USA’s Aggressive China Containment Strategy

Yanis Iqbal

On 6 October, 2020, foreign ministers of USA, India, Australia and Japan gathered in Tokyo to participate in the second Quad security dialogue, a strategic forum aimed at containing China. The Quad initiative first began in May 2007 with a meeting between the US, Japan, India and Australia in the Philippine capital Manila. In its preliminary years, the Quad did not explicitly espouse the objective of countering China’s rapid development and only aimed at maintaining regional security. Since the intensification of USA’s new cold war against China, the Quad grouping has coagulated as an organizational tool for American imperialism in the Indo-Pacific and now, it visibly aims at containing China.

The anti-China tint in the current Quad dialogue was discernible from US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s vilification of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) which has spearheaded China’s exponential economic growth. In an interview he gave just before the security dialogue, Pompeo aggressively said: “If one bends the knee each time the Chinese Communist Party takes action around the world, one will find themselves having to bend the knee with great frequency. So we have pushed back in a serious way with my diplomatic counterparts. Our military has been very active in the region, ensuring that we have a presence so that we can ensure that there is, in fact, a capacity for a free and open Indo-Pacific.” On the role of the Quad countries, more specifically, he stated: “once we’ve institutionalized what we’re doing, the four of us together, we can begin to build out a true security framework, a fabric that can counter the challenge that the Chinese Communist Party presents to all of us.”

From Pompeo’s alarmist declarations and future plans for the Quad grouping, it is quite evident that the US wants to utilize the four countries as a counter-offensive campaign against China and convert it into an “Asian NATO” for consolidating Indo-Pacific American hegemony. The rough contours of this imperialist strategy are outlined in Pompeo’s opening remarks at the Quad meeting where he stated: “As partners in this Quad, it is more critical now than ever that we collaborate to protect our people and partners from the CCP’s exploitation, corruption, and coercion.  We’ve seen it in the south, in the East China Sea, the Mekong, the Himalayas, the Taiwan Straits.”

US Imperialism in the South China Sea

USA’s attempts at over-powering China in the Indo-Pacific with the help of the Quad countries are firmly situated in the structural framework of a new cold war. Through this new cold war, the US is trying to imperialistically debilitate China’s socialist market economy and halt the country’s development of techno-productive forces. While the US cloaks its Indo-Pacific anti-China strategy in the rhetorical ragbag of insipid liberalism, it is important to remember that the American empire’s policies are always guided by imperialist objectives. We are seeing the orchestration of such imperialist campaigns in the South China Sea (SCC), particularly, where maritime disputes between China and various Southeast Asian countries have been exploited by the US to buttress its hegemony.

In 1947, Kuomintang-ruled China had demarcated its territorial claims in the South China Sea with an eleven-dash line on a map. The claim – which was recognized by the US at that time – covered the majority of the area which China regained from Japan after World War II, encompassing about 90% of the South China Sea, including areas claimed by Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. In 1953, the CCP-led government removed the portion encompassing the Gulf of Tonkin, simplifying the border to nine dashes. To this day, China invokes the nine-dash line as the historical basis for its territorial claims in the South China Sea.

The disputes between Southeast Asian countries and China in the SCC remained relatively inaudible until 2010 when Hillary Rodham Clinton – at that the US Secretary of State – innocuously declared, “The United States, like every nation, has a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons, and respect for international law in the South China Sea.” While Clinton’ statement may seem harmless, it was a thinly-veiled proclamation of the “pivot to Asia” strategy which signaled that the American empire was now turning its gaze to Asia and wanted China to acquiesce to USA’s overriding imperialist aims. To take an example, Clinton’s special emphasis on “freedom of navigation” reeks of imperialism because for more than 100 years, the developed nations invoked the “freedom of navigation” to dominate Chinese trade. American and British gunboats controlled China’s Yangtze, Yellow and Pearl rivers and coastal waters where they patrolled up to 1,300 miles inland. It was in 1949 with the Chinese Revolution that the People’s Liberation Army got rid of all foreign forces and their battleships from its rivers.

America’s economic ambitions in Asia were further crystallized in a speech given by former President Barack Obama on 17 November, 2011, to the Australian parliament wherein he announced: “as a Pacific nation, the United States will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this region [Asia Pacific] and its future…we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region.  We will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace…Our enduring interests in the region demand our enduring presence in the region.  The United States is a Pacific power, and we are here to stay.”

Ever since the initiation of the “pivot to Asia” strategy, the US empire has constantly tried to gain a foothold in the region and its involvement in the SCS dispute is another imperialist effort to do so by containing China. After the Obama’s pivot to Asia strategy, we have President Donald Trump’s “free and open Indo-Pacific” initiative which has the same objective of curtailing China’s development and asserting US dominance. An integral component of this new strategy has been a renewed focus on the SCS with the aim of thwarting China – Southeast Asia dialogue and instead, opting for strong-arm tactics. On 13 July, 2020, Pompeo issued a statement where he identified the SCS as an important element of the administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy: “The United States champions a free and open Indo-Pacific. Today we are strengthening U.S. policy in a vital, contentious part of that region — the South China Sea…In the South China Sea, we seek to preserve peace and stability, uphold freedom of the seas in a manner consistent with international law, maintain the unimpeded flow of commerce, and oppose any attempt to use coercion or force to settle disputes.”

Behind Pompeo’s empty phrases, one can observe the cold belligerence with which the US wants to maintain its hegemony. The concept of “freedom of the seas”, for instance, is not a harmless term and has its roots in patently imperial and expansionist aims. It was instituted in 1919 with Woodrow Wilson’s issuance of Fourteen Points at the end of World War I which established the US as the Restorer of the global capitalist order. Since the Fourteen Points were aimed at aiding American economic expansion, they had to incorporate new rules favorable towards the consolidation of a new empire. One such rule was “freedom of the seas”, expressed in point number II of Wilson’s 1919 statement of principles which read: “Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war”. The concept of freedom of the seas primarily benefited the US since it had the largest trade industry and exploited open trade policy to penetrate other countries’ economies.  Therefore, beginning with post-World War I restoration in 1919, America already took advantage of freedom of the seas by employing policies that were intended to benefit its incipient empire. Currently, USA is again trying to use freedom of the seas to re-lay the firm foundations for a unipolar world order. Criticizing the US’s repeated usage of the freedom of the seas as an imperialist tool, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying has stated: “The Chinese side advocates the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, yet this freedom definitely does not mean that foreign military vessels and aircrafts can enter one country’s territorial waters and airspace at will. China will stay firm in safeguarding territorial sovereignty. We urge parties concerned to be discreet in words and actions, avoid taking any risky and provocative actions and safeguard regional peace and stability.”

Contrary to Pompeo’s rhetoric about “peace and stability” in the SCS, it is increasingly becoming clear that what American wants is sheer dominance in the region. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) report entitled “U.S.-China Strategic Competition in South and East China Seas: Background and Issues for Congress” explicitly outlines the imperialist goals behind USA’s renewed militarism in the SCS. As per the report, US goals in the SCS include: “maintaining and enhancing the U.S.-led security architecture in the Western Pacific”, “maintaining a regional balance of power favorable to the United States and its allies and partners” and lastly, “preventing China from becoming a regional hegemon in East Asia”. The report also expresses worries regarding the construction of Chinese bases in SCS and states: “Chinese domination over or control of its near-seas region could complicate the ability of the United States to…operate U.S. forces in the Western Pacific for various purposes, including maintaining regional stability, conducting engagement and partnership-building operations, responding to crises, and executing war plans; and  prevent the emergence of China as a regional hegemon in its part of Eurasia.”

Since USA’s involvement in the SCS dispute is primarily motivated by imperialist factors, the country has not hesitated to use overtly coercive measures to discipline China into submission. In July 2020, David Stilwell, assistant secretary of state for East Asia, told the following to a Washington think-tank when asked if sanctions were a possible US response to Chinese actions in the SCS: “Nothing is off the table … there is room for that. This is a language the Chinese understand—demonstrative and tangible action”. In just a month after Stilwell’s intimidatory statement, the US began imposing sanctions and restrictions on certain Chinese State-Owned Enterprises and executives for what it termed as “malign” activities in the SCC.

The use of “demonstrative and tangible action” against China is a part and parcel of USA’s imperialist strategy which was defined as the following in a White House document titled “United States Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China [PRC]”: “When quiet diplomacy proves futile, the United States will increase public pressure on the PRC government and take action to protect United States interests by leveraging proportional costs when necessary.” In addition to sanctions, USA has also used militarism in the SCS as a method to leverage proportional costs from China.

The US Navy carried out Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) near China’s islands and reefs in the SCS five times in 2018. In 2019, the figure grew to eight, an increase of 60%, and the operations were conducted twice in May and November respectively. In addition, the US Navy’s FONOPs showed a clear sign of retaliatory belligerence. For example, when China denied the request for a US naval warship to visit Qingdao Port, the guided missile destroyer USS Wayne E. Meyer carried out a FONOP near Spratly Islands right on the following day. The number of American troops’ close-range reconnaissance flights in the South China Sea has also doubled since 2009 to reach nearly 2,000 sorties and large-scale military exercises have increased by 30% to nearly 100 times a year. These figures are gigantic when compared to China’s defensive military deployment which is being overhyped by the media. To take an example, the total tonnage of Chinese naval vessels has just reached 1/3 that of the US Navy.

Mass Hysteria against China

On 31 August, 2020, Dr. Stephen Burgess, a professor of international security studies at the US Air War College, published an article where he wrote: “If Washington does not act more assertively, its allies and partners will increasingly question US credibility and become more susceptible to China’s influence campaign.” Therefore, in order to increase US credibility, Burgess proposes a strategy of direct military action which “would involve the US Navy, backed by the US Air Force, selectively countering China’s aggressive maritime maneuvers by shadowing Chinese vessels and working with the navy and coast guard of its ally—the Philippines—to block attacks on Philippine fishing fleet, forces, and oil-and-gas research vessels and platforms, particularly around Pag-asa Island in the Spratlys and Reed Bank… If this way fails to pause China’s behavior and bring Beijing to the negotiating table, the next step would be for the US Navy to back the Philippines Navy and Coast Guard as they push back Chinese forces around Pag-asa and secure the area, ending Chinese pressure there… the ultimate step would be US support of Philippine forces as they take back rightful control of Scarborough Shoal, which could provoke China to escalate.”

Burgess’ article is an indicator of the extremely violent and frenzied atmosphere being created by the US administration against China. Through the use of alarmist and scare-mongering statements, USA has tried to whip up mass hysteria against China so that militarist tactics can be used against the country. Instead of allowing China and other concerned nations to resolve their disputes in the SCS through dialogue, the US has imperialistically surrounded the region with warships and framed the entire issue through a highly polarized, cold war prism. The world needs to immediately take cognizance of US militarism in the SCS and disallow the country from using other nations as geo-strategic chess pieces in the new cold war against China.

Industrialisation, Neo-Liberalism And The Pandemic

Bhavya Kumar

The human civilization, as we know it, is facing its worst crisis. One that has bought the global village to a standstill, baffled world leaders, claimed thousands of lives and endangered millions more.  Not many years ago, in 1967, United States Surgeon General, Dr. William H. Stewart allegedly made a famous (or rather infamous) remark

“It is time to close the book on infectious diseases, and declare the war against pestilence won.”

Yet, here we stand, at the peak of a global crisis, brought about, neither by war, nor by economic calamities (like the great depression) rather by a viral strain which took the world by storm at the opening of 2020. Today, more than a year after the first case of COVID-19 emerged in a small, crowded industrial town of China; the pandemic continues its exploits around the globe.

India fell prey to COVID in January 2020 and has since been battling the situation at hand; some would say, with the best capacity that it could. As of today, the COVID tally lies at 6.07 million cases in India. Within India, Maharashtra is leading the tally with 780,689 positive cases, flowed by Andra Pradesh (424,767), Tamil Nadu (422,085), Karnataka (335,928) and Uttar Pradesh (225,632). Incidentally four of these five states happen to be among the top five industrialised states in India: Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Andra Pradesh.

There seems to be an evident association between level of industrialisation and spread of the disease.  One which is backed historically and sociologically. The level of industrialisation of the states severely infected by COVID is a significant factor in understanding the scale and nature of viral spread in specific regions of India. Hence, let us take stock of salient features of ‘industrialisation’ in general and what it means in context of India specifically. Industrialisation refers to a sustained economic growth following the application of inanimate sources of power to mechanise production, later spreading to agriculture and services. It is a social change which is accompanied by processes like urbanisation, geographical concentration of industry and population and changes in occupational structures.  The euro-centric, abstract ideal of an industrialised society revolves around scientific evolutionism, guided by hyper-modernist tendencies. For instance, Max Weber’s interpretation of an industrialised, modernised western world as being progressive, rational, bureaucratised and disenchanted of traditional, magical and supernatural systems of beliefs and values, is a classic ideal typical description.  However, many erstwhile colonies of Imperial colonial powers like Britain, France etc, witnessed the unravelling of industrialisation in a haphazard and supposedly distorted pattern, which differed severely from ideal typical, abstract descriptions of the same. In India for instance, we must be aware of two details: One, the forced industrialisation brought about by an alien imperialist forces uprooted multitude of rural households, transiting them to the vortex of urbanisation. Many social problems which were unique to city life began festering. These were caused by inappropriate living situations, and space crunch, thereby giving rise to slum settlements (chalws of Mumbai, Jhuggi Jhopri of Delhi, bustee in Kolkata, Cheries of South Indian towns ). While this has been a historical trend in industrial towns like Mumbai, Nagpur, Kanpur, Madurai, Ahemdabad, Kolkata, Tuticorin, Cochin etc, one cannot take for granted the fact that very little has changed today. According to the census 2011, Mumbai, the financial capital of India, has the biggest share if slums; with 42% of its population residing in slums. The slum population in the states of Maharashtra, Andra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu are 10.54%, 12.04% and 8.04% respectively. This statistic can well give one an idea of social and health problems that ensue as a result of inadequate housing, water and sanitation facilities (aspects typical to slum dwelling). Social problems caused by slums- overcrowding, bad sanitation, lack of education are too many.

Two, a number of pre-capitalist relations of production co-exist with capitalist relations. For instance, the traditional caste system in India forged an unholy alliance with the process of industrialisation which resulted not in the extinction of feudalism, rather a fusion of capitalist mode of production with feudal and traditional values. While many downtrodden ‘low castes’ escaped traditional occupations to enroll themselves in ‘modern’, ‘industrial’ and ‘secular’ job profiles, but  did not grant them freedom from exploitation as one would envision. The ‘new age exploitation’ of the working class (specifically those who engage in menial labour) was driven by relentless profit motive of the capitalist owner, a production process characterised by commodity fetishism and the traditional, archaic caste-gender paradigm.

Hence, it would be safe to say that for reasons which were local (and unique) to the Indian social-cultural-economic fabric, industrialisation and modernisation defaulted on their promise of emancipation, liberation of the masses. What did prove to be accurate were Marx’s theories of alienation of labour and Weber’s theory of Iron Cage, where the worker was now reduced to a non-thinking, non-feeling, and constrained cog in the massive profit minting machine, which had the undivided support of traditional and feudal structures of authority. As the pandemic pushes more of this world to the brink, it is essential that we critique the structures that have proved to be unsustainable, discriminatory, historically bias, for, this pandemic has only exposed what has been hiding under the garb of growth, evolution and advancement.

Another structure which is worth mentioning is the State. The role of the Indian state in the context of industrialisation makes for an interesting study. The Indian state has been described by many as a neo-liberal state. Neo-liberalism is a late 20th century revival of ‘liberal’ market principles practiced in the 19th century, associated with free-market capitalism, liberal economy and minimum government interference. In India however, like industrialisation, neo-liberalism set its own course. It has been practised like a double edged sword. On the one hand by deploying the language of liberty and choice, giving individuals the opportunity to aspire, mobility by connecting them to the modern and free market, neo-liberalism tends to ‘liberate’. On the other hand one does not observe a complete withdrawal of state so as to encourage a laissez faire like environment.  The state has rather maintained a position of convenience. It has not weakened and withdrawn into the shadows. It rather lurks behind them, always watching, like the ‘Big Brother’. The state has never been as powerful as it is today with techniques like bio-surveillance, subtle (even overt in recent times) use of legitimised violence, novel methods of punishment etc to gain greater and effective control over its citizens. As a result of this ambiguous approach to neo-liberalism, one observes a convenient and ever increasing absence of state from domains like health, education, transportation and communication, social security, hygiene and sanitation, the domains which would’ve equipped the common citizen in their battle against the looming crisis. On the other hand, however, one witness the state’s imposing presence in the form of initiatives like ‘One nation, one market’, Jan Dhan yojna, demonetisation, half-hearted efforts at privatisation etc. Staying true to their stand, the State lurked behind shadows of inactivity letting crony capitalism, unsystematic industrialisation and social-cultural handicaps mark out its victims, and wait patiently, till a calamity, much like COVID-19 began preying  the ‘vulnerable’ (rather those who were pushed into becoming ‘vulnerable’ over years). The sudden spurt in positive cases over select regions in India, the appalling number of deaths, the in equipped public healthcare system and the subsequent collapse of the system of social security, education and civic liberties were not mere coincidences. These were ticking time bombs waiting to be set off; conspiracy hatched by the unholy alliance of crony capitalism and the neo-liberal state. In the coming times, the state is likely to have an important role to play with regards to the process of development and distribution of a vaccine for COVID. This particularly is true for the Indian state, responsible for the multitudes that have no choice but to invest their faith in the subsidised public health sector.  Whether or not the state chooses to seek redemption by taking the lead in the production, procurement and distribution of the envisioned COVID vaccine would be a supremely important factor with respect to the vision of our post-COVID world.

An objective overview of social facts shows us why the crisis situation was bound to unfold differently across the nation and observe patterns, if any. One such pattern observed was that of complicity between high levels of industrialisation and an equally high number of positive COVID cases. Though, this article does not claim that rampant industrialisation along with the neo-liberal state must be solely held responsible for the manner in which the pandemic unfolded, it does, however, strongly recommend critiquing the intersection of the two structural institutions.  This would help us locate the historicity of disasters as, not mere coincident but rather as a spectre which was in the offing for quite a while; one that is likely to repeat itself over and over owing to the unsustainable character of the alliance between the State and the market.

As mental health crisis deepens, New York City hospitals leave psych units shuttered

Josh Varlin

The coronavirus pandemic has exacerbated the preexisting mental health crisis across the world, with need increasing even as access to treatment is curtailed. Despite this mounting crisis, psychiatric wards across New York City, the global epicenter of the pandemic for weeks in the spring, have remained closed with no plans to reopen.

A September report from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) gives some indication of the simultaneous increase in need and decrease in access. DOHMH found that mental health emergency department visits decreased sharply in mid-March, falling from nearly 5,000 visits per week (the 2019 average) to less than 3,000 in March and April. The data, which go through June 17, do not show visits returning to normal.

This is not from decreased need. Calls, texts and chats to NYC Well, a municipal mental health line, spiked in mid-March well over the 2019 average—nearly 2,000 more per week at the peak—and remained significantly higher through the latest data. Instead, people were staying away from emergency rooms due to fear of catching the coronavirus.

Indeed, even had they reached hospitals, several hospitals in and around New York City have had their psychiatric wards closed, limiting capacity and forcing people to travel across the city for the help they need. The closure of these units is a major attack on mental health care coming amid an unprecedented crisis. While providing beds to treat COVID-19 patients has been the pretext for closing these units, hospitals have not laid out when, if ever, they would reopen, even as elective surgeries have resumed.

The pandemic and the concurrent economic crisis have dramatically increased stressors leading to poor mental health outcomes—either exacerbating existing mental illnesses or driving people into depression and anxiety disorders. The same DOHMH study, based on a poll conducted in May, found that 35 percent of adult New York City residents felt cut off or distant from people, 41 percent lost their job or some hours at their job, and 44 percent reported “overwhelming or above average financial stress.”

These factors have produced anxiety and depression among hundreds of thousands. According to the DOHMH, a full 44 percent of respondents experienced “symptoms of anxiety related to coronavirus” in the prior two weeks, while 36 percent reported “probable depression.” Adults have noticed similar parallels in their children, with 35 percent reporting that there has been a negative impact on the emotional/behavioral health of at least one child in their household.

A study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) based on June data found that essential workers and unpaid adult caregivers “reported having experienced disproportionately worse mental health outcomes, increased substance use, and elevated suicidal ideation.”

It is not yet clear if this has resulted in an increase in suicides, which appear to be steady so far this year compared to prior years, although some deaths have yet to be logged as suicides pending investigation.

Just as need for mental health care skyrockets, access to psychiatric and detoxification units at hospitals has plummeted. Units at hospitals in the New York City area have closed since the pandemic began:

Syosset Hospital, Syosset, New York (Image credit: Syosset Hospital)

set Hospital and a Brooklyn methadone clinic in the Northwell Health system, NewYork-Presbyterian’s Methodist Hospital and Allen Hospital and Westchester Medical System’s Hudson Valley Hospital.

None have reopened, and it seems increasingly unlikely that they will.

Psychiatric units have been on the chopping block for years due to their general unprofitability. The 30-bed unit at Allen Hospital, for example, located in Inwood, was nearly closed in June 2018, and was kept open only due to public outcry. Coverage of the attempted closure at the time noted that the median income near Allen was substantially lower than the income near other NewYork-Presbyterian hospitals, indicating that its permanent closure would affect poor workers rather than better-off city residents.

North of New York City, the psychiatric and detox inpatient beds at HealthAlliance Hospital in Kingston, New York, have likewise been closed since the pandemic began. The 60-bed unit provided the only services of its kind in Ulster County, and sources have confirmed to the Hudson Valley-based River that Westchester Medical Center is seeking to permanently move those beds out of the Kingston facility.

The true scope of the crisis is unknown. The DOHMH told the World Socialist Web Site that it does not keep figures for wait times to receive inpatient psychiatric services. A source at the Mount Sinai Beth Israel Department of Psychiatry told the WSWS that they are not accepting new patients for psychotherapy at this time. Other facilities did not return calls from the WSWS.

The drive to close these units and convert them, after the pandemic, to another specialty is driven by the large operating costs of providing psychiatric care compared to more lucrative care. The average net patient revenue (NPR) per psychiatric bed, adjusted for inflation, actually fell from $99,000 in 2000 to $88,000 in 2018, according to a report by the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA). “In contrast, the average NPR per bed across all beds, regardless of type, was about $1.6 million in 2018,” the report notes. In other words, the 30-bed unit at Allen, if it were converted to a 30-bed unit pulling in average revenue, would generate an additional $15 million for NewYork-Presbyterian.

Indeed, the reduction in psychiatric beds is a long-term trend. Across New York state, psychiatric beds have decreased from 6,055 in 2000 to 5,419 in 2018. Losses have been concentrated in New York City and on Long Island, which gained between them some half a million residents during this period.

Outpatient services such as weekly therapy sessions have not even come close to filling the gap left by the lack of inpatient services. It must be stressed that for many individuals, inpatient care will be by far the best treatment plan. With these services cut, many must turn to outpatient care.

However, due to health concerns around the coronavirus, many of these services have transitioned to telehealth. While telehealth can provide a role in expanding access to health care to remote areas and maintaining continuity during pandemics, it is obviously inferior in many respects to in-person care, including for therapy sessions.

Even putting that aside, during the height of the pandemic from March to May, compared to the same period in 2019, there was “a 41.2% overall decline in the use of behavioral health care services among New York-area members … with one of the following diagnoses: bipolar disorder/manic, major depressive disorder, schizophrenia and personality disorders,” according to MedCityNews.

The mental health crisis will be further exacerbated by cuts to local governments by Albany. Nadia Chait, associate director of policy and advocacy for the Coalition for Behavioral Health, told a State Assembly hearing in September, as described by the Albany-based Times Union, that “the providers her coalition represents have stopped filling staff vacancies and anticipate program closures, layoffs and service reductions should the cuts become permanent.”

Without access to mental health care, those with mental illnesses will increasingly be left to fend for themselves. Already, 45 percent of city detainees have a mental health diagnosis, and 17 percent have a serious mental illness. Even before they can be warehoused in jails, many people with mental illnesses are first brutalized by cops or even killed at the hands of police. That the answer to mental illness is not treatment but policing speaks volumes of the plans the American ruling class has for working class more broadly.

The resources exist to provide quality mental health care, including inpatient care, while still combating and, indeed, containing COVID-19. It is possible to ensure enough hospital beds both for COVID-19 patients and those who require hospitalization due to mental illnesses. However, with all that wealth monopolized by the ruling class, placing their profits over public health and social need, nothing can be done. Workers—in health care and other industries, in New York City and internationally—must unite in the struggle for genuine socialized medicine.

Protest strikes in German public transit: Workers’ anger grows over unsafe working conditions

Andy Niklaus & Christoph Vandreier

In the past week, public transport workers in numerous German cities have stopped work. While the union wants to limit the dispute to a set of minimum demands, anger is growing among the workers over miserable wages and completely unsafe working conditions.

Last Tuesday, buses and trains in Kassel, Wiesbaden and Frankfurt were hit by strike action, followed by Bremen and cities in Lower Saxony on Wednesday. On Thursday, depots throughout North Rhine-Westphalia remained closed for a whole day, and on Friday there was a full-day strike by the BVG public transit workers in Berlin and Brandenburg and a strike by bus drivers in Munich.

The trade union Verdi is demanding a nationwide collective agreement framework for the 87,000 employees of approximately 130 municipal transport companies. The agreement is to lay down minimum standards regarding vacation days, overtime pay and shift allowances. In some federal states, Verdi is also calling for shorter working hours or shorter shifts.

A picket in Berlin

The negotiations do not deal with specific wage and salary levels. These are laid out in numerous individual collective agreements—which the union and employers have used in recent years to divide the workers from different companies and regions—but exclusively with framework collective agreements regulating working hours, conditions, etc. Even if Verdi’s limited demands were implemented, little would change in terms of the miserable wages and working conditions.

But as the experience of the last decades shows, Verdi collaborates with the employers to push through ever new cuts against the workers. When the trade union calls for protest strikes, it is reacting, above all, to the enormous anger that has accumulated among workers inside the companies, especially during the pandemic. It is a means to let off steam and prevent any independent actions and to ensure that transport operations are maintained even under the adverse and dangerous conditions of the pandemic.

This is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that Verdi has not included a single demand for occupational safety under pandemic conditions within the framework agreements. To properly ensure the safety of drivers and passengers, all buses and trains must be equipped with modern air filters, vehicles disinfected at every shift change and the number of passengers strictly limited.

If, as is currently the case, the number of infections increases explosively, regular operations must be suspended. Instead, special buses with particular equipment, disinfection and specially protected personnel must be used to transport personnel necessary to maintain basic medical and public services. But Verdi has nothing to offer in this regard.

For many workers, on the other hand, it is precisely these life-threatening working conditions that are their main concern. “I live in a high-risk area and was given a bus to drive with a torn tarpaulin in front of the cab,” Kaya, a driver for BVG, told the World Socialist Web Site. “The operations control centre asked me to drive through a hotspot with an 80 percent passenger load. I refused.”

Defective protective film in a Berlin bus

A colleague at the BVG subsidiary Berlin Transport, who wished to remain anonymous, reported thoroughly unsafe working conditions. “Today, only eight out of 250 buses are washed every night. The remaining vehicles are not disinfected and go back into operation having only been swept. When taking over a bus, the driver’s seat must first be wiped down, not only because it is dirty, but because of the virus. Anyone who does not have his own disinfectant with him and cannot clean the steering wheel, including the entire driver’s workplace, is stuck.”

The general condition of the vehicles was just as big a “catastrophe” as their hygiene conditions. “The majority of buses are just scrap metal. Ventilation filters and pollen filters are not replaced or renewed—this increases the risk of infection. I bought a mask from the pharmacy myself because the masks we receive from BVG would have to be thrown away after two hours. Masks should be handed out every day, even for those on late duty.”

In a service instruction in March, i.e., at the then high point of the pandemic, BVG even said that drivers were not permitted to wear a face mask while driving, although the road traffic regulations would permit this. In contrast to passengers, who could wear masks, drivers were placed at the mercy of COVID-19 aerosols without protection.

“Verdi is unbelievable,” the transport worker continued. “One could have said, ‘Yes: The strike funds are full, now it’s time for a real strike!’ But instead, they don’t even fight for protection among the private drivers, who often only have to drive around with a warning tape in the bus.”

A tram driver from Munich described the measures taken to deal with the virus by the local transit company MVG there as “ridiculous.” She found it particularly “difficult” that in the Bavarian capital, only bus drivers were called on to strike. “I thought to myself, ‘Great, now we’ll pull in our tails again and only let the bus drivers go on strike’.”

Many colleagues associate the lack of infection protection with the already miserable working conditions. “I was shocked when I read what colleagues who work for private companies driving buses earn,” a Munich tram driver told the WSWS. “I thought we MVG people were badly paid, but it gets worse.” The strikes had shown that workers are slowly waking up. “More and more people are starting to think the same because they realize that the individual can achieve nothing, and that collective action can cause fear [for the employers].”

A crowded Berlin bus

Kaya noted, “Our shifts are getting longer and longer. Especially during the pandemic, there have been cutbacks and savings again: Here, some things were added [to our duties], there, turnaround time was stolen—even more than before coronavirus! That happened pretty fast, so it was well thought out from above.”

A colleague added, “In some weeks, I feel burnt out and so broken that I often fall asleep sitting at home. The rest period between duties should be increased to at least 14 hours—how many times has each of us fallen asleep for a second!”

The strike raises a very fundamental social question: Will the pandemic be given free rein, so as not to jeopardize the profits of the banks and corporations—or will the greatest efforts be made to protect the vast majority of the population from the deadly virus?

This is one of the reasons why the strikers enjoy overwhelming solidarity among the general population, despite the restrictions this imposes. A recent Forsa flash poll shows that almost two-thirds of those surveyed (63 percent) have sympathy for the protest strikes.

Employers and the media, however, are conducting a dirty campaign against the striking workers. The Berliner Tagesspiegel, for example, writes that the workers—who risk their lives every day to maintain public transport—are not entitled to shorter working hours because BVG has lost revenues due to the pandemic and the state has already spent billions to save large corporations. According to the paper, the strike has led to “the viruses celebrating another travelling coronavirus party.”

BVG also claimed that the striking workers were responsible for rising infection figures. “Given rising coronavirus cases, the warning strike, planned for a full 24 hours, also comes at a completely wrong time and exposes our passengers to an unnecessary health risk,” the company announced.

It is the companies and governments at state and federal level that have driven the explosion in infection rates with the completely unsafe reopening of businesses and schools and unsafe public transport. To secure their profits, they are willing to walk over dead bodies.

The transit strikes, on the other hand, show the only way to stop this madness and protect workers from mass infection. They must be extended indefinitely to the whole of Germany and made the starting point for a general strike. Workers must not resume work until safe working conditions can be guaranteed.

This requires the establishment of independent action committees, directed not only against the government and corporations but also against the trade unions, who regard their role as enforcing the dictates of the companies against the workers and ensuring that transport operations run smoothly under the most adverse conditions.

COVID-19 devastates Native American reservations in California and across the US

Kevin Martinez & Marko Leone

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a harmful impact on Native American reservations across much of the United States. As many tribes rely on revenue from casinos and other gambling operations, the pandemic has led to job losses and depleted funding for social services.

The residents of reservations—among the poorest and most isolated places in the country, where homes often lack electricity or running water—have suffered higher than average rates of infection and death from coronavirus.

While the pandemic has continued to rage across the US, the wealthy owners of lucrative casinos have insisted on re-opening without any significant restrictions regardless of the health consequences. Casino workers and tribal residents, among the most exploited layers of the population, have been made to suffer as a result.

Marquee outside the Golden Moon Casino and Hotel run by the Choctaw Tribe. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)

Early last month, a Harrah’s Resort Southern California executive resigned in May after raising concerns about reopening the casino in the middle of a global pandemic. The resort is owned by the Rincon Band of the Luiseno Indians.

Darrel Pilant, a general manager and senior vice president and employee of 23 years, filed a lawsuit against the casino’s operator, Caesars Entertainment Inc., after claiming he was forced to resign after Harrah’s made moves to reopen its casino resort back in May of this year, in defiance of a mandated stay at home order issued by Governor Gavin Newsom.

Pilant stated that the decision to reopen the casino caused “serious adverse health and safety consequences involving employees and customers contracting COVID-19.”

Through September of this year, 217 residents of San Diego County who contracted the novel virus reported being at a casino within two weeks of becoming ill. The numbers reported included 12 hospitalizations and the death of one casino patron.

All the confirmed cases were connected to San Diego County’s nine casinos and include 76 employees and 141 patrons.

Casino spokespersons were quick to deny responsibility by stating that casino patrons who tested positive cannot confirm that they contracted the virus from a casino itself, and furthermore, San Diego County officials have refused to name the specific tribal casinos where each of the outbreaks have occurred.

From the standpoint of private profit, the identification of any specific casino as a coronavirus hotspot would mean dramatic loss of revenue as patrons would avoid the location in an effort to protect themselves.

Pilant also stated in the lawsuit that Democratic Governor Newsom and San Diego County administrative officials were fully on board with the decision to reopen the casino, despite the illegality and overt recklessness of reopening a gambling center in the middle of a pandemic.

Casino workers in San Diego have previously voiced health and sanitization concerns. Photos have surfaced with casino patrons not wearing masks or respecting social distancing measures and workers have related that patrons are frequently removing their mask to speak.

A worker at t h e Sycuan Casino Resort , owned and operated by the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation east of El Cajon, stated that he has verbal exchanges with non-masked patrons at least 20 times per day.

At the Thunder Valley Casino Resort, owned by the United Auburn Indian Community just north of Sacramento, employees have complained that the casino has been operating with less than minimal safety measures.

With casino gaming revenue being the lifeline for tribal communities, the push to reopen effectively dangled the continued operation of social infrastructure, education, and medical services over the heads of tribal residents, highlighting the heightened disparities of wealth between working class tribal members and casino owners and operators.

The reliance on income from gambling for maintaining already limited social services is an indictment of corrupt tribal leaders, who are most often tied closely to the Democratic Party and oversee conditions of deep poverty on the reservations.

The industry in San Diego County is part of a larger boom seeing annual increases in total revenue collected. California alone dominated the Indian gaming market in 2016 and amassed a total of $8.4 billion dollars in gaming revenue that year. Nationwide, California dominates a little over a quarter of the national revenue collected on just gaming alone. California tribal casinos collected nearly a billion dollars in non-gaming revenue in the same year.

With the number of positive cases in San Diego County approaching the 50 thousand mark in the next few days, and 803 confirmed deaths, the dangerous character of tribal casinos staying open with limited restrictions like temperature checks and requiring face masks puts residents across the county and more broadly in jeopardy.

Despite the much-hyped economic benefits promised by gambling on tribal reservations, the reality is that the vast majority in these communities have not seen any tangible improvement in their lives.

The latest available statistics are telling. While casinos reap billions of dollars every year for the owners and operators, Native Americans continue to have the highest poverty rate among any ethnic or racial group in the US. American Indians are much more likely to be victims of police violence and suffer a host of health problems such as diabetes and liver disease a rate higher than the population as a whole.

They also suffered the lowest educational achievement rates in comparison to other demographics. According to the US Census Bureau, from 2013-2017 just 14.3 percent of Native Americans have a bachelor’s degree or higher. By comparison, 20.6 percent of African Americans and 34.5 percent of whites have a bachelor’s degree or higher.

These processes have only accelerated under the COVID-19 pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released data that showed a disproportionate impact of the virus on American Indian/Alaska Native populations. According to the CDC, Native populations were 3.5 times more likely to be infected than non-Hispanic whites.

The Navajo Nation, the largest reservation in the US, has recorded at least 560 deaths, a larger total than 13 states and a higher death rate than any state. In Arizona, Native Americans account for 11 percent of COVID-19 fatalities, despite making up only 5 percent of the population. In

Wyoming, 30 percent of the coronavirus deaths are Native American.

Accelerated job cuts in German auto industry

Dietmar Gaienkersting

Barely a day goes by without a new announcement of cutbacks and job cuts in the auto industry in Germany. The coronavirus pandemic is being deliberately used to slash costs and increase profits.

Last Tuesday, Daimler CEO Ola Källenius announced at a conference with investors that the Mercedes auto division would reduce its fixed costs by more than a fifth by 2025 (compared to 2019) by cutting capacity and personnel costs.

Källenius made no effort to hide the reason behind the decision. The plan was to restore profits to double-digits by 2025. Even under unfavourable conditions, the company was aiming for a profit margin “in the mid to high single-digit percentage range.”

Protest in front of the Daimler plant in Berlin

The cuts program, which was already announced in recent months, is expected to result in the loss of around 30,000 jobs worldwide, i.e., almost one in ten. While the company did not confirm this figure, it left no doubt about its intent. At the same time, management declared as it always does, the aim was to find solutions that were “as socially acceptable as possible."

Some information about about the concrete consequences of the planned cutbacks has already been revealed.

According to union sources, about 1,000 of 2,500 jobs are to be cut during the next few years at the company’s engine plant in Berlin, which first opened in 1902. In return, the company declares it will invest more in battery cell research. The works council at Daimler’s main plant in Untertürkheim, Stuttgart, however, is demanding it receive the new investment funds. According to the works council, the company plans to cut around 4,000 from the 19,000-strong workforce at Untertürkheim by 2025.

At a time when workers are being forced into the factories despite the increasing risk of COVID-19 infection—in the auto industry, only about a third of all employees are on the Kurzarbeit social insurance program, which partially compensates workers for lost wages due to reduced working hours—Daimler board member Markus Schäfer justified the cuts with the words: “The ultimate criterion is the health of this company.”

Schäfer said that Mercedes had deliberately set up production facilities in Eastern Europe and China in order to secure its competitiveness via a “mixed calculation” of “German high-wage locations” with lower-cost personnel abroad. No plant can therefore guarantee that it can maintain its workforce forever. This applies in particular to engine and component plants specialising in combustion engines, which are being directly affected by the transition to electric cars.

Instead of uniting the company's workers against these attacks, the auto union IG Metall and the union-controlled Daimler general works council (a type of corporatist body common in Germany) are dividing the workforce by denouncing workers in Eastern Europe. If any investment in conventional drive systems is made at all, “it will be in Poland or Romania,” declared works council chairman Michael Brecht and his deputy Ergun Lümali in a leaflet addressed to the more than 170,000 Daimler employees in Germany.

Daimler is just one of several corporations that have announced accelerated cuts to jobs and conditions in recent weeks and months.

In mid-September, Volkswagen announced the elimination of 9,500 jobs at its truck subsidiary MAN in Germany and Austria. Last Tuesday, the new MAN chief executive, Andreas Tostmann, prematurely terminated the existing site and job security agreement. This means that not only are compulsory redundancies possible, but also that benefits exceeding the general pay scale will be eliminated. A letter to employees cited “the planned reorganisation of MAN” as well as “economic reasons” as the basis for the cuts.

Only some details of the reorganisation have been released. For example, the production of heavy trucks and driver cabins is to be relocated from the main plant in Munich, possibly to Kraków in Poland. In addition, axle production in Munich could be outsourced to suppliers. This would threaten 3,000 jobs alone in Munich.

Another 1,300 jobs may be lost at the MAN engine plant in Nuremberg. Tostmann is also seeking to cut 1,500 jobs in the German service and sales network. To this end, component production is to be relocated from Salzgitter and also moved to Krakow. This would affect another 1,400 employees.

The works council at MAN is working hand in glove with management. The company's jobs protection scheme, which was extended in 2018, was due to last until 2030. The truck manufacturer has linked its termination of the scheme to an ultimatum: if a deal is reached with IG Metall and the works council by the end of the year, the contracts could come into force again “in whole or in part.” Should talks not succeed, “the agreements will expire at the end of the year or in 2021.”

It is already clear how this farce will proceed. The works council and IG Metall will approve the savings program and job cuts and then present them as a success on the basis that layoffs have been averted.

MAN works council chairman Saki Stimoniaris, who raked in 482,040 euros last year for his activities on the company supervisory board, declared: “We have no interest in any escalation.” The chairman of the VW Group works council, Bernd Osterloh, stated in the course of negotiations that the works council would “ensure that extensive job security measures come into force again.”

The job cuts at MAN are a prelude to attacks on all the 670,000 employees of the Volkswagen Group. The cancellation of guarantees against site and job cuts was backed up by VW boss Herbert Diess, who defended MAN's policy at the company’s online annual general meeting last week.

Even before the pandemic, Diess said that MAN's economic situation left it unable to fund important investments. MAN needed “restructuring with plant closures and staff reductions of around 9,500 in order to restore competitiveness,” Diess said.

The Munich-based auto manufacturer BMW announced in June plans to cut 16,000 jobs. The company is also increasing pressure on its suppliers to cut costs. Some suppliers are being asked to reduce their prices for current orders by an average of five percent by year’s end, reports the German business newspaper Wirtschaftswoche. A BMW spokeswoman argued cynically that the company could not cope with the consequences of the pandemic on its own.

Other major suppliers are also cutting tens of thousands of jobs. Last week the supervisory board of Continental decided to close its tire plant in Aachen by the end of 2021 and its auto electronics plant in Karben near Frankfurt by the end of 2024. The Continental factory in Regensburg will also be closed for re-tooling. This will affect around 4,800 jobs at the three sites. Worldwide, 30,000 jobs will be affected by the announced cutbacks at Continental, with 13,000 of them in Germany.

Two weeks ago, the auto supplier Mahle announced the closure of two of its factories in Germany. The closure of the production facility in Gaildorf in Baden-Württemberg is due to be completed in the course of 2023. At the plant, 290 workers manufacture camshafts and steel components. A second site in Freiberg, Saxony, with 85 employees, is scheduled for closure in 2022.

Mahle manufactures components for internal combustion engines, mainly pistons, but also filters and pumps. The company has cut 6,700 jobs since 2018. In mid-September, the company announced that it intended to cut a further 7,600 jobs worldwide, including 2,000 in Germany. Mahle currently still has 72,000 employees worldwide, including almost 12,000 in Germany.

Mahle's top management announced that it will start talks with the works council, once again to plan a “socially acceptable implementation” of the layoffs.

The situation is similar in company after company: workforce reduction, cuts and savings, developed and implemented by the various unions and the works councils. If they organise protests at all, they are toothless events that serve merely as an outlet to let off steam, while the unions help the big corporations to carry out the anti-worker offensive.

One example was an outdoor meeting held by the works council at the Daimler plant in Berlin on September 24. At the meeting, a leading representative of IG Metall Berlin, Jan Otto, appealed to management “to continue acting fairly and in the spirit of social partnership.”

Otto also agitated against Eastern European workers: “We will not allow management to secretly move combustion engine production lines to Romania or Poland.” Otto called on management to develop “future perspectives” for the Mercedes-Benz plant in Berlin in collaboration with the works council and the IG Metall: “We are prepared to do this and have plenty of ideas.”

Daimler workers in Berlin should take this as a warning. The union and works council will carry out the attacks the company demands. The main aim is to secure benefits for the union functionaries.

The Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei (the Socialist Equality Party in Germany) and the World Socialist Web Site call for the setting up of rank-and-file action committees that are independent of the unions and the works councils. Workers must take the struggle to defend jobs and wages into their own hands.

To do so, they must make contact with their colleagues in other factories at home and abroad. The nationalist agitation against Polish, Romanian or Chinese workers must be countered by unifying across borders. Priority must be given to lives, health and jobs of the workers, rather than profit maximisation and inflated dividends. There is enough money there in the hands of the company investors and owners.

State and federal governments conceal COVID-19 outbreaks in US schools

Chase Lawrence

Across the United States, the locations of COVID-19 outbreaks in schools are being deliberately hidden from the public, in order to prevent teachers and parents from drawing the conclusion that face-to-face instruction should stop. At the federal level, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Education have no programs in place whatsoever to track coronavirus cases in schools or colleges.

The list of states not reporting outbreaks in schools includes California, Nevada, Idaho, Alaska, Wisconsin, North Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Alabama, West Virginia, Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware. The rest of the states are split between having either limited data or district-level data, which often does not disclose the specific schools where an outbreak occurs.

Significantly, the locations of reported cases are known by state governments, and it is well within the capabilities of the state and federal government to report case locations. They are deliberately concealing this information as part of the broader back-to-work campaign to force parents to work in unsafe conditions, all to produce profits for the financial oligarchy.

North Paulding High School in Georgia, on August 4, 2020 (Photo: Twitter @ihateiceman)

The COVID Monitor website, which independently tracks coronavirus cases in school, has reported 42,778 cases in K-12 schools as of this writing, with most cases occurring after schools reopened en masse in late July. This figure is certainly an under-count, but nevertheless illustrates the criminality of school reopenings.

It is worth examining some of the specific efforts by the state governments to cover up the locations of outbreaks in schools.

In Illinois, the state government knows of at least 44 outbreaks at school buildings around the state and has deliberately withheld the location of these outbreaks from the public. The state’s Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker has endorsed school reopenings, stating, “I’m very much in favor of trying to get our kids back into in-person learning.” Classes started in-person during mid-August for most schools in the state, with an uptick in cases corresponding with this development.

As of October 2, at least 8,668 children ages 5-17 have tested positive for the virus across Illinois, with five children dying in the same age range. More than 1,800 public schools are open for in-person instruction, with roughly a quarter of students and staff attending only in-person and almost three-quarters attending at least partially in-person.

In Highland Community Unit School District 5 in Madison County, near St. Louis, which only announces cases by email to parents, there has been an outbreak with 25 cases confirmed after the district reopened with in-person classes. After having trended downwards, the county has seen a spike in cases since October 7, roughly corresponding to the start of in-person classes.

In New Trier Township School District 203 in Cook County, Illinois, which started on October 5 and announces cases every two weeks on its dashboard, at least 60 students and 13 school workers are now in quarantine. Cook county has also seen an increase in the seven-day average following school re-openings, although the full impact will probably be delayed due to the slow turnaround in testing. The county has recorded one of the highest confirmed cases and deaths in the US, with 63,990 cases and 1,967 deaths.

In New Jersey, teachers have collected data showing that 130 schools in the state have reported coronavirus cases. There is no significant effort by the government to track case counts in schools, with the recently launched state government website only showing 11 outbreaks in schools.

In Passaic Valley High School, there was an outbreak on September 18 reported by teachers that forced over 100 students into quarantine and ultimately caused the district to be shut down. The county has seen 19,702 cases and 1,255 deaths, with cases increasing following school reopenings that began on October 5. Democratic governor and multi-millionaire Phil Murphy has cited privacy laws as the reason for covering up outbreak locations.

In Texas, a report issued by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and Department of State Health omitted the locations of around 2,700 cases from schools with less than 50 students in the first week of school reopenings. The reason given by the TEA for the omissions was that by releasing case locations they would violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

Texas had the highest number of new cases in the US yesterday, with another 3,324 people becoming infected. The state government is going to wait a full four weeks after publishing the first report to reevaluate districts’ enrollment for in-person learning. The state and school districts lack any testing or contact tracing requirements, leaving it up to parents and teachers to self report cases.

In Iowa, which is currently a “red zone” as documented in a White House Coronavirus Task Force report, an effort by a concerned couple has revealed over 400 cases in schools across the state. Iowa officials have cited HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ) to hide data in the pandemic.

Health officials in Georgia have recently dropped plans to report the number of coronavirus cases in schools from weekly reports gathered from schools, while only 70 percent were reporting case numbers in the state. As with other states, officials have speciously justified their refusal to report cases in schools with the claim that the public has no legal right to information on outbreaks.

In Michigan, the Department of Health and Human Services recently issued an emergency order to disclose COVID-19 cases at schools after the Michigan Supreme Court struck down an executive order by Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer to shut down schools and some businesses. This is following earlier efforts by Whitmer to hide the location of coronavirus cases in schools and workplaces.

On top of the deliberate efforts to obscure the location of outbreaks, all states lack a meaningful testing regimen for students and teachers, crippling any response to the virus.

The invocation of privacy laws as a pretext to withhold the location of cases in schools is based on a falsification of these laws. The US Department of Education states on their website, “FERPA’s health or safety emergency provision permits such disclosures when the disclosure is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals.”

In addition to most of the aforementioned states, Indiana and Tennessee have cited the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act as a reason to obscure case locations, which is also false. HIPAA, just like FERPA, has an exemption which allows the release of information in the interest of public health and safety.

The Health and Human Services administration released a statement in light of the pandemic stating that “HIPAA Privacy Rule permits a covered entity to disclose the protected health information (PHI) of an individual who has been infected with, or exposed to, COVID-19” in certain circumstances, including in order to “notify a public health authority in order to prevent or control spread of disease.”

Suffice to say, none of the health or school privacy laws prohibit the release of information that could be used to save the lives of students, teachers, and parents, and every citation of these laws by various state agencies and governors is fraudulent.

French universities enforce de facto herd immunity policy on COVID-19

Samuel Maréchal

As part of its murderous herd immunity policy, the French government forced universities and schools to reopen with a near full program of in-person instruction in early September. The government’s aggressive university reopening campaign has benefitted from the critical support of the unions and pseudo-left political organizations.

In the month since the reopening, COVID-19 cases in France have accelerated rapidly, quadrupling from 4,982 cases per day on September 1 to 20,330 on October 9. As early as September 13, 12 clusters were reported at universities throughout the country, and on October 2, Fredérique Vidal, the minister for Higher Education, Research and Innovation, admitted 40 French higher education institutions were closed due to outbreaks. A recent report from the UK showed that half of new infections were from schools and universities, exposing the causal link between reopening and the spread of COVID-19 in the wider population.

Young people act as the primary spreaders of disease through the population and, contrary to pseudo-scientific claims promoted by the bourgeois media, are themselves vulnerable to the virus. Official government data shows that since the beginning of the pandemic, at least 40 people under the age of 30 have died from COVID-19 in France. Underlining the risk to college students, in September an otherwise healthy 19-year-old studentin the US developed neurological complications from COVID-19 and tragically died.

Universite de Paris - Faculte de Droit, Place de Pantheon (Image Credit: Peter Haas/Wikipedia)

In response to the rising tide of cases at universities, on October 5 Vidal’s ministry decreed that universities in maximal alert areas must conduct in-person classes that do not exceed 50 percent of their nominal capacity. The only other measures taken by the ministry have been to recommend that universities enforce mask wearing, encourage regular handwashing and a 7-day-quarantine for positive individuals, even though this latter measure runs contrary to the WHO’s 14-day quarantine recommendation.

Even if these limited measures were adhered to, they do not protect students or prevent universities acting as vectors for the spread through the wider population. In reality, the reopening of universities has formed an integral part of the ruling class’s herd immunity policy.

Students have taken to social media to expose and condemn the conditions this fall. Posting to #balancetafac on Twitter, Maxime, a history student, commented: “If one person is infected, the whole university will be sick within two weeks.”

Another student, at Paris II Panthéon Assas, posted a video exposing dangerous conditions at the university. Quentin, a student at the Sorbonne, wrote, “In universities all over France, it seems that the virus does not exist. The state is responsible for this.”

With crowded corridors and dining halls, as well as the close quarters and shared facilities of university residence halls, students cannot protect themselves. Another issue regularly raised by students is that lecture halls and dining facilities at universities often have little air circulation and, in some cases, do not even have windows.

A student at the École Normale Supérieure told the WSWS that the university’s administration failed to notify students that a classmate tested positive for the virus only one day after attending a lecture. It wasn’t until two weeks after the incident occurred that students were informed. In an email to the student the administration declared, “people present in the same classroom were not declared ‘contact cases,’” and then because no one else in the class had been symptomatic “you were not informed.”

Lectures without social distancing in French universities

The school cynically added this was proof that “when applied strictly (spacing, masks, disinfection), positive people do not contaminate other people in the same classroom.”

The potential consequences of this recklessness are deadly. How many students, not knowing of their exposure, continued to attend other classes, returned to shared residences, or even visited family members during this time?

The university administration’s utter disregard for student safety exposes Macron’s insistence that we must learn to “live with the virus” as a euphemism for uncontrolled spread through the population. Students are expected to get the virus, and when this does occur this information should be suppressed so that students have “no need to overreact.” Of course, by “overreaction” they mean that students take measures necessary to protect themselves and their acquaintances.

The French ruling class, mirroring the policy enforced by the financial aristocracy across the globe, have been planning to implement a policy of herd immunity since the beginning of the first confinement. The reopening of universities and schools is a crucial part of the plan to restart the extraction of profit from the working class which is desperately needed to back up the €750 billion handed to the European banks in March.

Despite having months to increase teaching resources, ensure access to high-quality internet for all and train professors to maximize the effectiveness of online learning before September, the state and university administrations instead worked to downplay the deadly implications of a return to in-person instruction.

Following these false assurances from the government, many students signed expensive rental contracts with the Centre régional des œuvres universitaires et scolaires or private landlords. This has ensured the continued flow of money to state-run halls, while students now face the prospect of months of online classes in tiny apartments with poor internet access, or returning home and endangering their families.

Other students reported that they were left uninformed about the status of their courses until days before they were scheduled to begin, leading to a last-minute scramble to find housing for the upcoming year.

Overcrowded lectures at French universities

Middle-class organizations such as the Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste (NPA) and the Solidaires student union offer no way forward to defend French students’ health and rights. Sauvons la recherche, a researchers advocacy group affiliated to Solidaires student union, republished a reactionary open letter originally published in Le Parisien on September 10 which declared, “We cannot live in fear.” Meanwhile the NPA has supported the reopening of schools.

For all their ostensible rejection of capitalism, these organizations shamelessly support and promote the dictates of the capitalist class.

Students across Europe and the US are facing the same deadly conditions. As the autumn term begins, a new wave of struggles against the herd immunity policy of capitalism and decades of crippling austerity in education is beginning throughout the world. This includes the mass occupation of 700 Greek high schools by students and teachers, the Brazilian teachers strike, and the ongoing graduate student struggles at universities across the US.

Students, youth and workers across the world are jointly confronting the deadly imposition of herd immunity by capitalist governments. As the world economic and public health crises worsen, the working class’s struggle against global capitalism is intensifying. This is the social force to which students must turn in the struggle for their own safety and rights to a high-quality education and standard of living.