Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

1
Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

How to defeat NACTs austerity attack

The NACT governments new package of labour reforms is designed to improve 'productivity' and
'create jobs' says John Key. This is the neo-liberal language for increased exploitation of
workers under worse conditions to restore profits. Under the new law workers will have fewer
rights than they had under the ECA in the 1990s. This is why the CTU has been forced to call
for street protests. However, like the social democrats in Greece and Spain, where the EU is
imposing tough austerity measures, the CTU will use street protests to try to pressure the
Labour Party to the left and defeat the NACTs at the next election. But Labour will not
challenge capitalism and imperialism. Its purpose has always been to reconcile workers to
capitalism. We say that the working class must organise independently of the Labour Party and
fight for a revolutionary party and program to socialise the economy and plan production for
need and not profit.

What drives the NACTS? heading for another great depression like the 1930s.
NZ is a weak, low-wage semi-colonial producer of
The NACTs have shifted up a gear to declare an open bulk commodity exports. Its a price taker and not a
class war on workers in this country with a series of price maker in the world market which means that
attacks on work rights (90 days fire at will for all new the NZ capitalist class has to drive down the costs of
jobs) beneficiaries (toughening work tests for sickness production to get any share of the profits from
benefits, DPBs) ACC (denial of sexual abuse counselling) agriculture, mining, tourism and education etc., that
savings (reducing employers Kiwisaver contributions), have historically flowed to British, US, and
cuts to health, education, privatisation of social Australian imperialism. Today that value is
services, tax increases increasingly flowing to
(GST) and so on ad Chinese imperialism.
nauseum. The whole point The national share of
is to force down wages profits, wages, taxes
and to cut the social wage and social services in
to shift more value Aotearoa depends on
produced by workers to the profits retained
the bosses and increase from the value of export
their profits. earnings of these
commodities, and today
The rise in violent crime is it is the relationship
a direct result of the crisis with China that is
and the call to arm the critical to this
police is to up the level of distribution of the
state force to clamp down national income.
on workers and suppress
refusal of workers to pay To keep the whole
for the crisis. It is not a economy buoyant the
policy option for the prices for commodity
NACTS, rural rednecks or exports (agriculture,
bloody minded fascists as tourism, tertiary
some think. education etc) have to be
held up by increasing
And it certainly can't be fixed by a Labour demand in these imperialist and other economies. They
Government that Sue Bradford is calling for. It is a want cheap milk powder, cheap iron sands, cheap
specific response by the NZ ruling class to the honeymoons and cheap degrees. This means competing
immediate crisis of profitability in the export with other semi-colonial exporters by driving down the
oriented sectors. Resistance to the NACTs which prices of production including labour costs (fire at will,
merely aims to get Labour into government in 2011 performance pay for teachers in schools and
will fail miserably as we explain below. universities, workfare) environmental costs (gutting the
RMA, cutting ETS obligations) and energy costs
Chinese semi-colony? (privatise water, privatise national parks, foreshore and
seabed, make workers subsidise corporations (eg
The NACTs represent international capital in NZ RioTinto-formerly Comalco, electricity, and billions in
facing a serious global crisis of falling profits that is ETS subsidies).

2
Class Struggle 90
The main demand for such commodities at the
moment is being driven by China which is rapidly
overtaking the other imperialist powers as NZ's main
trading partner. This explains the NACT's
subservience to Chinese imperialism and NZ's
weakening ties with its traditional trading partners -
apart from Australia which is a weak imperialist
power dependent on China for its growth and NZ's
main trading partner.
The opposition to selling land to Chinese corporations
and the growing Chinese migrant population reflects
this increasing influence. China is the only large
dynamic capitalist economy whose rapid growth is so
far preventing the
global economy
going into a
complete slump.
That is why in the
last analysis the
NACTs policies are
those of a NZ semi-
colonial ruling
class forced to
serve the interests
of Chinese
imperialism.
Strategy for
fight back
Understanding the
class enemy then,
is the key to
fighting back. The
NACTs represent a
subservient,
largely parasitic, NZ ruling class that is becoming the
lackey of Chinese imperialism. They have no room to
manoever but have to cut production costs to meet the
demands of Chinese imperialism. Key signals this when
he agreed to joint ventures with Chinese corporations
in third countries. He is acting for NZ bosses seeking a
stake in the profits from China's ability to super-exploit
third world countries. Such pressure to outsource NZ
production will grow if costs at home are not cut
drastically.
This is the new template that shapes NZ politics. We
can call it the Chinese century. It excludes the
possibility of reforms since these raise capital's costs
and harm NZ's competitiveness. Whatever the antics
of the NZ ruling class may be they are driven by this
necessity. And NZ workers do not have the clout of
Chinese workers who are winning higher wages from
a very low base. The only alternative for NZ workers
is to fight for a socialist Aotearoa.
Socialism needs a revolution
To make this absolutely clear, by socialism we mean
July-August 2010
the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by a
socialist, planned economy democratically administered
by the working class. We do not mean some fake
socialism which can be won by a 'progressive' bloc
between workers and national capitalists benefitting
from the relationship with China. Much of the left
models its brand of socialism on market socialist
reforms. Parliamentary socialism is the Standardista
brand. The there is the Chinese brand which advocates
a form of market socialist state that acts to 'develop'
rather than 'colonise' the semi-colonial world. This is
the Chavista or Bolivarian brand espoused by the
Australian Green Left and local mimics.
We have discussed the danger for workers of these left
reformist
positions at
length
elsewhere. We
argued that
China is no
different from
the US or EU
imperialists in
Asia, Africa or
Latin America,
where it extracts
super profits like
all imperialist
powers, even if
its methods
differ. We
conclude that
there is no
possibility of the
NZ working class
being able to
follow some
imaginary
Fabian, Chavist or Chinese road to market socialism.
Therefore, the fight for a socialist Aotearoa is not just
against the NACTs, but also against the Labour Party
backed by the CTU union bureaucracy which thinks that
it can reform capitalism in the new Chinese Century
because NZ's relationship with China is 'progessive'.
Aotearoa socialist republic
In its essence the fight for socialism is the not to
kowtow to China but to join forces with Chinese
workers to fight to expropriate imperialism and the
NZ ruling class who are the junior partners of
imperialism.
By socialism we mean collective ownership and also
collective consumption of value as the product of
labour. Nationalisation can become collective property
only if workers take control and prevent the
privatisation of value as profits (eg stop private mining
of national parks). This means defending state owned
assets not only from privatisation but also from private
3
Class Struggle 90
appropriation of value by putting them under workers
control. This means nationalising under workers control
all land and landbased resources, the key sectors of
industry, and the banks, as steps towards socialism.
How do we get there?
The Maori struggle to regain customary ownership of
the Foreshore and Seabed is one avenue. It would tie
up land and sea-based resources as common property
that opens the way to end private profits. However, in
itself it does not stop profiteering by corrupt bosses or
by capitalist partners (such as Maori held fishing quota
in JVs with Japanese corporations).
But we have no confidence in the Maori Party brand of
iwi communalism. It would see customary land
benefitting iwi capitalists rather than Maori workers. It
would copy the Chinese 'Communist Party' capitalists.
Land in China is state owned, but the capitalists are
able to make profits from the labour value extracted
from workers on that land. To stop this Maori customary
land would have to be democratically administered by
the majority of Maori workers to ensure that the rent
(value) produced was also collectively used to meet the
needs of the masses and not the private greed of any
class of shareholders. Maori workers have a common
interest in this with Chinese workers to socialise
nationalised property!
Land Nationalisation
This is the model for the agricultural sector. Here the
demand for land nationalisation should not be based on
opposition to foreign ownership (the CAFCA and Green
Party and some Maori nationalists line) but collective
working class ownership which requires class alliances
with foreign workers. Agricultural workers would call
for a class alliance with working farmers in NZ and poor
peasants in China. And since nationalisation in itself
July-August 2010
does not prevent profiteering, the workers in this
sector need to demand land nationalisation under
workers’ and small farmers’ control. This would
remove the costs of servicing mortgages as one major
flow of rent from the land to a parasitic class or
rentiers. Similarly the attempts by Fonterra to create
shares that can be traded on the stock exchange is
designed to allow international finance capital to profit
from the labour of working dairy farmers.
It is interesting that the NACTs are opening up to
Chinese imperialist investment in Agriculture while Alan
Hubbard who offers interest-free loans to young
farmers is seen as a threat to the profits of the
corporates. Hubbard proves that farmers can benefit
from their own labour without being mortaged to the
big banks. Socialism however, cannot be built on
Christian philanthropy. In exchange for land
nationalisation farmers would have interest free state
loans and access to state R and D to develop their land
and retain the product of their labour.
Action Program
In this situation where NZ's economic role is that of a
semi-colony to Chinese imperialism facing a global
crisis, no trust can be put in the National or Labour
parties that both subordinate workers to the
capitalist class and to imperialism. In every sector
where the new employment reforms are designed to
drive down wages and conditions, such as in
agriculture, mining, tourism, education, etc., to
allow Chinese and other imperialists to reap super-
profits from Aotearoa, workers have to fight for what
they need now and not what the local or Chinese
capitalists say they can 'afford' to pay.
• Jobs for all on a living wage! Reduce hours
and share the work. Benefits tied to the living
wage!
• For unions on every jobsite under the control
of the membership with recallable delegates!
• For rank and file control of the unions. For
union independence from the state. Break
with the union bureaucracy!
• No sackings under the 90 days act! All for one
and one for all!
• Equal rights for all workers by age, gender,
ethnicity, nationality, sexuality!
• For workers committees and assemblies in
every city.
• For a national Congress of workers
assemblies.
• For a general strike to smash the NACTs
austerity program!
• No to privatisations! For nationalisation of the
land and key sectors of the economy under
workers control with no compensation!
• For a socialist Aotearoa/New Zealand!
4
Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

Release Sergeant Bradley Manning – War Hero!

The release of the Afghanistan 'war logs' that blew the all this data and uploading it to someone he identified
secrecy surrounding the inhuman war in Afghanistan as Julian Assange. At times, he claimed he himself had
have been traced by the Pentagon to Bradley Manning - leaked the material, suggesting that he had taken in
bradass87 - an intelligence officer based in Iraq. The blank CDs, labelled as Lady Gaga's music, slotted them
logs that expose the ongoing conduct of a brutal, into his high-security laptop and lip-synched to
murderous war against the people of Afghanistan are nonexistent music to cover his downloading: "i want
likely to fuel a new wave of people to see the truth,"
anti-war opinion against the he said.
war. He dwelled on the
abundance of the
While Wikileaks role in disclosure: "its open
facilitating the publication diplomacy … its
of the logs is to be Climategate with a global
welcomed, the real hero scope and breathtaking
of this scandal is depth … its beautiful and
bradass87 who was horrifying … It's public
arrested in May and has data, it belongs in the
spend two months in jail public domain." At one
in Kuwait. We say the point, Bradass87 caught
workers of the world must himself and said: "i can't
demand the immediate believe what im
release of Brad Manning as confessing to you." It was
a war hero! too late. Unknown to him,
two days into their
Manning was dobbed in to exchange, on 23 May,
the army by a former Lamo had contacted the
hacker Adrian Lamo. US military. On 25 May he
According to the Guardian: met officers from the
It was not until late May Pentagon's criminal
that the Pentagon finally investigations department
closed in on a suspect, and in a Starbucks and gave
that was only after a very them a printout of
strange sequence of events. Bradass87's online chat.
On 21 May, a Californian On 26 May, at US Forward
computer hacker called Operating Base Hammer,
Adrian Lamo was contacted 25 miles outside Baghdad,
by somebody with the a 22-year-old intelligence
online name Bradass87 who analyst named Bradley
started to swap instant Manning was arrested,
messages with him. He was immediately extraordinarily shipped across the border to Kuwait and locked up in a
open: "hi... how are you?… im an army intelligence military prison
analyst, deployed to eastern bagdad … if you had
unprecedented access to classified networks, 14 hours a Lamo's reason for informing on Manning to the military
day, 7 days a week for 8+ months, what would you do?" was that the log could identify and expose military in
For five days, Bradass87 opened his heart to Lamo. He the field. Perhaps this was as the result of the first
described how his job gave him access to two secret Wikileak from Manning, the video of the massacre of
networks: the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, civilians:
SIPRNET, which carries US diplomatic and military
intelligence classified "secret"; and the Joint Worldwide ... on 5 April, Assange held a press conference in
Intelligence Communications System which uses a Washington to reveal US military video of a group of
different security system to carry similar material civilians in Baghdad, including two Reuters staff, being
classified up to "top secret". He said this had allowed shot down in the street in 2007 by Apache helicopters:
him to see "incredible things, awful things … that their crew could be heard crowing about their "good
belong in the public domain and not on some server shooting" before destroying a van which had come to
stored in a dark room in Washington DC … almost rescue a wounded man and which turned out to be
criminal political backdealings … the non-PR version of carrying two children on its front seat.
world events and crises." This obscenity led to a scramble to find the
Bradass87 suggested that "someone I know intimately" perpetrators, not of the assassination but of the leaks.
had been downloading and compressing and encrypting Lamo tries to throw dirt on Manning's motives:
5
Class Struggle 90
Lamo, 29, who lives in Sacramento, said that the
Afghan war documents are "basically a large dump of
battlefield intelligence systems
that Manning had access to."
He said, however, that Manning
lacked the technical expertise to
obtain and transmit all the data
and received help from people
who worked with WikiLeaks.
"There was overlap between
people who were his friends and
people working with WikiLeaks,"
Lamo said.
"They made him feel real cool by
putting him in touch with
Assange," he said. "They were
WikiLeaks' 'shopper' for classified
information. There are at least
two people in his social circle
who are in contact with
WikiLeaks."
Lamo said he does not know how
Manning's friends came to know
or work with WikiLeaks. "At some point he was either
induced, or of his own volition, decided to contact
[WikiLeaks]," Lamo said.
So Manning is risking the lives of his fellow soldiers
because he wants to feel 'cool' by associating with
WikiLeaks? But it doesnt really matter if Manning felt
'cool' or not, he jeopardised his career, his freedom (he
could face 50 years in jail) and possibly his life by
acting on his beliefs that the war was "criminal". If
Manning's posts on his dig.com address and his support
for wikileaks role in 'climategate' are any indication,
Manning may have right-wing libertarian politics.
A blogger says that Manning was
screaming "look at me, I'm a
hero waiting to happen".
I can't say if this has harmed the
security of our troops. But I
don't think it's advanced the
cause of peace. This information
gives us a measure of insight
into what it's like on the ground
of a massive war - but how much
did we need that, and what cost
was it worth paying to obtain? As
far as I can see, two things have
been satisfied by this leak:
bradass87's desire for notoriety,
and our need for voyeurism.
So bradass87's actions that can
lead to a courtmartial and years
in jail are motivated by nothing
more than a 'desire for notoriety' to feed our need for
'voyeurism'.
Whatever Manning's motives and whatever our
July-August 2010
reaction, the truth about the war can only bring
about stronger actions to end this imperialist war and
the capitalist system that makes it necessary.
Manning's case is proceeding within the
military justice system, with the Army
Criminal Investigation Command leading
the probe. The next step is a preliminary
hearing to determine whether there is
sufficient evidence to recommend a
court-martial, Lapan said. If individuals
not connected to the military are found
to be involved in the leak, "then that's
when Justice and the others would
potentially get involved," he said.
Here we see the military rushing to
suppress the truth and punish the
whistleblowers and of the 'messengers'
such as Wikileaks.
The world's workers must defend
whistleblowers against imperialist war!
As for the argument that the truth be
suppressed for the sake of the lives of
the military personnel, we say bring on the truth, more
truth and nothing but the truth. A recent case of the
photo of NZ SAS soldier on duty in Afghanistan, Willie
Apiata, when published in the corporate media, met
with condemnation by the RSA (Returned Services) who
said it put him at risk. We say more photos please.
Postcript on Lieutenant Timothy
O'Donnell
On August 4th NZ time the first NZ casualty of the war
in Afghanistan occurred. The dead soldier was
Lieutenant Tim O'Donnell aged 28, a
member of the NZ Provincial
Reconstruction Team in Bamyan
Province. A decorated career soldier
who also served in East Timor,
O'Donnell was killed when his convoy
hit a roadside bomb. The irony is that
the war in Afghanistan is lost, the
COIN of McCrystal and Petreus
(counterinsergency operation) has
failed, and Obama is looking to do a
deal to get out leaving a massive US
base at Bagram. Not only that, the
people of Bamyan do not want the
Reconstruction Team as there is no
nation building possible in a middle of
a war. Yet the death of this soldier
becomes a cause for national
mourning in New Zealand. As
communists we do not mourn his
death, nor do we welcome it. As a professional soldier
and an officer O'Donnell was prepared to risk his life to
wage an oppressive war. His death is part of the defeat
of imperialism in Afghanistan.
6
Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

US-China Rivalry threatens Global War

In recent weeks China and the US have taken more hostile stands militarily. This is expressed in
China's opposition to the current joint US-South Korea military exercises in the Yellow Sea. The
US has also intervened in the dispute between China and Vietnam over Islands in the South
China Sea. This military standoff represents a deeper falling out politically as China has
refused to concede to the full sanctions on Iran demanded by the US, and now stands to gain as
the EU cuts off all investment. War preparations against Iran continue meanwhile. China has
also taken a clear stand for an independent Afghanistan against a permanent US base in the
heart of central Asia. China is likely to back Pakistan in any fallout with the US over support
for the Taliban. China also stands to gain from Pakistan's influence over the Pashtun which
leads to a moderate Pashtun state or Pashtun control of Afghanistan.
Behind the political fall-out is the now powering away from the US
growing economic rivalry between accumulating more capital from its
the US the hegemonic imperialist FDI proportionately than the US.
power on the wane, and a rapidly China against its image of projecting
growing China which is now the 'soft power' is making tough deals in
US main rival in Asia, Africa and the semi-colonial countries and
Latin America. This rivalry has raking in superprofits.
intensified with the onset of a
global recession in 2007 which Thus the mixed motives of the US
saw the US, EU and Japanese towards China's dynamic economy
economies go into recession, means that the US wants to
while China continued to grow similtaneously dominate China's
rapidly. The global capitalist crisis economy short of any all-out direct
continues to deepen and military confrontation. Its current
threatens to slide into a double- tactics are to push China back, but
dip recession or depression. It will widen the gap not so far as to force a serious breakdown in relations.
between the US and China and push the US into a more Instead the US uses the big stick to make Japan
aggressive projection of its military power in Asia backdown on evicting the US base from Okinawa, and
where it is determined to create a permanent base in to allow more US bases in Japan. Then there is the re-
Afghanistan, in Africa where AFRICOM now mobilises US awakening of the Korean war which has been halted
and African forces in many countries, and in Latin only by an armistice since 1953, the Cheonan incident
America were the US stage the coup in Honduras, has 7 and the South Seas conflict with Vietnam. All of this is
new bases in Colombia, and renewed its occupation of the result of a policy in which the US attempts to both
Haiti. In all of these new expanding US military fronts, profit from and yet contain China. The further away
the US is using its military superiority with the main from China the more the US is prepared to stoke up its
objective of pushing back China's expanding economic client regimes to confront China. As we discuss below
power. this opens up the immediate prospect of proxy wars on
every continent. What is the likely outcome of this
The inter-imperialist rivalry between the two bipolar scenario?
imperialist poles, the US bloc and the China bloc,
explains the current military escalation in East Asia. From multipolar to bipolar rivalry
China's economy continues to grow at almost 10%. US
investments in China continue to grow. US firms rely on As we have argued at length elsewhere, the only
the China market to avoid bankruptcy. General Motors explanation for the behaviour of China today is as an
is contracting in the US but expanding in China. Apple emerging imperialist power. This is the only way we can
is now taking advantage of the growing Chinese middle account for its phenomenal growth and its global
class. China is now outstripping Japan as the No 2 world influence. We put this down to the unique features of
economy. At this rate it could catch up with the US China being an ex-workers state able to retain both the
within two decades or less. Thus the US is trapped in its territorial internal colonies of its former workers state,
relations with China. Without its investments in China as well as the strongly centralised state apparatus and
the US would be in a deep depression. So the US state planned economy. The Stalinist bureaucracy was
strategy with China is to increase its economic share of able to transform itself into a powerful capitalist class
China's labor power, resources and market. Yet China is retaining control over the Chinese economy. Opening

7
Class Struggle 90
up to the global market and to foreign investment
provided the new ruling class with access to modern
technology and a platform from which to catch up with
the most productive capitalist economies. The rapid
capital accumulation that resulted now had to be
invested globally to maintain the rising level of raw
materials and labour power required to maintain the
high growth rate. As a result China emerged as the only
new imperialist power since the rise of Japan in the
period between the world wars of the 20th century.
Yet it couldnt expand into the global economy unless it
was able to displace existing imperialist powers.
China is still an emerging imperialist power that has
only begun to invest heavily globally in significant
amounts since 2000, and it's growth has been at the
expense of the US and its traditional imperialist
allies, notably France, Spain and to a lesser extent
Japan. This is evident in both China's inroads into the
spheres of influence of the European powers in all three
continents. This is true where China is replacing its
rivals as the dominant political and economic power, as
in Latin America where it has formed strong alliances
with the Bolivarian and other populist regimes in
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru and
Venezuela. It is also evident in Africa were a number of
states are entering into 'strategic partnerships' with
China at the expense of the US and the EU. It is also
reflected in the willingness of China to form JVs with
European oil and mining corporations such as Total and
BP -notably with BP in Iraq and Total in Latin America
and China itself.
Thus the US and EU imperialist powers have been
weakened by the rise of China. In particular the bipolar
world acts to pull Europe apart. Russia is within the
China pole outside the EU and NATO and a main partner
in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Russia
has a strategic relationship with Germany to trade oil
and gas for the latter's high tech industries to
modernise the Russian economy. Germany is torn
between Russia and the EU in imposing tough new
sanctions on Iran. While France, UK, Germany fall in
behind a tougher stand to isolate Iran, Russia pulls in
the other direction. It seems then that the Germany
Russia relationship is engaged in a tug of war at the
centre and can shift towards one or other pole
depending on who controls Caspian oil. Even more
important we can see that Germany is now
strengthening its relations with China. Since the global
recession Germany has moved closer to China as its
biggest export market and a major site for German FDI.
In 2009 Germany's exports overall declined by 18% while
its exports to China grew by 7%. It now recognises 'one
China' and has softened its criticisms of China's 'human
rights' abuses. All of this points to opposing forces
splitting Europe as Germany, Ukraine and Turkey move
away from the US pole towards the China pole.
The other states that are most affected by the bipolar
pull are the former Soviet republics of Eastern Europe
and of Central Asia that made up the sphere of
influence of the former Soviet Union and who's
economics are all going with the flow of Caspian oil. In
July-August 2010
2001 Russia and China formed the SCO with most of the
former soviet republics of Central Asia - Kyrgyzstan,
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan - as Pepe
Escobar puts it a "security blanket" between it and
Afghanistan. But SCO is much wider and forms the
potential anti-US global bloc of states. Iran, India and
Pakistan have "observer" status, and increasingly
aligned to the SCO are the other members of the BRIC,
India and Brazil, as well as Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
The recent tensions between the US and Pakistan over
Afghanistan and between Israel and Turkey may
indicate a further pull towards the China/Russia pole.
Tensions in Central Asia such as the recent coup in
Kyrgyzstan suggest that the US bloc is losing ground to
the China/Russia bloc.
Reformist illusions in China
Most of the revolutionary left is locked in the 20th
century conception of China as a form of workers state,
a market socialism, or a capitalist semi-colony
dominated by US and Japanese imperialism, or some
hybrid thereof. For the reformist left that supports the
Bolivarian and Cuban road to socialism, China is a form
of market socialism that is helping the 'developing'
countries of the South to escape the exploitation of the
US and the IMF and World Bank. For them China is not
interested in colonising these countries but in a
mutually beneficial economic 'cooperation'. The fabled
'win win' solution. It therefore does not impose an
imperialist policy on its trading partners. China has no
need of military expansionism since it is growing on the
basis of its competitive advantage. Therefore, in any
military confrontation with the US and other imperialist
powers, or in any proxy war between China and the US,
China should be defended.
What the reformist left fails to recognise is that China
has made a rapid transition from a bureaucrat workers
state, via state capitalism to become an emerging
imperialist power. There is no 'win win' scenario except
for the Chinese ruling class and its national capitalist
junior partners. The workers and poor peasants in both
China and its 'strategic partners' face the same old
capitalist zero-sum game. Capitalist China cannot
expand as a benign capitalist power but must adopt an
expansionist imperialist policy. This means that the
left cannot explain the reality of a China today as a
powerful, global force now coming into conflict with
the US and its main allies. It is clear that such an open
conflict invalidates the idea of China as dependent or
subservient to other imperialist powers, or acting in a
benign way that does not pose a threat to other
imperialist states. If that were the case China would
not be expanding economically, nor would it be facing
political and military opposition from the established
imperialist powers.
The failure to understand China's transformation from
workers state to imperialist power means that the
revolutionary left is disarmed in the event of this
military standoff leading to active hostilities. What if
China's military got into a skirmish with the US over say
8
Class Struggle 90
Taiwan or the DPRK? What if China came into conflict
with Israel or the US over Iran? What if Zimbabwe which
is armed by China went to war against the US proxy
regime in Uganda of Rwanda? Or if the situation in the
Sudan blew up and the North which is armed by China
invaded the South backed by Uganda and armed by the
US? Any of these scenarios pose the question as to
which side to revolutionaries defend.
Revolutionaries in a bipolar world
What is the revolutionary position? We recognise the
right of oppressed countries to defend themselves
against imperialism. Thus Iran, Taiwan, DPRK,
Zimbabwe, Sudan etc all have the right to defend
themselves from any aggressive imperialist power.
However, if any of them acts as the direct proxy for any
imperialist power, then we cannot defend them without
defending the imperialist backers. Thus, since we say
China is imperialist, we cannot back China in any direct
or proxy war with other imperialist powers. By ‘direct’
we mean the direct involvement of the imperialist
powers. The escalation of the Korean conflict could
potentially drag China into defending its claim to
Taiwan, its historic defence of the DPRK, or the South
China Seas. For reasons outlined above this is an
unlikely scenario at the present though as tension rises
the potential for a clash is ever present. Right now,
proxy wars in other parts of the world are more likely
to become flash points as in Iran, Venezuela and
Central Africa. In all of these cases any attack by the
US or other imperialist powers is to recover these
nations as part of their particular sphere of interests.
Thus it is the increasing loss of the resources in these
countries to China that forces the US to go to war.
For example, in Iran the US lost control with the
overthrow of the Shah in 1979. Ever since the it has
been hostile to the Islamic regime and seeking to
overthrow it in favour of a US friendly leadership.
Further destabilisation via a color revolution or
sanctions will lead inexorably to open war as neither
the Islamic regime nor China as its main backer will
accede to US demands. In a war with the US, Israel,
NATO or the UN we would side with Iran as an
oppressed country, but at the same time we would call
for the working class of Iran to take the leadership of
the anti-imperialist struggle and expropriate all
imperialist property including that of China. The same
in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine etc. Wars in
any of these states are directly connected to the major
inter-imperialist front that runs through Afghanistan
and Pakistan between the US and its allies and China
allied with Russia.
It is the same in Latin America and Africa. In a US proxy
war between Colombia and Venezuela we would be for
the defence of Venezuela. We do not oppose the use of
Chinese or Russian arms to defend Venezuela. However,
we also say that the only reason that China and Russia
sold arms to Venezuela was to establish client states in
July-August 2010
order to invest capital and super-exploit Venezuelan
labor and raw materials. The defence of Venezuela
from the US cannot put any faith in the national
bourgeoisie nor China or Russia as allies in this struggle.
In Africa the US that is mobilising its forces to push its
client states Rwanda and Uganda to gain control of oil
and other minerals in the DRC, the Sudan and Somalia.
Here as in Korea, China is unlikely to get directly
involved right now. Nevertheless in opposing US proxy
wars in its client states we would also oppose China
directly intervening to use any of these states as
proxies. For example if China was to get involved
militarily as Russia did in Abkazia and South Ossetia in
the proxy war with Georgia backed by the US, we would
be for the defeat of both imperialist powers. In all
cases we call on the working class to take the lead in
the anti-imperialist struggle and as well as defeat the
imperialist military interventions and occupations to
expropriate all imperialist property and that of their
national capitalist junior partners.
Imperialism's death knell
The current global crisis is a crisis of imperialism
approaching its death knell. The US and its EU allies are
on the decline. They have accumulated huge stockpiles
of worthless fictitious capital that cannot be invested
productively. The recession that began in 2007 was the
start of the destruction of this worthless fictitious
capital. Capitalism survived this recession only by the
dynmmic productive power of Asia led by China that
pulled Latin America and Australia behind it. And by
the massive bailouts to finance capital paid for by the
future surplus value of the world's workers. The next
phase of the crisis which is to force workers to reduce
their wages and welfare to slave standards will be one
of severe deflation as more mountains of worthless
capital are destroyed.
The worlds' workers will not pay for the next instalment
of bailouts. The resistance shown by the Greek workers,
the Spanish workers and the peasants and workers of
Kyrgyzstan show that workers are willing to fight. They
are held back only by the illusions that the reformist
left continues to keep alive in the labor movement. But
the crisis leaves the dying imperialisms of the US and
EU forced to fight the only viable imperialism China to
yet again repartition the world by means of war and
massive environmental destruction. In these wars
workers must resist all the siren songs of the reformist
left to back China as the salvation of defunct capitalism
and imperialism.
The solution to the crisis of capitalist imperialism is
not to kowtow to China but to unite all workers with
Chinese workers to overthrow all our national ruling
classes and to open the road to world socialism.
Workers turn your guns on your own imperialist
ruling class!
For a new world party of socialism!
9
Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

The Deepwater Horizon Disaster: Oil Spill

shows that Capitalists Unfit to Rule
During the OPEC oil embargo of 1973-74, war criminal Henry Kissinger is reputed to have
quipped, "Oil is too important to be left to the control of the Arabs". We have a different
perspective: Oil is too dangerous to be left to the control of the capitalists! As we go to press
in late June 2010, the oil spill (read: gush) into the Gulf of Mexico from British Petroleum‘s
exploded oil rig Deepwater Horizon has already become the worst oil spill disaster in world
history, far exceeding the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, and even the 1979 Ixtoc disaster
off the coast of Mexico – and there is no end in sight.
Since April 20, when the oil from the well plus the
actions of BP and its toxic chemical dispersants
contractors set off the initial used by BP now pose a
explosion that sank the oil rig major public health danger
– the deepest offshore oil to the coastal populations
drilling operation in the U.S., of the Gulf – as with
if not in the world – tens if Hurricane Katrina. At the
not hundreds of thousands of same time, oil from the BP
barrels of oil have gushed out spill has begun to enter the
each day into the Gulf of ocean currents of the Gulf
Mexico, and onto the Stream. This could carry
coastlines of Louisiana, dangerous pollutants along
Alabama, and Mississippi. In the coast of Florida and
Florida, the oil has reached the East Coast towards
the pristine white beaches, many of the tourists are Europe and the rest of the world – where the toxic
gone, and many thousands have lost their jobs. The plumes could destroy entire fish populations around the
same coastal areas of the Gulf that were pounded by globe. Hurricane season has already started, and severe
Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and left to rot by the Bush storms pose a threat of even greater dispersal of the
administration, have been hit hardest by the oil spill, toxins and carcinogens now floating in the Gulf in vast
and have been left to rot by Obama, the Democratic quantities.
'environmental' President.
Almost all the public statements made by BP and the
Time has come and gone for stopping the gusher and Obama administration about the spill have been nothing
cleaning the spill, but the government has merely but an endless barrage of lies. BP and the government
pretended to put Obama's boot on BP's throat, all the have done the bare minimum to stop the spill and clean
while canalizing and damming up the righteous fury of it up, in order to minimize the damage to BP's profits.
the Gulf Coast residents with all the power of the Initially, official estimates by both BP and the U.S.
Washington spin machine. Over and over, the true government put the figure for the size of the spill at
picture has been suppressed by BP spokespersons, between 12,000 and 19,000 barrels per day (at 42
government experts, the police, and compliant editors gallons to the barrel).
and publishers in the mainstream press. The Coast
Guard has put force behind the spin, raising false hope However, this proved to be at least five times less than
in each of the parade of fixes, killing priceless time and the measurements made by university scientists and
guardingthe prerogatives and property of BP until two environmental groups, who severely criticized BP's
relief wells come to the rescue (maybe) in August. A mathematical analysis and arrived at figures that put
million gallons of crude oil are being burned off on the the size of the blowout at a minimum of 70,000 barrels
surface daily, yet we see no mention of any possible per day. And the numbers just keep on rising. After BP
effects on public health in the region, or on climate was forced to provide a high quality video of the spill,
change, and neither OSHA nor the EPA has attempted independent scientists estimated that it was releasing
to intervene. at least 25,000 barrels per day – and possibly as much
as 100,000 barrels per day![2]
The vast area of ocean covered by the oil spill
approaches 4000 square miles, the size of Delaware and In stark contrast to the lies by BP CEO Tony Hayward in
Rhode Island combined.[1] In combination, the crude May 2010 that the impact of the spill would be "very,
10
Class Struggle 90
very modest", Deepwater Horizon is one of the worst oil
spills in history. It amounts to nothing less than a
monstrous crime against nature by capitalism,
specifically U.S. and British imperialism. The only way
humanity can prevent such hellish environmental
catastrophes in the future is for the working class in the
U.S. and around the globe to rise up and get rid of
capitalism, once and for all, through the socialist
revolution. The earth's ecosphere will not survive more
than a few decades unless the working class takes
power and establishes socialism on a worldwide scale.
The explosion and fire that sank the Deepwater Horizon
oil rig killed 11 workers. One of the last workers to
escape the explosion was Mike Williams, a technician
working for Transocean, the company that leased the
oil rig to British Petroleum. In a television interview
broadcast in May 2010, Williams exposed the central
role played by BP executives in creating the conditions
that led to the massive blowout of crude oil from the
well.
Immediately before the spill, BP executives arrived at
the rig to oversee the completion of drilling by
Transocean and the plugging of the well by
Transocean‘s contractor, Halliburton. At a management
safety meeting held on the rig, Transocean managers
proposed to insert three concrete plugs into the well
and keep down the massive pressure by using heavy
drilling fluid called mud. According to Williams, the BP
manager responded, "Well, my process is different, and
I think we‘re going to do it this way".[3] [4] What BP
management wanted was to begin removing the mud
before the last plug was set, and so speed up the
operation to save money. Of course BP got their way,
and what resulted was a massive blast of methane gas
that set off the entire disaster.
From the very beginning, BP's attempts at closing off
the gushing oil well have been halfhearted at best, and
token at worst. Much like any other capitalist
corporation, every single step BP has taken since April
20th has been motivated by its bottom line, the
protection of its sacred super-profits ($6 billion in the
first quarter of 2010). This included its decision to put
off a costly 'top kill' operation to close off the oil well
until well over a month after the spill – only to find that
it did not work after all. In this regard, BP is not
especially greedy, anti-environmental or evil –
especially in comparison to American corporations! BP
is simply obeying the laws of capitalism's 'free' market
in extracting (and often spilling) oil solely for the
pursuit for profit – and not to satisfy real human or
environmental needs.
Oil slicks from the BP spill have already reached the
Gulf wetlands and beaches, killing thousands of birds,
fish, marine mammals, and oyster beds, as well as plant
life. Still, BP continues to deny the existence of oil
plumes. Plumes are huge curtains of oil that remain
deep in the ocean and may not even be detectable
from its surface. For example, just one plume has been
measured at 3 miles across and 1,500 feet thick, at a
July-August 2010
depth of 3,600 feet below the surface of the ocean.[5]
Plumes like these have the potential to kill hundreds of
dolphins and whales, and millions of fish and other
marine organisms. If this situation continues for another
month or two, huge sections of the Gulf of Mexico could
well become a dead zone.[6] This could bring dire
consequences for the ecology, the fishing industry, and
tourism, not only in the U.S. states that border on the
Gulf, but also in portions of the Caribbean.
Thousands of Gulf Coast fishermen and shrimpers who
were made jobless by the BP spill have volunteered to
become involved in the oil cleanup. But BP has not
been willing to hire more than a small number of them
– and only on condition that they first renounce their
right to sue the company. These fishermen are likely to
lose their livelihoods for many years, and BP offers
them $5000 each! This barely pays the interest on their
insurance costs. Most of them have received nothing as
of yet. BP also refused to supply the fishermen with
protective equipment, and now many of them have
become sick from exposure to the crude oil and
dispersants. To add insult to injury, BP threatened to
fire workers in clean-up crews who turned up for work
wearing protective respirators. EPA tests have shown
that the combined effect of crude oil and dispersants,
in the form of small airborne particles, is even more
toxic than they are separately.[7] This may also explain
why five offshore rigs were shut down soon after the
spill when rig workers fell ill.
While a lot of attention has been focused on the role of
the BP corporation and its executives, the liberal and
environmental left in the U.S. has tried to downplay or
ignore the close ties between BP, and the oil industry
generally, and the Obama administration. Obama was
the recipient of huge financial contributions from BP-
controlled PACs and PB employees during the 2008
election.[8] BP continues even now to expend millions
of dollars to lobby top Democrats in Washington,
including Democrats close to Obama himself.
During the first two weeks of the BP spill, many even in
the mainstream media commented on how Obama and
BP seemed to be speaking with one voice. On April 2,
2010, just weeks before the spill, Obama stated that "I
don't agree with the notion that we shouldn't do any
[offshore drilling]. It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs
today generally don't cause spills. They are
technologically very advanced"[9] These remarks were
made in response to a question about Obama's speech
declaring hisintention to open up large areas of the U.S.
coastline to offshore drilling.[10]
The administration continued to stand by this decision
for two weeks after the rig exploded, and asserted that
the disaster would in no way lessen its support for the
lifting of a moratorium on offshore drilling off the
Atlantic coast. As White House Press Secretary Robert
Gibbs maintained to reporters a few days after the rig
explosion, "In all honesty I doubt this is the first
accident that has happened and I doubt it will be the
last. We need the increased production. The President
11
Class Struggle 90
still continues to believe the great majority of that can
be done safely, securely and without any harm to the
environment."[11] [12]
Even as late as mid-June, Obama's Interior Secretary
stated that it was his hope that the moratorium
prohibiting offshore drilling would lass less than six
months! Obama continued to defend BP even in the
face of scandals involving the Minerals Management
Service, the department of the federal government
responsible for regulating offshore drilling and other
industrial activity of the oil industry in the U.S. While
issuing 'safety alerts' to BP and other oil companies to
activate back-up switches on oil rigs (an option of last
resort to prevent crude oil blowouts), the MMS did
nothing to enforce its regulations. The director of MMS
stepped down after the spill when it was revealed that
MMS staff had accepted 'gifts' from oil companies, such
as tickets to sports events, lunches, and even sex
parties with industry-hired prostitutes.
Opinion polls published in the first month after the BP
spill showed that the vast majority of those surveyed
were critical and even angry at the Obama
administration's response to the disaster – almost to the
same degree as they were at BP. Even fellow Democrat
James Carville of Louisiana pleaded with Obama a
month after the spill, "Man, you got to get down here
and take control of this, put somebody in charge of this
thing and get this moving," he said. "We‘re about to die
down here."[13] While the pressure of public opinion
caused Obama to shift his position and extend the
moratorium on new offshore drilling permits – to a
token six months – he has adamantly refused to budge
on his insistence that BP remain in charge of shutting
down and cleaning up the spill.
Like his Republican predecessor, Obama and his
administration are 100% committed to supporting the
industrial production of the oil companies, including
offshore drilling, regardless of the destructive results to
the environment. If supporting the oil industry was not
on Obama's agenda, why would his administration have
spent billions, if not trillions, of dollars on the wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan? The truth is that U.S., European,
and now Chinese imperialism are all absolutely
dependent on oil to fuel their economic exploitation of
the planet and the working class around the world.
July-August 2010
This is even more true today, because the world is
experiencing the worst capitalist economic crisis since
the Great Depression of the 1930s. Oil has become the
lifeblood of modern day imperialism, and it is precisely
for this reason that the Middle East and the ex-Soviet
republics in central Asia are such critical areas of the
world to imperialism. At the same time, the oil
companies and other powerful multinational
corporations, which are at the heart of the U.S.
capitalist economy, depend for their very existence on
the continuation of highly dangerous processes and
unchecked pollution. The oil and petrochemical
industries are one of the main sources of the
greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change
and global warming.
The capitalists who own the means of energy
production (such as offshore oil rigs, refineries, coal
mines, and the like) are incapable of defending the
environment and protecting humanity from the effects
of environmental damage or climate change. This is
because of capitalism's commitment to production for
the sake of profit. In the market, need is measured not
in terms of hunger, sickness or pollution, but in terms
of profit. The capitalists of BP and other the oil
companies have no reason whatsoever to avoid the
pollution of the environment if this impedes the
production of their profit. It is the job of Obama and
the politicians of the twin ruling class parties, the
Democrats and Republicans, to protect the interests of
the oil companies and make sure that nothing does
indeed impede their production of profits.
The recent observations by environmental scientists
that oil from the spill has begun to enter the Gulf
Stream, and that the BP oil gush has released huge
amounts of methane into the Ocean, underlines the
urgency of this environmental catastrophe. Modern day
imperialism has created the potential to destroy the
whole global environment. Already the ice covering the
Arctic Ocean has begun to disappear as a result of
global warming. If the frozen methane that lies beneath
the Arctic Ocean begins to thaw, it will release a
greenhouse gas (methane-air mixture) that is 26 times
worse than carbon dioxide in terms of its global
warming effect. In other words, what the catastrophic
oil spill highlights is the urgency of the environmental
crisis created by global capitalism.
The widespread destruction of fish populations by oil
pollution carried by the Gulf Stream, and the other
threats posed by climate change from greenhouse gas
emissions, means that now more than ever, our planet
is facing a dire environmental emergency. To avoid the
further destruction of this planet, all offshore drilling
must stop now.
Workers at home and abroad must combine their
struggle against the economic crisis of the capitalist
system with environmental consciousness. The working
class must fight for workers' control of the oil industry
and of all industries that emit greenhouse gases.
Workers must control heavy industry so we can
12
Class Struggle 90
implement the emergency measures needed to
transform our current industrial technologies into
green, environmentally friendly, sustainable
technologies.
What this means today, in the aftermath of the worst
oil spill in U.S. history, is that the oil and energy
industries must be nationalized under workers’ control,
with no compensation to the bosses. To pay for the
clean-up operations, we must demand hundreds of
billions of dollars from the oil and energy companies
who are responsible for the destruction of the
environment in the first place. At present, despite all
their promises, Obama and BP have hired ridiculously
small crews of workers to clean up the vast areas of
contamination of wetland, beaches, and open ocean in
the Gulf of Mexico.
We can already see that the serious cleanup objectively
called for would require an international emergency
effort on the scale of that undertaken during the World
Wars. We demand that as part of an environmental
public works program, millions of the able-bodied
unemployed be hired at union wages and benefits,
trained, housed, fed, and equipped with proper
protective equipment, and deployed to scour the
waters, the wetlands, the islands, and the beaches; to
clean and rehabilitate injured wildlife; and to dispose
of the waste in an environmentally sensitive manner.
The clean-up must be placed entirely under workers'
control and carried out by workers' organizations in
conjunction with independent scientists and engineers.
Much more could be done through the creative use of
existing technology and resources. For example, the
trucks used to remove waste from portable toilets can
be used to clean up oil spills by sucking oil into their
holding tanks. The armed forces, with all their
technology and equipment, can be put to much better
use in cleaning up the oil spill than in killing hundreds
of thousands of innocent people in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
The operations aimed at plugging the well must be also
be placed under the control of the oil and energy
workers. Independent scientists from the oil industry
and the government should coordinate the efforts, and
all BP personnel must be subordinated to these
independent scientists, who in turn must be
accountable and under the control of oil and energy
workers.
Finally, an investigation of this monstrous crime against
nature and humanity must be carried out by
committees of workers in the oil industry, working with
scientists and engineers accountable to the working
class. We call on the International Trade Union
Conference, the AFL-CIO, and the United Steelworkers
(now home to the former Oil, Chemical, and Atomic
Workers Union) to form an independent, international
workers' commission of inquiry into this totally
preventable disaster. We would want them to interview
everyone who ever worked on this project, and every
July-August 2010
living victim of the explosion and its results, and to
gather information not only on the immediate
environmental and economic effects of the disaster,
but also on the long term health effects to cleanup
workers and Gulf residents, and other indirect
consequences.
We call for a Workers' Militia to accompany them in
their investigation, so that they will suffer no
interference, obstruction, or obfuscation by BP or any
government body. The Workers' Commission of Inquiry
should report to an international workers' tribunal,
primarily made up of workers from the Gulf Coast
states, as well as affected workers in other areas such
as Mexico and the Caribbean, but also representing
local fishermen and the unemployed. A workers'
tribunal would establish culpability and bring charges,
but also publish findings and assess true costs –
including losses to the pension funds that invested in
BP, representing the retirement dreams of many
millions of workers.
In the end, only workers' control of the means of
production can prevent the recurrence of such
environmental catastrophes in the future. The entire
energy industry, including the oil corporations and the
Wall Street investors and banks that finance them,
must be expropriated without compensation – that is,
nationalized under workers control – and defended by a
workers' government. In reality, this goal can only be
achieved if the working class in the U.S. and around the
globe rise up, and get rid of capitalism once and for all
through the socialist revolution.
• Hands off the workers helping in the clean
up; no gag orders on participants; no
interference with media access to BP
personnel, cleanup workers, and Gulf area
residents and locations!
• Immediate, full replacement of wages and
benefits for all those who lose work as a
result of the disaster, directly or indirectly!
Billions of dollars to fund retraining and
create millions of jobs in remediation!
• Provide appropriate protective equipment for
all cleanup personnel. Provide health care for
all, especially for cleanup workers and those
affected by the spill. Provide multilingual
health warnings at all affected beaches and
fishing areas.
• No cap on BP’s obligation to pay for every
penny of the cleanup cost and all damages to
Gulf Coast workers, fishermen, and their
families. Prosecute all BP executives and
regulators whose decisions contributed to this
disaster!
• Reprinted with permission of Humanist
Workers for Socialist Revolution
http://redrave.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-
deepwater-horizon-disaster-oil-spill.html
13
Class Struggle 90 July-August 2010

Education ‘Reforms’ pave way for privatisation

The Government has introduced a large number of education cuts, alongside moves towards
privatisation, National Standards, and targeted cash injections to support its assessment
focused agenda. To justify this, it has created a “crisis” which does not exist. The NZEI
teachers’ union is strongly opposed to National Standards and has conducted protests and
campaigns but stopped short of striking or an outright refusal, instead calling for a trial. The
education cuts are part of an assault on the welfare state including health, benefits and social
services, designed to make the working class pay for the international capitalist crisis, and to
make private providers rich at our expense. Assessments of students and teachers paves the
way for rewarding the well performing schools and teachers at the expense of the failing
schools opening the way for the privatisation of education. These attacks on public provision of
universal, compulsory education funded by taxation has to be resisted by mobilising teachers
unions alongside parents and students.

Early Childhood Education

The cuts to Early Childhood Education, where instead of
100 % funding for qualified teachers, there is now only
80%, is an absolutely shameful and short sighted attack
upon the most vulnerable members of society.

The cuts affect 2,000 centres caring for 93,000 children.

$285 million will be cut over the next four years. Centres
are losing between $20,000 to $80,000 per year, and
are faced with the choice of either cutting staff or
raising fees. The majority are raising fees by up to $40
per week. These cuts will hurt low income families the
most, especially the one in four families living in
poverty, most of whom are beneficiaries. There is no
way these families of can afford a fee increase, so they
will be forced to withdraw their children. More than a
quarter of affected centres are planning to leave the 20
free hours per week scheme and half are considering Some have argued that a grandmother type of figure
reducing staff to student ratios. can care for the young just as well as a qualified
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/elizabeth- teacher. However surveys have shown that the
binning/news/article.cfm?a_id=163&objectid=10654237 presence of an educated qualified teacher or carer with
http://www.nzei.org.nz/Early+Childhood+Education their wider vocabulary, theoretical knowledge and
www.educationaotearoa.org.nz practical skills, enriches the learning environment of
http://www.educationaotearoa.org.nz/storage/Educati children at all ages, and enhances their development
on%20Aotearoa%20Winter%202010.pdf and learning.

Early childhood education is the foundation of all other
learning and numerous studies have shown how it is
linked to higher achievement and quality of life for an
entire lifetime. However it is a very long time before
any profits can be made out of children attending ECE.
In fact capitalists have an interest in shifting the costs
of ECE to ‘user pays’. This may be why it is already the
Cinderella of the teaching profession with centres
operating already on stretched budgets. While the NZEI
has achieved pay parity for kindergarten and primary
teachers this does not necessarily apply to private
centres, and non -qualified staff, like teaching
assistants in primary schools, are paid poverty wages
scarcely above the minimum wage.
Whilst quality ECE from age three onwards produces
excellent results, some studies have indicated that the
attachment needs of babies up to age two or three are
better met by consistent committed care by a known
adult. Achieving this would need more funding not
less, for example by reducing adult to child ratios
considerably at centres, increasing funds for
professional home based care, extending paid parental
leave, increasing the domestic purposes benefit, and
increasing funding to parent co-operatives such as play
centres. The low pay or no pay of workers at this level,
and up through the education sector, are an example of
the non-valuing of women’s work in general,
particularly caring and mothering work, which has

14
Class Struggle 90
generally been done for free, despite the high skill and
commitment level that it demands.
A society with a genuine commitment to equality in
education would begin at pre-school level, with free
early childhood education for all,
and more funding for Kohanga
Reo’s and centres for Pacifica
children. Instead ECE funding cuts
may be forcing some of these
centres to close. Cutting costs at
the pre-school level, where much
future crime could be prevented,
goes hand in hand with increased
spending on prisons, which like
schools, are to be run as public
private partnerships, where
massive public spending will end
up as private profit. It is therefore
hypocritical for the NACTs to claim
they have the interests of children
at heart!
University and Adult
Education
Restrictions on university entrance
are reversing a trend which has seen large numbers of
New Zealanders gaining tertiary education. Unemployed
and beneficiaries were amongst those benefitting from
university education. Even so, some groups still have
low university attendance, such as Pacific Island
students. There are few Pacific language early
childhood education centres available, and Pacific
Island students are channelled into non-academic
NCEA(National Certificate of Educational Achievement)
exams at secondary schools so the schools can achieve
higher pass rates.
5% of university funding is now linked to performance,
and National has warned that this is just the start. John
Key has made grumbling noises about the poor
investment that interest free loans make; and the
government restricts loans to those with a good pass
rate.
The cutting of the Training Incentive Allowance has
stopped many single parents from being able to get
qualifications which would take them out of poverty
and into professional occupations. Others have gone to
extreme lengths to try to study under starvation
conditions.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=
1&objectid=10666600&fb_ref=fb_like&fb_source=profil
e_oneline
National does not really want beneficiaries to have
higher education. Instead it prefers them to do short
cheap training courses so that they can quickly be put
on the labour market offering their skills to employers
for low pay.
The cuts to Adult Community Education have meant the
loss of a very cheap cost effective service to
July-August 2010
immigrants for English as a second language classes,
literacy classes, and other classes which enrich
people’s lives and provide social cohesion. The PPTA, to
whom many of the teachers belonged, campaigned
against this. www.dimming.co.nz
National Standards
The Government is determined to
impose National Standards on
primary schools despite almost
universal resistance from teachers,
academics, and international
evidence. To justify this, National
would have us believe that
education is in crisis, rather than
their capitalist system, and that
national standards are needed to
‘pull up the tail’ of those failing in
the current system. That is, to
close underperforming schools or
force them into private hands
where the focus will be to train
cheap, compliant wage-workers!
In fact, New Zealand does not
have a crisis in education, and is
doing very well by international standards. As John
Hattie put it in recent radio discussion with Charmaine
Pountney and Gordon Dryden:
http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/doco/doco-20100627-
1600-Radio_NZ_-_Smart_Talk_Science_innovation-
048.mp3
“Where is the problem we are solving?”
Where there is a problem, the reason is poverty which
affects about twenty to twenty five percent of
students.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=
1&objectid=10666578
Notwithstanding more funding being allocated to lower
decile schools (in low SES areas), these schools have far
too little funding; and sometimes lack cultural
relevance.
According to Charmaine Pountney, former principal of
Auckland Girls’ Grammar School, what is lacking is a
commitment to equality. The Child Poverty Action
Group has explained at length how poverty affects
children’s ability to learn, from lack of food, books,
clothing, ability to pay for uniforms, school trips and
cultural activities etc. An immediate answer would be
to raise benefits and wages; re-introduce a universal
child benefit, and provide more education resources
where they are needed.
www.cpag.org.nz
The NACTs answer to this manufactured crisis is
‘National Standards’. This involves requiring every child
from age six, every year, to sit tests which measure’s
the child’s literacy and numeracy against a “standard”
which is deliberately set higher than the current
national average, and higher than is needed for the
15
Class Struggle 90
child to succeed perfectly well at NCEA later on. This is
a bit like deliberately setting benefits below the level
of needs, which the government has been doing since
1991. Just as a beneficiary cannot live on benefits that
are deliberately set too low, so a child cannot possibly
succeed in a test where the pass mark is deliberately
set above their developmental level.
This scandalous and cruel assault upon young children’s
self esteem, where children are labelled as failures
from age six, is deemed by National to be the way to
“bring up the tail” of the children who are currently
performing below the average. In fact, results of
similar national testing overseas, and a whole barrage
of educational experts and teachers in New Zealand,
show that they do not improve learning at all.
Academics John Hattie, Martin Thrupp, Terry Crooks,
Lester Flockton, wrote an open letter to Education
Minister Anne Tolley, asking her not to introduce
National Standards. They are not against assessments,
but point out that we already have these. They talk
about the international failures of these kinds of tests,
the dangers of publicising results (eg having been used
as league tables overseas) and the impoverishment of
the culture of teaching and learning. They point out
that some of our most remarkable adults have had
unremarkable school achievements. They are even
willing to work with Anne Tolley to devise better
national tests which focus upon a child’s progress.
http://www.nzei.org.nz/site/nzeite/files/misc%20docu
ments/Academics'%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Hon%20An
ne%20Tolley.pdf
Charmaine Pountney said in the radio discussion, that
class hegemony was maintained by national standards
which will be fine those already achieving well but
make no difference to students in lower decile schools.
She said that that the tests wrongly focus on “outcomes
not incomes”, and “output not input”.
According to John Hattie only 50% of infants who would
have passed PAT tests (Progressive Achievement Tests),
would pass National Standards, and only 35% of year 8
students would. The tests are thus unfair, and “out of
kilter with existing assessment tools”. Children who are
well on track to pass NCEA (National Certificate of
Education) at secondary schools and well within current
July-August 2010
norms, are deemed ‘failing’, and said to be below the
National Standard which is deemed to be ‘aspirational’.
This is disputed by teachers who say it is grossly unfair
to judge today’s students by tomorrow’s standards
(Education Aotearoa p 20-21) Jan Tinetti, Principal of
Merivale School in the Bay of Plenty which has a 98%
Maori roll ,describes the standards as Eurocentric and
“almost middle class.”. “They miss a lot of what is
aspirational for my kids...they miss the cultural
richness.” (all quotes from Education Aotearoa p19-21).
National Standards run counter to learning through play
which is vital for younger children in particular, and
discourage creativity, imagination, or other subjects,
while the focus is simply on passing tests in literacy and
numeracy. Parental support for National Standards is
dropping after the first test results have come out.
An article in the Independent entitled “My little Boy’s
Class Struggle”- also on the NZEI website- describes the
difficulties faced by a 6 year old child who left behind a
nurturing, warm, creative classroom environment in
Ireland, to face a classroom focused almost entirely on
passing tests in Australia. There was no more fun, no
more cuddles, no more school plays.
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/parenting/my-
little-boys-class-struggle-2272380.html
Children in Australia face increasing pressures with a
big national test at age eleven, and miss out on the
arts.
Teachers and Unions Resistance against
National Testing
In New Zealand the primary teachers’ union, the New
Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI ) strongly opposes
National Standards, and is conducting a campaign
against it. It has a facebook page: NZEI-Te-Riu-Roa
Some teachers are trying to protect their students
from the tests because of the hurt they can cause.
Professional development has been inadequate and
therefore abandoned, or refused because of opposition
to national standards. Principals are refusing to waste
school’s budgets on training courses on it. Most
teachers are either not implementing or struggling with
the process (Education Aotearoa, Winter 2010, 20-21)
Recent surveys (have indicated that more than a
quarter of teachers do not understand the tests, and
that around 40% do not feel prepared for them.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=
1&objectid=10666913
NZEI organised a bus trip from Kaitaia from the Bluff to
protest the National Standards, with rallies in all the
major centers, and a petition which they took to
parliament. They have issued thousands of postcards,
and have set up websites www.nationalstandards.org,
www.handsupforlearning.org.nz and facebook pages.
They have set up a group called “Project Orange” for
community supporters to join to oppose the standards.
16
Class Struggle 90
Teachers and principals (who are both in the same
union although the principals are also in a Principals
Federation) are united against national standards, with
school boards (technically their employers) reluctantly
behind the principals, but the School Trustees
Association has backed Anne Tolley and has been
telephoning teachers with warnings about their
resistance to the standards. Anne Tolley, backed by the
media, has tried to portray teachers as failing in their
duties by publically criticising the standards; and
generally portraying them as hostile and disobedient.
Teachers have responded that they are not bound by
the confidentiality of public servants, but by their
professional duties as teachers.
But the NZEI is not calling for an out and out refusal
of the standards, but only for a trial of them. Nor
have they called for stop work meetings or strike
action over the issue. A strike would be illegal, which
is the excuse used by union officials not to take
action. NZEI is also engaged in wage negotiations as
their collective contract comes up for renewal.
The Post Primary Teachers Association say National
Standards could have ”disastrous effects upon students
and teachers”, and could lead to league tables that
wrongly label schools as failures. They say it would be
“most unwise” to ignore the international evidence
against them. http://www.ppta.org.nz/
However the PPTA is not very supportive of the NZEI.
PPTA members are opposed to pay parity with
primary teachers and resent primary teachers
achieving pay increases on the PPTA’s coat tails, as
Exposing and Ending the Wage System!
Review of ‘Exposing Right Wing Lies’.
The Question and Answer booklet by Mike Treen of the
Unite union is an antidote to the dominant capitalist
statistics or “right wing lies”, which the National – Act
parties use to justify attacking the working class.
http://gpjanz.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/exposing-
right-wing-lies.pdf
Below we will deal with a few examples of his
arguments. However, Treen’s booklet keeps the debate
within the bounds of capitalism. He deals in half-truths
to answer the two important questions on the cover –
“Who is to blame for the economic crisis and what are
the solutions?” and so offers no solution but that of
reforming capitalism. We need to go further and apply
the Marxist analysis to expose the capitalist economic
forces behind the crisis.
This pamphlet is aimed at union members who may be
confused by the NACTs attack on workers and sticks to
July-August 2010
they see it. This disunity weakens both unions, which
as public sector unions with high union membership,
could have some impact.
Teachers in Australia went on strike against then
Minister of Education Julia Gillard’s league tables being
published on the website “My School” which forced her
to take them down.
In the UK, national testing happens at age six and age
eleven. Lessons are increasingly structured, with every
single reading lesson requiring an assessment. Teachers
unions have refused to implement the tests in 2011.
There are important lessons here. The education
unions must unite in an all out opposition to the cuts
in education and to National Standards as deliberate
moves to attack the foundations of publicly funded,
secular, universal and compulsory education. Strike
action by the combined teachers unions supported by
other unions would send a clear message that they
are prepared to put their professional standards and
the rights of children to the test in a showdown with
this NACT government.
Ultimately to realise our education needs, along with
all our other needs to food shelter, health as well as
meaningful work and social equality, we need a
program to end capitalism and plan for a socialist
society.
(to be continued)
the Trade Union level of consciousness which sees
capitalism as a class divided society because the bosses
do not pay the full value of wages. Marx, however
rejected the wages system itself as a class division
based on capitalist ownership and exploitation of wage
labour. Treen’s booklet unfortunately adds to the
confusion. It does not challenge the wage system.
This is par for the course for Treen who is National
Director of the Unite union, and was for years a
member of the former Socialist Action League (now
Communist League) and is a longstanding member of
the Cuban Solidarity Committee. More recently Treen
has visited Venezuela and Bolivia representing Unite
union and is publicly supportive of the Bolivarian
Revolution led by President Hugo Chavez. This
pamphlet therefore reflects Treen’s political positions
and is consistent with the Council of Trade Unions
Alternative Economic Strategy.
17
Class Struggle 90
Right wing lies
Increasing minimum wages
will increase prices.
Increasing minimum wages
Workers share of the total NZ Gross Domestic
will increase inflation.
Profit (GDP) has dropped by 10% (while
capitalists share increased).
Increasing minimum wages
will increase
unemployment.
Cutting youth rates will
increase youth
employment.
Rogernomics part I (under
Labour) worked
(privatising, rail, road
maintenance printing,
power, telecoms, &
commercialising TV, Coal,
etc)
Rogernomics part II (under
National) cut welfare &
reduced access to
education, housing &
health, attacking unions.
The ECA would make a
“free” labour market.
workers would be rewarded
for hard work
National blamed
unemployed as “bludgers”:
now John Key says,
“slackers”
GST is a fair tax
Less tax on rich will “boost
investment and economic
growth”
Inequality is an incentive to
work hard
Labours 1999 – 2008 record
Cut welfare health and
education spending to pay
Reformist half-truths
Wages have been lagging behind prices and
inflation. In spite of increasing efficiency
and productivity by 80%.
Actually minimum wage increases have been
alongside increased employment.
The proportion of youth unemployment
remained steady with increased youth
minimum wages (in last 10 years).
Rogernomics failed (1980s and 1990s) the
rich got richer and the poor got poorer.
There was no increase in economic growth
or general incomes (except for the rich) with
Rogernomics. Labour effectively outlawed
political strikes. They sold capitalists whole
sections of the economy to run – for profit
(not for social good).
Take home wages fell by 25% in real terms
(1982 to 2008). The National government’s
Employment Contracts Act (ECA) in 1991
attacked union organisation and cut benefits
(social wages).
ECA was an attack on organised workers
(unions). Membership has dropped from 720
thousand to 350 thousand. (CTU) Union
leaders failed to fight the when workers
were calling for a General Strike.
Because of loss in real wages – working
families have increased their hours of work,
and level of debt. To bring in the same
“real wage” income (as 20yrs previously).
National cut all benefits: unemployment,
DPB, invalids, sickness. And ‘retirement’ was
cut by pushing the age of eligibility back
from 60 to 65yrs.
The richest paid as little as 6% of their
income in GST, while the poorest paid 9-14%
GST (getting into debt to survive at rates
above the 12.5% GST).
No evidence for impact on growth. In fact
growth & productivity have sometimes been
highest when top tax rate was highest.
Suicide, crime and drug abuse went up.
Study by Richard Wilkinson and Kate
Pickett in their book “The spirit level –
Why more Equal societies nearly always do
better” show income inequality is not a
good thing.
Labour never challenged the fundamental
policies which were already there. Only
minimal tinkering with the economy
occurred.
The welfare state was a reform to even up
the system. The cuts to welfare to pay for
tax cuts are unfair and unions need to fight
July-August 2010
Marxist truths
The lag in wages reflects the growing rate of exploitation
of workers with increased productivity. Wages decline
relative to profits. Prices are broadly based on the labour
time that went into the goods – the minimum socially
necessary labour. Workers therefore have in interest in
replacing capitalism with socialism.
Inflation is driven by forces in the capitalist market.
Inflation is used to devalue wages. The real value of wages
is forced up only by the organised strength of workers
through strikes and occupations.
Unemployment continues in capitalism because the
capitalist class keeps a permanent “reserve army” of the
unemployed to force workers to compete for jobs driving
down their wages. Youth are forced into the reserve army
by casualisation , restoring youth rates etc. The solution is
to fight for jobs for all by sharing the work on a living
wage.
The “free-market” ideas of Roger Douglas were designed
to open up NZ to the global market allowing international
capital to buy up cheap public and private assets and
restore its falling profits. State assets such a transport,
electricity, telecoms etc; were subsidies to capitalism
while NZ was a protected economy. Deregulation meant
they were restructured and sold off to reduce the drain of
taxes on capitalist profits. Workers have a class interest in
expropriating all state and private assets under a Workers
Government.
All these were attempts to restore capitalist profits, with
the costs passed on to the working class. Organised
workers are a threat to capitalists, because if workers
strike we can stop profits flowing to the capitalist
class. Strong unions are schools for revolution and threaten
the class rule of capitalists.
Unions are allowed by capitalism only to the extent they
can control the working class. If union leaders do not fight
effectively for workers then they need to be replaced.
However unions without a Marxist analysis of capitalism
will not end this messy capitalist system.
An excuse by the capitalist class to increase the rate of
exploitation making workers produce more profits for
capitalism at reduced labour costs (wages).We demand
jobs for all by sharing work on a living wage!
Capitalism creates a reserve army of unemployed which
includes disproportionately, women, youth, ethnic
minorities and migrant workers. It is in the interest of all
workers to unite to fight and overthrow capitalism.
There can be no ‘fair tax’ (as no ‘fair wage’) since all
taxes come out of the value produced by productive
workers. The demand to tax the rich, or employers cannot
prevent exploitation at the point of production.
A workers revolution is needed to create a planned
(socialist) economy where production can be used and
developed to meet the needs of all. (Not this chaotic
capitalist investment for profits system).
Inequality under capitalism results from capitalists owning
the means of production and workers having to work to
produce profits in order to survive. Inequality therefore
cannot be overcome by redistributing income from
capitalists to workers unless workers unite to overthrow
capitalism and create a classless society.
The Labour Party is a mixture of capitalists and workers
representatives who only want to reform capitalism – a
bourgeois-workers party. They do not organise to
overthrow this rotten system
The Welfare state was a reform of capitalism –without
ending the rotten system that is capitalism. The Welfare
state is a wage paid socially to the working class as a
18
Class Struggle 90
for tax cuts to defend and extend the welfare state.
Economy – is in crisis or The economy is grim. This booklet concludes
“fragile recovery” that the long term solution is a democratic
plan, with “community control and workers
in management”
Alternative Economic Strategy
The Council of Trade Unions (CTU) alternative
economic strategy is based on the delusion of “an
economy that works for everyone", as if such a thing
could exist under the capitalist system. The current
focus of the CTU is on increasing productivity (which
for Marxists is the rate of exploitation) so that
workers can bargain retain some greater share of the
increased value they produce.
This aligns the union leaderships with the capitalist
class as collaborating in the rise of productivity of the
working class to restore (falling) profits. Marx very
clearly described how the profits for capitalism will
fall, and continue to fall. Moreover, the higher the
level of productivity, the greater would be the
tendency for the rate of profit to fall because
machines do not produce value. The bosses try to
recoup their falling profits by
cutting real wages and
conditions and attacking the
social wage funded by taxes.
The latest capitalist crisis was
the direct result of such a
tendency for falling profits.
When ordinary capitalist
production was not returning a
‘good’ profit margin, finance
capitalism poured capital into
dodgy and convoluted home
loans. The value of these was
artificially raised by speculation
(and lies) way above the real
labour value in construction. As
wages were cut and jobs lost
the banks found that workers
couldn’t pay their inflated
mortgages. The real price of housing was way below
this ‘fictitious’ value and the result was the sub-
prime crash.
There is a little reporting about the cost to the
section of the working class who had taken home
loans and have now lost their home to mortgage sales
and are left with a debt burden which will continue
to suck a cut from their wages into the profits of
finance capitalists. The efforts of the capitalists to
restore profits are mostly attacks on the working
class, and so it is in workers interests to fightback.
The NACTs have continually used the latest capitalist
crisis as an excuse to launch a capitalist range of
July-August 2010
whole (by the labour of health and education workers, etc)
to supplement the wage paid directly by the employers.
Crises are inevitable in the anarchic capitalist world
economy. Only workers organised and able to make
a revolution can take control of banks and the whole
economy, to plan it for the social good.
attacks on the working class. National’s new
employment law is permission for bosses to ‘Fire at
will’ in their attack on the working class. It is worse
than the Employment Contracts Act of 1991 because
the weakness of the unions today makes it extremely
difficult for workers to avoid signing onto a 90 Day
‘trial period’.
The NACTs would like to dispense with the unions to
discipline workers from fighting back. But the two
headed attacks on wages and the social wage (Health,
Education, Housing and Welfare) means that workers
will resist. That is why the CTU has responded to the
Labour ‘reforms’ with a call to go to the ‘streets’. It
has to demonstrate its utility to the NACT bosses that
it can control the workers fightback and steer it into
support for the Labour Party. Treen is a national
leader of the Unite Union which has successfully
recruited unorganised youth.
While Unite is leading the fightback
against the 90 Days Fire at Will,
picketing workplaces that are
sacking young workers under this
law,.unlesss this is seen as a first
step towards challenging the
bosses’ class rule over all of
society, it becomes no more than
pressure on governments to reform
workplace relations, and holds
back the new wave of militancy
within the dead end of parliament.
The only real power workers have
is our ability to stop the flow of
profits for the capitalist class by
taking strike action. We don’t
mean token strikes with media
stunts and ineffective pickets. We
mean a strike (reinforced by picketing) that really
does stop production and/or distribution of
commodities and stops capitalists’ profits.
It is the potential of unionised working to organise
effective strikes and pickets which scares the
capitalist class. All the past gains of working people
have been fought for and won only with the backing
of strike action (real or threatened). As Trotsky said
in the classic work on Trade Unions in the epoch of
imperialism; break with the state, take control of the
unions into the hands of the rank and file and turn
the unions into organs of workers power to fight for a
Workers Government and socialist society!
19
Class Struggle 90
What We Fight For
Overthrow Capitalism
Historically, capitalism expanded world-wide to free
much of humanity from the bonds of feudal or tribal
society, and developed the economy, society and
culture to a new higher level. But it could only do this
by exploiting the labour of the productive classes to
make its profits. To survive, capitalism became
increasingly destructive of "nature" and humanity. In
the early 20th century it entered the epoch of
imperialism in which successive crises unleashed wars,
revolutions and counter-revolutions. Today we fight to
end capitalism’s wars, famine, oppression and
injustice, by mobilising workers to overthrow their own
ruling classes and bring to an end the rotten,
exploitative and oppressive society that has exceeded
its use-by date.
Fight for Socialism
By the 20th century, capitalism had created the pre-
conditions for socialism –a world-wide working class and
modern industry capable of meeting all our basic needs.
The potential to eliminate poverty, starvation, disease
and war has long existed. The October Revolution
proved this to be true, bringing peace, bread and land
to millions. But it became the victim of the combined
assault of imperialism and Stalinism. After 1924 the
USSR, along with its deformed offspring in Europe,
degenerated back towards capitalism. In the absence of
a workers political revolution, capitalism was restored
between 1990 and 1992. Vietnam and China then
followed. In the 21sst century only Cuba and North
Korea survive as degenerate workers states. We
unconditionally defend these states against capitalism
and fight for political revolution to overthrow the
bureaucracy as part of world socialism.
Defend Marxism
While the economic conditions for socialism exist
today, standing between the working class and
socialism are political, social and cultural barriers.
They are the capitalist state and bourgeois ideology and
its agents. These agents claim that Marxism is dead and
capitalism need not be exploitative. We say that
Marxism is a living science that explains both
capitalism’s continued exploitation and its attempts to
hide class exploitation behind the appearance of
individual "freedom" and "equality". It reveals how and
why the reformist, Stalinist and centrist misleaders of
the working class tie workers to bourgeois ideas of
nationalism, racism, sexism and equality. Such false
beliefs will be exploded when the struggle against the
inequality, injustice, anarchy and barbarism of
July-August 2010
capitalism in crisis, led by a revolutionary Marxist
party, produces a revolutionary class-consciousness.
For a Revolutionary Party
The bourgeois and its agents condemn the Marxist party
as totalitarian. We say that without a democratic and a
centrally organised party there can be no revolution.
We base our beliefs on the revolutionary tradition of
Bolshevism and Trotskyism. Such a party, armed with a
transitional program, forms a bridge that joins the daily
fight to defend all the past and present gains won from
capitalism, to the victorious socialist revolution.
Defensive struggles for bourgeois rights and freedoms,
for decent wages and conditions, will link up the
struggles of workers of all nationalities, genders,
ethnicities and sexual orientations, bringing about
movements for workers control, political strikes and
the arming of the working class, as necessary steps to
workers' power and the smashing of the bourgeois
state. Along the way, workers will learn that each new
step is one of many in a long march to revolutionise
every barrier put in the path to the victorious
revolution.
Fight for Communism
Communism stands for the creation of a classless,
stateless society beyond socialism that is capable of
meeting all human needs. Against the ruling class lies
that capitalism can be made "fair" for all; that nature
can be "conserved"; that socialism and communism are
"dead"; we raise the red flag of communism to keep
alive the revolutionary tradition of the' Communist
Manifesto of 1848, the Bolshevik-led October
Revolution; the Third Communist International until
1924, the revolutionary Fourth International up to 1940
before its collapse into centrism. We fight to build a
new, Fifth, Communist International, as a world party
of socialism capable of leading workers to a victorious
struggle for socialism.
Class Struggle is the bi-Monthly paper of the
Communist Workers’ Group of New
Zealand/Aotearoa, in a Liaison Committee with
Humanist Workers for Revolutionary Socialism.
PO Box 60620, Auckland, New Zealand.
Email cwg006@yahoo.com
http://redrave.blogspot.com
http://communistworker.blogspot.com
20