2021: Expand the fight for Australian independence and socialism.

 

Written by: Alice M. on 1 January 2021

Alice M., Vice-chairperson on behalf of the Central Committee, CPA (M-L)

Global capitalism is in a major economic, political and social crisis. The pandemic has exposed and intensified the irreconcilable contradictions of this brutally exploitative and decaying system.

Capitalism’s relentless drive for profit requires constant expansion giving rise to imperialism. It requires the seizure of more resources and markets, the intensification of exploitation of the working class, other working people and the environment. Behind the endless attacks on worker’s rights, conditions and livelihoods, the global climate crisis, and the health crisis stands our enemy – imperialism!

Rival imperialist powers and their multinational corporations competing for control of the world’s resources and markets are compelled to drive down workers’ wages and conditions worldwide. That’s what drives neo-liberalism, the relentless attacks on organised labour and working people, the intensified repression of the people, and is the cause of imperialist wars. It can offer no solution to the climate crisis.  

Of particular concern to Australian workers and even some sections of the petty-bourgeois and bourgeois classes is the increasing militarisation of our Indo-Pacific region, and the rivalry between US imperialism and Chinese social-imperialism (socialism in words, under Communist Party leadership, but imperialism in its actions). PM Morrison makes a heroic show, as a US puppet, of telling China that Australia’s sovereignty is not for sale whilst it has long been already sold to the Americans.  Outgoing President Trump delivers one of the US’s highest military awards, the Legion of Honour, as a Christmas present to Morrison and the other two main pieces on US imperialism’s anti-China chessboard, India’s Modi and former Japanese PM Abe. 

For working people, increasing repression is matched with the expanding powers of the capitalist state (legal, police and army). The New Year will see attempts by the government to take away more rights from workers in both precarious and “permanent” employment, and then move on to further attacks on unions. State repression of whistleblowers continues, including against David McBride who provided the Afghan Tapes to the ABC and thus uncovered the war crimes committed by Australian troops in Afghanistan. Threats to the civil rights of the general public continue to come from Peter Dutton and others.

Today, more and more people are questioning capitalism; some are hoping the system can be made more “humane”, fairer and peaceful. That is impossible. The only genuine solution for the masses of people and the environment is ending capitalism and building a socialist society run by the working class serving the needs of the people and the environment, not accumulation of private profit.

Capitalism’s crises breed people’s resistance and struggle. The imperialist ruling class tries to take struggle and resistance out of people’s hands, divert it away from workplaces and communities, tries to keep alive the illusion that the problems can be solved through parliament, and divert attention from the capitalist system, the root cause.

In spite of the pandemic restrictions and lock downs, workers are organising and fighting back to defend their rights and conditions.

The central pillars of capitalism in Australia are dominated by the interests of US imperialism. US imperialism dominates and rules over Australia economically, politically, militarily and culturally through its corporations and subservient Australian puppet governments. This is why Australia is so integrated into the US war machine and why our government drives Australia’s relationship with China into the ground, despite China being our largest trading partner.

Capitalism and its highest stage of imperialism won’t collapse of its own accord. To end capitalism and imperialism in Australia means a struggle to end Australia’s subservience to US imperialism. It requires people’s mass organisations and conscious struggle for a revolutionary anti-imperialist, independent and socialist Australia.

Only a mass people’s movement and struggle in workplaces and communities can empower the working class and the people. The strength of a mass movement and political leadership by determined revolutionary working class organisation is needed to bring about a lasting and fundamental change for an independent and socialist Australia.

A new year gives us the opportunity to recommit ourselves to the struggles of our class and our futures. 2021 calls for organising, mass mobilisation and unity of the people against imperialist domination, attacks on the working class and the people, opposing the trend to fascism and imperialist wars, and the climate crisis.

Immediate tasks in front of the people include to reject carrying the burden of capitalist crisis (including Covid-19), to oppose provocations that ramp up regional tensions and add to the danger of imperialist war, to organise and fight for workers’ rights, for secure and sustainable jobs, to support First Peoples’ struggles and demands, and to defend public health and public education, aged care, the climate and democratic rights.

Our rallying call is organise and build a powerful and united people’s movement to fight for Australian independence and socialism. Join us in the struggle.

Join the CPA(M-L).

Fighting Program of the CPA(M-L): http://www.cpaml.org/fightingprogram.php
General Program: http://www.cpaml.org/generalprogram.php  

Record Year for Rural Land Sales

 Written by: Duncan B. on 31 December 2020

2020 was a record year for rural land sales despite the coronavirus. Four sales in 2020 exceeded $100 million while 15 sales made $50 million or more.

The Canadian Public Sector Pension Investment Board spent more than $1billion on rural properties this year following on from 2019 when it was also the biggest buyer of Australian rural property. PSP spent $845 million in 2020 to take over Webster Limited which is Australia’s fourth-oldest company and one of the nation’s biggest landholders. 

Other major investors were the US-based Hancock Agricultural Investment Group which spent $218 million to secure two of Australia’s most expensive farms and Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets which also made some big purchases.

The rural property market changes rapidly with properties being bought and sold all the time. Properties also pass in and out of Australian hands as Australian and foreign owners buy and sell holdings. Chinese companies both bought and sold properties during the year.

There is a lot of concern in some circles about Chinese investment in Australian agriculture. Perhaps we should be more worried about the Canadians!

ABCC and Lendlease in court battle over Eureka flag ban

 Written by: Danny O. on 31 December 2020

The federal government’s anti-union ideological and political task force, the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) is locked in a court battle with one of the country’s largest construction companies, Lendlease. 

The building giant is challenging the ABCC’s interpretation of the Building Code with regard to the banning of union mottos, logos, posters, and other paraphernalia including the Eureka flag on federally funded construction sites. 

Blatantly ideologically driven in its motivations, the ABCC holds that the clause in question necessitates a blanket ban on all displays of union material on site. Lendlease argues that the ban only applies to material that gives the impression that union membership is anything but a voluntary individual choice. Displays of popular slogans such as ‘No ticket, no start’ and ‘100% Union’ would be obvious inclusions under that interpretation. Banning the Eureka flag, which has far wider meaning and significance than just that of a symbol used by unions, raises much bigger question marks. 

The clause at the centre of the debate reads, “The code-covered entity must ensure that building association logos, mottos or indicia are not applied to clothing, property or equipment supplied by or which provision is made for by the employer or any other conduct which implies that membership of a building association is anything other than individual choice for each employee.” Readers can make their own interpretation of what that might mean.

The case is an interesting test of the anti-union provisions of the Building Code, which all companies engaged in federally funded construction work are required to adhere to. The court’s decision, expected early in the new year, will provide clarity to an issue that to date has been implemented unevenly across the industry. Just what the court’s decision is and what it will actually mean in reality for the industry will depend on several things, not least of them the relative strength of the contending classes on the ground and their willingness to struggle.

Besides being another obvious case of the relentless union busting by the federal government and its ABCC attack dog against the CFMEU which must be opposed, the case raises a number of questions worth considering for class conscious workers.

Scratching the surface   

Lendlease, a giant building company, is apparently challenging the federal government’s anti-unionism enforced by the ABCC. Why? Don’t unions stand in the way of companies making profit? Wouldn’t Lendlease be happier if the unions didn’t have a presence on site? Many workers’ first assumption would often be that that is true. Certainly it’s true that Lendlease and the CFMEU are no strangers when it comes to butting heads in the past. And no doubt they will butt heads in the future. So, what’s going on?

Part of the answer lies in the dual nature of trade unions under capitalism. On the one hand they are organisations that advance the interests of the workers against the employers. On the other hand, they are not revolutionary organisations that seek to do away with bosses and emancipate the workers from wage slavery, but rather seek to win the best conditions for wage slavery under capitalism. By its nature that necessitates at times a certain level of peace and compromise between the unions and the bosses. 

The big end of the commercial construction industry in Melbourne is one of the most productive in the world. It is also one of the most well unionised. Productivity requires disciplined labour. A happy, safe, and well-paid workforce with little to complain about can be more profitable than an angry, agitated and strike-prone one. For Lendlease, it may just be good for business to have the union on site. For now.

That raises another question. Capitalism is the economic system of the class rule of the capitalists. The state, in the form of the government, the courts, the police, the army etc., support and enforce that rule. So why are the ABCC (an arm of the capitalist state) and Lendlease (a capitalist business) in contradiction? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the ABCC to support the profit making of a capitalist like Lendlease? 

The capitalist state doesn’t usually make decisions based on what’s best for one particular capitalist enterprise, but has to manage the capitalist system as a whole. That can lead to contradictions between different sections of capitalists, and even between capitalists and the state. The outlook of the individual capitalist will often be narrow and pragmatic. Lendlease are in the business of making money. If they think they can make more money in the short term by avoiding unnecessary conflict with the union then that’s what they will do. Not a small part of Lendlease’s decision to challenge the ABCC’s interpretation of the Building Code is the practicality of the endless paper work, distraction, and cost of dealing with inspectors and all the trivial supposed code breaches. It gets in the way of making money.  

For the federal government and the ABCC, on the other hand, their outlook is much wider and more ideological. It is good for the capitalist economy as a whole if unions are made entirely ineffective and workers’ wages and conditions driven down. In Australia today, unions are at the weakest they have been for generations. Strikes are practically illegal, union density is somewhere around 10%, and the union movement is legally hog-tied and bogged down in factionalism and a narrow reliance on the electoral fortunes of the ALP. 

Despite it being a far cry from the militancy of the 1970s, the federal government is determined to put an end to one of the few examples of a union willing to defy the anti-union laws to support its members, the CFMEU.  

Strange Bed Fellows of the Class Struggle  

A giant construction company teaming up with a militant building union to defend flying the Eureka flag on construction sites against the ABCC – you can add it to the list of things most people probably didn’t expect in 2020. 

But class struggle is never a straight line. It’s rarely so simply black and white. It twists and turns. It has ups and downs. It takes place within the incredibly complicated and many contradictions of concrete reality. Conditions are forever changing. Sometimes favourable and sometimes not. Common interests can give way to irreconcilable antagonism. Antagonism can give way to temporary common interests. Allies can become enemies, and former enemies can become allies against other enemies.

It can all sometimes make for strange bedfellows.

But one thing is certain. The class struggle never stops and there can be no permanent reconciliation between the interests of the working class and the parasitic capitalists or their state. 

The Eureka flag was born a flag of rebellion. Australian workers will raise it as a flag of revolution yet.

 

 

War clouds over the Taiwan Straits

 Written by: (Contributed) on 29 December 2020

A major diplomatic stand-off between the United States and China over the Taiwan Straits immediately prior to Xmas during the dying days of the Trump administration reveals the narrow waterway might become a future theatre of war.

It will be interesting, therefore, to note future Cold War positions taken by the incoming Biden administration and their likely effect upon Australia and Japan, which have both been drawn ever closer to US-led diplomatic positions and likely 'real-war scenarios' during the period of the Trump administration.

In the period leading to Xmas celebrations the US navy sailed the USS Mustin, a guided missile destroyer, through the Taiwan Straits, the water-way which has effectively divided mainland China with Taiwan since 1949, is only 130 kms at its narrowest, with an average width of 180 kms dividing the two landmasses. It is one of the most politically sensitive areas of the region; China has always regarded Taiwan as merely a renegade province since its establishment as Formosa in 1949. The position has been contested by Taiwanese governments in recent years with some demands for full independence.

The rise of China as a dominant regional player and second-biggest economy in the world has altered the traditional balance of forces across the sensitive northern part of the South China Seas; in recent years, for example, US military concerns have been raised about the 'growing imbalance of power across the Taiwan Strait'. (1)

During the past four years of the Trump administration diplomatic tensions and hostilities have soared over the Straits; the issue of Taiwan was raised during the initial Trump presidential election campaign and subsequently followed with a dramatic increase in defence spending to the tune of $17 billion US arms sales to Taiwan during the period of the administration. (2)

Behind the scenes there have been a number of important considerations, which include the Trump administration using Taiwan as a major part of their regional policy due to its close proximity to China.

While the US switched their diplomatic allegiance to China in 1979, they have always retained strong commitments toward Taiwan, often at a clandestine level. The present American Institute in Taipei, for example, has an estimated five hundred US diplomatic staff ostensibly on temporary leave from the State Department in Washington. (3) Meanwhile, their hosts in the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen, are 'increasingly being invited to regional dialogues on the Indo-Pacific organised by think tanks'. (4)

The ruling presidential administration in Taipei, which was re-elected earlier in the year, has been responsible for two policy commitments which run counter to traditional positions: raising questions about eventual independence for Taiwan and the implementation of a New Southbound Policy with the aim of establishing 'deeper ties with South-east Asian neighbours and beyond'. (5) Taiwan's foreign policy has also provided the Tsai Ing-wen administration with increased access into US-led nerve-centres of power and decision-making.

It has not proved particularly difficult to find examples of the role of Taiwan within US-led decision-making and implementation of more aggressive foreign policy options toward China.

Some of those involved in recent opposition protests in Hong Kong have been linked to Taiwan. The recent arrests of a group of opposition activists attempting to flee Hong Kong in a speed-boat were heading for Taiwan, where the Tsai Ing-wen administration has 'quietly turned a blind eye to residents turning up without proper visas or paperwork'. (6)

The Trump administration arms deals with Taiwan have also coincided with increased demands for independence from within the ruling administration, raising questions about whether they were undertaken as part of a planned and concerted diplomatic push; an official US Defence Department publication, The Indo-Pacific Strategy Report, June 2019, actually referred to Taiwan as a country. (7) The stated position runs counter to established UN protocol.

It is also important to note Taiwan remains a central consideration with Island Chain Theory (ICT), a classic Cold War type model and relic of the previous period which has been revamped by US military planners to restrict regional access and egress by China and their naval and maritime fleets in recent years; the three chains all use US strategically-placed landmasses. Taiwan, for example, is central to the first chain which runs from the Kuril Islands, through the Philippines to Borneo. The second has included Guam, a US territory. The third, has included Hawaii, the US regional command centre for the Indo-Pacific.

Recent US-led Cold War regional diplomatic positions have increasingly made use of ICT: when the Chinese Shandong aircraft carrier sailed through the Taiwan Straits a few days after the USS Mustin, diplomatic tensions soared; China was viewed as entering into a sensitive area of ICT.

The fact the USS Mustin was the twelfth such US-led naval presence in the Taiwan Straits during 2020, while the Shandong was the only Chinese naval presence during the same time period, has revealed just how aggressive US-led diplomatic positions have been during the past year. (8) The Trump administration has had no intention of accommodating China. Statements by the Trump administration over the wider South China Seas and so-called 'freedom of navigation' manoeuvres and exercises have been deliberately ambiguous; they have been, for all intents and purposes, examples of military engagement with China, falling into the grey zone of operations just short of real-war scenarios. (9)

The diplomatic position has rested upon earlier initiatives.

US regional foreign policy toward Taiwan has included 'strategic ambiguity … which … has guided US policy on Taiwan for decades'. (10) While the US remains formally committed with defence agreements to defend Taiwan, in reality they require other regional allies to maintain the position. The US requires military facilities in the Indo-Pacific region itself, for rapid deployment, if required. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), a US agent of influence, proclaims that while 'Washington would provide military support   ... they would ... expect Japan and Australia to be involved'. (11)

Both Japan and Australia are regional hubs for 'US interests' linked directly into US-led military planning; they have, therefore, been placed into a difficult position in recent years. They are linked directly into a triangular diplomatic network with the US based on real-time surveillance with Pentagon-based military planning for regional operations.

The Trump administration has been responsible for pushing Taiwanese independence and attempting to alter the status quo. (12) China has not stood idly by, but countered many of the demands.

It remains, therefore, important to note the forthcoming position taken by the Biden administration, which will be likely to have considerable bearing upon Australia. It has been suggested the incoming Biden administration may seek a return to traditional US diplomatic positions and the status quo. (13) Whilst this may mean a less erratic and provocative stance, Biden is expected to be stronger and more direct in trying to stop China’s expanding influence. 
                               

We, therefore, need an independent foreign policy!

1.     U.S. seeks new Asia defences, The Wall Street Journal, 24-26 August 2012.
2.     Biden will speak softer but act stronger on Taiwan, foreignpolicy.com (FP), 10 November 2020.
3.     Beijing keeps a wary eye on new US Taipei outpost, Australian, 18 June 2018.
4.     Ibid.
5.     Ibid.
6.     'Speedboat fugitives' to face trial, The Weekend Australian, 26-27 December 2020.
7.     Taiwan Flashpoint, The Lowy Institute, 25 February 2020.
8.     Chinese carrier enters Strait, Australian, 23 December 2020.
9.     How will reckless adventurism in Taiwan Straits expose Trump administration, CGTN, 21 December 2020.     
10.   FP., op.cit., 10 November 2020.
11.   2021 the year of the wolf warrior at the door, Statement from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Australian, 23 December 2020.
12.   FP., op.cit., 10 November 2020.
13.   Ibid.

ICOR - Stop the war preparations in Southern Kurdistan! The Kurdish people are not alone!

 

Written by: ICOR on 28 December 2020

For months the South Kurdish ruling party PDK (the party of Barzani) has been preparing for a war against the PKK under hypocritical pretexts. 

It is obvious that with its military provocations and propaganda, the PDK, in close cooperation with the Turkish secret service MIT, wants to prepare the way for a war of invasion of the fascist Turkish state against the Kurdish freedom movement. 

The stationing of military forces serves the purpose of encircling the Kurdish freedom movement from different directions and cutting its connections to the outside world. To this end, the PDK stationed military units at the "Gate to Qendîl" in the Zînê Wertê region, whereupon the Turkish air force bombed guerrilla positions in the region. Special units of the PDK surrounded the Gare guerrilla area in the Medya Defense Zones with heavy weapons, further attacks by the Turkish army followed on the strategic border region of Heftanîn and the entire region of Bradost, Xinêre, Goşine and Helgurt. The numerous attacks by the Turkish Air Force prove that the PDK is directly transmitting information to Turkey.

 

Since October, the Iraqi government and the PDK have also been trying with little success to gain complete control over the self-governing Yezidi region of Sinjar and dissolve the self-defense forces.

 

All this shows the scope of the entire war preparations, which are being carried out in a coalition and with the approval of various counterrevolutionary powers. The Turkish state mobilizes everything in its power to destroy the PKK, stifle the Kurdish people's will for freedom and attack the achievements of the Kurdish people, especially of the women. But the imperialist USA also supports any plan to weaken the Kurdish freedom movement. As early as November 6, 2018, the US renewed its hostility to the PKK with the call for arrest of leading PKK cadres. The states in the region also support the attacks on the PKK, as it is one of the most important anti-imperialist dynamics in the region and thus, a threat to the capitalist and imperialist rulers.

 

The coming attacks against the PKK in Southern Kurdistan therefore represent a great danger for the freedom struggle in the region.

 

The PDK, which stands in the way of the Kurdish people's unification efforts and disregarded any calls for calm, risks a new inner-Kurdish civil war that will spread all over Kurdistan through its treacherous cooperation with the fascist Turkish state. The PDK betrays the just demands of the Kurdish people for freedom and self-determination.

 

It is necessary to thwart these plans and organize international solidarity with the Kurdish people.

 

We call on the PDK to immediately stop its war preparations and cooperation with the fascist Turkish state!

 

We call on all freedom-loving people in the world to take to the streets against any attacks on the Kurdish people and their freedom fighters in all parts of Kurdistan!

 

Down with imperialism and colonialism!

 

Long live international solidarity and the struggle for democracy and freedom!

 

Signatories (as of 20 December 2020, further signatories possible):

1. PCPCI   Parti Communiste Proletarien de Côte d'Ivoire (Proletarian Communist Party of Ivory Coast)

2. MMLPL   Moroccan Marxist-Leninist Proletarian Line

3. CPSA (ML)   Communist Party of South Africa (Marxist-Leninist)

4. PCT   Parti Comuniste du Togo (Communist Party of Togo)

5. PPDS   Parti Patriotique Démocratique Socialiste (Patriotic Democratic Socialist Party), Tunisia

6. MLOA   Marxist-Leninist Organization of Afghanistan

7. CPB   Communist Party of Bangladesh

8. CPI (ML) Red Star   Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Red Star

9. NCP (Mashal)   Nepal Communist Party (Mashal)

10. PPRF   Patriotic Peoples Republican Front of Nepal

11. NDMLP   New-Democratic Marxist-Leninist Party, Sri Lanka

12. CPA/ML   Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist)

13. БКП   Българска Комунистическа Партия (Bulgarian Communist Party)

14. БРП(к)   Българска Работническа Партия (комунисти) (Bulgarian Workers Party (Communist))

15. PR-ByH   Partija Rada - ByH (Party of Labor - Bosnia and Herzegovina)

16. MLPD   Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Deutschlands (Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany)

17. UCLyon   Unité Communiste Lyon (Communist United Lyon), France

18. UPML   Union Prolétarienne Marxiste-Léniniste (Marxist-Leninist Proletarian Union), France

19. KOL   Kommunistische Organisation Luxemburg (Communist Organization of Luxemburg)

20. RM   Rode Morgen (Red Dawn), Netherlands

21. UMLP   União Marxista-Leninista Portuguesa (Portuguese Marxist-Leninist Union)

22. MLKP   Marksist Leninist Komünist Parti Türkiye / Kürdistan (Marxist Leninist Communist Party Turkey / Kurdistan)

23. KSRD   Koordinazionnyj Sowjet Rabotschewo Dvizhenija (Coordination Council of the Workers Class Movement), Ukraine

24. PR   Partija Rada (Party of Labor), Yugoslavia (ex)

25. PCC-M   Partido Comunista de Colombia – Maoista (Communist Party of Colombia - Maoist)

26. NPCH (ML)   Nouveau Parti Communiste Haϊtien (Marxiste-Léniniste) (New Communist Party of Haiti (Marxist-Leninist))

27. PCP (independiente)   Partido Comunista Paraguayo (independiente) (Paraguayan  Communist Party (independent))

28. BDP   Bloque Democratico Popular (Popular Democratic Bloc), Peru

29. PC (ML)   Partido Comunista (Marxista Leninista) (Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist)), Dominican Republic

 

Scandalous verdict in Nuremberg: a prison sentence for shouting at police

 

Dear friends and comrades,

On the 2^nd and 12^th of February 2021, court proceedings will take place against two comrades from Nuremberg. The current decision of the local court would be an interpretation of ‘resistance against executory officers’ unprecedented in Germany: just shouting at police officers is to be punished with a prison sentence without probation. Therefore, this would create a precedent applicable to other entirely non-violent methods of civil disobedience. These methods could then be interpreted as collaborative resistance against executory officers. This would place serious new legal instruments of state force into the hands of the executive branch of government. To help prevent this, we would be grateful for any support for the campaign #Jamnitzer #SolidaritaetGegenPolizeistaatlichkeit, for example through statements of solidarity, spreading of the issue through your structures and publications.

Greetings in solidarity and thank you for your support,

Prolos

Scandalous verdict in Nuremberg: a prison sentence for shouting at police

In October, the Nuremberg local court sentenced two leftist activists to 18 and 15 months imprisonment, without probation (since the judgement is not yet final, both defendants are not in prison while they await the appeal process). The reason for this sentence: they supposedly shouted at police officers at the Jamnitzer square in the summer of 2019.

The Jamnitzer square embodies the struggle against gentrification and isolation in Nuremberg. Cramped living quarters and overpriced bars are only examples for the many reasons local residents have to spend evenings outdoors. Particularly in this quarter, where private gardens are rare, the public square is a hub of community and social encounters. This however, runs directly counter to the interests of property investors who wish to attract a better paying class of citizens with expensive venues and a stylish, quiet neighbourhood. This necessitates the displacement of less affluent residents. These interests are enforced by a police force which seeks ever more aggressively to prevent the less well-off majority from using this public space.

As a result, in June 2019, park users had had enough and a stop-and-search incident was met by a group of people congregating in solidarity with those stopped by the police and making verbal demands that the police leave the square and stop their harassment, causing the officers to retreat. The incident has led to enforced police presence, even in the form of specialist units, and constant surveillance, accompanied by the prosecution of even minor administrative offences.

But the consequences of this evening in June are even more far reaching, as local media has taken up the police narrative, constructing scenes approaching civil war, clearly attempting to make the police’s reaction and the two - obviously politically motivated - prosecutions appear more reasonable. Within this narrative, spontaneous solidarity among a group of park users is construed as a disciplined mob and one man randomly named as the ringleader.

The legal practice applied to the proceedings was from the start highly dubious and the political motivation is clearly discernible. The older defendant was supposedly identified from a photograph showing eight men over 50 who looked nothing like one-another, but were all ascribed to leftist circles by the interior intelligence agency. The principle applied here was clearly that it would be equally desirable to get a hold of any one of them. The younger defendant was identified based on just one police officer’s statement which was so vague it resulted in the intelligence agency producing three blocks of photographs of eight different individuals – the defendant being the only one in his block roughly fitting the officer´s vague description. In court however, the police officer suddenly claimed to identify the accused with great certainty, in spite of a different witness’s assurances that the defendant had not even been present at the incident. The judge also ignored the fact that the police witness’s boyfriend, also a police officer, had sat in on the proceedings prior to his girlfriend’s statement and had left to have lunch with her directly after other relevant witness statements and directly before she made hers.

This only underlines the fact that the outcome of the case had at this point already been decided upon. It was simply an instrument to address the political issue which had arisen from the use of the Jamnitzer square. The state prosecutor stressed in their demand that this verdict had to create a precedent as deterrence to prevent the Jamnitzer from becoming a No-Go-Area. In fact, the only thing currently threatening to make it a No-Go-Area is continued police harassment. The lawless spaces they evoke seem to be more often found in police stations and courtrooms.

The judge basically followed the demands of the state prosecutor, issuing sentences of 18 and 15 months respectively, permitting neither sentence to be suspended on probation. At the same time as such show trials are held to boost the police’s ego and suppress leftist organising, the state refuses to dissolve the „National Socialist Underground“, NSU, complex. Extremist right wing factions and violent excesses in police and army are dismissed as isolated cases, the existence of militant right wing networks in organs of state force is denied. This presentation of alternative facts is a tested method to obstruct the public gaze.

Constant police scandals have not prevented the police force from being equipped with ever more powers, such as through the police competency law. And the line between intelligence agencies and police becomes ever more blurred, while our rights are curtailed and even the mildest forms of resistance are punished with prison sentences. This is open preparation for the state’s enforced battle against its own people. Political opponents are the first guinea pigs for these methods, but we do not have a long way to go before every football match resembles a military parade, youths are routinely beaten up and strikes and labour unions are criminalised.

Where injustice becomes law, resistance becomes a duty. Because this situation concerns us all! Show solidarity – only a united struggle can preserve the rights and freedoms which a united struggle won for us. We are grateful for any support for the campaign #Jamnitzer #SolidaritaetGegenPolizeistaatlichkeit, for example through statements of solidarity, spreading of the issue through your structures and publications.

Let us confront their oppression with our solidarity!

 

 

A solidarity account has been created with the legal aid network “Rote Hilfe” for the two prosecuted comrades:

Rote Hilfe Nuremberg GLS Bank

IBAN: DE85 4306 0967 4007 2383 59

BIC: GENODEM1GLS

Purpose: Jamnitzer

 

 

For further updates:

https://www.redside.tk

http://www.prolos.info/

https://twitter.com/Prolos_Nbg

https://aufdersuche.blackblogs.org/

 

The group "Auf der Suche – Anarchistische Gruppe Nuremberg" has created a page dedicated to this topic:

https://aufdersuche.blackblogs.org/jamnitzer-no-cops-no-stress/

 

Some links to interviews (in German), with the criminal defence lawyer amongst others:

https://www.redside.tk/2020/10/18/haft-ohne-bewaehrung-wergen-anschreiens-der-polizei-neue-interviews/

 

Solidarity shirts can be bought at black mosquito.

https://black-mosquito.org/de/jamnitzer-no-cops-no-stress-soli-t-shirt.html

 

Nationalise Coles and other Big Food and Beverage Corporations

 

Written by: Ned K. on 26 December 2020

In recent weeks two major disputes between workers and large corporations are a preview of what workers can expect in coming years from the multinational corporations and compliant governments in Australia.

As people in Australia sat down for Xmas dinner, warehouse workers at a Coles Distribution Centre in NSW were being locked out by Coles until at least 11 February 2021. The workers had already been locked out for a month over a dispute with Coles about job security and redundancy pay. Coles announced during negotiations for a new Agreement that they were going to close the Smeaton Distribution Centre and build a new automated warehouse which would employ about a quarter of the number of 400 workers at the Smeaton Centre. To make matters worse for workers, Coles said it would not offer any of the workers in the warehouse that was closing a job in the new warehouse.

When workers took action for better redundancy pay and job security, Coles used the Fair Work Act to lock workers out until 1 February.

The warehouse workers, members of United Workers Union, took their protests to Coles retail outlets and held protest marches on Coles Head Office in Sydney.  Their Union initiated a boycott Coles campaign but as this article is written, Coles remained unmoved.

Coles have a lot to lose in this dispute as have the workers. The workers' loss is their livelihood and if Coles lose this dispute, they know that their plan to automate warehouses across the country will be met with even more resistance on a larger scale from workers.

Competition between a growing number of large retailers in Australia is driving them to reduce production costs and distribution costs to make more profits in a tighter market.

If the Coles workers win this first round struggle, Coles know that further closures will cost them much more.

Further south in Adelaide, brewery workers from the Japanese owned West End Brewery sat down to Xmas dinner with mixed feelings. They were ordered back to work prior to Xmas after a two-week strike for better redundancy pay in response to the brewery owner Kirin’s (part of the Mitsubishi group of companies) decision to close the brewery in June 2021. Following the return to work, the workers and their Union, United Workers Union, negotiated a slightly better redundancy package with seven additional weeks’ pay for each directly employed worker in addition to their existing redundancy package won in previous disputes. However, long term labor hire workers missed out altogether.

Both the brewery and Coles disputes show the strong fighting tradition of workers employed by multinational corporations. If you don't fight you lose.

What characterised both these disputes was that there was no initiative from the Labor Party or any other parliamentarian to question why the closures of workplaces was allowed to go ahead. 

Multinational corporations just make a decision to close up shop and there is complete acceptance by the Parliaments of the country about this and the struggle becomes left to the workers to fight for the best deal they can get to minimize the blow of being thrown out of full time work with working conditions and pay that they had won over many years’ employment and struggle.

Workers in Australia want to work in industries and sectors where decisions about their future and their livelihoods are made in the interests of Australia as a sovereign nation and the workers who work in the industries and sectors concerned.

Any politician worth their salt would be calling for the economic lifelines of the country to be in the hands of the Australian people, rather than tame acceptance of decisions by multinationals to increase their profits.