28 Feb 2017

The Trump administration and the crisis of American capitalism

Joseph Kishore

President Donald Trump will deliver an address to both houses of Congress tonight, broadcast live throughout the United States. According to talking points released by the White House yesterday, the speech will “lay out an optimistic vision for the country” and “invite all Americans of all backgrounds to come together in the service of a stronger, brighter future for our nation.”
The very fact that Trump will be delivering the address is proof that the “state of the union” is neither optimistic nor bright. Trump and his administration of political thugs are testament to the horrifying decay of political culture in the United States. The agenda that the administration is rapidly implementing holds out for the working class of the entire world a future of unending war, dictatorship and social devastation.
The first five weeks of the Trump administration have given ample demonstration of this fact. Trump is packing his administration with CEOs, billionaires, ex-generals and individuals dedicated to what his chief strategist Stephen Bannon referred to last week as the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” In a policy directive released yesterday, the Trump administration calls for a massive 10 percent increase in spending on the military, to be paid for through cuts in everything else: public education, mass transportation, housing, job training, the arts, pollution controls, and health and safety regulations.
The “administrative state” is to be replaced with the “garrison state,” with all the resources of American society subordinated to the preparations of the ruling class for world war.
Among the first actions of the new government is a brutal crackdown on immigrant workers. Thousands are being rounded up and deported, and the Trump administration is setting up the framework for mass internment camps. The government is encouraging the most backward and reactionary elements, expressed in the wave of bomb threats against Jewish community centers and the racially-motivated shooting of two Indian men in Kansas last week.
In all its actions, the new government is implementing a definite political strategy. One should not hesitate to use the word “fascism.” The denunciation by Bannon of the “corporate globalist media,” Trump’s demand for “total allegiance to the United States of America” and his call for a “new national pride” founded on the “blood of patriots”—this is language inspired by Mussolini and Hitler. The Trump-Bannon government is using the immense power of the presidency to develop a fascistic movement, which will increasingly take on extra-parliamentary forms.
Throughout his campaign and in the first weeks of his administration, Trump has pitched his rhetoric to the discontent and frustration of broader sections of the population. With lying and empty rhetoric about the “forgotten man” and pledges to “Make America Great Again,” he is seeking to direct social anger against the “enemy” abroad and establish the base for an authoritarian and militarist agenda.
Trump does not have mass support. Indeed, his presidency is the most unpopular in the history of the United States. Polls make clear that his attack on immigrants and other reactionary measures are broadly opposed. In the first weeks of his administration, Trump has confronted protests involving millions of people in the United States and internationally.
However, in the absence of any progressive political outlet for this anger, it is the extreme right that is benefiting. This is true not only in the United States, but also in Europe, where far right and fascistic political movements are also on the rise.
The administration’s greatest asset is the spineless and reactionary character of his critics within the political establishment. The Democrats are doing everything they can to divert and disorient popular opposition. Along with their allies in the media, they are promoting a vile, neo-McCarthyite campaign focused on denunciations of the Trump administration for being too soft on Russia. Their strategy is two-pronged. They want to pressure Trump to adopt positions that conform to the demands of dominant sections of the military-intelligence apparatus, while at the same time diverting the anger of millions of workers and youth away from any challenge to the capitalist system.
Responsibility for the rise of Trump lies squarely with the Democratic Party and what is generally presented as “left” politics in the United States. The Democratic Party, no less than the Trump administration itself, is a political instrument of Wall Street and the intelligence agencies. The policies of the Obama administration for the eight years that followed the economic crash of 2008 were dedicated to rescuing and enriching Wall Street. Far from being held accountable for the swindling and criminality that produced the crisis, the financial aristocracy is richer than ever. The Obama administration continued and expanded the wars of the Bush administration, while escalating the attacks on democratic rights and increasing the power of the intelligence agencies.
During the 2016 election campaign, Hillary Clinton ran as the candidate of Wall Street and the status quo, refusing to even acknowledge mass social discontent. While the leftward movement of broad sections of workers and youth was expressed in support for the campaign of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and his call for a “political revolution” against the “billionaire class,” Sanders’ task was to channel this anger behind Clinton, an action that helped assure Trump’s victory. Sanders is now reprising this role in his new position as part of the leadership of the Democratic Party in the Senate.
The obsessive fixation of the Democratic Party and the political organizations that surround it on various forms of racial, ethnic and gender identity politics plays into Trump’s hands. The Democrats and their apologists are opposed to any movement against Trump that is associated with policies of social reform and economic redistribution, beyond a more agreeable distribution of wealth within the top 10 percent. As such, they are incapable of advancing a viable basis for opposing the reactionary chauvinism of the fascistic right.
In the final analysis, the rise of Donald Trump is the expression of the protracted and now terminal crisis of American capitalism. He is not an intruder in an otherwise healthy society. However bitter the dispute within the ruling class, they are all united on the conviction that American imperialism must control the world and the attack on the working class must be intensified. Under Trump, the ruling class is embarking on a new stage in this catastrophic project.
Essential political conclusions must be drawn. It is impossible to separate the fight against the Trump administration from the fight against the social and economic order that has produced it: capitalism. The social force that must be mobilized against Trump is the working class. It is in the working class that real and enduring opposition to the new administration will develop.
The Socialist Equality Party is fighting to arm the working class with a political program that offers a real solution to the great problems that it confronts. The working class can only secure its basic rights—to a secure and good-paying job, health care, housing, education, retirement—by means of a frontal assault on the wealth of the corporate and financial elite. It must reclaim the massive fortunes accumulated by the super-rich through fraud and speculation. The stranglehold of the financial aristocracy must be broken through the transformation of the gigantic banks and corporations into publicly-owned utilities, democratically controlled to meet social need, not private profit.
The social interests of the working class must be connected to the fight against imperialist war, which threatens the entire globe with catastrophe. The SEP fights to counter the reactionary and fascistic nationalism promoted by Trump and similar political tendencies internationally through the unification of workers of every nationality, race and gender on the basis of their common class interests.
The basic and urgent task is the building of a revolutionary leadership, the SEP and our worldwide organization, the International Committee of the Fourth International. The Trump administration represents a clear and present danger. It must be fought through the systematic, persistent and urgent organization of the working class in the fight for socialism.

27 Feb 2017

Abel Visiting Scholar Program 2017 for Mathematics PhD Scholars in Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 
  • 30th April 2017 for research visits between September 1 and December 31, 2017
  • 31st August 2017 for research visits between January 1 and April 30, 2018.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Developing Countries
About the Award: The program is designed for post doctoral mathematicians in the early stages of their professional careers.   It is designed to offer the opportunity for a ‘research sabbatical,’ a necessary complement to teaching and other academic duties for mathematicians desiring to also sustain a viable research program.
Type: PhD/Fellowship
Eligibility: Applicants must
     1.   hold at the time of application a PhD in Mathematics,
     2.   be based in a developing country at the time of application
     3.   hold a position in a university/ research institution
     4.   be in the early stages of their professional careers, more precisely: the applicants  should
            4. 1) not yet be of full professorial rank but have a working contract in a university/ college
            4. 2) be under 40 years of age at the day of the application deadline.
Therefore for the application deadline of April 30, 2017, applicants should be born ON or AFTER April 30, 1977.
The maximum age may be increased by up to three years in the case of an individual with a broken career pattern (applicants who wish to apply for the April 30, 2017 deadline should be born on or after August, 31, 1974). This should be noted in the application together with the reason for the broken career pattern.
 Applications from women mathematicians are strongly encouraged.
Selection Criteria: The selection criteria is based on the the quality of the project and the benefit/added value for the home institution/country.
Selection: A selection committee decides which applications are successful.
The Selection Committee consists of
a) a member chosen by the Abel board
b) a member chosen by CDC
c) a third member chosen by the IMU EC
The time of members of the committee is three years for the members b) and c) with a maximum of two periods. The Abel Board decides for a).
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The grant can cover for one month and only for the applicant:
  1. travel cost to the host institution (economy flight or equivalent) 
  2. food expenses (daily expenses should not exceed USD 30 per day)
  3. accommodation expenses (monthly rent should not exceed USD 1200- in case you expect higher accommodation cost, please explain in your application the expected higher cost)
  4. travel health insurance
  5. visa cost
  6. local public transport up to USD 100 (for one month)
The total maximum amount is USD 5,000 per grantee.
Family expenses and any other cost cannot be covered.  
Duration of Scholarship: 1 month. In case the length of the visit exceeds one month, the candidate should provide evidence of financial support from the host institution to cover the living expenses beyond the first month.
How to Apply: Each application must include:
  1. A curriculum vitae including a list of recent publications
  2. A research plan for the visit
  3. An official invitation from the institution of the international research partner
  4. One letter of recommendation If the letter of recommendation is not written by the international research partner (the host), the application should include a statement from the host approving the research plan.
  5. A copy of the PhD certificate
  6. A statement about the current employment status/ position in the home institution signed and stamped by your employer. The statement should include the duration of your employment
  7. A budget estimation (see Financial Support)
  8. In case you are planning to stay for more than one month you must attached a proof of the matching funds for your living costs from the host institution
The application form can be found here.
Please always send your application form cc to “cdc.grants@mathunion.org”.
Your application can only be considered if you sent by the date of the application deadline all required documents.
Award Provider: The Abel Visiting Scholar Program is administered by the Commission for Developing Countries of the International Mathematical Union.

The ASC-IIAS Joint Fellowship Programme 2017 for Research Study in The Netherlands

Application Deadline: 
  • 15th March 2017
  • 15th September 2017
Offered annually? Yes
About the Award:  We are particularly interested in receiving fellowship proposals that go beyond a mere analysis of current issues associated with African-Asian comparative economic developments or Chinese investments in Africa — although none of these themes, if appraised critically and for their societal consequences, will of course be excluded. Our definition of Asia and Africa is broad and inclusive, Asia ranging from the Middle-East to the Pacific Coast, and Africa from North-Africa to the southern tip of the continent.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • Applications include a work plan of 1000 words maximum and a CV
  • Candidates should have a PhD
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Fellowship: Fellows will receive a monthly grant to cover the cost of living and housing
Duration of Fellowship: Fellowship has a maximum period of 6 months
How to Apply: Interested applicants are invited to email/post their applications, consisting of:
  • Application form  download here (Word)
  • Curriculum Vitae
  • Two letters of reference
    Please ensure that a minimum of two letters of reference are sent to us in confidence via email or post, commenting on the applicant’s academic abilities and the value of  the applicant’s research project.
Address for submission of applications, reference letters and/or queries:
(1) Email: iiasfellowships@iias.nl 
OR
(2) IIAS-ASC Fellowship Programme
c/o Ms. Sandra van der Horst
International Institute for Asian Studies
Rapenburg 59
2311 GJ Leiden
The Netherlands
Award Provider: The International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS)

Cologne Business School Bachelor, Master and Fulltime MBA Scholarships for International Students 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 15th June 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Germany
Type: Bachelor, Master and fulltime MBA
Eligibility: 
  1. The applicant is a non-German citizen
  2. A full application for a CBS program (Bachelor; Master, MBA) has been submitted
  3. The applicant provides excellent academic achievements
  4. In addition to that, outstanding social & cultural dedication or athletic accomplishments will also be considered
  5. The applicant has to write an essay about a topic which will be defined by the examination board
  6. The applicant is only allowed to hold one scholarship at a time
Selection: After the closing date for the application has passed, the submitted documents of all applicants will be examined by the examination board and the most talented applicants will be invited to a Skype interview with a member of the examination board. Until the 23rd of June 2017, all applicants will be informed if they were awarded and about the level of their scholarship.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The level of the scholarship (25%, 50% and 75% of the tuition fee) mainly depends on the skills and the financing need of the applicant.
Duration of Scholarship: 2 years
How to Apply: If you want to apply for a foreign student scholarship, please submit the following documents until 15th of June 2017 (cob) to: scholarship@cbs.de
  • Transcript of records and certificates of your latest school or academic degree
  • An essay about “How does (if) the slowing down of China affect Germany?” (max. 1000 words). Please use the CBS Style Guide (see in link below)
    Essays that do not follow the rules set out in the CBS Style Guide, will not be considered for the scholarship!
  • Proof of your social dedication or athletic achievements, if applicable
  • Personal letter and statement that indicates the applicant’s need for a scholarship
Award Provider: Cologne Business School

University of Sheffield Southern Africa Student Scholarship Fund (SUSASSF) 2017/2018 - UK

Application Deadline: 5th May 2017
Eligible Countries: Botswana,Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa,Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
To be taken at (country): UK
Type: Masters
Eligibility: You must have applied to study on one of the following courses to study at the University of Sheffield, starting in 2017:
  • MA International Development
  • MSc Environmental Change and International Development
  • MPH International Development
2. You must be classified as overseas for tuition fee purposes.
3. You must be self-funded to receive this award, i.e. not funded by a research council, government, private enterprise, charity or any similar organisation.
4. This scholarship cannot be awarded in conjunction with any other funding awards, either from the University of Sheffield or external sources.
5. Your mode of attendance must be full time.
6. Receipt of the scholarship is subject to successfully meeting any condition(s) attached to your offer before the deadline provided by the Admissions Service.
7. Receipt of the scholarship is subject to successfully receiving a visa to study at the University in September 2017.
8. You must be a national of and permanently domiciled, in Botswana,Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
Selection Criteria and Procedure: This is a competitive process and not all applications will be successful; a panel of senior members of staff will select the strongest application.
The panel will be looking to see in particular if you have:
  • provided a clear rationale for applying for a postgraduate course at the University of Sheffield,
  • outlined challenges to academic progress and detailed how these barriers have been overcome successfully,
  • outlined examples of work experience in the field of International Development,
  • clearly articulated future ambitions; these goals relate to the postgraduate degree you have applied for, and how your learning will benefit others from your country.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship offers the following support:
  • A full tuition fee waiver
  • Maintenance for University accommodation and a monthly stipend
Award Provider: University of Sheffield
Important Notes: The outcome of your application will be announced, via email, before Friday 30 June 2017.

Makerere University PhD Fellowship in Pre-eclampsia Research for African Researchers 2017 – Uganda

Application Deadline: 17th March 2017
To be taken at (country):  Uganda
About the Award: This is a three-year PhD fellowship to be undertaken at Makerere University. The successful candidate will work under the mentorship of Dr Annettee Nakimuli to develop a PhD research project to investigate the immunology and genetics of pre-eclampsia and its consequences among women attending Mulago Hospital. The PhD fellow is expected to undertake an international collaboration, with international co-supervision and mentorship. This collaboration may be within or outside Africa. This is intended to broaden and enhance the research experience and training. MUII-plus will support the PhD fellow to identify suitable collaborators.
Type: PhD, Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • Masters degree in Obstetrics and Gynaecology or any Basic Science Masters in a relevant area ( Immunology or Genetics)
  • Award will be conditional on acceptance for a PhD programme at Makerere University
Value of Fellowship: This fellowship includes University fees, student stipend, health insurance, one return airfare for student, one return airfare for overseas co-supervisor, travel insurance, visa costs, research funds, bench fees and costs for international conference attendance.
Duration of Fellowship:  Three years
How to Apply: Applications should be submitted to the MUII-plus Administrator, Mr Moses Kizza (mkizza@uvri.go.ug; moses.kizza@mrcuganda.org) and should consist of a cover letter (not more than 1 page), resume (not more than 4 pages), a personal statement (not more than 1 page), scanned copies of certificates and three letters from referees. The personal statement should include your aspirations for career progression in the next 8 years, research interests and any information you consider relevant. Closing date for receipt of applications is 17th March 2017. Ask the referees to send reference letters directly to Mr Kizza by the same date.
Award Provider: Makerere University

UFOs: The Myth That Won’t Die?

David Macaray


“Sometimes I think we’re alone in the universe. Sometimes I think we’re not. In either case, the thought is staggering.”
—R. Buckminster Fuller
The 19th century naturalist Thomas Huxley (1825-1895) made an astute observation. He noted that even though the universe has to be filled with all sorts of alien life—that, statistically, it is almost guaranteed to be teeming with both intelligent and unintelligent life forms—there is virtually no chance of any of them ever meeting any of the others. Why? Because it’s simply too big. As Donald Trump might say, the universe is “yuge.”
Pick up a high-powered rifle and fire it in the air. If the bullet were to travel for, say, 10,000 years at rifle-speed, the distance it traversed over that period would be so infinitesimally small compared to the dimensions of the universe, it wouldn’t even move the needle. How big is the universe? So big, no adjective can describe it.
And yet there are people who insist that aliens have not only landed on earth, but that they were the ones who created the dinosaurs, built the pyramids, and gave us the world’s great religions. After building the pyramids, they decided to hang around for a few centuries. Apparently, they now occupy themselves by doing rectal probes on the white, male population of rural Alabama.
It’s no coincidence that the so-called “UFO craze” in America began in the 1950s. This craze happened to coincide with the same period in which the U.S. Air Force and the Soviet Union began experimenting with all manner of exotic aircraft. There were literally thousands of UFO sightings during this decade. Thousands.
But if these super-advanced space aliens had been tooling around Earth in their flying saucers ever since the pyramids, why were there no reports earlier? Why were there no sightings until the 1950s—when the Air Force began doing its experiments, and everybody and his brother began reporting UFOs?
There was a ridiculous book written in 1968, called, “Chariots of the Gods,” by Erich von Daniken, a self-promoter and con man who had spent time in a Swiss mental institution. The book was filled with spectacular examples of “proof” that space aliens had visited Earth. Naturally, it became a best-seller.
One of von Daniken’s amazing examples was the famous Iron Pillar, located in Delhi, India, estimated to have been built around 400 AD. The author stated that, incredibly, even after all this time, (1) the 23-foot high iron edifice was totally rust-free, and (2) that no one had a clue how it was created. The world’s greatest scientists were dumbfounded. The greatest minds in the world were baffled. Clearly, it had to be the work of an advanced race of extraterrestrials.
As it happened, I was in Delhi years ago, and (along with thousands of other tourists) visited the Iron Pillar. While it was impressive, there were two things wrong with von Daniken’s claims: (1) The Iron Pillar does, in fact, have rust on it, and (2) after examining its metallurgy, scientists had no problem figuring out how it was constructed. While it was an amazing accomplishment for 400 AD, it was clear that this puppy had been built by ingenious Indians, not spacemen.
But, alas, as long as it remains fun to believe in space aliens, we’re going to believe in them. And because no one trusts the Government, we cling to the myth that we actually captured some of these little bastards and are keeping them locked up in Area 51. It’s all part of a massive cover-up. It’s a conspiracy. And it’s yuge.

Cameroon expels 500 Nigerians fleeing Boko Haram

Anderline Amamgbo

Thousands of Nigerians have been displaced by the Boko Haram insurgency. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees said it was “very concerned” after 517 Nigerians were expelled, including 313 who had requested asylum. As of February 17, more than 61,000 Nigerian refugees were at the Minawao camp in northeast Cameroon, but there are many others outside the site. Boko Haram, a militant Islamist group that has now fragmented into two factions, took up arms against the Nigerian government in 2009. The conflict, which has spread from northeast Nigeria to other countries in the Lake Chad region, has displaced more than 2 million people.
Over 500 Nigerians who fled into northern Cameroon to escape Boko Haram Islamists have been forced to return to Nigeria, the UN refugee agency said Wednesday. The UN agency said it planned to sign an agreement with Cameroon and Nigeria on March 2 for the voluntary return of 85,000 Nigerian refugees. But it also said it was continuing to urge the Cameroon government to offer asylum and respect international conventions against forced repatriation of asylum seekers. Boko Haram attacks have also driven people from Cameroon villages along the border. On Wednesday, the Red Cross distributed food to 2,500 displaced households at a camp in Kolofata, Cameroon.
In the meantime the Nigerian Government has approved the construction of the Cameroon-Nigeria border link bridge as part of its efforts to strengthen the bilateral ties between the two countries. The Minister of Power, Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola said the construction would swallow up $38 million, while $9 million would be for consultancy. Nigeria and its neighbours have cooperated closely in fighting Boko Haram, which split into a faction aligned with the Islamic State militant group (ISIS). Five countries—Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon, Chad and Benin—contribute troops to a regional taskforce aimed at routing the militants. Cameroonian troops have also conducted cross-border operations against Boko Haram. The militants have been pushed back in Nigeria, but still retain the capacity to carry out suicide and car bombings. Seven suicide bombers blew themselves up last week on the outskirts of Maiduguri, the Borno state capital in northeast Nigeria.

South Africa: Anti-immigrant protests erupt in Pretoria

Anderline Amamgbo

An anti-foreigner mob of about 1,000 people rampaged across South Africa’s capital city on Friday, assaulting and looting, in the latest dangerous escalation of tensions over immigration. The march nearly turned disastrous when the mob entered a Pretoria neighbourhood dominated by Somali and Nigerian migrants. Hundreds of foreigners confronted the mob, the two sides separated by only a few metres, wielding bricks, wooden poles and other weapons. Police finally managed to disperse them with stun grenades, rubber bullets and water cannons.
Many South Africans accuse the foreign migrants of causing unemployment and crime, despite evidence that the migrants create jobs by opening businesses and employing locals. Anti-foreigner attacks, which have erupted sporadically into deadly violence since 2008, have remained frequent in South Africa this year at a time of economic stagnation, high unemployment and rising crime. The attacks on foreign migrants – largely Nigerians, Zimbabweans and Congolese – have caused a growing rift between South Africa and other African countries. The Nigerian government has protested the attacks this week, calling on the African Union to “intervene urgently” to prevent more bloodshed. The violence has sparking retaliatory attacks in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, where one group of protesters on Thursday ransacked a shop owned by MTN, a South African cellphone company. After protesting the anti-foreigner violence in South Africa, they broke into the shop and stole cellphones and laptops. Police were deployed to guard the shop.
South Africa has suffered anti-foreigner violence in the past, mostly notably in 2008 and 2015 when dozens of foreigners were killed by mobs. Attacks have erupted again in Johannesburg and Pretoria over the past week, on the pretext of targeting drug-dealers and brothels. Dozens of foreigners saw their homes ransacked, robbed or destroyed in arson attacks. In one case, a mob invaded a Nigerian church, assaulting the Nigerian pastor and his congregation and leaving them with bloody injuries.
At the same time, another group announced the formation of an anti-foreigner political party, South African First, which vowed to force all foreigners to leave South Africa within 48 hours of winning power. The violence in Pretoria on Friday began when an anti-foreigner group – supported by the new political party – obtained permission to march to government offices. The group carried an official memorandum blaming foreigners for a long list of problems: everything from illegal taxis and untidy churches to unfair hair-salon competition. It even demanded a government program to teach foreigners to speak more politely. “They are arrogant and they don’t know how to talk to people,” the memorandum concluded. At least one person in the anti-foreigner march carried a placard asking U.S. President Donald Trump for support. “Donald come and save us,” the sign read. “Foreigners must go,” the mob sang after one assault. “We will kill them. They are destroying South Africa.” they said.
South African President Jacob Zuma seemed to be supporting the marchers, saying that the organizers were merely protesting against crime. “It was not an anti-foreigners march,” he said on Friday, disregarding all of the evidence. Amnesty International said the South African government has fuelled the anti-foreigner attacks since 2008 by failing to arrest the perpetrators and tolerating a “toxic populist rhetoric that blames and scapegoats refugees and migrants.” The Nelson Mandela Foundation, a charity created by the late president and anti-apartheid hero, said it was shocked that the authorities had given permission for a “march of hatred” in Pretoria on Friday. The Nigerian embassy in South Africa set up a hotline where Nigerians could report attacks on foreigners. The Nigerian government advised its citizens in South Africa to be vigilant, and it urged South Africa “to bring perpetrators of these deplorable acts of violence to justice.”

Australian youth pushed into unpaid “work experience”

Robert Campion

A recent report has shown that amid the slowdown of the Australian economy and the growth of unemployment, thousands of young people are being compelled to perform unpaid work, in the hopes of securing permanent employment.
The government-sponsored report, entitled Unpaid Work Experience in Australia: Prevalence, nature and impact, was carried out by several universities. While the report tried to put a positive spin on the phenomenon, its contents give a glimpse into the lives of a generation facing perpetual job insecurity.
The report was based on a survey of 3,800 young people around the country. It found that a staggering 58 percent of respondents aged 18–29 had participated in at least some unpaid work experience (UWE) in the previous five years. The figure was estimated at 26 percent for those aged 30–64 and 34 percent across all ages.
The length of UWE varied widely. Over a third of the young people surveyed had worked unpaid for over a month. For 10 percent, it lasted six months or longer. Much of this was accrued on a part-time basis.
Only 27 percent of respondents were offered paid employment by the host company or organisation. Half of those surveyed participated in unpaid work as part of a university or tertiary course. But significantly, 47 percent signed up for UWE as individuals, in an attempt to break into the labour market.
The workers faced precarious conditions, with virtually no rights or legal protections. Over 30 percent of those who chose to comment, said their experience was negative. They cited dangers to health and safety, injuries, insufficient amenities, including toilets, and confusion over whether they would be covered in the event of an injury or accident. Others said they had been forced into menial tasks that gave them no experience in the relevant field.
Some reported they had been “exploited” and simply used as “free labour.” Examples in the report included, “a musician asked to work for ‘exposure’ rather than payment” and “a pastry maker used for 160 hours of work experience, told he was a great worker, but then let go at the end as the patisseries knew they would get another free worker.”
Respondents said they faced financial hardship, including struggling with the cost of living, childcare costs and relying on support from family and friends. The report mentions similar studies in the UK, which have revealed that professions such in journalism, law and finance are dominated by those from “privileged backgrounds” not merely because they have access to social networks, but because their families are able to bear the financial costs, particularly in expensive cities such as London.
Following the report’s publication, a number of young people commented on their experience. Michael Hogan, quoted in news.com.au, spoke about the pressures of UWE placements for teaching students: “Imagine this day. You’re at work at 7.30 am ready to make another impact and show how good you are, then you don’t leave until 4.30 pm because you’re getting assessed and unpacking what you did that day and then you get home and you’re evaluating and looking back at feedback and what you did wrong. It’s very stressful, you almost get to the point where you break. Sometimes you don’t put the pen down until 8 pm.”
Sophia, who worked for nine months as an intern in the media industry, was sometimes required to work 12-hour days without any pay. “You felt like you couldn’t say no because there were a million other people who would happily take your spot if you refused to do something or left on time,” she explained.
Commenting on the prospects facing young people, Sophia said: “I think it’s so competitive now, everyone has a tertiary education, so the only way to differentiate yourself is to have first-hand experience or a post-grad degree. When we hire at my current job I instantly dismiss anyone who hasn’t had past industry experience—internships have been normalised and are expected rather than being a bonus.”
The prevalence of unpaid work is a product of a decades-long assault on the jobs, wages and conditions of the working class, presided over by successive Liberal-National and Labor governments, in collaboration with the thoroughly corporatised unions.
The Labor governments of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating deregulated the economy, beginning in the 1980s, creating the conditions for the destruction of hundreds of thousands of jobs. The unions have enforced the shutdown of large sections of manufacturing and the erosion of longstanding working conditions, leading to an unprecedented growth in various forms of insecure employment. According to various reports, up to 50 percent of the entire workforce is employed in casual and part-time positions.
Australia’s youth face an historic reversal in social conditions, with rising housing costs, student debt, and chronic under-employment. Apprenticeships, TAFE courses and other forms of vocational education have been gutted.
Today, government measures are aimed at using young people, ever more directly, as an ultra-cheap labour force, to drive down the conditions of the working class as a whole.
The federal Liberal-National government is rolling out a ‘Prepare, Trial, Hire’ (PaTH) policy. Coming into effect in April, it will push youth who have been unemployed for six months or more into 30–50 hours of work a fortnight. They will receive an additional payment of just $200, on top of their meagre unemployment benefit, effectively a wage of $4 per hour. The government will also reimburse employers with $1,000 for taking on an “intern.”
The policy is aimed at creating an “intern army” of 120,000 young people over a period of four years. They will take up virtually unpaid positions in fields such as motor trades, hospitality and retail. The Labor Party welcomed PaTH, having previously supported moves to force all long-term unemployed people under the age of 50 into “work for the dole” programs.

Border issues and Brexit dominate Northern Ireland elections

Steve James

The March 2 elections for the 90 seats of the Northern Ireland Assembly will take place in conditions of mounting political turmoil.
The Brexit crisis, followed by the election of Donald Trump to the US presidency, has greatly exacerbated divisions between Europe and America and is provoking open conflict between the UK government and the European Union (EU). In addition, the British ruling class and all its political parties are split between Brexit supporters and those whose interests are entangled with continued British membership of the EU.
Whatever the outcome of the election, the power-sharing arrangements between pro-British unionist and Irish nationalist parties are coming unstuck.
The election was triggered by the resignation of Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness and Sinn Fein’s refusal to immediately nominate a replacement. Sinn Finn seized on the long-running Renewable Heat Initiative (RHI) scandal as an opportunity to attack their unionist rivals and partners in power, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).
Sinn Fein has stated they will not re-enter government with the DUP under leader Arlene Foster until the conclusion of a public inquiry into RHI. Party spokesman, West Belfast MLA Pat Sheehan, insisted there would be no revival of the assembly, housed in Belfast’s Stormont Palace, without an Irish language act, a bill of rights and agreement on how to deal with the “legacy issues” of “the Troubles”.
Between 1969 and 1998, Northern Ireland was torn apart by an extended low-level war between the British Army and forces loyal to the Protestant-dominated Ulster (Northern Ireland) government on the one hand and Irish republican forces dominated by the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) on the other.
The conflict resulted in thousands of deaths and was brought to an end under the auspices of Tony Blair’s Labour government, when, backed by the EU and the US, a deal was put together which opened the door PIRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein, to share power in the Northern Ireland government with the pro-British unionists. The 1998 Good Friday Agreement and subsequent deals allowed the British military presence to be vastly reduced, the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish republic to be de-militarised and facilitated a considerable flow of EU funds and global investment into the formerly investment-starved north.
Political life, as codified in the agreement, remained divided on sectarian and “community” lines, with parties being required to identify themselves as Unionist or Nationalist. The vicious anti-Catholic discrimination which characterised Northern Ireland from its founding in 1921 at the conclusion of the Irish War of Independence morphed into a new form of institutionalised sectarianism, which served and serves to divide the working class.
Since 2007, Sinn Fein and their former arch enemies, the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and then later the DUP have run Northern Ireland in the mutual interests of rival cliques of the upper middle class seeking to fill their pockets while jointly imposing austerity measures.
Deepening social inequality and a host of ever more egregious corruption scandals have exposed both ruling parties and the institutions they uphold as hostile to the interests of the working class.
In addition, the British decision to leave the EU is generating enormous alarm in both parts of the island. While factions of the ruling elite in the north see departure from the EU as offering new opportunities to slash taxes and drive down living standards, the dominant faction in the south and a significant section of the northern bourgeoisie extending beyond Sinn Fein’s normal constituency see Brexit as undermining both trade with Britain and Ireland’s position in transatlantic transactions between the US and the EU.
Concerns are centred on the border, which 20 years ago was marked with heavily fortified military and police checkpoints and patrolled by British Army helicopters but which is now almost invisible. Today over 200 crossing points carry around 177,000 lorries, 208,000 vans and 1.85 million cars every month. Any disruption to this flow of goods, commuters and travelers threatens an economic collapse on both sides. Theresa May’s Conservative government have, however, made clear they intend to leave the EU’s customs union, thereby making the 1921 partition line an external EU border.
The British and Irish governments have repeatedly insisted that no border checks will be imposed, but no one has yet come up with a means to explain how this can be done. Instead, the border and even the status of Northern Ireland are becoming one of many bargaining chips in the high stakes struggle between Britain and the EU over the terms of the country’s departure.
Following recent talks between Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach) Enda Kenny, and the President of the European Commission, Jean Claude Juncker, Kenny and Juncker announced their shared aim that, according to Kenny, “the language of what is contained in the Good Friday Agreement will also be contained in the negotiations outcome”—referring to the a final deal between the EU and Britain. “In other words, if at some future time, whenever that might be if it were to occur, that Northern Ireland would have ease of access to join as a member of the European Union again.”
Northern Ireland voted by 56 to 44 percent to remain in the EU, but the DUP campaigned for a “leave” vote and even served as a conduit for pro-Brexit cash to be funnelled into “leave” adverts in London, thereby avoiding limits on referendum expenditure.
Deep divisions between the EU and the US that have emerged in recent years over Ireland’s status as a low tax haven for US tech and chemical companies are further complicated by the election of Trump.
The EU has demanded the Irish government collect €13 billion in taxes from, among others, the US-based Apple Corporation. There is widespread speculation as to the impact of Trump’s “America First” agenda in exacerbating these tensions and the impact this will have on Ireland.
Irish journalist Fintan O’Toole questioned whether post-Brexit Britain securing a quick and unfavourable trade deal with the US would mean that the Northern Ireland border would become a geopolitical fault line not only between Britain and the EU but between European and US-dominated power blocs.
This is the context of Sinn Fein’s decision to effectively shut down the Northern Ireland government, at least for the duration of the RHI enquiry and pending full implementation of outstanding issues from the Good Friday Agreement. Direct rule from London, something the British government is keen to avoid, will necessarily be imposed instead. Sinn Fein’s aim would seem to be to marginalise Stormont during the Brexit negotiations, while pushing forward their case for a new “border poll” on the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein is the only all Ireland party and has been mooted as a coalition partner for both the main bourgeois parties in the south, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail.
Foster’s DUP warned in response of a “brutal” election, which can only mean a savagely sectarian campaign harking back to the days of the Protestant hegemony. This month, the DUP voted, like the vast majority of MPs, to trigger Article 50 in the House of Commons. It also voted against an amendment put forward by Northern Ireland’s nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) to preserve rights for the “people of Northern Ireland” contained in the Good Friday Agreement and upheld by the EU. Foster has reiterated her intention to cut the corporate tax rate to 12.5 percent in line with the Republic of Ireland, or even as low as 10 percent.

Spanish port workers prepare national strike against EU reforms

Alejandro López & Alex Lantier 

Spanish port workers unions have called nine days of strikes starting on March 6, as anger builds among workers against the conservative Popular Party (PP) government’s port liberalization decree.
The decree, which still requires parliamentary ratification, would be a historic attack on the labour conditions of port workers in Spain, in line with similar attacks across southern Europe. It opens the door to mass redundancies, wage cuts of up to 60 percent, using temp agencies to provide low-paid contract workers, and slashing safety conditions.
By taking strike action, the port workers are entering into political struggle against the PP and the European Union (EU): the European Court of Justice has ruled that Spain must impose the reform or face sanctions. Their struggle can only be waged by mobilizing broader sections of the working class, in Spain and internationally, against EU austerity. The fight must be taken out of the hands of the unions, which have called the action only because, as wildcat actions spread, they feared totally losing control of the situation.
The State Coordination of Sea Workers (CETM), the main port workers union, has until now been doing everything it can to delay, break up, and call off struggles against the decree. Two weeks ago, it called a three-day strike to take place every other hour on February 20, 22, and 24—which it then called off in order to continue talks with the PP, which has pledged not to back down on the reform.
Finally, port workers took matters into their own hands, launching wildcat strikes in Valencia, Alicante, and Cádiz, where port companies’ association Anesco (the National Association of Stevedoring and Ship Consignment Companies) reported a 23 percent fall in productivity. CETM officials initially downplayed these reports, claiming this was because workers lacked “motivation.”
It is precisely such treacherous actions by the unions that have emboldened the PP to try to impose the liberalization decree, overturning an earlier agreement between Anesco and the CETM.
The strike can only proceed as a struggle against the port reform if workers reject the straitjacket that the union bureaucracy will seek to impose on it. The CETM has no intention of paralyzing Spain’s 46 major ports. Rather, it is again proposing to strike on alternate days at each port, undermining the impact of the walkout.
The CETM is further trying to lull workers to sleep, by advancing the false perspective that they can rely on pro-capitalist opposition parties, like the Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE) and Podemos, to block attacks on the port workers in parliament. In a statement published last week, the CETM appealed “to the common sense of the other parliamentary groups, so they do not support a modification of the port system which is, on the other hand, one of the most efficient in Europe.”
It also quoted CETM spokesman Antolín Goya: “We will initiate union mobilizations and actions to re-establish communication, demand companies to make every effort to negotiate, and explain to parliamentary groups the error of an imposed norm that destabilizes a sector and destroys jobs.”
The PSOE and Podemos are playing along, making empty criticisms of the decree. On Sunday, PSOE regional premiers Susana Díaz (Andalucía) and Ximo Puig (Valencia) complained that the decree “does not seek consensus and understanding between employers and workers.”
Unidos Podemos spokesman Félix Alonso lamented that the PP “seems not to be aware of the economic and social repercussions of a solution that has not been agreed upon” by the unions and the port companies. He warned that if the PP imposes the decree outright, this will undermine the authority of the unions among the workers. In future, he said, “any agreement between the unions and companies will be a dead letter.”
Claims that the PSOE and Podemos will help port workers defend themselves against PP attacks are a political fraud. These parties are servants of finance capital, whose international allies impose similar measures in other countries. In 2016, after two years of struggle, Portugal’s Socialist Party government oversaw an agreement between the Portuguese Dockers Union and port employers’ associations to liberalize the sector, imposing a wage scale going from €850 to €2,300 per month.
It was Podemos’ ally in Greece, the Syriza-led government, that imposed the privatization of the port of Piraeus in the face of strike action by Greek dock workers. After striking for one month, the Federation of Greek Port Employees (OMYLE) called off the strike as it began to have a real financial impact on the ports. This was another testament to the role of middle-class, populist parties like Syriza and Podemos as enforcers of the diktat of the financial aristocracy.
At most, the PSOE and Podemos may try to delay and manoeuvre, in order to better impose attacks on the workers without provoking a major strike against Spain’s minority PP government, which is very weak and unpopular. They fear that a major port strike could trigger far broader struggles in the working class—ending the “social peace” overseen by the unions, potentially bringing down the PP government and doing irreparable damage to their economic and political interests.
PSOE member César Ramos spoke for these concerns when he said, “we should be thinking more about social peace than the €21 million fine [from the EU for not imposing the liberalization decree]. That amount is insignificant compared to what we can lose if the conflict is maintained in ports.”
Spanish business is now deeply dependent on exports and fears a port strike that would halt the flow of goods. Spanish exports have risen €65.3 billion since the 2008 economic crash, as successive PSOE and PP governments’ austerity measures slashed wages and conditions. While Spain’s economy collapsed, and mass unemployment spread, Spain also emerged as a profitable export platform for international capital.
William Chislett of the state-funded Elcano Royal Institute said, “Faced with plummeting demand from consumers, companies and the government, companies have had no alternative but to seek out markets abroad, or in some cases face going to the wall, particularly small and medium-sized ones. Exports thus became a matter of survival.”
Port management and the PP are in a weak position, and they are acutely aware of explosive political discontent in the European and American working class after the election of Trump, which provoked mass protests internationally.
Precisely because of this, however, the ruling class will rely all the more on the treachery of the union bureaucracies and take ruthless measures against the workers. The media have already launched a hysterical and provocative propaganda campaign—coming from defenders of the Spanish government and the EU, which since 2008 have handed trillions of euros to the banks—accusing port workers of being “privileged” members of a “labour aristocracy.”
This makes it all the more urgent for workers internationally to support Spanish port workers as strike action develops, and for the workers to take the struggle out of the hands of the unions, organizing it on the basis of an internationalist and socialist perspective.