15 Sept 2020

Zuckerberg wants to “Change” the World with his Philanthropy

Zeenat Khan

Since 2014, we all have seen how Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg constantly talks about changing the world. Will his billionaire philanthropy actually save the world? His estimated wealth to date is $111 billion USD. It makes him the fifth richest man on the planet. In 2017, while Zuck was nabbing an honorary degree from Harvard College, Harvard’s 28th President Drew Faust immortalized the famous dropout with the following statement: “Mark Zuckerberg’s leadership has profoundly altered the nature of social engagement worldwide. Few inventions in modern times can rival Facebook in its far- reaching impact on how people around the globe interact with one another…And few individuals can rival Mark Zuckerberg in his drive to change our world through the innovative use of technology, as well as his commitment to advance science, enhance education, and expand opportunity through the pursuit of philanthropy.” Wow! I never thought that I will live to see such abundant praises and weighty endorsement from none other than an elite university president (a historian of the Civil War and the American South) for a dropout.
After dropping out from Harvard, Zuck promised his mother that one day he will go back and get that degree. Sure enough he made good on his promise or rather Harvard gave that honorary degree to him on a silver platter in 2017. It gets better. Zuck was also the featured commencement speaker for the graduating class of 2017. He was very happy that no one will now call him a “college dropout.” Such a generous gesture was not forgotten by the new graduate. Later in the year, in November, he had rewarded his now beloved alma mater with the following announcement: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan want to use their wealth to increase opportunities for the next generation. According to the Boston Globe, “Zuckerberg and Chan are granting Harvard University $12.1 million to encourage low-income undergraduate students to pursue jobs in public service.”
Essentially this exchange between Harvard and Facebook’s “golden boy” CEO sheds light on centuries-old adage, “Money talks,” and reaffirms wealth is powerful. Twelve years after dropping out, he got that Harvard degree because he created Facebook which at the time was worth $400 billion. He simply got that diploma without doing the hard work. His graduating batch mates of the class of 2006 all had worked their butts off to get that diploma from the prestigious university. Now are we supposed to be impressed by wealthy Zuck because his recent mantra is: He wants to change the world?
When one becomes a billionaire at age twenty-six, one can possibly be arrogant, and say money can be a substitute for real education. Very early into their philanthropic gestures, I came away feeling that they are also two-faced, and mostly out there to help themselves into millions more. After professing their love for the disadvantaged, and the needy, people like Zuckerberg and Chan turn to social projects to feel a sense of accomplishment. Charity possibly gives them a way out to absolve them of the moral dilemma and psychological pressure of having an insane amount of money. It probably eases their conscience due to ethical conflict.
Back in 2014, Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla made their debut as philanthropy’s cutest couple, the younger version of Bill and Melinda Gates. The new philanthropist couple of Silicon Valley is believed to be at the top of the nation’s highest income bracket. Giving to charity improves the couple’s self-image, and further signals their elevated social status. At the beginning of their philanthropic work, they were being boastful and made a big announcement that they were donating $120 million to San Francisco’s Bay Area schools. I recall seeing Priscilla in her first television interview (since she wed the billionaire). She told NBC television’s Savannah Guthrie why as a couple they felt compelled to give. To live a life well also means to give to the community, she noted. According to her, they live in an affluent neighborhood in the Bay area, and few miles down the road there is extreme poverty and people struggling to survive. Knowing that, how can she sleep well at night? She feels “giving back” is a social obligation to her and Mark.
In 2014, Zuckerberg was considered a self-made billionaire and his own estimated fortune was $6.9 billion. Donating $120 million every four years to a suffering school district is a small drop in the bucket. It’s true that to the suffering students, Zuckerberg’s motives don’t matter. They are just happy to be in a freshly painted classroom, decked with new tabletop computers, and new text books. When the wealthy people donate millions, the public view gets clouded and it prevents them from seeing that Zuckerberg is mostly driven by profit-making motives.
The “dynamic” Zuckerberg duos giving $120 million in improving the suffering school districts was not necessarily a great move. It may have solved the immediate problems, but surely had distracted the educators and the school system to rethink a policy that has long term answers. With donated money, one cannot go very far where education system is concerned. In situations like this, a much larger scale government initiative to change the conditions of the school system would have been the better solution. The government might be more likely to focus on the education projects if they weren’t being helped by charities with their millions.
For Mark and Priscilla, it was the beginning of a great public relations move to improve their image as “nice people.” Starting early on with philanthropy perhaps had released the emotional pressure they were under for having billions. The couple did not come from old money families. Though it appears Mark’s family had money as his parents had sent him to the Phillips Exeter Academy (a co-ed boarding school in New Hampshire). On the other hand, Priscilla’s hard working immigrant parents were only able to send her to Harvard because in the financial aid package she was offered a full scholarship.
It won’t be too far-fetched to think that Mark and Priscilla are actually modeling after Bill and Melinda Gates. Zuckerberg had made similar donations in 2010, when he gave $100 million to refurbish the run down public schools of the city of Newark, New Jersey. At the time, it was seen by many as an attempt to deflect the negative attention from the movie that came out in 2010, the Social Network based on his life.  Facebook’s rather sketchy origin story was famously sanctified by Aaron Sorkin in the 2010 movie. Mark’s publicist knew that donating large sums of money was good press for him.
It is ironic that Zuckerberg gave money to schools, whereas he himself was a dropout. However, adopting the U.S. education system was a gallant move that was undoubtedly orchestrated by his publicist. Publicists make a key strategy to focus on communities where the donors live. That way the donation makes a positive impression of them to the public. The school system is in dire need for cash, and they must upgrade everything to give the deprived kids a decent education. These schools are far behind in the national average in terms of test scores in standardized testing. As a daughter of struggling immigrants, Priscilla claims to have understood their plight, and wanted to support the community with a huge donation. Outwardly, she made a strong case to support her views. Their donated $120 M went towards different innovative classroom projects to update age old systems from Kindergarten through 8th grade classes. Such philanthropic act was welcomed by the area’s neglected schools. There is nothing ominous about giving back to one’s community. Then why so many people are skeptical about their motives?
Zuckerberg constantly talks about changing the world. How does he plan on changing it other than the obvious i.e. 2.8 billion people use at least one of his services — Facebook, Messenger, WhatsApp or Instagram? Initially, it was to revamp the faulty education system that was producing unintelligent kids. Then he wanted to do something entirely different with his money. According to a recent report by Vice News, Zuckerberg and wife wanted to “throw their money where it counts.” “The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative(CZI) — a limited-liability company founded by Zuck and his wife Priscilla Chan back in 2015 that’s dedicated to “charitable efforts” — has publicly committed $45 million “into groups aligned with two political causes: ending the era of mass incarceration and fixing the affordable housing crisis in American cities.”
Chan with husband Mark Zuckerberg in Prague, Czech Republic, 2013
Chan married Zuckerberg on May 19, 2012, the day after Facebook’s stock market launch.
CZI wanting to focus on something different is not entirely based on altruistic motives. “The announcement is also significant for what it tells us about the role Zuckerberg wants to play in the political process. It seems clear, based on how the money is being spent, that Zuckerberg isn’t particularly interested in being a leading-light hobbyist philanthropist seeking to raise awareness — he wants to leverage his wealth in the political arena to change laws and fix problems. The groups funded by CZI are chosen according to their track records on the introduction and passing of referendums, successfully lobbying for legislation, and swaying the minds of city officials on key issues. And looking at some of the most recent recipients of CZI funds — which includes a number of bona fide superstars (in the world of lobbying, at least), such as Families Against Mandatory MinimumsAlliance for Safety and Justice, and the American Conservative Union Foundation’s Center for Criminal Justice Reform — you can tell success is a prerequisite.” Go figure.
“Even by our current dismal standards, however, Zuck is full of crap.” “Point one: the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is not a charity. It’s a limited liability corporation (LLC) that, like any other company, can donate to actual charities but can also invest in for-profit companies. Point two: this is all about control.”— Counterpunch.org
It is alleged that Zuckerberg started Facebook in his Harvard College dorm room to get Non-Jewish girls. Of course, Zuck denies it. In 2018, he had to testify before Congress to clarify whether Facebook was invented to rank hot girls on campus. He said it was his “other” website Hotmash that was developed to do it. After facing backlash from students, he shut down the sexist site saying, “He doesn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings” by making fun of their looks, and by comparing their photos with farm animals. But the allegations never went away. Another accusation that he does not accept is that Facebook was not originally his brainchild. In the movie, the Social Network, Zuckerberg was portrayed as a greedy corporate type who stole the idea of Facebook from his fellow Harvard students. It has been suspected that the original Facebook idea came from fellow Harvard students Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, identical twins, and their partner Divya Narendra. Zuckerberg sidestepped them, and created the early version of Facebook and made it his own. In 2008, Facebook settled their case with the Winklevoss brothers for $65 million dollars. Therefore, in the mind of the public, Zuckerberg still remains a “geek” who is “intellectually corrupt.”
Zuckerberg is not shy about saying that he wants to control the Internet. Facebook investors currently estimate the net worth of FB as of September 11, 2020 is $763.74B. In 2014, it was about $80 billion, and Zuckerberg’s share was about 25%. “Zuckerberg still owns over 375 million Facebook shares with a current value of over $98 billion, making him the fifth-richest person in the world, behind Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Bernard Arnault and Warren Buffett.” He recently dropped to number five after selling 2.9 million shares (worth more than $526 million).
It is very likely that the money that Zuck and his wife will donate to charities will come from corporate funds designated for philanthropy. It will not make a dent into their personal fortune. Philanthropy of most corporate magnates is often hyped, as they usually do not disclose where the funds are coming from, nor are they obligated to. Last year, Zuckerberg’s personal wealth rose by a mind-boggling $27.3 billion, says a report.
After having made billions, the wealthy like the Zuckerbergs set out to do philanthropic work in the name of social justice. Their savvy lawyers set up tax evading trusts for the ultra-wealthy families in the form of a foundation. They hire professional staff with great vision who allocates the benefactor’s wealth to worthy causes. Zuckerberg’s lawyers set up Silicon Valley Community Foundation to do his charitable work. At the end of the day, “it is all about generating positive press for charitable giving,” for the world’s richest people such as Mark and Priscilla Zuckerberg. Such publicity has lots of positive benefits. For example, while passing legislation, the US Congress most likely will take all his charitable initiatives into account, and will reward him through various tax breaks. That will add millions more for them in the bank.
So how much does Mark Zuckerberg really make per year? It depends on how much Facebook declares as its dividend. For example, if in the year 2020 Facebook declares a dividend of $500 million, he will earn $125 million. Again, the dividend will depend on how Facebook is faring in the market place at that time. It is interesting that since 2013, Zuckerberg had started to pay himself a low salary of only $1 per year to increase the company profit. Facebook spent more than $23 million on security and private air travel for CEO Mark Zuckerberg in 2019, according to a financial filing published on April 10, 2020. That’s up from about $20 million spent in 2018 and $9.1 million Facebook spent in 2017. Zuckerberg’s annual salary remains $1.
Every few years, Zuck gets bored with the charities that he and his wife are supporting. Like a little boy, he needs something new to play with. It seems he is in a constant battle to seek validation from other wealthy billionaires. The process perhaps helps him to cultivate “internal stimulus” to make him more creative. After all, we are talking about a quirky millennial dad who in 2016 announced after the birth of his child that he will build an A.I. to run his home and to help him with his work. Now that he is bored in changing the education system, ending the era of mass incarceration, and the housing crisis etc., he has come up with a new agenda. His latest interest is to preserve the “integrity” of the upcoming November election. Zuckerberg has announced that he and his wife will donate $300m “to preserve [the] integrity of our elections” by funding voting access initiatives.” He said, “he was committed to expanding voting access and providing “local and state officials across the country with the resources, training and infrastructure necessary to ensure that every voter who intends to cast a ballot is able to…His announcement comes as Facebook — the most popular social media platform in the world — faced increasing criticism over its handling of political misinformation, as well as repeated failures to prevent fake news and dangerous conspiracy theories from spreading online.” This sudden shift is different from his all other prior initiatives and was met with fierce criticisms. “Mark Zuckerberg has raked in $40,800,000,000 since the pandemic began,” former US Secretary of Labor Robert Reich wrote in a tweet. “That’s 136 times the $300 million donation he hopes will distract us from all the ways he’s allowed fascism and misinformation to erode our democracy.” “Billionaire philanthropy won’t save us,” he continued, adding: “Tax the rich.”
Is former Labor Secretary too eager to predict doom and gloom? Or some people are being naïve if they think that Zuck will be able to live up to his mission statement by bringing the world closer together? Will spending billions change the world from all its problems? If God put Mark Zuckerberg on this earth to change the fate of the millions of people who are suffering, and to bring major transformations to global society, then he should change himself first. He must stop acting like a modern day messiah, and change the unethical practices by his corporation. When people no longer will consider Facebook is unscrupulous by design, it is free of scandals, and its business practices are not being questioned, and Mark Zuckerberg has no wish to dominate the global market like other tech billionaires, only then he can set out to do good around the world.

Hospital merger between Beaumont and Advocate-Aurora Health faces internal opposition

Kevin Reed

The planned merger between Detroit-area Beaumont Health and the Chicago-Milwaukee-based Advocate-Aurora Health has been delayed amid growing opposition among Beaumont staff as well as a group of donors who are calling for the current management team to be fired.
On Friday, Becker’s Hospital Review reported that Mark Shaevsky, a former Beaumont Health board vice chair and trustee, sent a letter to Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel calling for the removal of CEO John Fox, COO Carolyn Wilson and CMO David Wood. Shaevsky, who was a board member at Beaumont for 17 years, said in an interview with Crain’s Detroit Business that patient safety concerns raised by staff had not been sufficiently addressed.
Meanwhile, Becker’s reported that a group of Beaumont donors met with the health system board of director’s vice chair to express their views and that they are preparing a letter calling for more physicians and nurses to be added to the board. The letter will also call for a halt “to the merger with Advocate-Aurora for at least one year and fire the system's CEO, COO and CMO and bring in an interim management team.”
The Beaumont board confirmed that a vote on the planned merger with Advocate-Aurora had been delayed pending a detailed review of the results of a staff survey that showed significant lack of confidence by doctors and nurses in the leadership of the eight-hospital system in the Detroit Metropolitan area.
As reported by the WSWS in early August, a group of Beaumont doctors circulated a petition denouncing the elevation by management of financial considerations above patient care. The physicians’ “no-confidence” petition called on the 16-member Beaumont board of directors to remove CEO Fox and CMO Wood.
In a cover letter that accompanied their petition, the Beaumont doctors described “a continual erosion of the standard of patient care that we all have worked so hard to maintain,” while noting, “changes instituted by the current leadership have been done to increase the financial status of the organization.” The letter also stated that the physicians and the community “now face the imminent threat of a merger with a Chicago-based hospital system which would remove any local control of our hospitals.”
Many members of the Beaumont staff were reluctant to sign the petition or participate in the surveys given management’s record of retaliation against employees who speak up. Doctors reported that Beaumont management had fired top doctors who objected to its decisions.
According to a statement from the author of the petition, “Employed doctors don't know what to do. They are worried about retaliation. So many private doctors now are sending their patients elsewhere, Henry Ford, Michigan Medicine, Cleveland Clinic. The feeling is Beaumont is more concerned with profits than quality.”
The doctors are opposed to a series of decisions by Beaumont management, including: a new physician contract as part of the Advocate-Aurora deal that would drastically cut salaries and implement an onerous non-compete clause in the Midwest; outsourcing of anesthesiology services to a third party vendor and the replacement of more than 100 certified registered staff nurses; and hundreds of layoffs to cut costs and make the deal more attractive.
The mergers and consolidation of hospital networks is part of a corporate trend across the country and represents the subordination of critical health care services to the financial performance upon which the massive salaries of top executives are based. Beaumont’s Fox has a $6 million annual salary, Wood garners $2 million and Advocate-Aurora’s CEO Jim Skogsbergh makes $11.7 million.
These executive compensation programs are based on the intensification of the exploitation of doctors, nurses, technicians and hospital support staff, which is borne out by the details of the new salary program being pushed at Beaumont. According to the doctors, the CARTS 2.0 (Clinical, Administrative, Research, Teaching and Strategic) pay system would cut the income of 1,300 staff physicians by up to 50 percent.
One doctor told Modern Healthcare, “Beaumont is trying to wiggle out of what I think is fair compensation. They have all sorts of excuses to pay us at the 25th percentile instead of the 80th percentile where many of us are at based on our productivity. They are offering way below market value for us.”
Several doctors also said that Beaumont told them the salary cuts were due to the DOJ corporate integrity agreement, but they do not believe this explanation. The dramatic drop in compensation is far below any concerns that the DOJ would have over excessive pay.
The non-compete clause that doctors are required to sign states that they cannot leave and go to another hospital system within a 35-mile radius for three years. Responding to the objections by doctors about the non-compete language, Fox said in typical corporate-speak, “We have set the criteria for the non-compete that's where Beaumont is providing extensive value to employed doctors for their practice.”
Another cost cutting measure that comes at the expense of the doctors is Beaumont’s elimination of teaching stipends. One doctor told Modern Health, “The employed clinical faculty had been told to help develop the medical school curriculum, provide teaching and serve on committees and support research with medical students — all without any additional compensation.”
While the corporate executives at Beaumont are looking at every dime they spend and cutting costs for critical staff involved directly in providing patient care, the hospital spent a reported $1.8 million to hire “labor consultants” to prevent a union organizing effort among nurses by the Michigan Nurses Association (MNA) dating back to 2019.
According to a report in the Guardian, Beaumont management hired the union-busting firm Kulture Consulting, which was co-founded by James Hulsizer, the former director of labor relations for Donald Trump’s casino properties in Atlantic City, New Jersey. This strategy has turned out well for Beaumont as Trump’s National Labor Relations Board worked with hospital management to whitewash the company’s intimidation tactics and drive the MNA off of its premises.
Beaumont doctors, nurses and staff must rely upon their own strength and not place any confidence in the politics of the official labor movement, which centers on making appeals to the Democrats in Lansing to protect their interests.
Meanwhile, nothing that the corporate decision-makers say or offer, including the Beaumont Board of Directors, should be accepted. Their interests are incompatible with those of health care workers. Behind closed doors, the board is preoccupied with determining the size of the golden parachute for CEO Fox and his team, which has been estimated at as much as $20 million.
The solution to the crisis of the health care system, which has been starkly revealed for all to see during the coronavirus pandemic, cannot be found within the capitalist system. The financialization of hospitals and other providers of medical services—whether they are in the for-profit or non-profit category—is a demonstration of the way that society’s critical infrastructure has been ever more converted into a money-making operation for the parasitic elite.

14 Sept 2020

White House announces Oracle Corporation as “trusted tech partner” of TikTok

Kevin Reed

Business news sources began reporting on Sunday evening that California-based software services and technology giant Oracle Corporation had been selected by the Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok as its “trusted tech partner” in the US.
The Wall Street Journal reported, “Oracle Corp. won the bidding for the US operations of the video-sharing app TikTok, people familiar with the matter said, beating out Microsoft Corp. in a high-profile deal to salvage a social-media sensation that has been caught in the middle of a geopolitical standoff.”
On Monday morning, the preliminary deal was confirmed by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who said his office received a bid from Oracle to take over TikTok’s US operations over the weekend. Mnuchin also said the proposal had yet to be reviewed and approved by the White House.
Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo meets with the Oracle Leadership Team, in Redwood City, California on January 15, 2020. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha/ Public Domain]
Mnuchin told CNBC that two aspects of the deal will be examined. The first is by the Treasury Department’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS) which brokered the deal. The second “is the national security review under the president’s executive order.”
President Trump issued an emergency order on August 6 demanding that the China-based ByteDance divest itself of TikTok on the unsubstantiated grounds that the company was turning over “Americans’ personal and proprietary information” to the Chinese intelligence state.
Mnuchin said that the President’s executive order specified that the acquisition of TikTok had to be completed by September 20 in order prevent a shutdown of the tremendously popular short-form video sharing app, not by September 15 as had been previously stated by the President. It is estimated that TikTok has 100 million users in the US, nearly two-thirds of them under the age of 30.
Mnuchin also claimed that the Oracle plan included a commitment “to create TikTok Global as a US-headquartered company with 20,000 new jobs.”
From the beginning of the anti-Chinese campaign against TikTok, references to national security have been a top priority for the administration. As Mnuchin explained on CNBC, “From our standpoint, we’ll need to make sure that the code is, one, secure, Americans’ data is secure, that the phones are secure, and we’ll be looking to have discussions with Oracle over the next few days with our technical teams.”
Mnuchin’s comments on CNBC—which assumed the features of a public relations damage control operation—raised many more questions than they answered. He did not explain why a TikTok technology partnership with Oracle has been announced instead of a purchase of the assets of the social media platform from ByteDance as originally demanded by Trump. Mnuchin also would not explain why it was that Oracle beat out Microsoft, an early front runner in the negotiations for the TikTok deal.
He said, “I don’t want to go into the details of the negotiation. I would say there has always been a critical factor for us driving national security is making sure that the technology on American’s phones is safe and make sure that it is not corrupt.” He added that Oracle’s proposal included “many representations for national security issues.”
By mid-August, President Trump made it clear that he favored Oracle in any TikTok deal. On August 18, Trump said, “I think Oracle is a great company, and I think its owner [Larry Ellison] is a tremendous guy. He’s a tremendous person. I think that Oracle would be certainly somebody that could handle it.”
Oracle’s CEO Ellison, a fervent Trump supporter, is the fifth wealthiest person in the US, with $72 billion in personal net worth. That Trump and Mnuchin were able to maneuver the deal in Ellison’s direction lends the entire affair the distinct odor of high-level corruption. Oracle’s stock value jumped 8 percent on Wall Street on news of the deal, or approximately $15 billion. Ellison owns 35 percent of company stock and personally made $5 billion in one day.
Ellison is also a supporter of the US intelligence state and went on record in the aftermath of the 2013 revelations by Edward Snowden of unconstitutional mass government surveillance of the public, saying that the National Security Agency programs are “absolutely essential.”
With Ellison’s record of support for illegal spying combined with the emphasis on “national security” concerns—including the massive amounts of personal data the Trump administration claims the social media app can gather about users—there is every reason to believe that the new TikTok Global is being created as a platform for international NSA intelligence gathering. TikTok is available globally in 150 markets, in 39 languages and with 500 million users.
It appears that the Oracle deal has been announced as a partnership due at least in part to the intervention of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce last week, which changed economic policies to prevent the export of key software such as AI and software algorithms, both of which represent the core technologies of TikTok.
Any deal that does not involve the complete divestiture of all the assets of TikTok and leaves the sophisticated video recommendation engine as property of ByteDance undermines the bogus national security claims of the Trump administration and, thereby, exposes the real purpose of the campaign in the first place: to whip up anti-China fears and xenophobic hatred in the run-up to the 2020 elections.

Washington, DC mayor calls for reopening of public schools amid pandemic

Nick Barrickman

On Wednesday, Washington, DC’s Democratic mayor Muriel E. Bowser responded to a reporter’s question about when it would be possible for the District of Columbia to reopen public schools in person. “I think [Washington, DC Public Schools] can do it, and I think DCPS should do it,” she stated.
The mayor added she “would expect” the public school system to begin admitting small groups of students for in-person learning this month. “I don’t think we have any health data to suggest that we can’t do small groups,” she said. The fall school year began on August 31 in DCPS.
The announcement follows news that two of Washington, DC’s largest public charter school networks, KIPP DC and Friendship, were admitting groups of students back for in-person courses several days per week. The two charter networks collectively enroll over 11,000 of Washington, DC’s 100,000 public school students.
Bowser also announced that she had assigned her deputy mayor for education Paul Kihn “to assess the successes and struggles of charter and private schools that have resumed some in-person instruction to glean lessons for the public school system,” according to the Washington Post.
The District originally shuttered schools in March as the pandemic spread across the Mid-Atlantic region. Over 7,000 people have succumbed to complications stemming from COVID-19 in the greater Washington, DC metropolitan area.
Bowser’s declaration represents a right-wing provocation against teachers in the school system. The mayor is taking direct cues from the business community, in this case, the District’s largely unregulated charter school networks, to push for a reckless school reopening which will result in the spread of the deadly COVID-19 illness.
According to the Post: “charter schools offering in-person learning say they are serving small groups of students and have not faced a situation in which a teacher who does not want to teach in person is needed in a classroom. But teachers have told the DC Public Charter School Board that they don’t have protections and are fearful of what would happen if they were asked to return to buildings before they are comfortable.”
In early July, DCPS provoked outrage among public school teachers when it issued a letter to staff asking them to indicate intent to return for in-person instruction in the new school year. Rather than allowing teachers to virtually teach students, the letter suggested teachers unwilling to appear in person should file for sick leave. If sick leave was denied, teachers would then be forced to do in-person course work or face termination.
At the time, the Washington Teachers Union (WTU), an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, had advised educators not to sign the letter until the school system’s position was clarified. The District of Columbia announced in late July, after considerable parent and teacher pushback, that it would switch to an entirely online format until at least November after COVID-19 cases spiked throughout the region.
“We saw some trends in our data that were not ideal for making decisions about the upcoming school year,” stated Bowser at the time. Bowser’s announcement Wednesday abruptly shifted the school system’s policy once again after less than two weeks of classes were completed.
Bowser’s announcement follows a general trend in the United States in which Democratic Party administrations at the local and state level have often set the pace for an abrupt reopening of businesses and schools amid the pandemic. In the Washington, DC metropolitan region, encompassing the District, Maryland and Virginia, this was set by Virginia’s Democratic Governor Ralph Northam in late May, when his government announced “phase one” reopening of businesses even as COVID-19 case numbers rapidly rose.
Not to be outdone, Maryland’s Republican governor Larry Hogan also began the state’s reopening process at the same time. Last month, Hogan contravened his own health department and demanded that the suburban Washington, DC jurisdiction of Montgomery County allow private schools to open in person even as the local health officer warned “data does not suggest that in-person instruction is safe for students or teachers.”
On Friday, a report from Montgomery County noted over 13 cases at local schools since classes restarted, including an instance at a Catholic school where a second-grade teacher had accidentally infected one of her students with COVID-19.
For its part, the WTU has acceded to the Bowser administration’s about-face, with WTU spokesperson Joe Weedon telling the Post that it sought “more conversations
with the Bowser administration” because it “hasn’t seen satisfactory guidelines for student and teacher safety protocols for in-person learning.”
WTU president Elizabeth Davis told the Post that “there are teachers who are comfortable returning to classrooms and she is working on identifying them.”

Mounting opposition to school reopenings as 55 New York City teachers test positive for COVID-19

Alberto Escalera

With schools slated to reopen across New York City next week, 55 teachers and school staff in the district have already tested positive for COVID-19. Since most of those that tested positive had to wait several days before receiving their test results, many had already reported to school buildings for preservice preparations with colleagues last week.
Teachers across the largest school district in the United States returned to their buildings to prepare for the upcoming school year on September 8, after a deal was struck behind their backs between the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) and Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio.
The deal, which highlights the collusion between the teachers unions in the US and both political parties in the reckless reopening of K-12 schools, sought to derail a widely anticipated teachers strike by delaying the resumption of in-person instruction until September 21. However, all the fundamental issues at stake in the reopening of New York City’s schools remain unresolved, and there is mounting opposition to this homicidal policy.
New York City Teachers protesting unsafe school reopeings on Monday
Late last Wednesday, news began to surface that two teachers at two separate schools, PS 001 and MS 88, both located in District 15 in Brooklyn, had tested positive for COVID-19. According to initial reports, the teachers received their test results Tuesday evening, after they had reported to their respective schools earlier the same day.
By Wednesday it was revealed that 16 teachers from 16 different buildings had tested positive, with most of the tests administered on September 2, a full eight days before being notified of their results and two days after they had been in contact with colleagues in school buildings.
The explosion of COVID-19 positive cases among teachers across the city was entirely predictable given the widespread outbreaks that have taken place in K-12 districts and college campuses across the United States during the past month. Since August, at least six K-12 teachers have died from the coronavirus nationally, with countless others falling ill to the virus.
As in other places, New York City teachers are increasingly engaging in efforts to organize against the resumption of in-person instruction.
On Friday, teachers at IS 230, located in the Jackson Heights neighborhood in Queens, one of the areas worst hit by the coronavirus in the spring, organized a walkout after learning that administrators had failed to notify them that one of their colleagues had received a positive test on Thursday. The teacher had immediately informed both the DOE and the UFT of the results.
One teacher told the media, “We saw the procedures supposedly put in place to keep us safe not actually keeping us safe. We were promised it would be different this time around, … and it hit close to home for us because we already lost a staff member” to the virus in March.
On Monday IS 230 teachers continued their walkout and were joined by teachers at PS 139 in the Flatbush neighborhood of Brooklyn, citing concerns ranging from delays in contact tracing and poor ventilation to inadequate measures for disinfecting the building. At least one teacher from the school tested positive for the virus last week.
In a recent open letter issued by the staff of MS 88, located in the Park Slope neighborhood of Brooklyn, teachers denounced the delays in testing results as well as the haphazard and incomplete manner in which the city’s contact tracing program is being carried out. Firsthand accounts are emerging of several teachers being contacted by the city’s Test & Trace Corps three days after reported exposures.
Teachers and administrators across the city are also increasingly exposing the fraudulent manner in which the Department of Education has responded to a series of recent inspections of ventilation systems within school buildings. In a recent example, teachers and administrators from the Murry Bergtraum Campus, located in Lower Manhattan, sent a letter to UFT President Michael Mulgrew and schools Chancellor Richard Carranza, citing details from the most recent ventilation report issued by the DOE for their building.
Among the many unsafe conditions within the building, educators highlight that none of the windows are functional and only 50 percent of the 225 office and classroom spaces within the facility are rated “operational.” The building, which has a student population of approximately 1,000, has no unit ventilators and only two usable bathrooms that must be shared by students and staff. Despite these conditions, the DOE has deemed the building ready to receive students for in-person classes on September 21.
IS 230 teachers working outside after walking out last Friday (Credit: Twitter)
On Monday morning, educators and parents picketed outside the Murry Bergtraum campus.
Increasingly, parents of public school students have rallied behind educators in an effort to block the unsafe reopening of schools. Last Thursday, a parent advisory group in District 16, located in Brooklyn, voted unanimously to take legal action against the DOE to prevent the reopening of schools with in-person classes.
As in other parts of the US, the efforts by rank-and-file New York City educators to organize opposition to the reckless policy of in-person school reopening has shed light on the treacherous role being played by the American Federation of Teachers and its local affiliate, the UFT. While facilitating the reopening of schools, these unions seek to channel the immense opposition of teachers into the electoral campaigns of the Democratic Party.
The efforts of rank-and-file educators to organize popular opposition to the reckless school reopening policy is increasingly leading many to the conclusion that new organizations of struggle must be built. The recent formation of the New York City Educators Rank-and-File Safety Committee, along with similar committees of educators across the US, marks a significant step forward in this process.
By imposing a school reopening with in-person classes in New York City, with a student population of 1.1 million, de Blasio is attempting to normalize death among teachers and children. He spelled this out at a press conference Monday morning, stating, “Some people will test positive. … We have to remember that for the very small percentage of people who test positive for the coronavirus, it is a very temporary reality.”
Teachers picketing Intermediate School 230 in Jackson Heights, NY on Monday.
In pressing for the resumption of in-person learning in New York City, the ruling class aims to set a precedent to allow for similar reopenings in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and every other district throughout the country that is starting their semesters with online instruction.
The opposition to the unsafe reopening of schools is of vital interest to the working class as a whole. We call on all parents, students, teachers and education workers throughout New York City to read the founding declaration of the New York City Educators Rank-and-File Safety Committee and join us.
We urge teachers and education workers, school workers, parents and students throughout the US to build similar Rank-and-File Safety Committees in their respective areas and join our efforts to coordinate a broad, international campaign to end the homicidal policy of in-person school reopening being carried out in the name of capitalist profits.

The University of Iowa and Iowa State University students and staff unite together to oppose in-person learning

Andy Thompson

Iowa students and faculty at the University of Iowa and Iowa State University have united together to oppose the reckless reopening plans of the universities. The students and faculty are planning a sickout today after over 900 students at the University of Iowa participated in a similar action September 2.
The demands of those involved in the protest are to end all in-person classes and have all learning be done online until the pandemic is under control. The protest is being organized by two groups, UIowa Sickout at the University of Iowa and Iowa Student Action at Iowa State.
Representatives from Iowa Student Action told Iowa State Daily, “The Board of Regents and [University President] Wendy Wintersteen made the decision to open, prioritizing their own profit and not the health and safety of the community." The students continued: "They knew it would be unsafe to reopen but did so anyway. They care more about our tuition money and residence hall money than our lives."
Beardshear Hall, Iowa State University campus (Photo: SD Dirk / Wikipedia Commons)
Both schools are seeing massive outbreaks of COVID-19. In Story County, where Iowa State is located, 3,119 individuals have tested positive for COVID-19. Iowa has the country’s worst outbreak of the pandemic per capita. As of this writing, there have been 74,767 confirmed cases in the state. Its positivity rate for those who have been tested is close to 10 percent, and six counties have a positivity rate of over 15 percent. So far 1,218 Iowans have died from COVID-19.
The University of Iowa has reported a staggering 1,804 total cases. The University has done everything in its power to downplay the severity of the outbreak.
University of Iowa President Bruce Harreld has made relatively few remarks on the situation. Instead, he has been participating in an effort with other presidents from Big Ten football schools to create a plan to resume the football season as early as October 17. In August, when the Big Ten presidents voted to postpone the season, Harreld was one of the three votes in the minority to insist on playing during the pandemic.
Meanwhile, the University of Iowa students are reporting difficulties getting tested for the virus and have been provided few resources to handle the outbreak. One student, Will Luebke, told The Daily Iowan that even after he had come into contact with another student who had tested positive for COVID-19 he could not get tested since he was not yet showing any symptoms.
Luebke remarked, “[The Student Health nurseline] number was super busy and it took five different calls to talk to somebody. They told me that they wouldn’t test me, and I had to stay in my room for 10 days and if I had symptoms to call them back,”
On the contrary, the University has spared no expense when it comes to testing their football players and staff. From September 7-13, the University of Iowa athletics department reported that they performed 667 COVID-19 tests with 24 positive cases. Virtually everyone involved with bringing the football program back online has received testing while students are left with nowhere to turn.
At Iowa State University, the fall football season has begun playing before a mostly empty stadium, though several hundred, mostly family members of players, were allowed to be in attendance. Iowa State had originally planned to have 25,000 fans in attendance but announced they would close attendance after mounting pressure from the community.
Yesterday, Iowa’s three major public universities, the University of Iowa, University of Northern Iowa, and Iowa State University all announced that they would modify their spring semesters and cancel spring breaks due to the outbreaks.
The action of the universities throughout the state elucidates the pressing political issues involved in this struggle and underscores the need for the strike to expand and most importantly to adopt a clear political perspective.
The students and faculty involved in this struggle have taken an important step in linking up their struggles across campuses. It is only in a united fight by teachers, students, and workers more broadly that the policy of in-person learning can be halted and lives saved.
This struggle is part of a growing movement around the country of students, teachers, and workers who are opposed to the reckless reopening of schools and campuses. While the Trump administration has spearheaded this campaign, the Democratic Party is equally complicit.
What is required to carry this struggle forward is the independent mobilization of the working class against the entire policy of the ruling class to send children back to school, students back to campuses, and workers back to plants and factories. The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) and its youth and student movement the International Youth and Students for Social Equality (IYSSE) urge faculty, staff, and students in Iowa to solidarize themselves with the state’s thousands of meatpackers who also staged walkouts to protest pandemic conditions.

Dramatic spike in Philippines’ coronavirus death toll

Owen Howell

The Philippines recorded a sudden surge in deaths caused by COVID-19 on Saturday, along with a continued rise in case numbers. The death toll rose by 186, a new record and an alarming leap from the country’s average of around 50 deaths per day over the past week. It is the highest single-day fatality rate recorded so far in Southeast Asia.
The spike was attributed to incorrect figures provided by local authorities. The Department of Health said 128 cases previously reported as “recovered” were discovered to be 126 deaths and two active cases. The classifications cover data going back to April.
President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration explained the discrepancy in recorded deaths as an inevitable product of the country’s continuing validation process, in which reported cases are often duplicates or erroneous entries.
It is not the first time, however, that Philippine authorities have been found to conceal or alter data recording the spread of the virus. From June 12 to August 21, more than 4,000 cases were removed from the COVID-19 tally, apparently because of encoding errors. There were also corrections that revealed 309 deaths, earlier announced as recovered cases.
The official death toll reached 4,371 on Saturday, but this record suggests that the real total could be much higher.
The national government’s pandemic response has been marked by a lack of any serious efforts to detect, trace or isolate the disease. In public televised addresses, Duterte has by turns downplayed the threat of the virus and advocated unscientific methods, including washing face masks with petrol.
Confronting the worst coronavirus outbreak in both Southeast and East Asia, the Philippines has seen cases double over just five weeks. After an increase of nearly 5,000 new infections on Saturday, the figures have risen to 261,216 cases. It was the fifth consecutive day on which over 3,000 additional cases were tallied.
Of Saturday’s reported cases, 2,619 came from capital city Manila’s overpopulated metropolitan area, which has accounted for around half of total coronavirus figures. At least 82 percent of the newly confirmed cases dated back as far as August 30. The government had previously said it was expecting an “irregularly high number of cases this week,” due to the slow arrival of reports from overworked laboratories.
The underfunded health sector is struggling to provide an accurate picture of the virus’ rapid community spread across the densely crowded archipelago.
The Philippines currently has only 119 licensed laboratories capable of conducting coronavirus tests. Its testing rate is still among the lowest internationally, performing just 28,018 tests per million people.
As with testing labs, hospitals are unprepared to meet the demands placed on them by the global pandemic. Filipino Nurses United vice president Leni Nolasco has urged the government to immediately hire the country’s 200,000 unemployed skilled nurses to address the chronic shortage of nursing personnel in COVID-19 referral hospitals.
The government’s recent token efforts to augment the health system—with 5,000 new beds for isolation facilities and $US61 million for personal protective equipment (PPE)—will prove insufficient to prevent a growing public health crisis.
From the outset, Duterte’s government has imposed draconian police-state measures on the one hand, while pursuing ever more frantic bids to resume economic activity on the other.
Production in key sectors was halted in mid-March by a repressive lockdown centred in Manila. Social restrictions were slowly eased in June, with catastrophic results as the virus spread through reopened workplaces. Nevertheless, the government has desperately pushed the economic reopening, particularly since a recession was officially declared in the second quarter.
On Friday, Duterte signed into law a second economic stimulus package, known as Bayanihan II. It includes financial aid of $US2.8 billion for major corporations affected by the lockdown, as well as a $US525 million standby fund for future bailouts later this year. Similar to its predecessor, Bayanihan II allows presidential powers to realign funds for pandemic-related expenses.
Congressman Bienvenido Abante Jr. said last week that “funds are scarce” due to the low revenue collections brought about by the pandemic, the Manila Times reported. The new package, however, assured private businesses that funds will not be lacking for them, even as depleted healthcare and social welfare programs suffer.
Duterte’s signing of the package came as the government declared a further easing of restrictions across the entire Philippines, which began yesterday. Iligan City, Bacolod City, and Lanao del Sur will remain under modified enhanced community quarantine (MECQ) until the end of the month. For the rest of the country, workers will be herded back into unsafe and crowded workplaces to restart the flow of corporate profits.
Public transportation is gradually reopening. The number of passengers on the Metro Rail Transit was raised yesterday. The Department of Transportation announced that as many as 204 commuters are now permitted on a train (i.e., 68 per wagon). They added that physical distancing would be lowered to 0.75 metres between passengers, to be further reduced every two weeks.
A state-backed contact tracing app, Staysafe.ph, is set to be rolled out in transport terminals in the coming weeks. The app, however, is not a genuine attempt to implement contact tracing, but instead serves to justify the government’s back-to-work drive and the false notion that it is safe to return to places of employment.
The swift reopening of the country’s failing tourism industry is also on the agenda. Hotels can now accept greater numbers of guests under “specialised programs” outlined by the Department of Tourism, as the country restarts domestic travel.
Significant investments are being made in an expensive new project to rehabilitate Manila Bay for tourism purposes. Interior Undersecretary Jonathan Malaya claimed it would not detract funds from the government’s coronavirus response, despite growing criticism of the project as the health crisis worsens.
Fearful of mass opposition, government officials are trying to justify their failure to contain the pandemic since March. Health Secretary Francisco Duque III said on Friday, as quoted by ABS-CBN News: “I will be the first to admit that our initial response was rather slow, if not laggard. Why? Because nobody actually expected this pandemic.”
Such statements from ruling elites around the world aim to shrug off responsibility for the devastation inflicted by the pandemic. Medical experts had continually warned about a potential pandemic throughout the past decade.
Epidemiologists and health experts from the University of the Philippines have estimated that total cases could reach 310,000 to 330,000 by the end of this month.

Exposure of Trump’s lies on COVID-19 implicates Spain’s Podemos party

Alejandro López

Revelations that US President Donald Trump deliberately misled the public about the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic also expose the “left populist” Podemos party in Spain. Podemos is in government with the social-democratic Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE) and had access to the same type of information as Trump. Just like him, they issued misleading statements downplaying the risks posed by the pandemic.
This is a warning about “left populist” parties and politicians allied to Podemos internationally, such as Bernie Sanders, Jean-Luc Mélenchon of La France Insoumise, Katja Kipping of Die Linke in Germany, and Syriza in Greece. Drawn from the affluent middle class and based on the identity politics of race and gender, these parties lie and adopt murderous policies on issues that mean life and death to the working class.
Last week, well-known journalist Bob Woodward revealed that on January 28, US intelligence told Trump the pandemic was “the biggest national security threat you face in your presidency.” On February 7, Trump told Woodward that Chinese President Xi Jinping had warned him about COVID-19: “This is deadly stuff. It’s also more deadly than … even your strenuous flus … this is 5 percent [case fatality rate] versus 1 percent and less than 1 percent.” Trump added, “It goes through air, Bob. That’s always tougher than the touch.”
Another politician doubtless receiving such warnings was Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias, who is deputy prime minister of Spain’s PSOE-Podemos government and, since February, sits on Spain’s Intelligence Affairs Commission. That commission directs, supervises and controls the activities of the Centro Nacional de Inteligencia(National Intelligence Centre—CNI). Working closely with the CIA and other NATO intelligence services, the CNI assesses issues identified as major threats to Spanish national security, specifically including pandemics.
Podemos party leader Pablo Iglesias speaks as Spain's caretaker Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez looks on after signing an agreement at the parliament in Madrid, Spain, Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019. (AP Photo/Paul White)
Nonetheless, Iglesias was silent as Trump, top PSOE-Podemos government officials and the entire European ruling establishment downplayed COVID-19, encouraging the public to act as if nothing unusual was happening as the virus spread.
Experts on the CNI’s activities have already stressed that the CNI and its overseers were well aware of what was occurring. In June, Fernando Rueda, a leading authority on Spanish intelligence, said on radio that the CNI’s role during the pandemic has been “very important.” The CNI’s task, he said, “is to inform the government of everything that may be of interest to them in order to make the appropriate decisions.”
Rueda said the CNI had extensive information about COVID-19 since January, thanks to its US partners. “If the US had information at the beginning of the year and the CIA informed the [US] president that what was happening in China was more serious than what was being said, it is logical to think that the CIA would have also informed other secret services that China was not telling the truth about the expansion of the coronavirus.”
Woodward’s reports have subsequently shown, however, that Trump was in fact being accurately briefed by China. It was Washington and the EU countries who downplayed COVID-19.
Rueda then said, significantly, that “having information does not mean that you act. … Although the secret services must warn about any danger that could affect national security, governments sometimes ignore them. The CIA warned in January of the danger that the coronavirus could cause and Trump ignored their recommendations.”
Other reports suggest the CNI informed the Spanish government directly by the end of January. According to the right-wing news site OkDiario, the CNI transmitted to the Spanish government “concerns” raised by the head of the CNI delegation in China after the virus emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan.
This was based on contacts CNI Delegate in China Beatriz Méndez de Vigo had with intelligence sources at the Ministry of State Security (MSS), the ministry overseeing China’s intelligence services. Her notes from Beijing, written in mid-January 2020, highlighted an “alert” issued by a group of doctors from Wuhan Central Hospital, led by Dr. Ai Fen.
Thus, by January the Spanish government, and by February Iglesias, had access to reports on the severity of the disease, its ability to spread, and the necessity of lockdowns to contain it.
This information was also publicly available in the World Health Organization’s [WHO] January 30 notice, which declared the pandemic “a public health emergency of international concern.” Significantly, the WHO warned in the note that it was still possible to prevent the spread of the virus if countries put in place strong measures to detect the disease, isolate and treat cases, trace contacts and promote social distancing measures.
Yet Madrid and other EU governments refused to take action. At the time, Podemos was focused on its brainchild, the Sexual Liberty bill, to define all non-consensual sex as rape and establish special courts to deal with sexual offences. The virus continued to spread, however, and on February 24 Spain detected its first COVID-19 cases.
The first cases did not, however, change the course of the PSOE-Podemos government. On March 4, just 10 days before Spain implemented a nationwide state of alarm and lockdown, Spain’s National Security Council downplayed the threat posed by the virus.
Despite WHO notices, CNI warnings and the fact that the virus had already spread to Spain (Italian schools were already closed), the Council approved a report placing a pandemic as one of the least likely of 15 risk scenarios contemplated by Spain’s National Security Strategy. The only scenario judged less likely was one involving proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Iglesias attended this meeting.
Official accounts trivialised this act of criminal negligence as a bureaucratic error, with El País claiming that “the bulk of the document had been drafted months earlier” and dismissing the event as “underscoring experts’ limited foresight.”
On March 5, the day after the Council downplayed the virus, Podemos’ Minister of Labour Yolanda Díaz evaluated the risk very differently. Her ministry sent a guide to companies warning that work activity must cease if there is a “serious, imminent and inevitable” danger of COVID-19 infection, stressing that the interpretation of risk must be “restrictive.”
This immediately provoked a firestorm of denunciations. The big business associations CEOE and CEPYME denounced Díaz’s guide as a “grave mistake.” A CEOE official said, “Let’s be realistic. What do we do? The worker evaluates that he has coughed a lot? What if the employer says no, he has only coughed three times? Let’s be serious.”
The government rebuked Díaz for not having coordinated her response with the Ministry of Health; the Secretary of Communication called it a “grave mistake.”
Díaz quickly backed down, drafting a statement with the Prime Minister’s Office agreeing that only the Ministry of Health is authorized to send information on COVID-19. Iglesias intervened to praise Díaz and the “great work she is doing,” without referring to either the guide or COVID-19.
As the virus spread, Podemos continued to downplay it, calling instead for mass participation in the upcoming feminist march for Women’s International Day on March 8. By then, there were already 17 confirmed dead and nearly 600 recorded infections. Against WHO advice, the government let the demonstration proceed with 120,000 people in attendance, including PSOE and Podemos ministers.
This was followed by an abrupt shift. On March 10, the PSOE-Podemos government adopted limited measures against COVID-19, like banning sports events and flights to Italy—then the European country worst hit by COVID-19. On March 13, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez suddenly announced a nationwide lockdown, as industrial strikes spread from Italy across Europe.
Podemos’ conspiracy against workers and youth continues to this day, even though nearly 50,000 people have died in Spain and over 930,000 worldwide since then. Instead of using the time granted by lockdowns to test the population and prepare contact tracers to contain new outbreaks, however, the Spanish government focused on forcing workers back to work to produce profits after billions of euros in EU bailouts had been doled out to the banks and big corporations. Today, hospitals are once again teetering on the brink due to the lack of staff, and nursing homes are registering mass infections.
The PSOE-Podemos government is sending millions of children and students back to school, aware that this will lead to disaster. Education Minister Isabel Celaá reported that Podemos Minister of Equality, Irene Montero, told her privately that without a general protocol, the return to school will be “chaotic.”
In fact, the return to school is a politically criminal act that will massively accelerate the ongoing resurgence of the virus. The right-wing regional premier of Madrid, Isabel Ayuso, bluntly declared: “It is likely that practically all children, one way or another, will be infected with coronavirus.” Podemos is helping implement this herd immunity policy. It bears full responsibility for the tens of thousands of infections already recorded in the ongoing resurgence of COVID-19 and the wave of deaths set to ensue.

Protests continue against Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov

Markus Salzmann

For over two months, thousands of people have been marching in the streets of Bulgaria almost every day in opposition to Prime Minister Boyko Borisov. They are demanding the resignation of his right-wing government as well as new elections and fundamental reforms of the state apparatus. Bulgaria is viewed as the poorest and most corrupt country within the European Union.
Last week, the protests reached their peak to date, as security personnel used significant force against protesters. One hundred twenty people were arrested and around 60 injured. At least 38 people had to be taken to hospital, according to press reports. This includes a number of journalists.
The demonstrations in Bulgaria share many similarities with the protests against President Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus. Yet, unlike the latter case, they rarely get the attention of German and other European media outlets.
The reason for this is simple: Borisov’s GERB Party (Citizens for a European Development of Bulgaria) is a member of the European People’s Party, to which Germany’s Christian Democratic Chancellor Angela Merkel and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also belong. His politics are strictly pro-European, while President Rumen Radev, who supports the protests against the government, leans more toward Russia.
Protest against the government in front of the new National Assembly building, demanding government resignation in Sofia, Bulgaria, Thursday, Sept. 10, 2020. (AP Photo/Valentina Petrova)
Borisov, who began his political career in the Stalinist Communist Party of Bulgaria, has been in power since 2009. Since then, he has resigned twice in the wake of mass protests, but quickly came back into government on both occasions. Since the spring of 2017, he has been governing in a coalition with the United Patriots, (VP), an alliance of far-right and fascistic organizations.
Borisov is viewed as the embodiment of a system characterized by a tight entanglement of oligarchs, politics and the state. The protests are the “outbursts of long-standing indignation against the corruption and arrogance of the powerful, along with the fear of the coming of a terrible economic crisis,” Hristo Ivanov, who himself used to be a minister in Borisov’s cabinet, told Deutsche Welle .
Ivanov had spectacularly sparked the protests, by breaking into the luxury home of Ahmed Dogan. It is located on public land and has been illegally sealed off by state security personnel. Dogan is known as one of the wealthiest and most politically influential men in the country. After Ivanov put a video about his stunt online, it received over a million views.
The search of the workrooms of two advisers of President Radev also inspired the protests. Radev, a former general, is supported by the opposition Socialist Party, (BSP). Protesters also demand the resignation of Chief Public Prosecutor Ivan Geshev, who is viewed as an assistant of Borisov.
Borisov systematically solidified his grip on power with the help of the police and the military. Most of the press and the judiciary are also under the control of the government and the oligarchs that are aligned with it. Borisov seeks a constitutional change that would limit the authority of the president, while continuing to strengthen the state apparatus.
Supreme Court of Cassation President Lozan Panov, an opponent of Borisov, spoke of a “captured state” in der Spiegel. “In our country, there is an oligarchic merger of the legislature, the executive as well as the judiciary,” he told the German news magazine. He says, therefore, of media mogul Delyan Peevski that the latter is “not formally, but a de facto co-prime minister, as key institutions and offices are under his influence.” Panov accused the European Union of nourishing the cancer of corruption in Bulgaria with its grants.
The protests are socially heterogenous and lack a clear perspective. Calls for a “systemic change” dominate along with those for an end to the corruption. The protesters consist largely of young, educated people from the major cities.
“The spectrum of participants in the protest marches through the inner cities every evening goes from the young climate activists and supporters of the former Communist Party, to the urban conservative middle class and the young Western overseas university students who are currently living in Bulgaria due to the coronavirus pandemic,” Bulgarian broadcast moderator Vessela Vladkova told the MDR television station.
The current protesters are “especially young people who are in a less economically dire situation, but rather they are worried about the future of the country and the morality of the political elite,” according to Vladkova. The government would have difficulties staying in power “if those people who will become impoverished in the fall and winter through the economic crisis, caused by the coronavirus pandemic, join the protests.”
In truth, many workers have already started demonstrating against the government. A group of nurses have been protesting for weeks in front of the Ministry of Health in Sofia.
The opposition parties, representing rival cliques within the country’s ruling class, are trying to dominate the protests. Among them is the PR man Arman Babikjan, one of the organizers of the protests, who has good contacts inside the Bulgarian elite. He is trying to use the protests to unite the discredited and feuding opposition parties into a bloc against Borisov.
Babikjan said that he personally would welcome it “if the citizens’ protest declared a leader.” He is also willing to work together with the far-right. “When it comes to the basis of democracy, there is no left or right,” he explained. Like Judge Panov, Babikjan also appeals to the European Union to support the protest movement.
Their political differences with Borisov are minimal. In the 30 years since the restoration of capitalism, many parties and cliques secured their interests on the backs of workers in Bulgaria. The EU is at fault for the horrible conditions in the country. Its austerity packages over the last decades pushed large portions of the population into abject poverty.
The coronavirus pandemic exacerbates the social crisis. So far, there are almost 18,000 reported infections and 700 deaths in the country of 7 million people. There are no protective measures in schools or businesses anymore. The government has categorically ruled out any measures that could hurt economic interests in any way.
The already rampant poverty in the country continued to rise during the coronavirus crisis. Workers with unstable employment have lost their jobs. Many of those who earn their paycheques overseas can no longer travel there. Even before the coronavirus crisis broke out, over a third of children in Bulgaria were at risk of poverty.