21 Aug 2021

UK: How was the Plymouth mass shooting made possible?

Julie Hyland


The inquest into the murderous shooting rampage in Plymouth, southwest England opened Thursday.

Jake Davison, 22 years old, killed five people on August 12, before turning the gun on himself. It is the first mass shooting in England since 12 people were killed in Cumbria in 2010.

A Devon & Cornwall Police car (Credit: Lewis Clarke/Creative Commons)

The inquest heard that this followed an argument between Davison and his mother. Maxine Davison, who had been treated for cancer, was his first victim. Within 12 minutes, Davison had shot and killed four others: Sophie Martyn, just three years old, her father, Lee, Stephen Washington and Kate Shepherd. Two others, a mother and her son, were shot through their front door but survived. All were strangers to Davison.

Much of the media coverage has centred on Davison’s links to the “incel” or involuntarily celibate movement. Overwhelmingly young men, it combines self-loathing with misogyny, blaming women for the lack of sexual and social status. It came to prominence in 2014, when avowed incel Elliot Rodgers, also 22 years old, killed seven people in California including himself. Since then, several self-proclaimed incels have been responsible for a spate of killings in America, Canada and Germany.

Socially isolated, with long standing mental health problems, Davison posted videos of himself weightlifting in his mother’s front room and was reportedly using steroids and amphetamines. His videos on YouTube under the name Professor Waffle refer to “inceldom” and rage about his virginity and lack of attractiveness to women.

In his last video, Davison described himself as “beaten down and defeated by life” and said, “I wouldn’t clarify [sic] myself as an incel but have talked to people similar to me who have had nothing but themselves.”

The nihilism of the incel movement means it is associated with alt-right groups. So far there is little evidence that this motivated Davison, although internet posts indicate he was a supporter of former US President Donald Trump and had a fascination with guns.

The media have led demands for the shooting to be categorised as terrorism and for a clampdown on incel sites and chatrooms. Leading the way is the Guardian, with Laura Bates, founder of the Everyday Sexism Project, insisting, “The incel movement is a form of extremism and cannot be ignored anymore”, and linking it to “the everyday sexism that is rife in our society”.

The government is pressing for social network providers to collect the real identities of their users and make them available to police. This is supposedly to address the issue of how Davison was given a gun licence, despite the UK having among the strictest firearms regulations in the world.

This law-and-order approach, aimed at further eroding democratic rights, will do nothing to prevent such atrocities. Quite the reverse. It is an integral part of the reactionary climate in which disassociated and dysfunctional personalities can become mass shooters.

The “incel” movement is undoubtedly a particularly poisonous and violent outcome of the “culture wars” championed by both the right and “liberal” proponents of identity politics in its various guises.

Many of Davison’s internet posts refer to the incels he has engaged with as “similar to me, they’ve had nothing but themselves. And then they’ve socially had it tough, probably grew up in a s*** background.” He complained of “fighting an uphill battle with a big f**cking rock on my back”, while others get “a free ride to the top”. “Everything is rigged against you”, “imagine failing at everything in life and having absolutely no support whatsoever”, he says. “How can you have drive and willpower, you know, when you’ve been defeated a million times?”

This situation he blames entirely on women. There is a complete absence of awareness of any broader socio-economic context.

Then there is his fascination with guns, which has largely passed without comment in the media. At 22 years of age, Davison was born at the height of capitalist triumphalism, and its accompanying outburst of imperialist militarism. In that timeframe, the UK has been involved in 11 wars (out of the 36 since 1900). Three of them cover almost all of Davison’s short life-span—the bloody neo-colonial ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan and the open-ended “war on terror”. Those now demanding the state accrue even greater powers to “protect” women against misogyny are among the same forces that champion imperialist intervention into these countries on the grounds of defending “women’s rights”.

Davison was reportedly an apprentice crane operator at the defence and security company Babcock, one of Plymouth’s major employers. The port city is at the centre of the UK’s defence industry, with Devonport Dockyard the country’s only naval base to refit nuclear submarines. The south west is responsible for more Ministry of Defence employment and spending than any other region, with the dockyard accounting for 10 percent of Plymouth’s income.

At the same time, Plymouth has higher than average levels of poverty and deprivation. Life expectancy, even before the pandemic, was the lowest of any area in the south west, and it is no coincidence that cases of COVID-19 have risen exponentially.

Davison’s misanthropy mirrors that of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who proclaimed regarding the pandemic that he would rather “let the bodies pile high in their thousands” than impose a further lockdown. More than 150,000 people have died from COVID-19 due to the government’s “herd immunity” policy, one of the highest death rates in the world. Strikingly, Davison and Johnson both used film characters to represent their actions—Davison describing himself as the Terminator, while Johnson compared himself with Larry Vaughan, the mayor of Amity in Jaws who orders the beaches to stay open despite shark attacks.

Davison’s mental health problems were well known. He had attended a special needs school due to autism and other conditions. His former teacher, Jonathan Williams, told the media, “For me, having spent so much time with him and done all I could to help him, for it to end like this is heart-breaking. Jake would have had an education, health and care plan, which means the state would be required to provide support up to the age of 25. Was he really receiving the support needed?”

Relatives have said Maxine tried repeatedly to get help for her son for years, but “she was let down by the adult social care”. A family friend said Maxine “begged for mental health support”, but the National Health Service “said they are short staffed and that was it. The family even asked the police to come out to see him as he was talking and acting strange—they didn’t do a welfare check. And now six people are dead.”

Plymouth’s health and social care service, Livewell Southwest, confirmed they had been in contact with Davison during the pandemic by telephone but gave no further details.

Livewell Southwest has been described as a “pioneering social enterprise”, one of a number carved out of the privatisation of the NHS. A “community interest company”, created under the then Labour-controlled local authority, it took control of much of the city’s social and mental health provision. Last year, the “not for profit” enterprise made a £970,000 surplus, enabling it to hike the salary of its highest-paid director to £180,000 from £153,000.

Such moves are part of the systematic running down of social provision, especially after the 2008 financial crash and the imposition of austerity, with expenditure on public services as a share of GDP slashed to its lowest levels since the 1930s. COVID-19 has been used as the pretext for transferring even greater amounts of social wealth to the super rich, while public provision, especially in health care, is collapsing.

Finally, there is the question as to how Davison was able to hold a gun licence, despite his mental health diagnosis and previous violent incidents.

Devon and Cornwall Police has referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. Local police oversee the issuing of shotgun and firearm certificates on the grounds that they are more aware of mitigating circumstances.

Gun licences are extremely hard to obtain. Recent figures show 567,358 people licenced to hold firearm/shotgun certificates, broadly unchanged over the last decade. Those applying need to show “good reason” for their request and must prove that they “pose no danger to public safety or the peace”. Independent referees must provide character references, criminal records are searched, and an applicant’s doctor is approached for evidence of alcoholism, drug abuse or signs of a personality disorder.

Yet Davison had a history of anger-related mental health issues. In 2016, he beat up a teenager and his girlfriend. In September 2020, he assaulted two teenagers in a skate park. His gun was taken away from him by police following that incident but returned to him just months later after he apparently attended an anger management course. He had reportedly beaten up his father around the same time.

Relatives of Davison’s victims have spoken of their anger that a young man with such a history was considered a suitable candidate for a shotgun. Williams asked, “How is it possible that a police officer read Jake’s history of obsessive compulsive disorder, anger issues and depression and concluded he should be allowed to own a firearm?”

It is a further tragedy that the victims and their families are unlikely to receive any satisfactory answer to their questions because that would mean the ruling elite admitting to the malignant tendencies they are responsible for incubating and encouraging.

Reopening of French schools threatens children’s lives

Samuel Tissot


Amid the surge of the Delta variant in France, the Macron government plans in less than two weeks to crowd millions of children back into schools. Starting on September 2, millions of French students will return to lecture halls and student canteens, regardless of their vaccination status.

As in the September 2020 school reopening in France (when daily cases averaged just 5,407), this will lead to a new surge of COVID-19 cases and the propagation of new variants in a population where only 56 percent are fully vaccinated. Daily cases in France have averaged 23,279 over the last seven days. The 145 deaths recorded on August 17 was the highest total since May.

Despite widespread anti-scientific claims by the capitalist media that the virus isn’t dangerous for the young, as of July 2021, at least 16 school-aged children had died from COVID-19 in French hospitals. University-age students have also suffered severely throughout the pandemic. In the 20-29 age group, there have been 81 recorded COVID-19 deaths in hospitals. These deaths occurred before the propagation of the Delta variant, which now accounts for over 90 percent of France’s cases and is much more deadly and damaging for children and youth.

Furthermore, the Delta variant is more infectious, deadly, and extremely dangerous for children. Its spread has been associated with record child hospitalizations and deaths in India, the United States and Indonesia. Since the beginning of July, over 100 child deaths every week have been recorded each week by the Indonesian Pediatric Society. This August, at least four children have died in the United States from COVID-19 following infection at school.

As in the United States, the reopening of French schools, even as tens of thousands of infections are recorded daily, will accelerate the spread of the virus and lead to more tragic, preventable deaths.

In late July, French Education Minister Jean-Michel Blanquer unveiled a four-tiered plan that amounted to a commitment to avoid suspending in-person education, no matter the human cost. The green, amber, orange, and red levels are a hodgepodge of partial measures, including mask-wearing, group mixing and the cancellation of certain sports. In the context of mass community transmission these rules will not be enough to protect children, teachers or families.

Only at orange and red level is there any return to online education. In a “red” alert level, 15- and 16-year-olds will have hybrid classes at 50 percent capacity and lycée (high school) students will also have hybrid classes. Though vaccinated individuals can infect others with the virus, if a secondary school class member tests positive, then only those unvaccinated students will be sent home. Primary school classes will continue with in-person education, regardless of alert levels.

Part of the government’s plans to ensure in-person education continues is the vaccination of 12- to 18-year-olds, if parental permission is granted. At the end of September, the vaccine passport for social and cultural events will also be extended to all adolescents over age 12, although it will not apply to schools. Blanquer also said that 600,000 tests will be performed a week. However, since over 12.4 million children and 821,000 teachers attend schools in France, this will be nowhere near sufficient to prevent major outbreaks.

Moreover, the alert level is arbitrarily set by the government, meaning that the implementation of these limited rules will be made in line with the level of death the government thinks it can get away with, rather than any objective scientific criteria. The deadly implications of this can already be seen on the French island of Réunion in the Indian Ocean. Despite a record 3,590 cases last week, the equivalent of nearly 275,000 weekly cases in mainland France’s population, 220,000 school children returned to classrooms there last Monday.

The Macron government’s plan has nothing to do with defending children’s health or education, but seeks to reduce disruption to profit extraction from working families as much as possible. Only children old enough to stay at home while their parents go to work are to receive online education. Regardless of how many are dying, children too young to stay at home without parental supervision and who are totally unprotected against the virus are to be forced to stay in school.

Ruling circles are well aware of the danger posed by variants to children and the potential for a wave of children’s deaths and serious illnesses provoking explosive outrage among workers. Last month, High Commissioner for Planning, François Bayrou said: “I live with a fear of this virus, that one day a mutation will make the virus extremely harmful to children. … If it affected children, especially young children, then I think we would be faced with waves that would call into question the very stability of society.”

Yet this is precisely the scenario that the government’s own policy is setting into motion. The coronavirus, and particularly its delta variant, is a deadly virus capable of causing severe disease and death in all layers of the population. As it rips through the body, even in non-fatal cases, it causes severe inflammation of vital organs, including the brain and heart.

Allowing mass infection of children could not only cause deaths and a surge of infections in the coming weeks and months, but plague entire generations with life-long consequences. Even less potent variants have left many in these age groups plagued by the effects of Long COVID, including the devastating impact of COVID-19 infection on cognitive development.

The Macron government knows this very well, but it is preparing a mass slaughter and long-term damage to the young—yet again accepting mass infection and death to protect corporate profits.

Macron’s “herd immunity” policy has been supported by the union bureaucracies and pseudo-left parties during the pandemic. Nowhere has this been more explicit than their support for the government’s deadly policy of keeping schools open no matter the cost. The Stalinist General Confederation of Labour (CGT) and the Unitary Union Federation (FSU) have explicitly backed reopening schools since the summer of 2020—isolating teachers and students striking against a return to in-person learning last year, even as Macron’s policemen violently attacked them.

Moreover, pseudo-left groups like the Morenoite Révolution Permanente have anti-scientifically insisted that schools can be reopened safely by marginally changing security protocols, while denouncing health measures necessary to contain the deadly virus as “authoritarian.”

This treachery even allowed Blanquer to boast that France has kept its children in school longer than any other European nation. It is impossible to negotiate with the murderous representatives of the ruling class or to appeal to them to see sense. A movement must be built to oppose them.

Under conditions of the rapid spread of the Delta variant internationally, Macron’s deadly school opening must be opposed. Teachers and parents must prepare mass strike action independently of the corrupt unions, coordinated with teachers and workers across Europe and beyond. They must demand the suspension of in-person schooling, all non-essential production, and a policy of social isolation with full compensation until the virus is brought under control and the population is fully vaccinated.

Australia: More job cuts as Telstra divides business

Noel Holt


The Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union (CEPU) has begun negotiations with Telstra over a new enterprise agreement (EA) covering thousands of technicians at Australia’s largest telecommunications corporation.

The formerly government-owned entity announced plans in March to split the company into four business units, InfraCo-Fixed, InfraCo-Towers, ServeCo and Telstra International.

Telstra is aiming to establish separate EAs in each of these business units, atomising the workforce and further constraining workers’ already limited rights to oppose attacks on their jobs, pay and conditions. Under Australia’s draconian Fair Work Act, Telstra workers will be barred from defending the rights of their colleagues in other business units.

The CEPU, which backs the entire Fair Work framework, is also facilitating this attempt to divide workers. It stated on July 23: “The Union bargaining team has not yet had time to consider this issue in any great depth, but at this stage, our position remains that—we still prefer one agreement for the Telstra group workforce.”

These assertions have no credibility whatsoever. Telstra is in the final stages of a four-year restructure that the unions have enforced. The company first indicated its plans to split the business late last year, and confirmed them in March. The union does not want to openly endorse the carve-up, because of widespread opposition among workers, and so, instead, claims that it is still “considering” the issue. In the weeks since, no further statement has been issued.

The CEPU has not opposed any of Telstra’s other flagged demands, and has informed members it is willing to negotiate on “all matters.” The union has not yet issued any log of claims. In other words, everything is on the table, and the starting point of negotiations is what cuts to pay, conditions and jobs the CEPU is able to ram through.

Telstra is angling for increased “flexibility,” including split shifts and work outside of normal hours. The company claims that some basic conditions, in the existing agreement, such as 36.75-hour weeks, 15 weeks’ sick leave and its “above industry standard” redundancy package will be retained.

Telstra indicated it would also be seeking to have the changes included in a variation to the “Telstra Award 2015,” which can only be altered by application to Australia’s pro-business industrial court, the Fair Work Commission.

In negotiations for the current EA, the CEPU agreed to meagre pay “increases” of just 1.8 percent in 2019-20, and 2 percent in 2020-21, less than the annual increase in the cost of living at the time.

As the final touches are put on the union-management agreement, around 2,000 Telstra workers stand to lose their jobs before the end of the year. A further 1,600 workers, indirectly employed by the company, also face the scrapheap.

These cuts are the final stage in Telstra’s three-year $1 billion “T22” cost-cutting program, which has destroyed at least 8,000 jobs since it was announced in June 2018.

While the CEPU has bemoaned the cuts, it has ensured that they proceed without opposition. The union has suppressed widespread anger among workers, ensured that no action has been carried out against the cuts, and has promoted the company’s bogus “employee assistance” and “career transition” programs, as well as vague promises of possible redeployment for some laid-off staff.

Telstra’s T22 cost-reduction plan followed a $3 billion restructure investment announced in 2016, which was the first stage in preparing Telstra for its expansion into Australia’s $50 billion government-funded monopoly National Broadband Network company (NBN Co). The restructure involved creating a wholly-owned infrastructure business unit, Telstra InfraCo, with the plan that this would allow Telstra to incorporate NBN Co into its business.

Under the plan, all of Telstra’s infrastructure assets, along with close to 3,000 employees, were transferred into Telstra InfraCo, which then sold its services to Telstra, to wholesale customers and to NBN Co. Rather than transferring employees across to the newly formed Telstra InfraCo, Telstra intended to terminate current employees, forcing them to re-apply for their old jobs in the new business unit. This was eventually abandoned amid widespread opposition.

Telstra’s move to use Telstra InfraCo to buy into NBN Co was dealt a blow in 2019. Federal Communications Minister Paul Fletcher made it clear that Telstra’s vertical structure, including retail, as well as Telstra InfraCo, meant it could not legally own the NBN wholesale network. This meant that Telstra needed to carry out further restructuring, to fully decouple its non-retail and infrastructure business.

In March this year, Telstra announced that it had begun the process of splitting its business operations into four subsidiaries, under a holding company called Telstra HoldCo, in which shareholders will hold assets. The four subsidiaries are InfraCo-Fixed (the physical infrastructure assets including the fibre and exchanges that form Telstra’s fixed telecom network), InfraCo-Towers (mobile network tower assets), ServCo (the customer-facing side) and Telstra International (international business including undersea cables).

In June, Telstra announced the sale of 49 percent equity in InfraCo-Towers, to raise $2.8 billion, half of which was returned to shareholders in dividends. The sale boosted Telstra’s stock by 25 percent, compared with the beginning of 2021.

This sale of Telstra’s mobile towers to a well-heeled consortium, consisting of the Future Fund, the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation and Sunsuper, was aimed at putting InfraCo-Towers in a strong position to raise the investment capital needed to expand the mobile phone infrastructure network.

Telstra CEO Andy Penn said he intended “going the same way” with InfraCo-Fixed. This would better position the subsidiary to independently raise investment capital to make a strong bid for a stake in NBN Co.

These major restructure developments will inevitably mean further attacks on the jobs and working conditions of Telstra employees. The record of the CEPU demonstrates that it will seek to impose every demand of Telstra and its ultra-wealthy shareholders. Over the last decade, the union has overseen and enforced the destruction of tens of thousands of permanent jobs, and the massive growth of insecure contract positions.

Pregnant women succumbing to Delta variant in the US, leaving behind scores of broken families

Norisa Diaz


Another cruel aspect of the virulent Delta variant is the rate at which pregnant women, largely unvaccinated, are giving birth to their newborn babies desperately ill or as their final act before succumbing to COVID-19.

A number of counties and hospital systems throughout the country are reporting concerning spikes in the numbers of pregnant women admitted to hospital and growing numbers of deaths. Pregnant women infected with the virus have an increased risk of progressing to a more severe illness.

A pregnant woman waits in line for groceries with hundreds during a food pantry, sponsored by Healthy Waltham for those in need due to the COVID-19 virus outbreak, at St. Mary's Church in Waltham, Mass. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

The virulent Delta variant which is spreading quickly throughout the globe is putting increasing numbers of pregnant women in the ICU. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as of Friday August 20, a total of 18,262 pregnant women have been hospitalized from a known 107,532 total cases. More than 14,500 have been placed in intensive care and 10,003 of those have been ventilated. The total number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths among pregnant women stands at 128.

Vaccination rates among pregnant women are alarmingly low with the CDC reporting on August 11 that only 23 percent have received at least one dose and some 77 percent of expecting women remain un-vaccinated.

  • First time Florida mother Kristen McMullen, 30, began developing symptoms 3 weeks prior to her due date. After a four-day hospital stay she was sent home with antibiotics but would return within 48 hours unable to breath. Upon admittance doctors performed an emergency C-section as her husband Keith was forced to wait at home. McMullen was able to hold her newborn daughter Summer Reign once before being moved to the ICU moments after giving birth. She then saw her daughter only through FaceTime before dying ten days later on August 6. She leaves behind her husband Keith and newborn daughter.
  • Greyzie Miller, a young Jacksonville mother died August 15 after battling COVID-19 for weeks after giving birth to her baby girl. A fundraiser for her family said Greyzie was 31 weeks pregnant when doctors suggested an emergency cesarean section. Evie Aura Miller was born nine weeks prematurely and placed in the NICU. Greyzie was put into an induced coma with a ventilator which she was on for 17 days before her left lung and then right lung collapsed, and eventually her heart gave out, according to the GoFundMe page. She leaves behind her newborn baby girl, Evie, her two-year-old son, Silas, and her fiancé, David Miller who was able to take his newborn daughter home the day after he lost his wife.
  • An anonymous newborn girl was left orphaned in Mississippi when both the baby’s parents died of COVID-19. WBRC Birmingham reported that the unnamed mother was 32-years-old and in good health. She was admitted to a Mississippi hospital with COVID-19 complications and died within one week. Her last act was giving birth to her baby girl. The young mother was one of two pregnant women who passed away from COVID-19 in Mississippi last week. The child is receiving emergency pediatric care at University of Alabama at Birmingham. The baby’s father also tragically died of the virus, leaving her a ward of the state.
  • Pregnant Louisiana mother Lacresanna Williams, 21, of Shreveport, and her 42-year-old mother Victoria Williams died of COVID-19 just one day apart. Lacresanna tested positive for the virus during a routine checkup. The very next day, she died after delivering her baby via emergency C-section. Her aunt Cassandra Martin told TV station KSLA that the news sent Williams’ mother, Victoria Williams, into a panic. Victoria Williams did not tell her family that she had also contracted COVID-19. The 42-year-old woman died the following day. The infant is Lacresanna’s second child, in addition to a 1-year-old baby. Her grandmother, Earlie Williams, told KSLA: “She loses her life and leaves two precious babies here. And right behind her she loses her momma. She left five kids.”
  • Paige Ruiz, a 32-year-old Fort Worth, Texas mother of two died on August 15. Ruiz was the coordinator of student learning outcomes and federal programs for the Joshua Independent School District. She was due to have her baby on July 30 and she tested positive for COVID-19 just days before, on July 24. Ruiz had to go to the emergency room with difficulty breathing. Doctors performed an emergency C-section on August 2. She was taken off intubation and began to recover—before having complications that took her life August 15. Ruiz’s mother Robin Zinsou noted to WFAA “I kept asking her, ‘Have you talked to the doctor about getting the vaccine?’ and she said, 'No, mom. I’m going to wait until after I have the baby.’” In the two weeks before Ruiz took a turn for the worst, Zinsou recalled that, “She texted me and said, ‘Mom, I wish I got vaccinated’...She was texting her friends and her sisters and said, you know anyone who isn’t vaccinated, beg them to get vaccinated.” She leaves behind her husband Daniel, two-year-old daughter Joanna and newborn Celeste.
  • Young 24-year-old North Kansas City mother Braxten Goodwin died of COVID-19 two weeks after going into emergency labor. Goodwin’s family stated that she had planned to get vaccinated after giving birth. Goodwin leaves behind her 22-month-old daughter Nova and newborn son Levite. Her mother Tamika Horton told Fox4 Kansas City, “She wanted to go home. She said I want to go home and before she went to the ICU she was like, she was kind of scared she said. She was scared.” Goodwin never got to meet Levite. Soon after he was born she was put on a ventilator and died August 2. Horton said her daughter’s last words to her were calling for her daughter Nova.

In Palm Beach, Florida a group of concerned obstetric and gynecological physicians held a rare press briefing on Thursday at the Jupiter Medical Center to urge vaccinations of pregnant women as the hospital has seen anywhere from two to five pregnant patients being admitted to the hospital daily. The physicians, who represented nine practices in the area, reported pregnant or post-partum patients in the ICU over the last six to eight weeks.

Dr. Dudley Brown, Chairman of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department at Jupiter Medical Center told the Palm Beach Post, “Given that, my colleagues and I decided we needed to speak to the public on a larger and bigger platform to inform the community about the dangers and about what we are seeing at the hospital affecting our pregnant and non-pregnant patients.”

Doctors in Minneapolis, Minnesota, are also reporting concerns of a rise in pregnant women becoming critically ill with COVID-19. Dr. Sarah Cross with University of Minnesota’s Masonic Children’s Hospital reported to CBS Minnesota that she has seen a marked increase in recent weeks with pregnancy creating a high-risk condition for COVID-19 patients.

Cross emphasized the dangerous situation pregnant mothers are in, noting that “There are a lot of exposures, and pregnant women don’t have the luxury, in general, usually, of being able to really isolate themselves.”

Dr. Ryan Loftin who specializes in obstetrics and gynecology, and maternal fetal medicine at Allina Health also expressed concern to CBS Minnesota over a number of break-through cases in vaccinated mothers but noted, “What we are seeing in our numbers is that about 86% of COVID cases that we’re seeing in pregnant women are women who are unvaccinated, which fits with what we’re seeing nationally.” Loftin warned about the danger COVID-19 poses to expectant mothers, “It can be as severe as it is in anyone else, requiring intubation, mechanical ventilation and even including deaths of pregnant women because of severe illness.”

Dr. Mark Turrentine, an obstetrics professor at Baylor College of Medicine, who is also the co-chair of a COVID-19 work group for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) told NPR, “We have a highly infectious variant of COVID-19 virus in a group of individuals that the majority are not immunized. So yeah, we are seeing a lot of sick people...There is a threefold increase of intensive care unit admission,” a “two-and-half-fold increase risk of being put on mechanical ventilation or bypass support, and there’s even, you know, a little over a one-and-half-fold increased risk of death.”

“I have seen some pregnant women get really sick. I mean, I have seen some die,” said Turrentine. “And you know, you go into this business as an obstetrician gynecologist because patients are young and they are healthy. And most of the time you have great outcomes. This is a bad virus.”

In Los Angeles, County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer called on pregnant women to get vaccinated this past Monday after a recent 300 percent increase in weekly cases among pregnant women, noting that at least 27 cases of infection with COVID-19 were reported for the week that ended June 27, which jumped to 81 cases that were reported during the week ending July 25. Los Angeles County reported at least 11,264 confirmed COVID-19 cases among pregnant women as of August 10, twelve of whom have died.

Only as of last Wednesday, August 11 did the CDC update its guidelines to strongly recommend all pregnant women get vaccinated in light of rising numbers of unvaccinated pregnant women becoming seriously ill. The agency now warns that pregnant women who contract COVID-19 are more likely to have a severe infection, be hospitalized, and require a ventilator. The updated CDC guidance follows a recent analysis of data on 2,500 pregnant women who received at least one dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine prior to 20 weeks of pregnancy. It found no effect on miscarriages which remained within the normal range of 13 percent.

A week prior to the CDC announcement the two leading organizations representing physicians and scientists who specialize in obstetric care—ACOG and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommended that all who are pregnant get vaccinated.

A number of families of the deceased report that the majority of the mothers who have passed were hesitant about potential dangers to their pregnancy since pregnant women were not included in vaccine trials. Additionally, families report that individual providers and national agencies have lacked uniformity in vaccine guidance prior to the recent ACOG and CDC recommendations.

Chicago Nabisco workers join strike in four US states

James Martin


Nabisco bakery workers in Chicago, Illinois, have joined a strike of plant workers across four states against brutal working conditions, low pay and a proposed two-tier health care system demanded by management even as the company rakes in record profits. They join workers on strike in Portland, Oregon; Richmond, Virginia; and Aurora, Colorado.

Nabisco workers on strike in Chicago (Credit: Jan Walker)

Over 1,000 workers are now currently on strike against Nabisco and its parent company, Mondelez International, Inc., part of a growing rebellion of workers in multiple industries. Over 200 workers in Portland were first to strike on August 10.

Workers at Frito-Lay and its parent company PepsiCo recently struck against low wages, “suicide” work shifts, and higher health care costs in Kansas and Indiana, only to have their struggles betrayed by the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers (BCTGM) and the Teamsters. The bakery workers on strike in Chicago also joined the strike of 800 mechanics in the Chicago metropolitan region.

Nabisco workers, who produce and bake Oreo cookies, Ritz crackers and other popular snacks, have been forced to work 12- to 16-hour shifts, sometimes seven days a week, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mondelez is now proposing that workers accept an “Alternative Work Schedule,” widely hated and adopted in the auto industry, where workers take on up to 16-hour shifts without overtime pay. The company is also proposing a contract which creates a two-tier health care plan which costs more for all new hires.

While Nabisco workers toiled in gruesome conditions, Mondelez made record profits during the pandemic and made over $26.2 billion in revenue in 2020.

Worker Nathan Williams told Vice, “During the pandemic, we came in seven days a week. Some people worked every day—16 hours a day—for three months.” Nabisco demanded overtime hours and refused to hire more workers. Workers at Nabisco industrial bakery facilities in the United States and Mexico have faced a relentless assault on their living standards over the past decade, including cuts to pensions, mass layoffs and a constant threat of plant closures.

In 2016, Mondelez demanded that the BCTGM union, which covers the striking Nabisco workers, impose $46 million in concessions upon the Chicago workforce—equivalent to cuts of $23,000 per worker—or it would move production lines to Salinas, Mexico.

Mondelez also demanded an increase of 10 percent to the health care costs to replace the fully paid health care plan and replace the pensions with a 401(k) defined-contribution plan, offloading retirement costs onto workers. By 2018, Mondelez had eliminated the pensions of thousands of retirees and workers and moved them into 401(k) plans.

The BCTGM did nothing to oppose the assault on the Chicago workers, and Mondelez closed nine of 16 production lines at the Southside Chicago facility and laid off more than 400 out of nearly 1,000 workers. Workers making $26 an hour were escorted out of the plant by security guards during the layoffs which workers then described felt like a funeral procession. The company initially threatened to lay off nearly 600 workers. With the threat of layoffs, many higher paid workers at the plant retired early.

Michael, a former Chicago Nabisco worker, spoke out on social media in support of the striking workers. “I stand with you in your stand against corporate greed,” he said. “Please be aware that the current buildings you work in are old, and to reinvest in them might be the perfect excuse along with union negotiations that failed to set the ball in motion to let Mondelez close them!”

Michael noted that the company has kept the facility dilapidated for years to hang the threat of plant closure over the workers with the complicity of the union. He added, “The Chicago bakery went from 18 ovens to five back in 2017. This was their plan all along, and they are going to let your union leadership hang you all with it.”

Francesca, the daughter of a Chicago Nabisco worker, also said, “My dad told me stories of how back when he first started work at Nabisco in 1960 there were over 4,000 people. Now it’s just a few hundred.”

While Nabisco workers are seeking to fight for more, the BCTGM has sought to spread nationalist anti-Mexican poison, pitting American workers against their brothers and sisters south of the border. The most recent statement by the union states, “Nabisco has long profited from the loyalty and dedication of its U.S. workers and the exploitation of its employees in Mexico. By taking this action, Nabisco workers in all four locations are saying strong and clear: stop exporting our jobs to Mexico and end your demands for contract concessions.”

In fact, Nabsico workers in the US have more in common with their Mexican coworkers than the so-called “union” that claims to represent them.

Workers should put no trust in the BCTGM, which recently brought four consecutive sellout agreements to striking Frito-Lay workers in Kansas. Workers struck against poverty wages and had yet another sellout contract imposed on them after they were given meager strike pay and starved out.

At Nabisco, the BCTGM has worked to impose brutal working conditions on thousands of workers across the country and has overseen the layoff of hundreds of workers over the last decade. One laid off Chicago Nabisco worker, Tony, mockingly said that “[Mondelez] runs the union.” To which Henry, another former worker, respond, “What union?”

Scientific health policies contain delta variant outbreak in China

Alex Lantier


In a devastating exposure of anti-scientific policies pursued by Washington and the European powers that have led to millions of COVID-19 infections and deaths, mass implementation of scientific public health policies in China is containing the latest delta variant outbreak there. This highlights the potential for a global campaign of eradication of the virus to end the pandemic, if the resistance of the ruling class internationally to a scientific policy can be smashed.

A man and a child wearing masks to protect from the coronavirus walk through a shopping area in Beijing, China, Sunday, Aug. 15, 2021. (AP Photo/Ng Han Guan)

Last month, after a vast public health mobilization ended the epidemic inside China last year, a new outbreak emerged at the Nanjing airport. The delta variant brought aboard Air China flight CA910 from Moscow infected vaccinated maintenance workers at the airport and rapidly spread across China. Detected on July 20, the outbreak had sickened 381 people by the end of July in over a dozen provinces. While the outbreak at its peak infected over 140 people a day, this number is now falling significantly; broad areas of China are reporting no new cases.

Overall, there were 29 COVID-19 cases reported across China yesterday. Jiangsu province, where Nanjing is located and which was the outbreak’s initial epicenter, reported only three new cases. Nearby Shanghai recorded two and the southern border province of Yunnan, the next worst-hit in this outbreak after Jiangsu, eight. The southern industrial hub of Guangdong province reported nine. Hunan province, initially badly hit when tourists from Nanjing brought the delta variant there, reported no new cases.

While the situation in China remains dangerous, this initial success testifies to the enormous power of scientific methods against even the virulent delta variant. Vaccination and lockdowns of affected city districts—together with mass testing of entire cities, including Nanjing, Wuhan and Yangzhou, to find, isolate and rapidly treat the sick—are stopping a virus that is exploding out of control elsewhere around the world.

This comes after the success of the lock-down imposed at the beginning of the pandemic in Wuhan and across Hubei province, from January 23 to April 8 of last year. This strict lockdown, lifted only after new cases of the virus stopped appearing, ended transmission of the coronavirus inside China except for outbreaks imported from outside China’s borders.

In the imperialist countries and most of the rest of the world, however, governments pursued a diametrically opposed strategy. They rejected strict lockdowns or, when forced to implement them by wildcat strikes as in Italy and the United States, lifted them before transmission of the virus was over and programs for mass testing and to track-and-trace new cases were in place.

The resulting difference in health outcomes is staggering. Fewer than 5,000 died of COVID-19 in China, but over 643,000 died in the United States and 1,155,000 in Europe. The contrast is even sharper in the period since the lifting of lockdowns in the spring of 2020.

Since May 1, 2020, after the Wuhan lockdown, two people have died of COVID-19 in China, over 500,000 died in the United States, and over 950,000 in Europe. In India, whose population is similar in size to China’s, somewhere between 2.9 and 5.8 million have died, according to demographers’ estimates, and mostly left uncounted.

Fighting and ending the pandemic requires an international strategy, however. The Nanjing outbreak underscores yet again the impossibility of ending the pandemic with a national policy. Scientific policies must be employed to eradicate the virus on a global scale—otherwise, given the rapidly-mutating, highly contagious nature of the virus, new variants inevitably develop and spread back to areas where the virus has been eradicated.

The main obstacle is the refusal of the imperialist financial aristocracy in North America and Europe to implement a scientific policy. Instead, they gorged themselves on trillions of dollars, euros and pounds in bank and corporate bailouts and demanded that lives be sacrificed so workers could stay at work to generate profits. As millions died needlessly, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson infamously said: “No more f***ing lockdowns, let the bodies pile high in their thousands!”

Now, as the delta variant is set to provoke record losses worldwide, US and European media are launching a campaign to discredit Chinese health policies. It is more or less apparent that their target is not only China, but opposition in the working class internationally to policies of needless mass death.

In its report “China’s Delta outbreak shows signs of slowing,” CNN demanded Beijing stop trying to limit contagion. While admitting that a “‘zero transmission’ model … has so far proved broadly effective in curbing widespread transmission,” it said: “However, this approach requires punishing, oppressive measures that many argue are simply not sustainable in the long term, especially as new variants spread and other countries open back up. Experts say fortress territories will eventually have to shift away from this strategy—they can’t stay shut off from the world forever.”

Imperialist media are also trying to exploit the political crisis caused by the pandemic in China itself to discredit a scientific policy of saving lives. In France, the conservative daily Le Figaro claimed that Chinese scientists and doctors themselves reject Beijing’s policy and want to adopt President Emmanuel Macron’s call to “live with the virus.” Le Figaro cited the recent controversy in China over statements by leading virologist Dr. Zhang Wenhong.

Le Figaro claimed: “Zhang Wenhong, the well-known expert in infectious diseases in Shanghai, expressed doubts in late July about China’s zero-Covid strategy, calling on them to ‘learn to live with the virus.’” It added that this comment “put in question the viability of China’s pandemic management” and “had provoked bitter debate in the country.”

In reality, Zhang is not a supporter of European governments’ politically-criminal approach to the pandemic, and attempts to portray him as such are a fraud. In his latest post on the Weibo internet platform, Zhang unambiguously endorsed China’s health policy: “The international anti-epidemic situation is still very serious and China still faces enormous epidemic challenges. But we must have the firm conviction that our country’s anti-pandemic strategy is currently the best strategy for ourselves. ‘You tell whether a shoe fits by wearing it.’”

Le Figaro was citing a July 29 Weibo post by Zhang that was criticized in China. After this, his employer, Fudan University in Shanghai, began an investigation of potential plagiarism in Zhang’s PhD thesis. In a distorted echo of the imperialist press campaign itself, there were nationalist criticisms of Zhang on Chinese social media for supporting Western culture.

In the earlier July 29 post, Zhang had written: “As to how the world co-exists with the virus, each country gives its own response. China has given a beautiful response. After the Nanjing outbreak, we will certainly learn more. China must build a shared future with the world, arrive at communication with the rest of the world and return to normal life, while protecting its citizens from fear of the virus. China should have such wisdom.”

Zhang’s statement is ambiguous, because it avoids directly condemning the politically-criminal pandemic policies adopted by the imperialist countries and their allies. This ambiguity is not, however, simply an issue of Zhang’s individual opinions. Zhang, who is a physician and not a politician, is speaking under constraints imposed by his membership in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), a bureaucratic Stalinist party that restored capitalism in China in 1989 and now has deep economic and financial links to world imperialism.

Enmeshed in capitalist relations, and increasingly afraid of the working class at home, the CCP has largely avoided openly denouncing the health policies of imperialist countries. However, the CCP has not prevented Zhang and other Chinese medical and health workers from implementing policies that saved millions of lives in China.

Two important conclusions flow from this. Firstly, Zhang and other Chinese scientists working to eradicate COVID-19 are neither supporters of the imperialist powers’ reactionary pandemic policy nor agents of “the West” against China. The work that they and the working people of China have done is a great service to workers internationally: it shows that science and collective mobilization can end the pandemic.

20 Aug 2021

DAAD Masters Scholarships 2022/2023

Application Deadline: 31st August 2021

Type: Masters

Eligibility for the DAAD Masters Scholarships:

  • Excellently-qualified graduates who have completed a first degree (Bachelor, Diploma or comparable academic degree) at the latest by the time they commence their scholarship-supported study programme.
  • For applicants from artistic disciplines and the field of architecture, the DAAD offers subject-specific scholarship programmes.

Selection Criteria:

  • As a rule, applicants should have taken their final examinations no longer than six years before the application deadline.
  • Applicants who have been resident in Germany for longer than 15 months at the application deadline cannot be considered.
  • Notification of admission from the German host university for the desired degree course; please note that you yourself are responsible for ensuring that you apply for admission at the host university by the due date. If notification of admission is not yet available at the time of application, it must be subsequently submitted before the scholarship-supported study begins. A Scholarship Award Letter from the DAAD is only valid if you have been admitted to study at the desired host university.
  • If the degree programme includes a study period or work placement abroad lasting several months, funding for this period abroad is usually only possible under the following conditions:
    The study visit is essential for achievement of the scholarship objective.
    The study period is no longer than a quarter of the scholarship period. Longer periods cannot be funded, even partially.
    The study period does not take place in the home country.

Eligible Countries for the DAAD Masters Scholarships: International

To be Taken at (Country): Germany

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of DAAD Masters Scholarships:

  • Participation in a postgraduate programme after a first undergraduate course of study for the purpose of technical or scientific specialisation
  • Specifically, the following is supported:
    a postgraduate or Master’s degree programme completed at a state or state-recognised university in Germany
    or
    the first or second year of study at a state or state-recognised German university as part of a postgraduate or Master’s degree programme completed in the home country or in another foreign country; recognition of the academic achievements rendered in Germany must be guaranteed. The standard period of study of the postgraduate or Master’s degree programme should not be exceeded as a result of the study year in Germany.

Value

  • Scholarship payments of 861 euros a month
  • Payments towards health, accident and personal liability insurance cover
  • Travel allowance
  • One-off study allowance

Under certain circumstances, scholarship holders may receive the following additional benefits:

  • Monthly rent subsidy
  • Monthly allowance for accompanying members of family

Duration of Award: For a postgraduate or Master’s degree completed in Germany:

  • between 10 and 24 months depending on the length of the chosen study programme
  • The scholarships are awarded for the duration of the standard period of study for the chosen study programme (up to a maximum of 24 months). To receive further funding after the first year of study for 2-year courses, proof of academic achievements thus far should indicate that the study programme can be successfully completed within the standard period of study.
  • Applicants who are already in Germany in the first academic year of a 2-year postgraduate or Master’s programme at the time of their application may apply for a scholarship for the second year of study. In this case, it is not possible to extend the scholarship.

For a study period in Germany as part of a postgraduate or Master’s degree completed in a foreign country:

  • usually one academic year; an extension is not possible.

The scholarship usually begins on 1st October, or earlier if the student takes a language course prior to the study programme.

How to Apply for DAAD Masters Scholarships: The application procedure occurs online through the DAAD portal.Please note that the access to the application portal only appears while the current application period is running. After the application deadline has expired, the portal for this programme is not available until the next application period.

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit DAAD Masters Scholarships Webpage for Details

Invitation to a Fiasco: U.S. Policy toward China and Iran

Eve Ottenberg


U.S. foreign policy since World War II has been a screaming disaster. Coups, regime change operations and CIA-sponsored slaughters drowned the globe in blood. So did imperial wars, from Korea to Vietnam to Afghanistan to Iraq – all of which, incidentally, were lost. Washington’s pursuit of its “interests” inexcusably piled tens of millions of corpses to the heavens. So when Biden, early in his presidency, cited those interests as guides to his foreign policy, it was only natural to expect the worst.

That expectation has proved correct, except for the military withdrawal from Afghanistan, which paints a slightly more ambiguous picture of U.S. global relations. That retreat was a principled though painful diversion from the generally bellicose and dreadful trend. And even that became an unnecessary debacle – especially for the tens of thousands of Afghans who helped the U.S. Many observers warned that the Taliban were poised to sweep the country. The Biden team did not listen. It could have expedited the U.S. departure and the exodus of its Afghan employees back in winter. But it didn’t for one simple reason: fatal, imperial hubris. This flaw scars all of Washington’s awful policies. And that is the only way to describe Biden’s seamless continuation of Trump’s policies: abysmal. Just take China and Iran.

Sometime during the Trump administration, U.S. politicians and military honchos discovered to their horror that China is a communist country. Chinese commissars lifted over 850 million people out of poverty – how dare they! China takes pride in its centralized economic planning – anathema! Chinese leaders promote anti-colonialism by investing in infrastructure in the Global South, which they then hand off to the local governments – those brazen show-offs! China’s robust public health effort contained covid while it flamed out of control in the U.S. – they must be lying!

All this Chinese razzle dazzle success contrasts most shockingly with the image of corrupt, chaotic and destructive western capitalism. People might even get the idea that other economic systems are, well, superior; that maybe having, as the U.S. does, 500,000 vagabonds, millions of students indentured to the tune of nearly $2 trillion, a vast gulag caging over 2 million people, starvation wages for many, astronomical rents for all, no health care, lousy infant mortality and life expectancy stats compared to the rest of the industrialized world, 15 million people just a paycheck away from homelessness and, a global grasp causing the destitution of billions of people and the trashing of a habitable planet and a livable climate – maybe all this ain’t so great. Maybe there are other, better ways to do things besides the savagery of the American economic system. Maybe exporting that system around the globe, often at gunpoint, is a fiasco.

U.S. politicos and military bigwigs are determined to slam the brakes on this critique before it becomes action. The method of choice, mentioned in informed corners of the internet, involves arming Japan with nukes and then egging Japan, South Korea and India into attacking China. Our geniuses in the pentagon no doubt consider such a nuclear war “containable.” Our intellectual heavyweights in the CIA and state department, as Moon of Alabama has noted, probably salivate at the prospect of the U.S. stepping in after this mass murder and cleaning up financially, while enhancing Washington’s planetary power. Unfortunately for this grandiose scheme, China is already wise to it. Even now it expands its nuclear arsenal and builds new nuclear missile silos – the inevitable response to U.S. hostility and the apparent American appetite for a supposedly limited nuclear war.

This all seems like some wild fantasy to you? Consider this: For decades the One China policy has kept the peace not only between China and Taiwan, but between China and that perennial, compulsive aggressor, the U.S. China has made abundantly clear that attempted official Taiwanese severing from China is a casus belli. Since the reign of Richard Nixon, Washington has let this sleeping dog lie. But in July, the U.S. announced a $750 million weapons sale to the territory. This, predictably, infuriated China. That presumably was the intention, as the U.S. agitates for Taiwan to declare its independence and thus start a war.

To make sure everyone gets the message, Biden has stated that the U.S. is in “extreme competition” with China, which, economically, may be true, but it’s not true militarily. Or at least it wasn’t till this self-fulfilling prophecy started, with “extreme competition” serving as the perfect excuse for arming China’s neighbors and the Taiwanese territory to the teeth and goading them all into displays of martial prowess.

This lousy $750 billion arms deal had a record number of predecessors recently under – you guessed it – Trump. “These military transactions are a violation of Washington’s own avowed One China Policy,” wrote an Information Clearing House editorial on August 6, “which purports to acknowledge Beijing’s territorial sovereignty over Taiwan.” But Biden chose to ditch a policy that dates back to the 1970s, because clearly Trump, provoking clashes and ready to rumble with China and Iran, was a geopolitical brainiac. If that’s not Biden’s view, then he should prove it. But proving it involves a rational, peaceful policy toward China, not one driven by insecurities over whose whatever is bigger.

It’s not as if Washington isn’t constantly challenging Beijing. According to Connor Freeman, in the same publication, U.S. aircraft carrier group strike forces and warships roam the South China Sea. Reconnaissance planes skirt China’s coast – roughly three to five per day. What would Washington do if Beijing behaved thus in the Gulf of Mexico? Declare war. But the U.S. has ramped up even more provocations. The August 6 editorial notes that recently the seventh American warship travelled “between Taiwan and mainland China since Biden took office in January.” Seven U.S. warships. Is Biden drifting toward war? Ya think? “This week sees the U.S. navy engaging in huge military drills in the South China Sea,” the editorial continues, and then cites the many other NATO warships surrounding China. Either Biden wants war or he’s asleep at the wheel, while fanatical anti-China Dr. Strangeloves in the pentagon steer policy. My guess is the latter.

Over in Vienna, things aren’t going much better. That’s where negotiations jammed over the U.S. rejoining the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. Biden surged to power claiming he intended to bring the U.S. back into compliance with the Iran nuclear pact, one of Obama’s few foreign policy successes, which Trump so highhandedly stalked out of. So how’s that going? Don’t even ask.

Once again, Biden seems mesmerized by Trump’s belligerence and unable to renounce it, despite Washington being clearly in the wrong. The U.S. had a deal, then showed itself as utterly untrustworthy as any gangster by reneging. That may go over great in Trump’s mafia-infested world of real estate, but on the international stage, it spells ruin. Biden, however, refuses to do the right thing, namely, end illegal U.S. sanctions on Iran. If he did, Iran would come back into compliance – a compliance that, it’s worth noting, prevented Iran, for the duration of the intact deal, from even approaching enriching uranium to weapons grade. Once Trump idiotically busted up the pact, guess what? Iran, unbound by JCPOA constraints, sped forward and now has attained a position where it could soon produce a bomb. Thus Trump’s oafish international bungling, which Biden just can’t wait to imitate.

The Biden negotiating team lives in the past, according to Moon of Alabama on August 7, in the fantasy that it has the upper hand that Washington held nine years ago. “But this is no longer 2012. Back then, China and Russia agreed with the U.S. to put pressure on Iran. That pressure led to the nuclear deal. But today the situation is much different. It was the U.S. that left the deal. Iran, China and Russia are all in a stronger position than they were a decade ago. Why would the latter two agree to support Biden’s malign foreign policy and unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran?”

In other words, if Biden doesn’t cease his additional and ridiculous demands, he’ll kill the Iran nuclear pact. This is in no one’s interest. It is certainly not in the interest of Washington and its Mideast allies. No deal could very well mean catastrophic regional war, which, by the way, would ensnare the U.S. All of Biden’s talk about extricating the U.S. from military adventures in that region would be exposed as hot air.

So there you have it. When not living in the past, Biden can’t bring himself to shed Trump’s insane and capricious aggressions. The result is no Iran deal and an American drift toward nuclear war with China. Both are calamitous. Neither will end well for the world or for Washington. Somebody, like maybe the president, needs to grab that steering wheel and change course, pronto.