions about the people, policies or political tactics they should embrace.
On one side: a growing number of elected officials eager to move beyond the divisive politics and personality of former President Donald Trump despite having no clear alternative. And on the other: the GOP's vocal “Make America Great Again” wing, which has no cohesive agenda yet is quick to attack the status quo in both parties.
“It will be extraordinarily difficult, if not near impossible, for Ronna McDaniel to put the pieces back together,” said Republican fundraiser Caroline Wren, a leading voice in the coalition of far-right activists, conservative media leaders and local elected officials across the country who fought and failed to defeat McDaniel. “These people are not just going to forget.”
Indeed, as RNC members packed up from the Waldorf Astoria ballroom Friday, there was broad agreement that McDaniel's reelection alone would do little to heal the gaping divide that plagues their party, even as she celebrated a notably decisive reelection victory.
Trump quickly congratulated McDaniel on his social media platform after privately helping her campaign. But conservative activist Charlie Kirk, a Trump loyalist, likened McDaniel's successful reelection to a “middle finger” for the GOP's grassroots who demanded change at the institution that leads the party's political activities.
“The country club won today,” Kirk said from the back of the Waldorf Astoria ballroom where RNC members from across the country voted to give McDaniel another two-year term. “So, the grassroots of people that can’t afford to buy a steak and are struggling to make ends meet, they just got told by their representatives at an opulent $900-a-night hotel that, ‘We hate you.’”
A similar sentiment roiled the Republican Party earlier in the month on Capitol Hill as Kevin McCarthy struggled through days of embarrassing defeats in his quest to become House speaker before acquiescing to the demands of the anti-establishment MAGA fringe.
McCarthy's inability to control the hardline Trump loyalists in his conference now threatens to undermine a high-stakes vote on the nation's debt limit that could send shockwaves through the U.S. economy if not resolved soon. So far, House Republicans haven't articulated a specific set of demands.
Some see the Republican divide as a byproduct of the GOP's years-long embrace of Trumpism, a political ideology defined by its relentless focus on a common enemy and a willingness to fight that perceived foe no matter the cost.
McDaniel has repeatedly highlighted the perils of GOP infighting as she campaigned for an unprecedented fourth term as RNC chair. On Friday, she pleaded for Republican unity while citing a Bible verse once used by former President Abraham Lincoln before the Civil War.
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand,’” McDaniel said from the ballroom podium. “Nothing we do is more important than making sure that Joe Biden is a one-term president. But in order to do that, we have to be unified.”
It may get worse before it gets better.
The conclusion of the RNC's winter meeting marks the unofficial beginning of the 2024 presidential primary season. Trump has already launched his candidacy and promises to wage a fierce campaign against any would-be Republican competitors.
! The RNC is in the process of scheduling the first Republican presidential primary debates, which will likely take place in Milwaukee, the site of the party's next national convention, in late July or early August.
While he has been slow to hit the campaign trail since announcing a 2024 bid last November, Trump has events in New Hampshire and South Carolina this weekend. Sensing political weakness in the former president, as many as a dozen high-profile Republicans are expected to line up against him in the coming months.
Should he fail to clinch the GOP’s next presidential nomination, Trump has already dangled the possibility of a third-party presidential bid, which would all but ensure Democrats win the White House again in 2024.
New Hampshire-based RNC member Juliana Bergeron reflected upon the state of her party as she prepared to take a red-eye flight back home to attend Trump’s Saturday appearance. The New Hampshire GOP is working through its own bitter leadership feud.
“The party in New Hampshire is divided. The party nationally is divided. I just think there’s a lot of space between the far right and some of the rest of us,” Bergeron said.
“I think it’s over,” she said when asked about Trump. “I want to see a new generation out there.”
And there are some signs that Trump's MAGA movement may be ready to move on as well. Some privately acknowledged that Trump had lost control of his own movement, which worked to defeat McDaniel even as the former president and his lieutenants tried to help her.
While Trump declined to publicly endorse McDaniel, Wren said it wouldn't have changed the grassroots' demand for new GOP leadership even if he had.
“We’re not just sheep that follow a single endorsement anywhere,” Wren said. “We want to win elections and we’re not winning elections.”
Indeed, Republicans may need a successful national election to come together again. The next national election? Nov. 5, 2024.
“The hard work now begins for bringing our party together,” said former Trump chief of staff Reince Priebus, a former RNC chair who backed McDaniel’s reelection. “This isn’t going to be easy.”
The U.S. Blockade of Cuba Hurts Medical Patients in Both Countries By: Natalia Marques
https://www.midwesternmarx.com/articles/the-us-blockade-of-cuba-hurts-medical-patients-in-both-countries-by-natalia-marques
MIDWESTERN MARX
1/27/2023 The U.S. Blockade of Cuba Hurts Medical Patients in Both Countries By: Natalia Marques
The blockade of Cuba limits its ability to share its scientific and technological advances with the rest of the world. Picture
Scientists in Cuba believe that the breakthroughs they have made in the health care and technology sectors should be used to save and improve lives beyond the country’s borders. This is why the island nation has developed important scientific and medical partnerships with organizations and governments across the globe, including with those in Mexico, Palestine, Angola, Colombia, Iran, and Brazil. However, such collaborations are difficult due to the blockade imposed on Cuba by the United States, which has now been in place for the last six decades.
In a conference, “Building Our Future,” held in Havana in November 2022, which brought together youth from Cuba and the United States, scientists at the Cuban Center of Molecular Immunology (CIM) stated during a presentation that the blockade hurts the people of the United States, too. By lifting the sanctions against Cuba, the scientists argued, the people of the United States could have access to life-saving treatments being developed in Cuba, especially against diseases such as diabetes, which ravage working-class communities each year.
A Cure for Diabetes Cuban scientists have developed both a lung cancer vaccine and a groundbreaking diabetes treatment. The new diabetes treatment, Heberprot-P, developed by the Cuban Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB), can reduce leg amputations of people with diabetic foot ulcers by more than four times. The medication contains a recombinant human epidermal growth factor that, when injected into a foot ulcer, accelerates its healing process, thereby, reducing diabetes-related amputations. And yet, despite the fact that the medication has been registered in Cuba since 2006, and has been registered in several other countries since, people in the United States are unable to get access to Heberprot-P.
€^ Diabetes was the eighth leading cause of death in the United States in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, killing more than 100,000 patients in that year. “Foot ulcers are among the most common complications of patients who have diabetes,” which can escalate into lower limb amputations, according to a report in the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Each year, around 73,000 “non-traumatic lower extremity amputations” are performed on people who have diabetes in the U.S. These amputations occur at a disproportionate rate depending on the race of a patient, being far more prevalent among Black and Brown people suffering from diabetes. Many point to racial economic disparities and systemic medical racism as the reason for this.
“If you go into low-income African American neighborhoods, it is a war zone… You see people wheeling themselves around in wheelchairs,” Dr. Dean Schillinger, a medical professor at the University of California-San Francisco, told KHN. According to the KHN article, “Amputations are considered a ‘mega-disparity’ and dwarf nearly every other health disparity by race and ethnicity.”
The life expectancy of a patient with post-diabetic lower limb amputation is significantly reduced, according to various reports. “[P]atients with diabetes-related amputations have a high risk of mortality, with a five-year survival rate of 40–48 percent regardless of the etiology of the amputation.” Heberprot-P could help tens of thousands of patients avoid such amputations, however, due to the blockade, U.S. patients cannot access this treatment. People in the U.S. have a vested interest in dismantling the U.S. blockade of Cuba.
“So after five years [post-amputation], that’s the most you can live, and we are preventing that from happening,” said Rydell Alvarez Arzola, a researcher at CIM, in a presentation given to the U.S. and Cuban youth during the conference in Havana. “And that also is something that could bring both of our peoples [in Cuba and the U.S.] together to fight… to eliminate [the blockade].” Cuban Health Care Under Blockade Perhaps one of Cuba’s proudest achievements is a world-renowned health care system that has thrived despite economic devastation and a 60-year-long blockade.
After the fall of Cuba’s primary trading partner, the Soviet Union, in 1991, the island saw a GDP decrease of 35 percent over three years, blackouts, and a nosedive in caloric intake. Yet, despite these overwhelming challenges, Cuba never wavered in its commitment to providing universal health care. Universal health care, or access to free and quality health care for all, is a long-standing demand of people’s movements in the United States that has never been implemented largely due to the for-profit model of the health care industry and enormous corporate interests in the sector.
As other nations were enacting neoliberal austerity measures, which drastically cut social services in the 1980s and 1990s, Cuba’s public health care spending increased by 13 percent from 1990 to 1994. Cuba successfully raised its doctor-to-patient ratio to one doctor for every 202 Cubans in the mid-1990s, a far better statistic than the United States’ ratio of one doctor for every 300 people, according to a 2004 census.
As the blockade begins its seventh decade, Cuba is not only upholding universal health care but also continues to be at the forefront of scientific developments globally.
This was evident during the COVID-19 crisis. Cuba, faced with the inability to purchase vaccines developed by U.S. pharmaceutical companies due to the U.S. blockade, developed five vaccines. The nation not only achieved its goal of creating one of the most effective COVID-19 vaccines but also launched the first mass COVID-19 vaccination campaign for children from two to 18 years old in September 2021. To Share Knowledge Without Restrictions Despite its achievements, Cuban health care still faces serious, life-threatening limitations due to the economic blockade. CIM, for example, has struggled to find international companies willing to carry out vital services for them. Claudia Plasencia, a CIM researcher, explained during the conference that CIM had signed a contract with a German gene synthesis company which later backed out because it had signed a new contract with a U.S. company. “They could not keep processing our samples, they could not keep doing business with Cuba,” Plasencia said.
Arzola explained how it is virtually impossible to purchase top-of-the-line equipment due to trade restrictions. “A flow cytometer is a machine that costs a quarter-million dollars… even if my lab has the money, I cannot buy the best machine in the world, which is from the U.S., everyone knows that,” he said. Even if CIM were to buy such a machine from a third party, it cannot utilize the repair services from the United States. “I cannot buy these machines even if I have the money, because I would not be able to fix them. You cannot spend a quarter-million dollars every six months [buying a new machine]… even though you know that this [machine] is the best for your patients.”
I spoke to Marianniz Diaz, a young woman scientist at CIM. When asked what we in the U.S. could do to help CIM’s scientists, her answer was straightforward: “The principal thing you can do is eliminate the blockade.”
“I would like us to have an interaction without restrictions, so we [Cuba and the U.S.] can share our science, our products, [and] our knowledge,” she said. Author
Natalia Marques is a writer at Peoples Dispatch, an organizer, and a graphic designer based in New York City. This article was produced in partnership by Peoples Dispatch and Globetrotter. Archives January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 SHARE 0 COMMENTS Leave a Reply. DETAILS All ORIGINAL Midwestern Marx content is under Creative Commons (CC BY-ND 4.0) which means you can republish our work only if it is attributed properly (link the original publication to the republication) and not modified. Proudly powered by Weebly
Beyond Epistemology pp 129–153Cite as Hegel and the Natural Sciences
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5
Beyond Epistemology pp 129–153Cite as Hegel and the Natural Sciences
Errol E. Harris Chapter Abstract
Hegel is often represented as scornful and contemptuous of the natural sciences. He seems often to ridicule their methods and their achievements and to subordinate them, as forms of knowledge to the speculative “sciences” which, for him, constitute the body of philosophy. This is, at the very best, a half-truth, and is scarcely even true by half; for what Hegel certainly does very frequently ridicule is what he regards as pseudo-science and charlatanry rather than the genuine article, and his taunts are, more often than not, aimed at philosophers with whom he disagrees, and philosophical doctrines about nature which he considers superficial and trivial, than at the practising scientists and their recognized disciplines. Certainly, he did believe and teach, that the empirical sciences belonged to a lower phase of self-conscious reason than philosophy, but such a view is inescapable for any thinker who sees philosophy as the reflective study of human experience, including empirical science; and any philosopher who seeks to deny that his subject includes this reflective task is apt to renounce his own birthright as philosopher. To affirm the reflective (second-degree, or “meta-”) character of philosophy, on the other hand, is not to belittle or to despise the natural sciences; for it is only by paying them due respect that any philosophy of science, whether of its method and the concepts it uses (logic) or of its subject-matter (philosophy of nature), is able to attain its goal. Keywords Natural Science Common Sense Empirical Science Logical Category Absolute Idea These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution. Chapter USD 29.95 Price excludes VAT (USA) DOI: 10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Chapter length: 25 pages Instant PDF download Readable on all devices Own it forever Exclusive offer for individuals only Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout Buy Chapter eBook USD 84.99 Softcover Book USD 109.00 Learn about institutional subscriptions Preview Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Author information Authors and Affiliations Northwestern University, USA Errol E. Harris Editor information Editors and Affiliations Rights and permissions Reprints and Permissions Copyright information © 1974 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands About this chapter Cite this chapter Harris, E.E. (1974). Hegel and the Natural Sciences. In: Weiss, F.G. (eds) Beyond Epistemology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Download citation .RIS.ENW.BIB DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Publisher Name Springer, Dordrecht Print ISBN 978-90-247-1584-8 Online ISBN 978-94-010-2016-9 eBook Packages Springer Book Archive Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips Switch Edition Academic Edition Corporate Edition Home Impressum Legal information Privacy statement California Privacy Statement How we use cookies Manage cookies/Do not sell my data Accessibility FAQ Contact us Affiliate program Not logged in - 75.31.213.3 Not affiliated Springer Nature © 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.
Beyond Epistemology pp 129–153Cite as Hegel and the Natural Sciences
Errol E. Harris Chapter Abstract
Hegel is often represented as scornful and contemptuous of the natural sciences. He seems often to ridicule their methods and their achievements and to subordinate them, as forms of knowledge to the speculative “sciences” which, for him, constitute the body of philosophy. This is, at the very best, a half-truth, and is scarcely even true by half; for what Hegel certainly does very frequently ridicule is what he regards as pseudo-science and charlatanry rather than the genuine article, and his taunts are, more often than not, aimed at philosophers with whom he disagrees, and philosophical doctrines about nature which he considers superficial and trivial, than at the practising scientists and their recognized disciplines. Certainly, he did believe and teach, that the empirical sciences belonged to a lower phase of self-conscious reason than philosophy, but such a view is inescapable for any thinker who sees philosophy as the reflective study of human experience, including empirical science; and any philosopher who seeks to deny that his subject includes this reflective task is apt to renounce his own birthright as philosopher. To affirm the reflective (second-degree, or “meta-”) character of philosophy, on the other hand, is not to belittle or to despise the natural sciences; for it is only by paying them due respect that any philosophy of science, whether of its method and the concepts it uses (logic) or of its subject-matter (philosophy of nature), is able to attain its goal. Keywords Natural Science Common Sense Empirical Science Logical Category Absolute Idea These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution. Chapter USD 29.95 Price excludes VAT (USA) DOI: 10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Chapter length: 25 pages Instant PDF download Readable on all devices Own it forever Exclusive offer for individuals only Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout Buy Chapter eBook USD 84.99 Softcover Book USD 109.00 Learn about institutional subscriptions Preview Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Author information Authors and Affiliations Northwestern University, USA Errol E. Harris Editor information Editors and Affiliations Rights and permissions Reprints and Permissions Copyright information © 1974 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands About this chapter Cite this chapter Harris, E.E. (1974). Hegel and the Natural Sciences. In: Weiss, F.G. (eds) Beyond Epistemology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Download citation .RIS.ENW.BIB DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2016-9_5 Publisher Name Springer, Dordrecht Print ISBN 978-90-247-1584-8 Online ISBN 978-94-010-2016-9 eBook Packages Springer Book Archive Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips Switch Edition Academic Edition Corporate Edition Home Impressum Legal information Privacy statement California Privacy Statement How we use cookies Manage cookies/Do not sell my data Accessibility FAQ Contact us Affiliate program Not logged in - 75.31.213.3 Not affiliated Springer Nature © 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.
50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism
People's World
50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism January 27, 2023 11:17 AM CST
BY AMIAD HOROWITZ
50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism
Left: The New York Times announces the pending end of the U.S.' war in January 1973. Right: A new stamp issued in 2023 by Vietnam Post commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Paris Peace Accords. | NYT and Vietnam Post
Jan. 27th marks the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Paris Peace Accords, the agreement which ended the American War in Vietnam, or as it is known in the United States, the Vietnam War. From 1955 to 1973, the United States waged one of the harshest wars in modern history against the Vietnamese people, as part of its aggressive Cold War anti-communist foreign policy.
During the war, the U.S. military dropped more bombs than were used in all of World War II (often on civilian targets). It also deployed chemical weapons, napalm, and cluster bombs, and sent hundreds of thousands of draftees to kill or be killed, usually against their will. Millions of Vietnamese people were killed, maimed, and poisoned. The war was illegally spread to Laos and Cambodia, where more death and destruction were spread.
Despite the best efforts of the U.S. government and military, the imperialist attempt to maintain dominance over Vietnam failed. To this day, the U.S. War in Vietnam marks one of the biggest military and foreign policy disasters in the history of the United States.
Madame Nguyen Thi Binh holds a press conference during peace negotiations in Paris, on Oct. 30, 1972. | Spartaco Bodini It also marks one of the great victories of socialism and anti-imperialism. Against all odds, the Vietnamese people were able to defeat the world’s mightiest military, from the world’s richest country. Under the leadership of the Communist Party of Vietnam, foreign imperialism was defeated, and national liberation and unification were achieved.
The Paris Peace Accords—signed by the United States, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam), the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam), and the provisional revolutionary government of the Republic of South Vietnam—was the culmination of negotiations that began in 1968.
During the talks on the accords, the United States kept delaying the signing. The U.S. government hoped it could bomb the North Vietnamese and the National Liberation Front (commonly known in the United States as the Viet Cong) so much that they would compromise on their goals. When it became clear that the U.S. effort was futile, Washington finally agreed to sign the accords, ending what was, until Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history.
Due to the Tet new year holiday, the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Paris Peace Accords was celebrated a week early in Vietnam. I was fortunate enough to be invited to join a delegation of international friends of Vietnam that were coming to Hanoi to celebrate the anniversary of this monumental historical event. Among the delegates were peace activists from over two dozen countries that helped rally international support for the Vietnamese people during the war.
Before the official ceremony took place, the delegation visited the Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum to pay our respects, followed by a meeting with Nguyễn Xuân Phúc, the then-president of Vietnam. We were also given tours of Ho Chi Minh’s house and the B-52 Victory Museum. I had the opportunity to hear the stories of veteran peace activists and how they rallied the peace movements and logistical support in countries from France, the former USSR, Italy, The Philippines, El Salvador, Cuba, and many other countries.
At the formal ceremony marking the occasion, hosted by the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry, Nguyễn Thị Bình (affectionately known internationally as Madame Binh,) former lead negotiator of the National Liberation Front at the Paris Peace Conference and former vice president of Vietnam, addressed the assembled audience of war veterans, party leaders, press, and international guests.
Then-President Nguyễn Xuân Phúc, bottom row center, hosts veteran peace activists and international guests who were in Vietnam for the 50th anniversary of the Paris Peace Accords. | Vietnam News Agency Madame Binh recalled her time in Paris fighting for peace and for national liberation. The foreign minister of Vietnam, Bùi Thanh Sơn, also spoke about the importance of diplomacy in the world today.
One major theme throughout the week of commemorations was that victory in the war belonged not just to the Vietnamese people. Rather, it was an international victory—a victory of all peace-loving and progressive people of the world against injustice and imperialism. Speaker after speaker talked about the importance of the international peace movement that stood by Vietnam in nearly every country in the world.
Vietnamese war veterans and survivors of U.S. bombings became extremely emotional when thanking the international group for their support during the war. There was a special thanks offered to U.S. military veterans who returned home to spread the word about the unjust and criminal nature of the war and to rally support for its end.
As the youngest member of the delegation, who did not live through the war, it was an important learning opportunity for me. The victory of the Vietnamese people against U.S. imperialism, with the support of progressive people from around the globe, is irrefutable evidence of the power of internationalism. When the peace-loving people of the world stand together, even the mightiest armies will fall.
I had the opportunity to speak to the gathered delegations and expressed gratitude to those earlier generations of peace activists. Everyone felt it was important that younger activists were present to learn from the history of the war era.
Those of us today who want to fight for peace and to stop imperialism must follow in the footsteps of those that fought through the 1960s and ’70s. We must learn the importance of broad, progressive movements. We must learn from their immense dedication to the cause of peace. And we must learn the strength of internationalism.
Today, the international peace movement is weak and fractured. But a mere 50 years ago, it helped to end one of the bloodiest and longest wars of the 20th century. It can be done again today. TAGS: Cold War
history
Peace Vietnam
Vietnam war CONTRIBUTOR Amiad Horowitz Amiad Horowitz Amiad Horowitz is currently working on his PhD at the Academy of Journalism and Communications, part of the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics in Hanoi, Vietnam. RELATED ARTICLES Risk of WWIII grows, Ukraine peace talks a must Risk of WWIII grows, Ukraine peace talks a must “Anti-woke” Gov. DeSantis defends AP African-American course ban, draws pushback across the country “Anti-woke” Gov. DeSantis defends AP African-American course ban, draws pushback across... A communist view: Let’s reject falsehoods about Dr. Martin Luther King A communist view: Let’s reject falsehoods about Dr. Martin Luther King Comments 0 comments MOST POPULAR TODAY 50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism Scientists: Doomsday Clock moves closer to world nuclear disaster Poem of the week: Pat Mora’s “Legal Alien” ‘The Banshees of Inisherin’ review: An ahistorical film that rings hollow Free college was once the norm all over America ABOUT PEOPLE’S WORLD CONTACT POLITICAL AFFAIRS ARCHIVE MUNDO POPULAR ARCHIVE DOWNLOAD PRINT EDITION Copyright 2022. Some Rights Reserved. People's World
50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism January 27, 2023 11:17 AM CST
BY AMIAD HOROWITZ
50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism
Left: The New York Times announces the pending end of the U.S.' war in January 1973. Right: A new stamp issued in 2023 by Vietnam Post commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Paris Peace Accords. | NYT and Vietnam Post
Jan. 27th marks the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Paris Peace Accords, the agreement which ended the American War in Vietnam, or as it is known in the United States, the Vietnam War. From 1955 to 1973, the United States waged one of the harshest wars in modern history against the Vietnamese people, as part of its aggressive Cold War anti-communist foreign policy.
During the war, the U.S. military dropped more bombs than were used in all of World War II (often on civilian targets). It also deployed chemical weapons, napalm, and cluster bombs, and sent hundreds of thousands of draftees to kill or be killed, usually against their will. Millions of Vietnamese people were killed, maimed, and poisoned. The war was illegally spread to Laos and Cambodia, where more death and destruction were spread.
Despite the best efforts of the U.S. government and military, the imperialist attempt to maintain dominance over Vietnam failed. To this day, the U.S. War in Vietnam marks one of the biggest military and foreign policy disasters in the history of the United States.
Madame Nguyen Thi Binh holds a press conference during peace negotiations in Paris, on Oct. 30, 1972. | Spartaco Bodini It also marks one of the great victories of socialism and anti-imperialism. Against all odds, the Vietnamese people were able to defeat the world’s mightiest military, from the world’s richest country. Under the leadership of the Communist Party of Vietnam, foreign imperialism was defeated, and national liberation and unification were achieved.
The Paris Peace Accords—signed by the United States, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam), the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam), and the provisional revolutionary government of the Republic of South Vietnam—was the culmination of negotiations that began in 1968.
During the talks on the accords, the United States kept delaying the signing. The U.S. government hoped it could bomb the North Vietnamese and the National Liberation Front (commonly known in the United States as the Viet Cong) so much that they would compromise on their goals. When it became clear that the U.S. effort was futile, Washington finally agreed to sign the accords, ending what was, until Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history.
Due to the Tet new year holiday, the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Paris Peace Accords was celebrated a week early in Vietnam. I was fortunate enough to be invited to join a delegation of international friends of Vietnam that were coming to Hanoi to celebrate the anniversary of this monumental historical event. Among the delegates were peace activists from over two dozen countries that helped rally international support for the Vietnamese people during the war.
Before the official ceremony took place, the delegation visited the Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum to pay our respects, followed by a meeting with Nguyễn Xuân Phúc, the then-president of Vietnam. We were also given tours of Ho Chi Minh’s house and the B-52 Victory Museum. I had the opportunity to hear the stories of veteran peace activists and how they rallied the peace movements and logistical support in countries from France, the former USSR, Italy, The Philippines, El Salvador, Cuba, and many other countries.
At the formal ceremony marking the occasion, hosted by the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry, Nguyễn Thị Bình (affectionately known internationally as Madame Binh,) former lead negotiator of the National Liberation Front at the Paris Peace Conference and former vice president of Vietnam, addressed the assembled audience of war veterans, party leaders, press, and international guests.
Then-President Nguyễn Xuân Phúc, bottom row center, hosts veteran peace activists and international guests who were in Vietnam for the 50th anniversary of the Paris Peace Accords. | Vietnam News Agency Madame Binh recalled her time in Paris fighting for peace and for national liberation. The foreign minister of Vietnam, Bùi Thanh Sơn, also spoke about the importance of diplomacy in the world today.
One major theme throughout the week of commemorations was that victory in the war belonged not just to the Vietnamese people. Rather, it was an international victory—a victory of all peace-loving and progressive people of the world against injustice and imperialism. Speaker after speaker talked about the importance of the international peace movement that stood by Vietnam in nearly every country in the world.
Vietnamese war veterans and survivors of U.S. bombings became extremely emotional when thanking the international group for their support during the war. There was a special thanks offered to U.S. military veterans who returned home to spread the word about the unjust and criminal nature of the war and to rally support for its end.
As the youngest member of the delegation, who did not live through the war, it was an important learning opportunity for me. The victory of the Vietnamese people against U.S. imperialism, with the support of progressive people from around the globe, is irrefutable evidence of the power of internationalism. When the peace-loving people of the world stand together, even the mightiest armies will fall.
I had the opportunity to speak to the gathered delegations and expressed gratitude to those earlier generations of peace activists. Everyone felt it was important that younger activists were present to learn from the history of the war era.
Those of us today who want to fight for peace and to stop imperialism must follow in the footsteps of those that fought through the 1960s and ’70s. We must learn the importance of broad, progressive movements. We must learn from their immense dedication to the cause of peace. And we must learn the strength of internationalism.
Today, the international peace movement is weak and fractured. But a mere 50 years ago, it helped to end one of the bloodiest and longest wars of the 20th century. It can be done again today. TAGS: Cold War
history
Peace Vietnam
Vietnam war CONTRIBUTOR Amiad Horowitz Amiad Horowitz Amiad Horowitz is currently working on his PhD at the Academy of Journalism and Communications, part of the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics in Hanoi, Vietnam. RELATED ARTICLES Risk of WWIII grows, Ukraine peace talks a must Risk of WWIII grows, Ukraine peace talks a must “Anti-woke” Gov. DeSantis defends AP African-American course ban, draws pushback across the country “Anti-woke” Gov. DeSantis defends AP African-American course ban, draws pushback across... A communist view: Let’s reject falsehoods about Dr. Martin Luther King A communist view: Let’s reject falsehoods about Dr. Martin Luther King Comments 0 comments MOST POPULAR TODAY 50 years after Paris Peace Accords, Vietnam remembers victory over U.S. imperialism Scientists: Doomsday Clock moves closer to world nuclear disaster Poem of the week: Pat Mora’s “Legal Alien” ‘The Banshees of Inisherin’ review: An ahistorical film that rings hollow Free college was once the norm all over America ABOUT PEOPLE’S WORLD CONTACT POLITICAL AFFAIRS ARCHIVE MUNDO POPULAR ARCHIVE DOWNLOAD PRINT EDITION Copyright 2022. Some Rights Reserved. People's World
Friday, January 27, 2023
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)