<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Red Pepper &#187; Activism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/activism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk</link>
	<description>Red Pepper</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:29:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Red Pepper needs your help</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/donate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/donate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With increasing overheads and the well-known challenges of print media, it's not easy for a radical volunteer-led publication in this big bad capitalist world!]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All our writers donate their work for free. So do our editors. But our production and administration costs aren’t fully covered by subscriptions and sales. One-off and regular donations are crucial.<br />
We’ve recently made some real progress, gaining hundreds of new subscribers, and thousands of new online readers. Our <a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/mythbusters/">popular mythbuster series</a> has proved so useful that we’ve made it into a pamphlet.<br />
More and more, we’re making an impact. But it will take some time for this increased activity to match our financial needs. <strong>To cover this gap we’re asking for your support.</strong><br />
Red Pepper has <a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/history/">survived for nearly 19 years</a>, fostering analysis and debate, supporting campaigns, developing ideas for a world beyond capitalism. Vibrant movements need independent radical media.</p>
<h2>Donate today</h2>
<form name="form1" method="post" action="https://select.worldpay.com/wcc/purchase">
<p>Amount to donate: &pound;  <input type="text" name="amount">&nbsp;<input type="submit" name="Submit1" value="Donate" class="btn"><input type="hidden" name="instId" value="108501"><input type="hidden" name="accId1" value=""><input type="hidden" name="cartId" value="Donation"><input type="hidden" name="desc" value="Donation to Red Pepper"><input type="hidden" name="currency" value="GBP"></form>
<p>Or send a cheque made payable to Socialist Newspaper (Publications) Ltd. Address: Red Pepper, 44-48 Shepherdess Walk, London N1 7JP</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/donate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Einstein had it right: John Kerry’s latest Middle East ‘peace process’</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/einstein-had-it-right-john-kerrys-latest-middle-east-peace-process/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/einstein-had-it-right-john-kerrys-latest-middle-east-peace-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phyllis Bennis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Israel-Palestine talks will continue to fail until they are based on international law, human rights and equality for all, writes Phyllis Bennis]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/kerry.jpg" alt="kerry" width="460" height="300" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-10971" /><small>John Kerry: spot the pattern</small></p>
<p>US Secretary of State John Kerry’s latest foray into Middle East negotiations should be called the Einstein peace process. Doing the same thing over and over again and still expecting different results is the great scientist’s definition of insanity. This time around, all evidence to the contrary aside, indications are that Kerry actually believes this latest iteration of the decades-old industry known as the ‘peace process’ might really accomplish something. But unfortunately for Kerry, his political calculations are about to run aground on the unforgiving shoals of political reality.</p>
<p>Regardless of Kerry’s beliefs, the timing of this latest version of the talks clearly has a lot to do with the crises erupting across the Middle East region. The escalating civil and regional war in Syria, the growing sectarian and religious-secular divides exploding across the region, and even the Washington-backed Egyptian military’s coup against the Muslim Brotherhood, all reflect broader US weakness and failures in the Middle East. The inability of the US to respond strategically to those challenges is certainly part of why plunging back into Israel-Palestine talks, however repetitive of earlier failures, might have seemed a useful move – for distraction, for reassurance of Israel’s backers, for reassertion of a weakened empire’s fading but still extant power.</p>
<p>But despite all those reasons, these talks are doomed to the same failure as the 22 years of failed diplomacy that precedes them.</p>
<p><strong>A one-sided peace</strong></p>
<p>Part of the problem lies squarely in Kerry’s stated US goal for the talks: ‘ending the conflict, ending the claims.’ Not ending the occupation, not ending the siege of Gaza, not ending the decades of dispossession and exile of Palestinian refugees. Not basing diplomacy on United Nations resolutions and the obligations of international law. Only ending the tension, the dispute – regardless of which version of current reality becomes the officially agreed upon final status. Then, in Kerry’s world, all Palestinian claims will disappear, and the Palestinians, even if their internationally-recognised rights remain out of reach, will smile, applaud their brave leaders, and politely agree to suck it up. (Israeli claims of course will not have to end, because Israeli claims, all about ‘security,’ are inherently legitimate and non-negotiable, while Palestinian claims – to self-determination, real sovereignty, equality, return – are always political and up for grabs.) </p>
<p>The appointment of Martin Indyk as US envoy to the talks is a further indication that no one intends to change the framework of the last 22 years of failed US-led diplomacy. Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, former deputy research director of AIPAC – the powerful pro-Israel lobby – and co-founder of the AIPAC-linked Washington Institute for Near East Policy, has been central to US-controlled Israel-Palestine diplomacy for years. (For years now, it has become common to see Indyk, Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and others responsible for 22 years of failed US diplomacy in the Middle East, burnishing their ‘veteran’ status as a credential for continuing their careers.) </p>
<p>This round, like before, will ignore international law, and instead be based on the current disparity of power between occupied and occupier. The pro-Israel US arbiter will determine Israeli positions and Israeli-proposed ‘compromises’ to be ’reasonable’. Israel will continue to build and expand settlements in occupied East Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank based on the thousands of new permits already in place, while offering some kind of short-term partial delay in granting some number of new permits – and that will be called a major compromise. More than 600,000 Israeli settlers will continue to live in huge city-sized Jews-only settlements throughout the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the talks will be rooted in the understanding that in any final arrangement Israel will be allowed to keep all the major settlement blocs and 80 per cent or more of the settlers right where they are.</p>
<p><strong>The meaning of ‘swaps’</strong></p>
<p>Secretary Kerry announced proudly that this round of talks is based on the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, without mentioning that the ‘new’ US- and Israeli-imposed amendment to that plan stripped it of its potential value – the requirement that Arab normalisation with Israel could come only after ‘full’ withdrawal to the 1967 borders and a just solution to the refugee problem based on UN resolution 194 guaranteeing their right of return. Kerry’s new version ignores the refugees (at least so far) and adopts the US-Israeli language on borders (always said as one word) of 1967-borders-with-swaps. Those ‘swaps,’ of course, mean Israel gets to keep all its settlement cities, all its illegal settlers, virtually all the Palestinian water sources, while the Palestinians will be offered some undeveloped desert land abutting Gaza perhaps, or perhaps a proposal to place Palestinian-majority cities inside Israel, such as Nazareth, under the jurisdiction of the to-be-created Palestinian ‘state’. (There is likely to be no compromise on Gaza – Israel’s siege will remain, strengthened by Egypt’s new post-coup government tightening the closure of the Egypt-Gaza crossing at Rafah – and the Palestinian Authority diplomats are not likely to make Gaza a major part of their negotiating strategy.)</p>
<p>Palestinians, of course, will be expected to accept Israel’s ‘reasonable’ compromises as if both sides, occupied and occupier, have the same obligations under international law. (Oh right, international law doesn’t have a role here.) The price, if Palestinians reject any of those oh-so-reasonable proposals, will be US and perhaps global opprobrium for blocking peace. </p>
<p>Right now some developing countries (South Africa, Brazil) are hinting at somewhat more independent positions towards Israel-Palestine. The European Union’s new restrictions on funding settlement entities, made public just before Kerry’s announcement of the new talks and Israel’s acceptance of them, is particularly important, reflecting the impact of even mild sanctions on Tel Aviv. But while the civil society movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) continues to build, it remains unclear how the governments tentatively backing away from US positions would respond to the collapse of the US-controlled talks, especially if the US claim is that the failure is the Palestinians’ fault.</p>
<p>Israeli violations of international law, the Geneva Conventions, UN resolutions and more remain. The US does not set an end to those violations as a goal of these peace talks – let alone as a precondition. If it did, Israel would have to end its occupation of the 1967 territories and recognise the Palestinians’ right of return unilaterally – ending violations shouldn’t require negotiations. That’s why, ultimately, these talks will fail. Until negotiations are based not on US support for Israeli power but on international law, human rights, and equality for all, the ‘peace process’ will fail and will remain an example of Einstein’s insanity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/einstein-had-it-right-john-kerrys-latest-middle-east-peace-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Young Writers&#8217; Competition</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/competition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/competition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=5964</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Win £100 and your writing published in Red Pepper]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/460x300-writers-comp.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10665 alignleft" alt="460x300-writers-comp" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/460x300-writers-comp.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a><br />
Calling all young writers, activists and aspiring journalists! If you&#8217;re aged between 16-25 years old then why not enter our young writer&#8217;s competition? Entries will be judged by <strong>George Monbiot</strong>, author columnist for The Guardian; and <strong>Kara Moses</strong>, environment editor at Red Pepper.</p>
<p>The winner will get their work published in <em>Red Pepper, </em>receive £100 and get a one years subscription to the magazine. We will also publish some of the runner up entires on our website. Just answer the following question:</p>
<p><strong>How can we make our world fairer and more sustainable at the same time? </strong></p>
<p><strong></strong>Write up to 800 words about an inspiring project or policy which is tackling the environmental crisis and addressing social or economic injustice at the same time. Where has this initiative been discussed, developed or adopted? Could it be applied elsewhere?</p>
<p>Deadline: 22 November 2013</p>
<p><strong>More information and competition rules</strong></p>
<p>1. You must be 16-25 years of age.</p>
<p>2. Your article must be up to 800-words long and written in English.</p>
<p>3. Only one entry per person, which must be submitted electronically as a word document by 22 November 2013. Attach the document in an email, with the email subject line stating &#8216;Red Pepper young writers&#8217; competition&#8217; to Kitty Webster at kitty@redpepper.org.uk</p>
<p>4. Your entry must clearly state the following:</p>
<p>- Your name, age, place of education/work, and a contact number (landline or mobile)</p>
<p>- How you heard about the competition, e.g. through which one of the supporting organisations, or through which student society</p>
<p>If you have any questions then email kitty@redpepper.org.uk</p>
<p><strong>*** Good luck! ***<br />
</strong></p>
<p><em>This competition is kindly supported by the following organisations:</em></p>
<p><a title="People &amp; Planet website" href="http://peopleandplanet.org/" target="_blank">People&amp;Planet</a> &#8211; the largest student network in Britain campaigning to end world poverty, defend human rights and protect the environment.</p>
<p><a title="Shake! website" href="http://voicesthatshake.blogspot.co.uk/p/about.html" target="_blank">Shake!</a> &#8211; A project that brings together young people, artists and campaigners to develop creative responses to social injustice.</p>
<p><a title="Woodcraft Folk website" href="http://www.woodcraft.org.uk/" target="_blank">Woodcraft Folk</a> &#8211; the co-operative children and young people&#8217;s movement. They run hundreds of education groups in towns and cities across the UK where young people of all ages meet to play co-operative games, make friends and learn about big ideas from social justice to climate change.</p>
<p><a title="Young Greens website" href="http://younggreens.greenparty.org.uk/" target="_blank">Young Greens</a> &#8211; the youth and student branch of the Green Party. Young Greens aim to harness the energy and ideas of young people, and change the direction of our society towards a sustainable and just future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/competition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Twenty years of peasant organising</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/twenty-years-of-peasant-organising/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/twenty-years-of-peasant-organising/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2013 20:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>James O'Nions</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adam Payne]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10514</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Adam Payne of the newly-formed Landworkers’ Alliance in the UK reports from La Via Campesina's global conference ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-10515" alt="La Via Campesina's 6th conference" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ViaCampesina.jpg" width="460" height="306" /></p>
<p>Between the 5 and 14 of June, <a href="http://viacampesina.org/en/" target="_blank">La Via Campesina</a>, the global peasants union, held its 6th international conference in Jakarta, Indonesia. Alongside 500 delegates from member organisations around the world, two representatives from the recently affiliated ‘<a href="http://landworkersalliance.org.uk/" target="_blank">Landworkers’ Alliance</a>’ in the UK joined the gathering.<br />
La Via Campesina (literally ‘the peasants’ way’) is an international union of peasants and small farmers representing 188 member organisations in 88 counties. The total membership is in excess of 200 million and growing constantly as new organisations join. The international conferences are held every four years and are the highest forum for decision making within the organisation. This conference also marked the 20th birthday of the movement and was a place for the membership to celebrate as well as strategise.<br />
The past 20 years have seen La Via Campesina grow to become the largest and most internationally respected farmers organisation in the world. Not only is it seen as the representative voice of peasant farmers in civil society and inter-governmental forums; it is also considered by many as offering the most legitimate critique of neoliberalism and the most convincing vision of alternatives. Its power in international forums is derived from its strict ‘producers only’ membership policy, and its democratic functioning which give it a grassroots and representative voice.<br />
La Via Campesina was established in 1993 to unite the opposition of peasants movements to the World Trade Organisation’s agreement on agriculture, a free market trade agreement that has had disastrous implications for the livelihoods of small-scale producers. Since then they have been extremely successful in giving international visibility to the peasant movement. As Julia, a farmer from Germany said: ‘we have the dexterity of an organisation combined with the courage of a social movement’. They take every opportunity to remind the world that 75 per cent of our food is produced by peasants, but that rural areas are often the most deprived and exploited. La Via Campesina argues that peasants and peasant-led solutions must be seen and heard as protagonists in food and agricultural policy.<br />
A primary aim of the conference was to build consensus in the organisation about the focus for the coming four years. Unlike the last conference, which focused on improving internal functioning, in Jakarta a lot of space was given to formulating strategy. A number of topics emerged and were passionately articulated but there was a remarkable consensus on the main challenges that peasants farmers face worldwide and the most effective ways to challenge these forces of oppression.<br />
<strong>Land grabbing and agrarian reform</strong> emerged as a significant issue at the conference. It is clear that in the five years since the 2008 food crisis the enclosure and privatisation of land and common resources has increased significantly worldwide. Both state led and private sector land acquisitions are leading to higher and higher concentrations of ownership, taking previously common resources away from peasants and driving up the cost of land. The issue of land grabbing is set firmly in a wider critique of the corporate ‘green’ economy and the commodification of nature.<br />
In response to the increase in land grabbing, La Via Campesina has amplified its discourse on agrarian reform. Redistribution of productive land to producers and public legislation to prevent land grabs are high on it’s agenda. This is happening at national levels through lobbying and direct actions and internationally through the UN’s Comittee on Food Security (CFS) where ‘voluntary guidelines for the responsible tenure of farms, fisheries and forests’ have recently been agreed, and ‘guidelines for responsible agricultural investment’ are being discussed. As always, these international forums have yielded vague results, with no binding mechanisms for implementation, but represent important steps in the slow path to public policy on tenure, land grabs and investment.<br />
Closely linked to the opposition to land grabbing are increasing campaigns against public-private partnerships that use development rhetoric to open markets and create space for international investment in agriculture. The G8’s new alliance on food security and nutrition is one such example of a ‘development programme’ that seeks to facilitate access to land and markets for agribusiness at the expense of peasant livelihoods and traditions.<br />
<strong>GM and the commodification of seed</strong> remained high on the agenda with a recent proposal from the European commission on the regulation of plant health and marketing taking up a lot of energy in the European regional meetings. The proposal seeks to streamline the European seed industry, creating better incentives for companies to invest in seeds. However the proposal would place fees and registration requirements on small scale seed breeders and growers that would threaten livelihoods and the development of peasant seeds. Internationally the anti GMO campaign has been growing in strength with large scale direct actions against GM in Spain, France, Mexico, India and Haiti. La Via Campesina’s position on GM is that it is an unnecessary technology that damages peasant livelihoods and food security by concentrating power in the food chain in the hands of a few companies and commodified crops. They argue that to end hunger we need to address the situations of those who already produce food, and those who want to. Seeking to build a diverse and resilient local food system rather than the export-focused business-led model that GM is designed for.<br />
La Via Campesina’s struggle against agribusiness spreads far beyond the issue of GM. The conference saw the adoption of a global ‘campaign against agrotoxics’ (genres of chemical known in the UK as pesticides which includes herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) that was initiated by Latin American organisations in 2011. The campaign highlights that monopolies in the agrochemical market (just 6 control 67.9% of the market) force farmers into debt and dependence, but also that agrotoxics are dangerous to people and ecology and are responsible for a lot of death and disease among agricultural workers.<br />
<strong>Repression of social movements</strong> was also high on the agenda and space was made in the conference to honour the hundreds of peasants who have been threatened, persecuted, imprisoned and murdered in their struggles. In a number of the regions where members are active state and paramilitary violence against peasant movements is extreme. A member of the delegation from Honduras described how many of his colleagues had been killed for speaking and organising to defend the rights of agricultural workers. The issue is linked closely to the campaign against violence against women which seeks to build the strength and solidarity in the movement by challenging prejudices. In recognition of the intense repression faced by many members, La Via Campesina works hard to build inclusion and solidarity within the movement. As practical steps towards this they set quotas on the participation of men, women and youth, ensuring equal space for different voices.<br />
<strong>Food sovereignty and agroecology</strong><br />
To develop their proposals for an alternative agricultural policy framework, La Via Campesina came up with the concept of food sovereignty in 1996. Set upon the recognition that food and agriculture are a key element of struggles for social justice in both rural and urban areas, food sovereignty is the fundamental right for all peoples, nations and states to control food and agricultural systems and policies, ensuring everyone has adequate, affordable, nutritious and culturally appropriate food. This requires the right to define and control methods of production, transformation, and distribution at local, national and international levels. Most significantly it encompasses as socio-economic and political transformation. Food sovereignty was a huge part of the discourse at the conference and is used by all kinds of organisations to describe the alternatives that the La Via Campesina offers. While it sounds complicated when dressed in the language of policy, the fundamentals of food sovereignty are the basic demands of farmers around the world: fair prices for food and agricultural products, prioritisation to local and sustainable production and support for new entrants to agriculture alongside a curbing of the power of transnational corporations.<br />
As the failures of the import dependant food security model become clearer, food sovereignty is getting a broader recognition in public policy. Some counties, including Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, Senegal, Mali and Nepal have written food sovereignty into their policy frameworks, and it is gaining recognition in the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and Committee on Food Security (CFS). The sharing of victories and strategies for taking food sovereignty to public policy was a big component of the conference and something that will be happening more in the coming years.<br />
<strong>In the institutions</strong><br />
The work of La Via Campesina was described to me by an Italian farmer as 1 per cent institutional, 99 per cent mobilisation and mutual aid. At the institutional level, La Via Campesina have been working to create and hold a space for social movements in the UN’s intergovernmental forums for agricultural policy. They are actively lobbying in the FAO, the CFS and the European Union. The main focus here at the moment is twofold, first, following a successful attack on the World Bank’s attempts to write an ‘initiative on responsible investment’, La Via Campesina has been active in taking the issue to the more democratic forum of the CFS where it is working to build the ‘guidelines on responsible agricultural investment’ into an instrument that can be used to defend communities against land grabbing.<br />
In addition La Via Campesina have drafted a bill for the rights of peasants that has been accepted by the UN human rights commission and is now being pushed for ratification by the general assembly.<br />
In the institutions, La Via Campesina’s main aim is often just to give visibility to peasant issues and hold a channel open for farmers voices. As a farmer from Canada said at the conference, ‘often a victory in the institutions is just preventing a bad thing from happening’. Nevertheless, both the bill on the rights of peasants, and the guidelines for responsible agricultural investments hold huge potential for supporting la via campesinas work on the ground with internationally recognised frameworks.<br />
<strong>Don’t forget you are a farmer</strong><br />
In the achievements of the organisation it is easy to forget that really this is a farmers movement, focussed on supporting the livelihoods of peasants around the world. It is in this realm that the movement is having its biggest impacts and it came through clearly in the feeling at the conference. The last 20 years have seen a huge quantity of visits and exchanges with innumerable ideas translated between producers in different contexts. The cumulative effect of all this is to build confidence and capacity among farmers organisations to take active and political roles in directing their futures.<br />
In a time when protest seems to come and go it is inspiring to see an organisation build to this size without compromising its vision, its voice or its demographics. It is amazing that the organisation remains such a united, democratic and honest representation of the issues producers face.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/twenty-years-of-peasant-organising/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Summer of action</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/summer-of-action/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/summer-of-action/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 13:15:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10524</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Red Pepper’s guide to the camps, the demos, the schools, the festivals and the protests that will be making our summer]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-10525" alt="summer-action" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/summer-action.jpg" width="460" height="497" /><small>Illustration: <a href="http://www.eddbaldry.co.uk">hey monkey riot</a></small></p>
<p><a href="http://www.boycottworkfare.org">Boycott Workfare counter-conference</a><br />10 July, Manchester<br />While workfare profiteers meet to discuss more ways to privatise and abolish welfare, come to Manchester for a creative counter-conference as part of an ongoing summer of workfare protests across the UK.</p>
<p><a href="http://durhamminers.org">Durham Miners Gala</a><br />13 July, Durham<br />The 129th annual gathering. A fun day out with trade union banners, brass bands, speeches and merriment.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tolpuddlemartyrs.org.uk">Tolpuddle Martyrs festival and rally</a><br />19-21 July, Tolpuddle<br />Music, drama, poetry and speakers make this annual celebration of trade unionism a popular fixture in the calendar. No prizes for guessing that Billy Bragg is the headliner.</p>
<p><a href="http://peacenewscamp.info">Peace News summer camp</a><br />25-29 July, Norfolk<br />The annual Peace News summer camp is taking a lead from the global South after the regular organising committee stepped down to invite activists of colour to plan the event. Join Peace News to consider what it means to build real solidarity with activists in the global South.</p>
<p><a href="http://voicesthatshake.blogspot.co.uk">Shake!</a> and <a href="http://demandimpossible.wordpress.com/about">Demand the Impossible</a><br />30 July-9 August, London<br />Not one but two free summer schools at which 16-25 year-olds are invited to spend five days with a wide selection of activists and artists discussing and creating campaigns for change.</p>
<p><a href="http://ukfeminista.org.uk">UK Feminista summer school</a><br />17-18 August, Birmingham<br />A weekend of hands-on training in taking action for gender equality. Contributors include Southall Black Sisters, UK Uncut and South Asia Solidarity Group.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nodashforgas.org.uk">Reclaim the Power</a><br />17-20 August, West Burton, Nottinghamshire<br />Take action on fuel poverty and climate change by joining No Dash for Gas for a four-day camp and protest at EDF’s West Burton power station.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stopthearmsfair.org.uk">Stop the Arms Fair</a><br />10-13 September, London<br />The country’s least popular trade show, the DSEi Arms Fair, is due to return to London’s Docklands this summer. Stop the Arms Fair will be there to greet the arms dealers.</p>
<p><a href="http://dpac.uk.net">Disabled People Against the Cuts’ Five days of fightback</a><br />September, everywhere<br />DPAC will be taking action in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England during September with five days of co-ordinated action against the coalition cuts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/summer-of-action/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anti-G8 action in pictures</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/photos-of-anti-g8-action/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/photos-of-anti-g8-action/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:56:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jenny</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In pictures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jenny Nelson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10482</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You sent us your pictures of anti-G8 action this month in London]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/09.06-convergence-center-making-shirt.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10483 " alt="convergence center making shirts, by Anna Forgione" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/09.06-convergence-center-making-shirt.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a>T-shirt making at the convergence center</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/10.06-convergence-center-flags.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10484 " alt="convergence center flags, by Anna Forgione" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/10.06-convergence-center-flags.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a> Flag over the convergence centre</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/13.06-protester-in-front-of-bernardos-charity-shop-to-protest-their-involvement-with-immigration-dention-centres-for-children.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10485 " alt="protester in front of bernardos charity shop to protest their involvement with immigration dention centres for children, by Anna Forgione" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/13.06-protester-in-front-of-bernardos-charity-shop-to-protest-their-involvement-with-immigration-dention-centres-for-children.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a> At Bernardos charity shop to protest against their involvement with immigration dention centres for children</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-pensioners-against-the-crisis.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10486  " alt="pensioners against the crisis, by Anna Forgione" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-pensioners-against-the-crisis.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a> Greater London Pensioners&#8217; Association at Canary Wharf</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_004.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10487  " alt="'Capitalism equals crisis' banner at Canary Wharf with brass band, by Jenny Nelson" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_004.jpg" width="460" height="284" /></a> Capitalism equals crisis banner at Canary Wharf</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_017.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10488" alt="Power to the People banner at Canary Wharf, by Jenny Nelson" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_017.jpg" width="460" height="258" /></a> Banner at Canary Wharf<br />
<a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-protesting-with-love.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-10504" alt="14.06 protesting with love" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-protesting-with-love.jpg" width="460" height="300" /></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_018.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10489" alt="Tripods erected at Canary Wharf, by Jenny Nelson" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_018.jpg" width="460" height="258" /></a> Tripods erected at Canary Wharf</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_021.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10490" alt="Crowd outside Canary Wharf tube station" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_021.jpg" width="460" height="258" /></a> Crowd outside Canary Wharf tube station</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_024.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10491 " alt="Workshop on debt at Canary Wharf, by Jenny Nelson" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP_20130614_024.jpg" width="460" height="276" /></a> Workshop on debt</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-banner-nog8.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-10492" alt="Woman holding placard, by Anna Forgione" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-banner-nog8.jpg" width="250" height="375" /></a><br />
<a href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-protesting-banner.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-10510" alt="14.06 protesting banner" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/14.06-protesting-banner.jpg" width="250" height="375" /></a><small>With special thanks to photographer <a title="Anna Forgione photography website" href="http://arsenia.it/" target="_blank">Anna Forgione</a></small></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/photos-of-anti-g8-action/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s the problem with the If campaign?</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/whats-the-problem-with-the-if-campaign/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/whats-the-problem-with-the-if-campaign/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kai Grachy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A G8 summit coming to Britain traditionally heralds the launch of a large campaigning coalition of international NGOs. Kai Grachy takes a critical look at the 2013 version: the If campaign]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/world-vision.jpg" alt="world-vision" width="460" height="342" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-10300" /><small><b>An ad produced by NGO World Vision after George Osborne&#8217;s budget</b></small><br />
You could be forgiven for not having heard of the If campaign – even its biggest supporters would have to admit it’s been somewhat lacklustre to date. However, the campaign has caused controversy. Several anti-poverty groups have refused to join and it has no trade union members – exposing deeper problems in the state of mainstream NGO campaigning.<br />
The If campaign’s main action to date took place on budget day. It was an unedifying spectacle to see anti-poverty groups lauding one of the harshest post-war austerity budgets as a victory for the world’s poor. As announcements were made of policies that will thrust thousands of people into poverty in the UK, World Vision produced a postcard of happy African children running out of school with the slogan ‘Thank you George’ written above them (see above).<br />
A vicar from the north of England was asked by a Radio 4 presenter, ‘What impact will this budget have on poverty?’ He rushed, in an embarrassed manner, through the first part of the answer – ‘in the UK probably not a positive one’ – before getting to his main point: ‘but it’s a historic moment for global poverty.’<br />
It wasn’t. In reality, anti-poverty NGOs were applauding the government for finally (40 years late) fulfilling the pledge to spend 0.7 per cent of gross national income on overseas aid. That pledge was already a standing commitment of the government, and of all parties. The chancellor had announced he would fulfil this commitment in the autumn statement last year.<br />
So it was an empty campaign victory that provided the chancellor with a little relief amidst the overwhelmingly hostile reaction to his budget. The NGOs looked effective to their supporters, most of whom will doubtless continue to support these organisations in the belief that they are ‘making a difference’. Win-win.<br />
<strong>The If coalition</strong><br />
The If campaign is concerned with hunger; its proposition is that ‘there is enough food in the world to feed everyone, if only politicians gave more overseas aid/tax justice/stopped land grabs/[add one of eight policy demands]’.<br />
It treads a well worn path. One Direction, Orlando Bloom, Bill Nighy and Bill Gates have joined together to tell us how important it is that everyone has enough to eat. There are a series of simple actions (email your MP, share a film, talk to your friends) you can take, getting David Cameron to understand he has a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity to make poverty disappear. And there’s a mish-mash of policy aims, some of which are genuinely positive and some of which sound wholly unconvincing. Is a World Bank review of land grabbing really going to end the takeover of vast swathes of land in Africa by corporations and investment funds? No, but the British government is believed to be keen on it.<br />
The If coalition is smaller than its predecessors, such as Make Poverty History, with trade unions and more radical campaign groups not taking part. Its relationship with the government seems closer. There are no local groups or forums around the UK to allow for autonomous networks to develop. Groups from the global South seem completely sidelined – one NGO insider told me there had been no consultation with Southern groups on the basis that ‘this is a British campaign’. Campaign images suggest that the role of Africans is to look grateful.<br />
<strong>The opposition</strong><br />
Inside the If coalition there have been disagreements between those favouring a more pro-government, aid-focused line, such as Save the Children and Oxfam, and those who want to talk more about the structural causes of poverty, notably tax avoidance, such as Christian Aid and Action Aid.<br />
On the radical NGO side, War on Want and the World Development Movement (WDM) both issued public statements explaining why they wouldn’t join. WDM believes the If campaign ‘will not be challenging the power and impact of the financial system on food prices, nor is it grounded in the principles of food sovereignty [a model for control over, not simply access to, food]’. War on Want similarly believes that If’s policy recommendations ‘leave unaddressed the central issues at the heart of the global food system’.<br />
War on Want has even unearthed documents suggesting that ‘the government has for two years been planning with the aid agencies to use the If campaign to promote the prime minister as a leader on the global stage‘. In other words, from the government’s point of view, the campaign will make David Cameron appear a champion on poverty – no mean feat.<br />
Such a strategy might be excusable if the policies promoted would genuinely redress some of the world’s power imbalances. In reality, the call for more spending on agriculture will reinforce efforts to pour aid money into the corporate takeover of agriculture in Africa.<br />
At the last G8, Barack Obama launched the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition. The New Alliance promises to ‘mobilise private capital’ for investment in food production in Africa. What does that mean? Essentially, using public funds to support the likes of SAB Miller, Monsanto, Diageo and Unilever to get a greater foothold in the food production system of some of the world’s most impoverished countries. As an example of what this ‘partnership’ means in practice, African countries will guarantee more secure property rights for companies, and companies will ‘invest’ in those countries – which often simply means expanding their operations.<br />
The If campaign says that the G8, which came up with this cynical scheme, ‘shares the ambition’ of ending hunger ‘and accepts its share of responsibility’ even if it falls ‘far short of what is required’. The campaign says nothing about the corporate control of food being one of the major causes of hunger, nor the enforced entry of free market mechanisms to agriculture at the hands of Britain being a major cause of famine for centuries. Initiatives like the New Alliance don’t ‘fall far short of what is required’, they go much too far in the wrong direction.<br />
That goes to the heart of the problem with this sort of campaigning. In buying into the ‘political reality’ of neoliberal politics, NGOs are forced to see things from the perspective of those who believe unregulated private capital is the solution rather than the problem. Within such a world the one thing worse than having private capital, is not having private capital. There is no other option. The G8 only exists as a reassertion of the power of rich countries in the face of the challenge of the non-aligned movement in the 1970s. Asking them to do something is akin to petitioning the monarch.<br />
Some of the If campaign’s demands are worthwhile and necessary, even if they ‘fall far short of what is required’. This reflects the tensions within the campaign. But even when positive, they don’t fit into a coherent framework for changing the global economy.<br />
<strong>The genesis of If</strong><br />
To understand how this came about, we need to look back to a time before Bono and Geldof had even heard of Africa. The British development NGO has its precedent in both the missionary organisations tending to (and converting) the victims of British imperialism, and in some of the early organisations challenging the practices, and even very existence, of empire.<br />
In the 1970s and 1980s some – but by no means all – of these organisations took a radical turn, inspired by national liberation movements and liberation theology. Support for the Bangladesh liberation war and the Nicaraguan Sandinistas struggle, and opposition to South African apartheid and the Chilean and Argentinean military juntas, formed the bread and butter of these campaigning organisations. ‘Development’ was clearly understood by many NGO staffers as a battle against neo-imperialism, and notions of class, race and gender politics were vigorously debated.<br />
As the 1980s wore on, the international ecosystem of national liberation in which these ideas had grown disappeared. At home, the Thatcher government used charity law to crack down on troublesome NGOs. But there was one event where NGOs proved they could thrive. In 1984 Bob Geldof saw a BBC news report on a famine in Ethiopia. The attention he went on to bring to that famine was literally record breaking. He didn’t do it by educating people about the causes of Africa’s food shortages, however, but by ignoring the political explanations for the famine and getting people to donate. The image of ‘Africa’ created by LiveAid has never been overcome, partly because many NGOs have played up this image ever since – shocking pictures of dying children brought in the money after all, even if it was detrimental to building the sort of solidarity necessary to change the world. This model was combined with a sense of post-1980s defeat that radical change was not possible and a new ‘professional’ mentality, whereby NGO staffers substituted themselves for any sort of genuine grassroots movement.<br />
With a few notable exemptions, under New Labour NGOs played the role allotted to them by the government. Dependent on government money, given high levels of access, told they were ‘making a difference’, NGOs spent huge amounts of time speaking to governments, businesses, the World Trade Organisation, the International Monetary Fund – telling them to adopt standards of behaviour, grant debt relief and always, always ‘give more aid’. It was a cosy world.<br />
<strong>The poverty of thinking</strong><br />
The result is that campaigns are now not about progressive social change. Campaigns often reinforce the idea that neoliberal capitalism is good – it just needs to be expanded to the masses of the world at a faster rate. The term ‘development’ is now used to denote extending capital into new areas of society. Development aid now routinely facilitates private accumulation, from privatisation and ‘freer’ trade to microcredit.<br />
Increasingly, development spending is bundled up with private flows of money and channelled through private equity funds – making fortunes for ‘investors’. In response, most NGOs are silent. Like any industry they judge success by their bottom line – increased revenue and expansion of their operations. Their ability to generate income and maintain credibility comes from a constituency of campaigners. That’s why it’s okay for them to take the unpopular position of trumpeting this government’s anti-poverty credentials. They have no need to engage the wider public in a real debate about poverty, which could be harmful to their position – they simply need a compliant constituency big enough for the government to consider them important.<br />
Critiquing how we got here is important in changing the situation. There are some NGOs engaged in real empowerment and mobilisation work, recognising they don’t have all the answers to the world’s problems, but they do have a vital role to play. The Progressive Development Forum was recently formed to question where NGOs went wrong, and to embrace an agenda that critiques and challenges wealth and power. Recent posts on its blog have criticised NGOs’ focus on aid, the re-emergence of pictures of starving African children to raise money and the love-in the sector appears to enjoy with Bill Gates. War on Want and WDM have taken explicit positions on austerity in the UK. Smaller groups such as People &#038; Planet and the Jubilee Debt Campaign have begun to work on projects to engage anti-austerity activists in the UK in global anti-austerity work, while Platform uses experimental techniques to expose and challenge corporate power.<br />
Ultimately we get the NGOs we deserve. NGOs are created by their social context and, as we saw in the war against Iraq, can move to the left if there’s space and it feels safe. NGOs used to speak truth to power – it’s time for us to speak truth to NGOs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/whats-the-problem-with-the-if-campaign/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brushing history against the grain</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/brushing-history-against-the-grain/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/brushing-history-against-the-grain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2013 20:41:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mike Marqusee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=10250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We can’t decipher the present without examining its foundations in the battles of the past, writes Mike Marqusee]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/novus.jpg" alt="novus" width="250" height="332" class="alignright size-full wp-image-10253" />The city of Luxor in southern Egypt made the headlines in Britain at the end of February, when 19 tourists were killed in a hot air balloon accident. That tragedy will compound the woes of Egypt’s tourist industry, once a major source of employment and foreign currency, now languishing as foreign visitors are driven away by (misconceived and exaggerated) fears of instability and violence.<br />
Luxor, the site of ancient Thebes, the principal capital of the Egyptian New Kingdom (1550–1050 BC), is studded with colossal carved temples and richly decorated tombs. But the most revealing and moving of its many ruins may be the least spectacular. Known as Deir el Medinah, these are the low-lying remains of the workers’ village, home to the artisans who built the tombs and temples. Their small, sturdy domestic units are laid out on a grid pattern. Here lived stonemasons, tomb painters, carpenters, rope makers, porters. Scattered among the excavated foundations are mini-pyramids and entrances to underground burial vaults, small in scale but decorated with as much care, as much wealth of colour and detail, as the royal tombs in the nearby Valley of the Kings. These workers had their own visions of an afterlife, a better life. And they had a sense of their own value.<br />
This is the site of history’s first recorded strike. The workers were paid in grain, from which they made bread and beer, the staples of the Nile Valley diet. In about 1200 BC, the state treasury, drained by Rameses III’s imperial wars, failed to meet its commitments. The workers downed tools and staged a sit-in at the construction site of the pharaoh’s mortuary temple. Perhaps surprisingly, they won the dispute. Their leverage was their masters’ fear of dying without the proper funerary arrangements, entering the afterlife under-equipped. The Egyptian cult of the dead, for once, benefited the living.<br />
<strong>Approaches to the past</strong><br />
What are we to make of this episode from remote antiquity? Walter Benjamin, in his prophetic final essay, Theses on the Philosophy of History, written in 1940, distinguished between two opposing approaches to the past: ‘historicism’ and ‘historical materialism’. For the former time is linear, uniform, cumulative. ‘Its method is additive: it offers a mass of facts, in order to fill up a homogenous and empty time.’ In contrast, the historical materialist ‘records the constellation in which his own epoch comes into contact with that of an earlier one.’ The job of the historical materialist is not to reproduce but ‘to explode the continuum of history’.<br />
Benjamin asks: ‘With whom does the writer of historicism actually empathise?’ ‘The answer,’ he insists, ‘is irrefutably with the victor.’ History becomes a ‘triumphal procession in which today’s rulers tread over those who are sprawled underfoot. The spoils are, as was ever the case, carried along in the triumphal procession. They are known as the cultural heritage.’<br />
In contrast, for the historical materialist, ‘the cultural heritage is part and parcel of a lineage which he cannot contemplate without horror. It owes its existence not only to the toil of the great geniuses who created it, but also to the nameless drudgery of its contemporaries. There has never been a document of civilisation which is not simultaneously one of barbarism.’<br />
There’s no better illustration of that ringing dictum than the art of ancient Egypt, the product of a brutally stratified society governed by a religion of state power, personified in a god-man ruler. Yet long after the system that oppressed them crumbled, the work of the artisans of Deir el Medinah remains vital, colourful, rhythmic and refined; it excels at grand effects but also in delicate naturalistic detail. Whether in the vast vaults of the Valley of the Kings or in the humble tombs of Deir el Medinah itself, the afterlife is depicted as a better version of this life, furnished in abundance with the good things of this one: food, drink, flowers, birds, song, dance, family. Ancient Egyptian art remains alien, at times weird. But it’s also recognisably human; it leaps across chasms to forge a connection.<br />
On the left we see ourselves as makers of the future fully engaged with the present. We look ahead, not behind, and we resent the charge that we are ‘wed to outmoded doctrines’ and in particular that we have failed to adapt to the changes of the past 30 years. But we should not be ashamed of being ‘conservative’ in defending rights won in previous generations or communities threatened by ‘development’.<br />
Capitalism’s disregard for the future, its bias in favour of the short-term, is notoriously reckless. But it is equally reckless in its disregard for the past, unless that past can be packaged for consumption or the transmission of propaganda. In either case, the past is not allowed to stand independently, to speak with a voice of its own – and to demand from us some accountability.<br />
<strong>Brushing against the grain</strong><br />
Benjamin says our task is ‘to brush history against the grain’. An example of this in our own moment is the 23‑year campaign for justice for those killed at Hillsborough. Though justice itself has yet to be done, much of the truth has now been established. This was achieved only because the families and their supporters defied the massed chorus telling them their quest was futile, emotion-driven or vindictive. Their sense of duty to the dead was not diverted by appeals to pragmatism and the virtues of adjustment, of ‘living in the present’. As a result, they succeeded in recovering a suppressed history which, in turn, becomes an active element in our present and future.<br />
In Spain, the Association for the Recovery of Historical Memory aims to document the fate of Franco’s victims and to excavate and identify their bodies, including the tens of thousands dumped in mass graves. To do this, the association has had to defy the ‘pact of oblivion’ that smoothed the transition to democracy by shielding members of the old regime from accountability. In this case, a sense of obligation to the dead, to those who were on the losing side, was not a ‘backward-looking’ indulgence: it was a social necessity. We can’t decipher the present without examining its foundations in the battles of the past, acknowledging losses as well as gains.<br />
The Palestinian insistence on recognition of the Nakba – characterised by pro-Israel commentators as a vain desire to recoup a lost battle – is in fact a necessary engagement with the realities of the present: the ongoing impact of the Nakba in the policies of dispossession and ethnic cleansing. At the same time, it’s a steadfast insistence on a future of self-determination.<br />
Despite their brief victory, the workers of Deir el Medinah never escaped their state of impoverished servitude. They were on the ‘losing side’ in the march of history. Nonetheless, in their art and in their action, they remind us, in Benjamin’s words, that the ‘fine and spiritual . . . are present in the class struggle as something other than mere booty, which falls to the victor. They are present as confidence, as courage, as humour, as cunning, as steadfastness in this struggle, and they reach far back into the mists of time. They will, ever and anon, call every victory which has ever been won by the rulers into question.’<br />
<small>The illustration above is Paul Klee’s Angelus Novus, 1920, which Benjamin used to illustrate his point about the nature of history.</small></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/brushing-history-against-the-grain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Catastrophism: The truth won’t set you free</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/catastrophism-the-truth-wont-set-you-free/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/catastrophism-the-truth-wont-set-you-free/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nicholas Beuret]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9708</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Catastrophism, by Sasha Lilley, David McNally, Eddie Yuen and James Davis, reviewed by Nic Beuret]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-9709" alt="" src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/cata.jpg" width="200" height="320" />At its heart Catastrophism is about the loss of faith that haunts radical left-wing politics. Through a series of short essays by prominent US writers and activists it maps out the consequences of an end in the belief that radical change can come from mass politics – that is, from organising. In place of organising Catastrophism outlines two ways of doing politics.<br />
The first mode of politics is a kind of determinism: the very nature of capitalism will bring about its demise. Sasha Lilley’s essay gives a good overview of the history of this idea among the left. In its various guises it proposes that there is no need to organise, only wait. The end – through economic crisis or environmental collapse – is coming no matter what we do.<br />
The second is in many ways the very opposite – the truth of the impending crisis and the very fact of its imminent arrival will awaken the sleeping masses and provoke them to action. This idea – that it is the left’s role to bring the truth of the world to the masses, and that this will move them to revolt – is at the heart of much of the radical left and broader environmental movement.<br />
But as Catastrophism points out, this is often far from the case. Truth does not necessarily lead to action. Actually, when it comes to catastrophe and disaster, the truth can play a demobilising as well as mobilising role.<br />
The book doesn’t make a neat connection between the two modes of politics and catastrophe. The history of each as outlined in the book rather speaks to the idea that the radical left has moved between these two positions throughout its history. Determinism and volunteerism would seem to be the two dominant reference points of radical left politics.<br />
Where Catastrophism comes into its own is in identifying both that these points of reference are part of the general problem of left-wing politics at the moment, and that it is in times of crisis that they become even stronger tendencies. The author’s call for an environmental and left-wing politics animated by a faith in people’s ability to change the world is all the more timely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/catastrophism-the-truth-wont-set-you-free/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reclaiming Public Ownership: a 21st-century vision</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/reclaiming-public-ownership-a-21st-century-vision/</link>
		<comments>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/reclaiming-public-ownership-a-21st-century-vision/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clifford Singer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9702</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reclaiming Public Ownership, by Andrew Cumbers, reviewed by Clifford Singer]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/rpo.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="295" class="alignright size-full wp-image-9703" />Last summer, a coalition of trade unions published Rebuilding Rail, a meticulously researched report calling for Britain’s railways to be brought back into public ownership. Labour responded positively, with transport spokeswoman Maria Eagle saying the report put forward a ‘coherent case for reform’. The Tories countered that Labour wanted to ‘take us back to the 1970s’, and Labour’s enthusiasm appeared to cool.<br />
Few things seem guaranteed to get under Labour’s skin more than the accusation that the party will ‘take us back to the 1970s’. This is in part due to the prevalence of a neoliberal view that has demonised much of post-war Life Before Thatcher.<br />
But it is also a reminder to anti‑privatisation campaigners that they must make the case for something better than has gone before, not a return to the past. As Andrew Cumbers points out, the post-1945 model of nationalisation was indeed bureaucratic and over-centralised, and it wasn’t just the followers of Friedrich Hayek who said this but those on the new left too.<br />
His first chapter provides an excellent overview of that post-1945 period. ‘Morrisonian’ nationalisation was vital to post-war reconstruction, but ‘the lack of creativity or imagination surrounding the government’s plans and its willingness to defer to established interests became particularly striking characteristics’.<br />
As well as adopting the new-left themes of economic democracy and public participation, Cumbers takes seriously Hayek’s critique of centralised planning as a hindrance to innovation and knowledge sharing. He acknowledges that this is a particular problem in relation to ‘tacit’ knowledge, which is ‘bound up in social practices and routines within different parts of the economy’.<br />
But Hayek’s market-based formula is no solution. Ask an employee whose work has been outsourced to Capita or G4S how much of their tacit knowledge has been retained. Instead Cumbers sets out a vision of public ownership that rejects a one-size-fits-all model and promotes a diversity of approaches, with power dispersed from the centre.<br />
Far from going back to the 1970s, the problem we face in Britain is that we remain weighed down by the baggage of the 1980s. Cumbers’ 21st-century vision of public ownership offers a way forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/reclaiming-public-ownership-a-21st-century-vision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 2.028 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-09-18 15:13:16 -->