Excess deaths due to the COVID-19 pandemic reach 26 million

Evan Blake

On Sunday, the Economist’s tracker of excess deaths attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic reached a staggering 26 million globally, nearly four times the official COVID death toll of 6.9 million. According to this tracker, an average of 7,000 people continue to die each day above the pre-pandemic baseline, with the overwhelming majority either directly from COVID-19 or due to the myriad negative long-term health impacts caused by the virus.

The 26 million excess death milestone was reached exactly one year after US President Joe Biden falsely declared that “the pandemic is over” during an interview with CNN at the Detroit auto show on September 18, 2022.

While Biden’s claim was widely denounced by scientists and public health advocates at the time, it set the stage for the complete unwinding of all official pandemic response in the US and globally. It is worthwhile to examine what has actually happened with the pandemic over the past year, as well as the present situation as we head into the fourth fall and winter seasons of the pandemic.

According to official figures tallied on Worldometer, known to be vast undercounts, there have been 92,883 deaths from COVID-19 in the US and 360,852 globally in the year since Biden’s statement. According to the Economist, there have been 161,741 excess deaths in the US and 4.5 million globally over the past year.

Just three months after Biden’s comments, after an unrelenting campaign that included threats by major corporations such as Nike to move production elsewhere, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) lifted its Zero COVID elimination policy. This unleashed a catastrophic wave of mass infection and death, which multiple scientific studies have since estimated caused at least 1–2 million deaths in China from COVID-19 as virtually the entire population of 1.4 billion people were infected.

At the same time, Biden’s lie was seized upon by the corporate media and virtually every world government to deepen their propaganda campaign aimed at forcing the population to accept unending waves of mass infection, death and debilitation from COVID-19. This culminated in the unscientific ending of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) declarations by the World Health Organization (WHO) on May 5, 2023, and the Biden administration on May 11, 2023.

Just six weeks later, in late June, the latest wave of the pandemic began to sweep across the United States. Due to the complete ending of testing, case reporting and other surveillance by the Centers for Disease Control and Transmission (CDC), it has only been detectable through wastewater sampling, which shows that viral transmission has rapidly increased more than four-fold in the past three months.

Extrapolating from the wastewater data, infectious disease modeler JP Weiland estimates that 10–12 percent of the US population has been infected or reinfected with COVID-19 during the present surge, a staggering 33–40 million people. He projects that in the next six weeks another 23–33 million people will be infected, meaning that in total this wave will likely have infected 56–73 million Americans, or 17–22 percent of the US population.

At the same time, COVID-19 hospitalizations have more than tripled across the US, with 20,538 hospitalized from COVID during the week ending September 9, the most recent data available. As this is a lagging indicator, it will continue to rise in the weeks ahead.

According to Weiland, the average American has now been infected with COVID at least twice, and by this winter likely three times. Similar rates exist in virtually every country except China, where the majority of the population has only been infected once since the lifting of Zero COVID.

There is nothing like this scale of infection with any virus or pathogen in human history, in which a population of 8 billion people is being subjected to repeated waves of global mass infection in such a concentrated time frame.

The current global wave is being fueled by multiple Omicron variants, including the immune-evasive EG.5 (nicknamed “Eris”), and a number of variants referred to as “FLip” because they contain a combination of mutations that flip the positions of two amino acids, labeled F and L.

The highly-mutated Omicron BA.2.86 subvariant (nicknamed “Pirola”) continues to concern scientists globally. Initial studies have produced contradictory results on Pirola’s level of immune escape and infectiousness, but it continues to spread globally at an alarming rate.

Noted variant tracker and molecular biologist Marc Johnson tweeted Sunday, “BA.2.86 has remained the fastest growing lineage in the world since it emerged, with sequence numbers doubling about every week. If the advantage is not coming from immune evasion, it must have something else going for it.”

Most leading variant trackers have warned that the descendants of Pirola could pick up mutations which make it more transmissible, potentially causing an Omicron-type event of global mass infection in the weeks or months ahead.

The very evolution of this variant is a sign of the continued fitness of SARS-CoV-2 (its ability to reproduce efficiently) and thus its ability to mutate further. It highlights the ongoing danger that a variant could evolve that combines greater immune escape, infectivity and lethality, rendering existing vaccines totally ineffective and causing far greater levels of death. This very real danger is completely ignored by every world government and corporate media outlet.

Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 is evolving under conditions in which genomic surveillance has collapsed alongside aspects of pandemic surveillance, particularly since the ending of the PHE declarations in May.

Contrary to the lies and propaganda of Biden and the corporate media, the pandemic is not going away. All principled scientists understand that we remain in the beginning stages of the pandemic and that under existing policies COVID-19 will remain a dangerous pathogen for the foreseeable future.

Trevor Bedford, one of the world’s top evolutionary biologists, recently told the Seattle Times, “I’m generally very concerned about the overall rate of evolution for SARS-CoV-2. No single [Omicron] variant has been that impactful, but the overall accumulation of these mutations is having significant impact.”

At the American Society of Virology conference in June, Bedford said that SARS-CoV-2 is “evolving just as fast as it was in 2021, evolving about two-and-a-half times faster than influenza H3N2 … and is not really showing signs of slowing down.”

Biologist Arijit Chakravarty, who heads a research team that has made some of the most prescient analyses throughout the pandemic, made similar statements in a July interview with the World Socialist Web Site. He stressed that the very policies now in place only accelerate the process of viral evolution, creating a high likelihood that at a certain point a variant will evolve that causes existing vaccines to be unable to protect against severe disease and death, essentially putting mankind back at square one or even worse.

Arijit Chakravarty [Photo: Arijit Chakravarty]

In the interview, Chakravarty said,

I can’t predict the outcome of the next wave. I can’t predict the outcome of the next five waves. But, at the rate that we are going, a prediction can be made with a high degree of certainty that something bad will happen sooner than later along these lines. Keep this pandemic running for another five years and you’ll face a debacle on a scale that you haven’t yet seen. That’s a given.

Characterizing the ending the PHE declarations as “Orwellian Newspeak” which leave society with nothing in place to protect against a more dangerous variant, he commented,

In that kind of reactive strategy what will happen is billions will be infected before we realize something is wrong. And that’s too late to do anything about it. So not only is the pandemic very much not over, but by creating the impression that the pandemic is over in the face of rampant viral spread and continuing rapid viral evolution, we are essentially sticking our chin out and asking the virus to do its worst.

Finally, Chakravarty stressed that this is only the beginning of the pandemic, saying,

The path that we are on with respect to the pandemic is unsustainable, meaning neither is it inevitable, nor is it something that can continue indefinitely… This is Act One of a three-act play, and in Act Two things could really get ugly, to be honest. Things look dark now because what we have done from a public health standpoint is we’ve declared the war over unilaterally.

Alongside the dangers of viral evolution, the breadth of Long COVID continues to expand into what is now undeniably a “mass disabling event” throughout the world.

Multiple comprehensive studies indicate that at least 10 percent of people infected with COVID-19 go on to develop Long COVID. This risk is only slightly reduced by vaccination and is compounded with each reinfection. Recent studies have indicated that even asymptomatic cases can lead to SARS-CoV-2 persisting in the body, potentially causing long-term damage without the patient even being aware of it.

Due to the criminal response of world capitalism, no treatments for Long COVID are yet available and it is unclear when such treatments will be available. Multiple scientists have predicted that in the years ahead potentially billions of people could be suffering from one or multiple Long COVID symptoms, placing ever greater strains on healthcare systems and the basic functioning of society.

In a recent report published in Nature, the authors wrote,

The oncoming burden of long COVID faced by patients, health-care providers, governments and economies is so large as to be unfathomable, which is possibly why minimal high-level planning is currently allocated to it. If 10% of acute infections lead to persistent symptoms, it could be predicted that ~400 million individuals globally are in need of support for long COVID.

Again, this scale of mass debilitation is unprecedented in human history. The horrific reality now confronting hundreds of millions of people, many of whom suffer debilitating symptoms such as extreme fatigue, evidently does not factor into the calculations of Biden or any other politician who pretend that the pandemic is over.

United Nations UNHCR Fellowship 2024

APPLICATION DEADLINE:

30th Dec 2023

Tell Me About United Nations UNHCR Fellowship:

Are you passionate about international relations, refugee issues, and humanitarian response? Do you have a degree in international relations, political sciences, law, or a related field? If so, the UNHCR Fellowship in New York might be the perfect opportunity for you. This fellowship offers recent graduates or 2024-degree candidates the chance to work closely with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and contribute to global humanitarian efforts.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is a leading international organization dedicated to protecting the rights and well-being of refugees and displaced persons around the world. UNHCR provides essential support to those forced to flee their homes due to conflict, persecution, or other crises.

As a UNHCR Fellow, you will have the unique opportunity to work in New York and play a vital role in advancing UNHCR’s mission. Here are some of the key responsibilities and activities you will be involved in:

Responsibilities:

• Attend and report on assigned meetings promptly.
• Support UNHCR’s engagement with humanitarian, development, and other UN bodies and processes.
• Monitor, analyze, and report on key developments related to issues affecting UNHCR’s operations.
• Stay informed about UNHCR’s global operations and policies, facilitating smooth information flow.
• Promote UNHCR’s objectives through participation in briefings and inter-agency meetings.
• Advocate for the inclusion of UNHCR positions in UN policies.
• Follow and report on relevant negotiations and high-level events.
• Conduct research on topics of relevance and interest.
• Support UNHCR’s participation in international and bilateral forums in New York.
• Assist in planning and organizing public events.

TYPE:

Fellowship

Who Can Apply For United Nations UNHCR Fellowship?

To be eligible for this fellowship, you must meet the following criteria:

• Be a 2024-degree candidate or recent graduate from a UNESCO-accredited university.
• Hold a degree in international relations, political sciences, law, or a related field.
• Demonstrate a strong commitment to international relations, refugee issues, and humanitarian response.
• Possess fluency in English with excellent written and oral communication skills.
• Be proficient in PowerPoint, Microsoft Word, Excel, and Teams.

Funding and Medical Insurance:

Selected candidates are required to demonstrate a guaranteed funding source for the one-year period of the fellowship. Additionally, candidates must arrange and provide proof of valid medical insurance covering the fellowship period.

Equal Opportunity Employer:

UNHCR is committed to diversity and welcomes applications from qualified candidates regardless of disability, gender identity, marital or civil partnership status, race, color, ethnic and national origins, religion or belief, or sexual orientation.

COVID-19 Vaccination Requirement:

Recruitment as a UNHCR staff member or engagement under a UNHCR affiliate scheme is subject to proof of vaccination against COVID-19.

WHICH COUNTRIES ARE ELIGIBLE?

Any

WHERE WILL AWARD BE TAKEN?

New York, USA

HOW MANY AWARDS?

Not specified

What Is The Benefit Of United Nations UNHCR Fellowship?

Training and Learning Components:

During your fellowship, you will have access to a range of training courses, including security, prevention of harassment, protection, and more. You will also have regular meetings with your supervisor to reflect on your experiences and learning opportunities.

Through your daily work, you will gain valuable insights into UNHCR and UNHQ structure and processes, develop drafting and analytical skills, and engage in professional networking at an international level. You will also have the opportunity to work on research projects related to UNHCR’s mandate.

HOW LONG WILL AWARD LAST?

6 months beginning January 2, 2024

How To Apply:

UNHCR does not charge a fee at any stage of its recruitment process, and applications are encouraged from all qualified candidates without distinction on grounds of race, color, sex, national origin, age, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

We especially welcome applications from candidates with a refugee or stateless background who can bring unique perspectives to our team.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Epidemic or Revolution: The Other Side of the West Africa Upheaval

Ramzy Baroud

Image of a dirt road in West Africa.

Image by Annie Spratt.

What if the “epidemic of coups” in West and Central Africa is not that at all, but a direct outcome of outright revolutionary movements, similar to the anti-colonial movements that liberated most African nations from the yoke of Western colonialism throughout the 20th century?

Whether this is the case or not, we are unlikely to find out anytime soon, simply because the voices of these African nations are largely and deliberately muted.

In order for us to understand the real motives behind the spate of military takeovers in West and Central Africa – eight since 2020 – we are, sadly, compelled to read about it in Western media.

And that is a major part of the problem. Simply put, Western media has failed to convey the deeper social and economic contexts behind the political upheaval in various African regions.

The near-complete control over the narrative, however, is deliberate.

In a relatively comprehensive description of Oligue Nguema, the new leader of Gabon, the BBC website offered nothing of substance in terms of familiarizing us with the motives behind the military’s move against the corrupt, long-time leader of Gabon, Ali Bongo.

Of course, the voice of Nguema himself was almost completely absent in the piece.

It is difficult and time-consuming to find a cohesive, non-filtered political discourse emanating from Gabon – or Mali, Burkina Faso or the rest of the African countries undergoing political transitions now.

What we find instead is news, information and opinions, almost all filtered through Western news agencies, politicians, academics and ‘experts’. Even those who may appear to speak non-conformist language tend to feed the stereotype, perpetuating the mainstream perception of Africa.

A quick examination of recent articles on West Africa in the French media reveals an obvious truth. The language used in deconstructing the recent upheaval demonstrates that no true awakening is underway among the French intelligentsia, even by those who purportedly speak as part of the country’s mainstream ‘left’.

In an interview, published on August 30 in Le Point, French author and expert in African Studies, Antoine Glaser, blames the French government for failing to see how Africa has ‘gone global’.

The article appeared shortly after the Gabon coup. But Glaser’s ideas are not new. He has made several references in the past to such failure, including an article in L’Opinion early in August.

The gist of his argument is that France has failed to understand the changing political dynamics in and around Africa, and that the once tightly French-controlled African markets have been largely occupied by China, Turkey and others.

But the subtle message is this: Africa revolves or should always revolve in France’s orbit, and an alternative understanding must be developed by policymakers in Paris to cope with, or catch up to the new, globalized African politics.

The same sense of entitlement was conveyed in Le Figaro.

Isabelle Lasserre, in her article entitled ‘Gabon: la diplomatie française désarçonnée par l’«épidémie» de coups d’État en Afrique’, speaks of “bathtub torture” of French diplomats.

“They barely believe they can get their heads out of the water when a new putsch plunges it back into them, even more brutally,” she writes.

The ‘brutality’ referenced here is not that suffered by African nations in the painful periods of colonialism, post-colonialism and decolonization, but that of French diplomats.

Lasserre references Macron’s use of the phrase “epidemic of putschs” – “putschs’ being another word for ‘coups’ in German.

It was Macron who popularized the term. It makes Africans appear unruly, sick even. French journalists are now blaming their government for failing to diagnose, let alone remedy, the pan-African disease.

No alternative understanding is possible when the problem is coined in such a way, where the blame is squarely on Africans, and the lesser blame – of simply failing to understand – is placed on France and other Western governments.

“In Africa, one coup does not drive out another but adds to the previous one,” Lasserre writes.

In other words, it is an African-induced chaos, and Europe is suffering and shouldering its consequences – ‘a white man’s burden’ of sorts.

Little attention has been paid to the possibility that perhaps African countries are fed up with the old apparatus, that of Western-supported wealthy and violent dictators – and supposed ‘democrats’ – who squander their country’s wealth to remain in power.

Gabon is a very rich country in terms of energy resources, lumber, manganese and iron. But its tiny population of 2.3 million is very poor.

This racket of exploitation has been sustained for decades simply because it served the interests of the local rulers and their multinational partners.

What other means of protests do the people of Gabon – or Mali, or all the rest – have, when mass rallies are violently crushed and the media is tightly controlled? – aside, of course, from military coups.

This does not seem to be the heart of the matter to many in the French media, who are mostly concerned about losing their stronghold in Africa to China, Russia and others.

Instead, some in the media are even flouting the theory that Africans are impressed with the persona of ‘strongmen‘ of non-democratic regimes – a direct reference to Russia and China.

Although the ‘strongman theory’ has long been discounted, or at least lost its appeal in academic circles, it is often applied in its old form and ugly insinuations in Western understanding of Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

It would make no sense for Africans to reject democracy, one that is based on true equality, fair distribution of wealth, ample opportunities, freedom of expression and the press, and all the rest. The only explanation, though often communicated indirectly, is that they all suffered from collective malaise, which complicates the supposedly noble mission of Western countries.

In truth, many African nations – as demonstrated by the latest popular military takeovers – deeply resent Western governments for the right reasons: their military interventions, economic exploitation, political meddling and a lingering sense of superiority.

Rarely do we hear such alternative views because we are not meant to. The political discourse emanating from West Africa, although largely inaccessible, speaks of a collective desire for a paradigm shift.

“It is necessary for this fight to go through arms, but also through our values, our behavior, and the recovery of our economy”, said Ibrahim Traoré, the transitional President of Burkina Faso.

In his speech, late last year, he declared that “the fight for total independence has begun.”

A similar sentiment was conveyed by Assimi Goita, President of the Transition in Mali when he spoke about the need to ‘regain’ the nation’s dignity in the context of ‘colonial domination’.

France’s and other Western countries’ ‘experts’ should fundamentally reconsider their understanding of Africa.

They should also diversify their political lexicon, to include ‘dignity’, ‘values’, ‘liberation’ and ‘total independence,’ because, clearly, the language of ‘epidemic of coups’ and other self-serving, convenient phraseology has completely failed.

UK retail chain Wilko collapses, threatening 12,500 jobs

Ioan Petrescu

Hundreds of stores of the retail giant Wilko will close in the coming weeks, after talks to rescue the bankrupt company failed.

Administrators at PwC confirmed on Monday that nearly 300 Wilko stores and its distribution centers will cease operations in the coming weeks. The company collapsed owing £410.9 million to landlords, suppliers, HM Revenue & Customs and others.

Since the bankruptcy announcement August 10, last-ditch efforts by HMV owner Doug Putman to strike a rescue deal aimed at taking over 200 stores took place, only to fall through. Administrators at PwC explained, “no aspect of the retail chain could be salvaged in its current configuration”.

Wilko closing down sale, Wood Green, north London [Photo by Philafrenzy - Own work / CC BY-SA 4.0]

At the beginning of the year, Wilko borrowed £40 million from Hilco Capital, a financial services holding company that specialises in restructuring distressed companies. Hilco has been separately advising the administrators (PwC) on the possible liquidation of assets, suggesting plans for the bankruptcy of Wilko were made as long as nine months ago. Hilco’s deal will reap rewards with the Sunday Times noting, “Hilco also stands to rake in fees from the liquidation of Wilko’s stock, valued at £117.6 million when the discount chain collapsed.”

In recent months, Wilko also considered entering a “company voluntary agreement” (CVA, in which an insolvent business proposes a repayment plan for its debts over a specified period) with some of its landlords, in return for reduced rents. Management eventually decided against it, for undisclosed reasons.

PwC had already offloaded 51 sites out of Wilko’s total of 408 to its competitor, B&M, for £13 million, while announcing the closure of 52 others. On Tuesday, rival retailer Poundland announced that it will take over another 71 Wilko stores and rebrand them under its name. The following day, another retailer, The Range, bought Wilko’s brand for £5 million, including its online operations.

The collapse of Wilko will mean job losses for most of its 12,500 employees, with as many as 1,300 being dismissed as soon as next week, when the first stores begin to close. The rest of the stores are set to close by early October. Employees will be asked to work two extra days after closure.

Workers in stores that have been acquired by competitors are not safe either, with Poundland only saying it will give “priority” to former Wilko workers when hiring new staff for the shops.

Another 300 jobs were lost last week when Wilko’s two big warehouses in Worksop, Nottinghamshire, and Newport, Wales, were closed. Most of the redundancies take place in poorer areas of the UK, where the affected workers will have a hard time finding alternative employment, amid a biting cost-of-living crisis.

The failure of Wilko is another in a mounting string of bankruptcies of traditional “brick-and-mortar” retailers, such as Debenhams and Arcadia in the UK, and Galeria Karstadt Kaufhof in Germany. In terms of the numbers of staff and stores, this is the largest retail failure since Woolworths in 2008, and the second largest in terms of turnover (£1.2 billion compared to Debenhams’ £1.3 billion in 2020).

High street retailers face increasing pressure from online retailers such as Amazon, ballooning rents, especially in prime locations in city centers, as well as declining demand with mounting inflation and falling real-terms wages leaving workers unable to afford to buy as much as they used to.

Wilko was one of the oldest retailers in Britain. It was founded as a shop (then named Wilkinson) in Leicester in 1930 by James Kemsey Wilkinson. It expanded across the Midlands initially and by the 1990s became one of Britain’s fastest-growing retailers. It rebranded as Wilko in 2012. The chain benefited from the collapse of Woolworths in 2008 but its failure to adapt to the switch to online shopping meant that its sales started falling below those of its lower-cost competitors such as Poundland, Home Bargains and The Range.

According to the Financial Time (FT), “a combination of supply-side problems and not enough liquidity to get those supplies back in again, has meant shrinking sales”. Wilko reported sales of £1.3 billion in the year to January 29, 2022, down from £1.6 billion in 2018. The group plunged to a £36.7 million loss before tax that year, from a £4.3 million profit the year before.

Some big suppliers, including Unilever and Procter & Gamble, which provide many staple household cleaning and food products, refused to supply the store until their debts were repaid, which led to empty shelves compounding the drop in sales. By August 10, Wilko owed about £70 million to suppliers and would have needed at least this amount to continue trading.

This proved a major stumbling block for any investors looking to acquire Wilko on a “going concern” basis. HMV owner Doug Putman was initially interested in an acquisition but pulled out after learning the extent of Wilko’s debts. As a result, a veritable vultures’ feast is taking place, with rival retailers cherry-picking the most profitable parts from Wilko’s corpse to add to their own businesses.

Despite its worsening financial situation, the retailer continued to pay its owners £2.25 million in dividends during 2021 and a further £750,000 in February 2022. Over the past decade, Wilko shareholders, most prominently the Wilkinson family, extracted £77 million in dividends from the company—more than the amount owed to suppliers by the end. Over the last 20 years the family took out more than £100 million in dividends from Wilko.

In a final kick in the teeth, “Members of Wilko’s pension scheme face a cut to their savings after the collapsed retailer’s defined benefit scheme fell into the Pension Protection Fund (PPF),” reported the Sunday Times. The newspaper added, “The deficit in the scheme, with some 2,000 members, has swelled to £76 million on a buyout basis, according to the latest estimates from administrators at PwC, greater than the £50 million initially thought.” While the “PPF, an industry-backed lifeboat, stands ready to plug much of the shortfall,” the result is that “members of the scheme at retirement age will receive their full pension; those under that age face a 10 per cent cut to benefits.”

The trade union representing Wilko workers, the GMB, has played its usual role during the entire affair, supporting the owners over the workers. Even though it was aware of the retailer’s dire financial straits, the union did not warn workers of the threat to their jobs, nor did it mount any struggle in their defence. Throughout the bankruptcy proceedings, the union acted as a partner to the company, aiming to make the store closures as smooth as possible, while merely “pushing” for any prospective new owners to retain as many Wilko staff as possible.

The GMB were complicit in attacks against the workers, as was tacitly admitted by Nadine Houghton, national officer of the union, when she said “GMB members have remained loyal and committed to Wilko, accepting pay cuts and cuts to terms and conditions to help the business stay afloat”.

The union betrayed struggles by Wilko workers in 2019 (calling off a strike against the introduction of a seven-day schedule described as “brutal”) and in 2021, when the retail chain cut workers’ sick pay. This, while Wilko stores remained open during the entire COVID-19 pandemic with its workers on the frontline. In 2017, the GMB collaborated with management to cut 1,000 jobs after the retail chain recorded an 80 percent drop in profits the previous year.

US careens toward government shutdown

Barry Grey

The crisis of the political system in the US reached a new level of intensity over the past week, with Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s announcement Tuesday of an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden, the announcement Thursday by a Justice Department special counsel of a criminal indictment against Biden’s son, Hunter, and the growing prospect of a shutdown of the federal government when the current fiscal year ends on September 30.

This takes place in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election, in which the leading Republican candidate, Donald Trump, is under federal and state criminal indictment for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. The presumptive Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, is unpopular, visibly fragile if not senile, and focused on escalating the war against Russia and preparing for military conflict with China, two nuclear powers. This is coupled with mobilizing the trade union apparatus to suppress a growing rebellion by the working class.

To pay for the current and looming wars and shore up the world position of the US dollar, the American ruling class must brutally increase its exploitation of the working class, destroy millions more jobs, and gut what remains of basic social programs on which hundreds of millions of workers and young people rely.

It is not accidental that the escalation of the US political crisis coincides with the United Auto Workers’ calling of a mini-strike against the Detroit Three automakers. Working directly with the auto bosses and the Biden administration, UAW President Shawn Fain is desperately trying to block an all-out strike by 150,000 US autoworkers, who are furious over the deliberate undermining of a serious fight by the union bureaucracy.

On Tuesday, September 12, the day the House returned from its summer recess, McCarthy bowed to the demands of the fascist House Freedom Caucus and Trump, announcing the launching of an impeachment inquiry into alleged corrupt relations between President Biden and his son, Hunter. The latter’s shady and lucrative business dealings in both Ukraine and China while Biden was vice president are well known, as is Biden’s assistance in the efforts of Hunter to trade on his father’s position to win clients and amass consulting fees. Still, despite months of investigations by House Republicans, no hard evidence has been put forward showing that the senior Biden personally profited from his son’s operations or was directly involved. Just two weeks ago, McCarthy, lacking sufficient support among House Republicans to obtain a vote for an impeachment inquiry, had said he would not announce one on his own. But that is precisely what he did last Tuesday.

From left, Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. attend the House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing of the United States Department of Justice with testimony from Attorney General Merrick Garland, Thursday, Oct. 21, 2021 on Capitol Hill in Washington. [AP Photo/Michaels Reynolds/AP]

Within minutes of McCarthy’s announcement, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, a leader of the Freedom Caucus, gave a speech from the House floor calling the impeachment inquiry a mere “baby step” and threatening to lodge a “motion to vacate,” which would trigger a vote to remove McCarthy from the Speaker’s chair. Gaetz reiterated his caucus’s demands for trillions in cuts in social programs and a de facto ban on asylum seekers. He added demands for limits on Ukraine war funding, as well as non-compliance with the special counsel’s prosecution of Trump for attempting to overthrow the 2020 election, which he called “election interference” by Biden’s Justice Department. Unless McCarthy acceded to these demands, Gaetz said, his caucus would vote against a continuing resolution for short-term funding for the federal government and precipitate a shutdown on October 1.

Gaetz on deficits and the dollar

In an interview Tuesday on MSNBC following his speech from the House floor, Gaetz echoed the concerns of Wall Street over the explosive growth of the US national debt and government deficits and channeled their demands for unprecedented cuts in social spending. He said:

We are about to hit the moment in time where we are going to run $2 trillion annual deficits at a time when much of the world is de-dollarizing, from BRICS to the African Union to more energy being sold in the yuan due to the energy deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia. So as the world de-dollarizes, I think that it’s really dangerous for us to be running up these deficits. If Speaker McCarthy brought us individual spending bills over the year, he would not be facing the challenge.

When the 218th Congress opened last January, Gaetz and company blocked McCarthy’s election as House speaker until the 15th ballot. With the Republicans holding a mere five-vote majority in the House, the Freedom Caucus exerted and continues to exert leverage all out of proportion to its actual support in the population.

The Freedom Caucus fascists extracted pledges from McCarthy in return for allowing his elevation to Speaker, including holding separate votes on all 12 individual appropriations bills for the federal government instead of an omnibus bill, a budget blueprint that would use fiscal 2022 as its starting point, a vote on term limits, plum committee assignments for Freedom Caucus members, further militarization of the US-Mexico border and a balanced budget vote. These demands add up to the evisceration of public health, education, nutrition, housing and anti-poverty programs, which have already been starved of funds under Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

On Thursday, David Weiss, the Trump-appointed US attorney for Delaware, who was elevated last month to special counsel by Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland, announced the indictment of Hunter Biden on three felony charges related to his illegal purchase of a gun in 2018. The charges, which potentially carry substantial prison time, mean the president’s son could be on trial in the midst of Joe Biden’s reelection campaign. During the same period, Biden himself will likely face subpoenas and possible impeachment proceedings in the Republican-controlled House, and Trump could be on trial in either state or federal court.

The same day, at an internal meeting of House Republicans, McCarthy was blocked via a procedural vote led by Gaetz and his allies from moving to a floor vote on a Department of Defense annual defense spending bill. The $846.45 billion bill includes a 5.4 percent pay raise for service members and a large boost to starting pay for new recruits. McCarthy, who, along with most Republican leaders, supports the war against Russia, sought to get the bill passed by the House and then proceed to a one-month continuing resolution to avoid a shutdown of the government. McCarthy’s bill, in a concession to Gaetz and Trump, stripped out funding for the Ukraine war. By blocking a vote on the bill, at least for the present, the Freedom Caucus made a federal shutdown in two weeks more likely.

Biden responsible as poverty and inequality soar

The Biden White House has sought “common ground” with the Republican demands for massive social cuts. The omnibus budget bill passed by Congress last December and signed into law by Biden ended an emergency increase in food stamps benefits enacted after the COVID-19 outbreak. The cut, which took effect March 1 of this year, sharply reduced benefits for 42 million Americans, all of them poor and many of them children. This was followed by the removal from Medicaid rolls of tens of millions of low income people, including millions of children, the termination of the expanded child tax credit and other stimulus programs enacted at the onset of COVID-19 and the resumption of payments on university student loans.

It is under these conditions that a far-right faction of the Republican Party, publicly supported by Trump, is seeking to engineer a partial shutdown of the government. This would not affect programs of vital concern to the ruling class, since military operations and those of repressive agencies like the FBI and CIA would not be affected nor would payments on the national debt. But all domestic social programs and regulatory agencies would be halted, although Social Security and similar benefit payments would still be made.

Whether or not a shutdown occurs or is averted by a compromise agreement that includes a short-term continuation of current funding levels, the outcome will shift the trajectory of official policy further to the right and ratchet up the attack on the social conditions and democratic rights of the working class.

The political responsibility for the outsized influence of the growing fascist wing of the Republican Party rests with Biden and the Democrats, who have systematically worked to cover up the complicity of the Republican Party, as well as sections of the military, police, FBI, financial elite, corporate media and US Supreme Court, in the attempted coup of January 6 and the ongoing conspiracy to establish a dictatorship.

Even now, with Trump and his allies in Congress seeking to shut down the government and create the maximum level of havoc in advance of the 2024 elections, the mantra of Biden and the Democrats continues to be an appeal for bipartisan unity and a “strong Republican Party” in order to conduct the war against Russia and suppress the working class at home.

The Sunday interview shows highlighted the conflicts within the Republican ranks between various right-wing factions and the desperate efforts of the Democrats to maintain an alliance with a section of the GOP so as to prosecute the war against Russia. NBC devoted the inaugural appearance of Kristen Welker as host of “Meet the Press” to an extensive interview with Trump. Asked if he backed the threat of the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government unless the FY 2024 budget includes far deeper social cuts, Trump endorsed a shutdown, saying, “I’d shut down the government if they don’t get an appropriate deal.”

McCarthy, interviewed on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” program, moderated by the fascistic Maria Bartiromo, dared Gaetz and Co. to bring a motion to vacate, which he knows would likely fail. He said he would bring a continuing resolution agreement to the floor for a vote this coming week. Touting his record as a budget-cutter, he cited his deal with Biden at the end of May to raise the US debt ceiling, saying it included “the biggest cut in US history, nearly $2 trillion.”

Interviewed on ABC’s “This Week” program, Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York reiterated the Biden administration’s appeals for bipartisan unity. Calling for an end to “partisan gamesmanship,” he said, “We’re going to continue to try and find common ground with the other side.” Despite McCarthy’s launching of an impeachment inquiry against Biden, Jeffries did not rule out supplying Democratic votes to keep McCarthy as House Speaker should Gaetz place a motion to vacate the position. Asked if he would back McCarthy, Jeffries said “no decision” had been made.

New Thai cabinet stacked with pro-military and big business figures

Ben McGrath

The new Thai government of Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin took office early this month after being approved by the monarchy. The administration came to power following May’s general election, after which the winner, the Move Forward Party, was blocked by the military from forming a government. The composition of the cabinet and the subsequent release of its first policy statement last week make clear the anti-working class, anti-democratic character of the government.

Thailand's Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, arrives at Parliament in Bangkok, Thailand, Monday, Sept. 11, 2023. [AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit]

Srettha’s Pheu Thai Party formed a coalition with the two military-backed parties—the previous ruling Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP) and the United Thai Nation Party (UTN). The coalition also includes eight other parties including the right-wing populist Bhumjaithai Party (BJTP), which was part of the regime installed after the 2014 military coup. Coup leader General Prayut Chan-o-cha held power as junta leader then prime minister up to this year’s election.

Within the 34-member cabinet, portfolios have been allocated to six of those parties, with Pheu Thai holding 18 ministerial positions. The BJTP has eight posts, the PPRP and UTN each hold three, and Chartthaipattana and Prachachart hold one each.

The cabinet also includes nine officials who served in Prayut’s government. These include Deputy Prime Minister and Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul of the BJTP, Labor Minister Pipat Ratchakitprakarn, another BJTP member, and Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Thamanat Prompow of the PPRP. He has previously been described in Thai media as a “fixer” for Prayut’s military junta. Another figure in the new government is Patcharawat Wongsuwon, a PPRP member who was not in Prayut’s cabinet, but is the younger brother of Prawit Wongsuwon, another 2014 coup leader and current head of the PPRP.

The inclusion of so many figures in the new cabinet who are close to the military and the monarchy makes clear that Pheu Thai, which has long postured as the party of “democracy” in Thailand, has abandoned any pretensions to represent a democratic alternative. In the face of growing discontent of workers, farmers and the poor, the bourgeois Pheu Thai party fears a social explosion no less than the military.

Pheu Thai is the de facto successor of the Thai Rak Thai Party, with its members migrating to the People’s Power Party following the 2006 coup, and then to Pheu Thai in 2008. The party represents a dissident faction of the ruling class frustrated at the domination of the traditional ruling elites—the military, monarchy and state bureaucracy. In power, it gained a following among the rural and urban poor by implementing limited social reforms while pushing for a further opening up of the economy to foreign investors.

The military, which controls the unelected upper house giving it a veto over the formation of a government, has allowed Pheu Thai to take power to mollify widespread public discontent, but is keeping it on a tight leash.

Pheu Thai’s pledges to rewrite the anti-democratic 2017 military constitution will be blocked or purely cosmetic. Prime minister Srettha has already made clear that his government will not touch the draconian lèse-majesté law that is used to muzzle criticism of the monarchy.

Any changes the new government does carry out will largely be to benefit big business and the ruling elites. Srettha himself is a 61-year-old real estate tycoon and not an elected member of parliament.

Many leading cabinet members are from big business. They have pledged to boost Thailand’s economy. Bangkok has set a modest target of 5 percent GDP growth annually. Currently, the government expects 3.2 percent growth for next year while growth stood at just 1.8 percent in the second quarter of this year. This inevitably means imposing austerity on working people.

The government’s agenda is being given a populist façade, with a three-year debt moratorium for farmers and small businesses announced on September 13. Thai household debt is more than 90 percent of the country’s GDP. More details of the moratorium will be announced in coming weeks.

In releasing his government’s agenda to the National Assembly on September 11, Srettha focused heavily on the economy. “Under the present economic circumstances, Thailand is like a sick person…Tourism and spending are recovering so slowly that there is the risk of economic recession. It is necessary to stimulate the economy and spending,” he said.

Another promise is a 10,000-baht ($US280) digital wallet scheme, slated to be implemented early next year. All Thai citizens 16 and older will receive 10,000 baht in digital currency as part of a stimulus plan. People are restricted in how they can use the digital currency, which will only be valid for six months. They will be barred from spending the digital currency to reduce their debt and must spend it within four kilometers of their registered address. It is not convertible to hard currency except by approved businesses who must pay taxes when doing so. The plan has specifically been touted as a means of raising tax revenue.

Like many of Pheu Thai’s pledges, detail of the digital wallet scheme has not been worked out or released to the public. However, the handout is primarily designed to develop new digital infrastructure for businesses and has been backed by companies working with blockchain technology.

Pheu Thai also pledged to raise the minimum wage to a paltry 400 baht ($US11.20) a day. The current daily minimum is between 328 and 354 baht, varying by province. Big business, however, has already pushed back on this limited increase.

Labor Minister Pipat Ratchakitprakarn, a wealthy businessman and former Prayut cabinet member, criticised the increase, saying, “If we are going to increase the minimum wage to 400 baht, inflation and GDP must be considered.” He continued, “Under the current economic circumstances, the wage should increase by 2 percent,” or an increase to 361 baht at most.

A key aspect of the government’s economic plan is the promotion of new free trade agreements while opening the economy further to foreign investment. While traveling to the US for the UN General Assembly this coming week, Srettha plans to hold discussions with companies like Microsoft, Google, and Telsa on investing in Thailand.

While much has been said about these economic issues, little has been discussed publicly about the growing danger of a US-instigated war with China that would inevitably draw in Thailand. The new government has stated that it will continue a balancing act between Washington and Beijing. This will prove increasingly difficult as Washington lines up its allies in the Indo-Pacific for its war drive.

US imperialist hypocrisy and the Libyan flood

Patrick Martin

A man sits by the graves of the flash flood victims in Derna, Libya, Friday, September 15, 2023. [AP Photo/Yousef Murad]

Over the weekend, former President Barack Obama urged his 132 million followers on Twitter (X) to make contributions to charitable organizations aiding the people of Derna, the Libyan city devastated by a flood that killed well over 20,000 people, according to estimates by local officials.

“If you’re looking to help people impacted by the floods in Libya, check out these organizations providing relief,” Obama wrote, citing an appeal from his own foundation.

This statement provoked a barrage of hostile comments on social media from those who justifiably cited Obama’s own responsibility for creating the conditions for the Libyan disaster. His government launched the US-NATO war in 2011 that destroyed the existing regime of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi. The bombing set in motion the protracted civil war, still ongoing, that has laid waste to a country that was once the richest in Africa.

Other top US officials responsible for the war in Libya include then-Vice President Joe Biden and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who played the main role in publicly justifying the war. She gloated about US-NATO success in killing Gaddafi. “We came, we saw, he died,” she boasted at the time.

Now-President Biden issued his own sanctimonious appeal for support and sympathy for the Libyan people. “Jill and I send our deepest condolences to all the families who have lost loved ones in the devastating floods in Libya,” he said in a statement last week, adding that the US was sending emergency funds to relief organizations. No dollar amount has been announced yet, but it will be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1.1 billion spent by the US on the 2011 war, let alone the tens of billions being spent on the war against Russia in Ukraine.

The total aid appeal announced by the United Nations is only $71 million. This sum is dwarfed by the vast human need, and by the enormous amounts squandered on the killing zone that Ukraine has become. The European Union, which has poured nearly $40 billion into the war against Russia, pledged a mere $537,000 in aid to the victims of the Derna flood.

The United Nations also bears responsibility for the Libyan tragedy. On March 17, 2011, the UN Security Council approved actions against Libya (with Russia and China abstaining rather than vetoing), authorizing members states to “take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi.” This language gave the UN seal of approval to the imperialist pretext for attacking Libya, the supposed threat of a massacre of the people of Benghazi by Gaddafi’s forces. Two days later, the US-NATO bombing began.

That war killed 25,000 Libyans, including Gaddafi, who was tortured and murdered by Islamic fundamentalists recruited, trained and armed by the Pentagon and CIA, as well as Britain and France. These fighters were then shipped by the CIA to Syria to join an insurgent movement against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that became known as ISIS. The port through which these hardened guerrillas were transported was the city of Derna, now largely destroyed by the September 10 flood.

Other Islamists moved south, destabilizing most of the Sahel region, including Chad, Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso and the Central African Republic, and spreading violence into Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country.

A map featuring north and central Africa. [Photo: www.openstreetmap.org]

Within Libya itself, the consequences of the US-led war were catastrophic. Economically, Africa’s most prosperous country before the US-NATO attack has been transformed into one of poverty and deprivation, with crumbling infrastructure. In 2010, the year before the war, Libya’s GDP was $11,611 per capita. By 2021, this figure was cut nearly in half, to $5,909 per capita. The country’s net wealth actually fell 21 percent from 2010 to 2021, in sharp contrast to African countries like Ethiopia (up 591 percent), Kenya (up 468 percent) and Nigeria (up 230 percent).

The US-NATO bombing of Libya was followed by a civil war between rival factions, each backed by a different constellation of outside powers vying for control of the country’s vast oil and gas reserves, the largest in Africa. Libya has now been effectively partitioned between an eastern region headquartered in Benghazi and a western region controlled from Tripoli, the capital city.

Reportedly the eastern region rulers, headed by Khalifa Haftar, once a CIA asset but now allied with France, Russia and the United Arab Emirates, looked with suspicion on the city of Derna because of its role in the activities of the Islamic fundamentalists and American intelligence operatives. They were not inclined to expend resources to repair and strengthen the infrastructure there, even after reports of visible cracks in the two dams which protected the city against possible flooding of the wadi, the riverbed, usually dry, which ran through its center.

It was these two dams that failed under the impact of Storm Daniel, the hurricane-sized weather event, likely strengthened by climate change, which poured more than 15 inches of water on the city, a year’s average rainfall in a few hours. The huge volume of water, freed from any constraint by the dam collapse, roared down upon the defenseless inhabitants of Derna and swept away or buried in mud an estimated one in four buildings in a city of nearly 100,000 people.

The American corporate media, of course, says nothing in its coverage of the disaster about the responsibility of the Obama-Biden administration and the US government for this colossal human tragedy. There will be no indictments, either politically or juridically, of the war criminals in Washington.

When the United Nations General Assembly convenes Monday in New York City, the leaders of the major powers will give complacent speeches about the urgency of mobilizing the world in support of Ukraine. They may even give lip service to the causes of fighting global hunger and disease, the need to assist the victims of “natural disasters” in Morocco, Libya, Turkey and countless other countries.

Coinciding with this event is the two-day conference sponsored by the Clinton Global Initiative, the foundation run by Bill and Hillary Clinton. This boasts seven US governors, four Biden cabinet members, two former White House press secretaries, a genuine war criminal, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and reportedly the Pope. There is no mention in its voluminous agenda of either the Libyan disaster or Hillary Clinton’s role in it.

There is silence likewise from the pseudo-left groups and “left” academics who backed the US-NATO war in Libya, and who now back the US-NATO war against Russia in Ukraine. None of these groups has the slightest independence from American imperialism or its European rivals. All of them, like Obama, Biden and Clinton, have blood on their hands, and political and moral responsibility for one of great crimes of the 21st century.