The global crisis of capitalist rule and the strategy of socialist revolution

Joseph Kishore

In the founding document of the Fourth International, The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International, written and adopted in 1938, Leon Trotsky summed up the character of the epoch as expressed in the political crisis of class rule in all the major capitalist countries:

The bourgeoisie itself sees no way out. In countries where it has already been forced to stake its last upon the card of fascism, it now toboggans with closed eyes toward economic and military catastrophe. In the historically privileged countries, i.e., in those where the bourgeoisie can still for a certain period permit itself the luxury of democracy at the expense of national accumulations (Great Britain, France, United States, etc.), all of capital’s traditional parties are in a state of perplexity bordering on a paralysis of will.

Without much modification, this passage serves well as a description of the world situation as the year 2018 draws to a close.

In Britain, Prime Minister Theresa May is essentially a political corpse, having barely survived a vote of no confidence from her own Conservative Party last week. The British ruling class remains wracked by internal divisions over Brexit two and a half years after the referendum backing a decision to leave the European Union. May is hoping for some arrangement with the EU that will mollify her opponents within the Conservative Party, while the Labour Party headed by Jeremy Corbyn is seeking to avoid any measures that would further destabilize the government and encourage popular opposition.

In France, the banker-president Emmanuel Macron is perhaps the most reviled individual in the entire country, with approval ratings hovering just above 20 percent, down 27 percentage points over the past year. There is enormous popular support for the demands of the “yellow vest” protesters, to which Macron responded once again over the weekend with mass arrests and tens of thousands of riot police on the streets of French cities.

In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel has resigned as leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), which she has headed for 18 years, though she intends to remain chancellor until 2021. Under the Grand Coalition government of the Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union (CSU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the German ruling class has fostered the extreme right, making the fascistic Alternative for Germany (AfD) the official opposition party and a dominant political force in the country. Under Merkel’s leadership, Germany has developed into the most unequal country in Europe, as the ruling elite revives a military agenda of aggressive great power conflict.

In Australia, the ruling Liberal-National coalition government is hanging by a thread. There is civil war within the Liberal Party following the political coup that ousted Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in August and replaced him with Scott Morrison, the seventh prime minister in just over a decade.

Then there is Sri Lanka, which has seen an extraordinary turn of political events over the past seven weeks. This involved the illegal firing of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe by President Maithripala Sirisena, the appointment of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to take his place, the dissolution of parliament, a Supreme Court ruling declaring the dissolution unconstitutional, and, yesterday, the reappointment of Wickremesinghe by Sirisena. Lest anyone conclude that this reversal marks an end to the political crisis, Sirisena, shortly after swearing in the prime minister he had previously sacked, denounced him as corrupt and a threat to the nation.

The most intense political crisis, however, is in the United States, the center of world imperialism. The Trump administration is increasingly besieged, struggling over the past week to appoint a new chief of staff to replace the fired Gen. John Kelly. Trump faces a series of criminal and civil investigations into his private companies, his charity and his inauguration committee. The president’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, was sentenced to three years in prison last week, while the parent company of the National Enquirer and its chief executive have supported claims by Cohen that Trump was personally complicit in violations of campaign finance laws during the 2016 election.

The Democratic Party, while increasingly aggressive in its palace coup maneuvers against Trump, is deathly afraid of doing anything that will stoke popular anger. Dominant sections of the ruling elite contemplate with foreboding the tasks that lie before it—including great power conflict and dealing with growing social unrest—and see in the Trump administration a government unequal to the challenge. “Every one of us wades through his wreckage of norms,” lamented New York Times columnist Frank Bruni on Sunday, “is unsteadied by his assault on truth, braces for whatever happens next and knows that it may have much greater and longer consequence for us than it does for Trump.”

Yet any destabilization of Trump or constitutional crisis can encourage what is most feared—the intervention of the working class. Hence the Democrats’ vacillation between threats of impeachment and demands for a more aggressive policy against Russia, on the one hand, and groveling pleas for Trump to work with them in implementing his regressive and militarist agenda, on the other.

The universality of political crisis—and to the above list many more countries could be added—is itself of immense objective significance. Whatever the national peculiarities, the destabilization of political institutions in every country is driven by the same crisis of the global capitalist system.

Ten years after the financial collapse of 2008, there are growing signs of renewed economic crisis. The Chinese economy is slowing sharply, Europe is in stagnation, and the United States faces the possibility of a recession next year. The ruling class is resorting to policies of economic nationalism and trade war, particularly the American ruling class. Such measures not only offer no way out of the economic blind alley, they fuel geopolitical conflicts that threaten world war.

Above all, there is the growth of social inequality, mass discontent and, increasingly, open class struggle. The ruling class is casting about for some means of stopping the inevitable tide of events—whether through internet censorship, ever more nakedly directed at social opposition, or by means of repression and violence, including the promotion of fascistic and extreme nationalist movements. The frenzied drive to rearm and prepare for wider wars is, moreover, driven in large measure by the desire to direct internal social tensions outward.

A year that has seen significant expressions of working-class struggle throughout the world is coming to a conclusion with the yellow vest protests in France, a strike by a hundred thousand tea plantation workers in Sri Lanka, a mass demonstration of tens of thousands of teachers in Los Angeles, California and other expressions of social anger.

The struggles by workers are developing in opposition to the existing political parties and the trade unions. Such was the case in France, where the yellow vest protests developed through social media and outside of the control of the unions. In Sri Lanka, workers greeted the Ceylon Workers Congress’s “back to work” order last week with protests and the continuation of the strike before it was finally shut down on Friday.

For the working class, the critical question is to develop its own organizations of struggle and political leadership. It cannot allow itself to be channeled behind any faction of the ruling class. It must take political power into its own hands.

Important advances were made over the past week, with the establishment of a steering committee of rank-and-file committees of autoworkers and other sections of the working class in the United States, and the establishment of an action committee to coordinate and organize the struggles of Sri Lankan plantation workers. In both cases, the emergence of independent organizations of working-class struggle developed under the leadership of the International Committee of the Fourth International and its national sections, the Socialist Equality Parties.

In founding the Fourth International, Trotsky concluded from the conditions and political experiences of the preceding period that the “historical crisis of mankind is reduced to the crisis of revolutionary leadership.” So it is today. In response to the global crisis of capitalist rule, the working class must advance its own strategy of world socialist revolution. The leadership of this world movement is the International Committee of the Fourth International.

India-Pakistan: The Berlin Wall Moment is Still Far Away

C Uday Bhaskar


The six kilometre Kartarpur corridor that will connect the Indian state of Punjab with the holy Sikh shrine in Pakistan—the much revered Kartarpur Sahib—the final resting place of Guru Nanak, the founder of the Sikh faith, was inaugurated formally through foundation—stone laying ceremonies in both countries.

Indian Vice President Venkiah Naidu did the honours on the Indian side on 26 November and declared: “The corridor will become a symbol of love and peace between both countries.” At the ceremony, Naidu was accompanied by the Chief Minister of Punjab, Captain Amarinder Singh, who introduced a discordant note about Pakistan and the support to terrorism but the overall mood was positive.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Imran Khan, held a more expansive event on 28 November and was eloquent in asking: “If France and Germany who fought several wars can live in peace, why can't India and Pakistan?” Earlier, India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, praised the Kartarpur initiative and went to the extent of comparing it with the fall of the Berlin Wall, which added to the optimism that was triggered.

When New Delhi and Islamabad made swift back—to—back announcements about the opening of the Kartarpur corridor to mark the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak (April 2019), it was assumed that some back—channel negotiation was ongoing and that religious diplomacy would facilitate some kind of political breakthrough to the long stalled bilateral dialogue.

However, the choice of the date for the Indian ground—breaking ceremony in the Gurdaspur district—26 November—coincided with the tenth anniversary of the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai (26/11) and the symbolism was intriguing. Why did New Delhi decide on this date? Was there any review and change to India’s stated policy that support to terror and talks cannot go together? Speculation began that maybe India would attend the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit scheduled to be held in Pakistan and the optimism was growing. 

However, within hours, there was a reality check and a number of contradictory developments and statements emerged. First, India’s External Affairs Minister. Sushma Swaraj, confirmed that she would not attend the ceremonies in Pakistan and Punjab’s Chief Minister Singh who had also been invited, declined to attend too. In his remarks, Singh drew attention to the terrorism and separatism being supported by Pakistan’s Inter—Services Intelligence (ISI) and publicly cautioned Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, not to provoke India. Soon after Swaraj also confirmed that there were no plans for India to attend the SAARC summit and asserted that ‘terror and talks’ cannot go together.

Yet, to respect the Sikh sentiment, the Modi government chose to send two central ministers–Harsimrat Kaur Badal and Hardeep Singh Puri–to Pakistan with a message that Kartarpur was a stand—alone religious initiative and not to be linked with any other aspect of the uneasy bilateral relationship. Concurrently there was internal dissonance within the Congress party in the Punjab government, for junior minister and cricketer—turned politician Navjot Singh Sidhu (formerly with the Bharatiya Janata Party and who had first brought Kartarpur into the public domain in August 2018 when he attended Khan’s swearing—in ceremony to the office of Pakistan’s prime minister) became the Indian face at Kartarpur. It was evident that Amarinder Singh was not enthused with this participation by Sidhu but this is indicative of the current political dynamic in the state over Kartarpur.

If India represented a divided (and confused?) constituency, the event in Pakistan was marred by the presence of the pro—Khalistan leader Gopal Chawla, and his photograph with Sidhu generated controversy in India. The Khan’s reference to Kashmir in his remarks was criticised by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs and in short, the sudden hope that was generated in the early stages of the Kartarpur announcement was short—lived.

In a subsequent interaction with visiting Indian journalists, Khan exhorted India to make a fresh start to revive the stalled bilateral dialogue with Pakistan. He responded to questions about terrorism, 26/11 and Hafiz Saeed but presented a contradictory posture on the ‘core’ issue of state support to terrorism.

While maintaining what Islamabad always says in public—that Pakistan does not support terrorism or allows its soil to be used to export terror (a claim that is rejected by both Afghanistan and India)—Khan tried to downplay the Hafiz Saeed issue by claiming that the 26/11 case is sub judice in Pakistan and that his government had clamped down on Saeed and his group.

Khan’s contradictory positions on terrorism was visible even when his party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was in power in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province after the 2013 election and Peshawar was rocked by terror attacks. At the time, instead of taking a firm stand against the terror groups, as the leader of the PTI, Khan urged talks with the Taliban.

In his first 100 days as prime minister, Khan also rejected US President Trump’s admonition about Islamabad supporting terror groups. Ironically, on 26 November 2018–the 10th anniversary of 26/11–Imran Khan also addressed a gathering in North Waziristan where he noted: "We have fought an imposed war inside our country as our war at a very heavy cost of sweat and blood and lose to our socio—economic fibre. We shall not fight any such war again inside Pakistan."

Believing that Pakistan is a victim of an ‘imposed war’ and living in denial about the eco—system that Rawalpindi has nurtured for decades to support terror groups selectively is the strongly held internal narrative that Imran Khan has to discard for any meaningful movement in the bilateral dialogue with India. Until then, Kartarpur is likely to remain a standalone initiative in the run—up to the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak.

The Berlin Wall moment is clearly far away.

The Rising Tide of Attacks on Minorities!

 Adv Syed Mujtaba

Gandhi’s vision of the ideal society was that of a non-violent and democratic social order in which there would be a just balance between individual freedom and social responsibility. He had a very high regard for the place of ideals in human life. Without ideals, he said, life could have no meaning because there would be no goals towards which human endeavour could be directed. In Gandhi’s ideal society, satyagraha is particularly stressed as a means (which he describes as “love force” or “soul force”).This force, he wrote, is indestructible and the force of arms is powerless when matched against the force of love or the soul. He admits that there was no historical evidence of any nation having risen through the use of this force. It is in this sense that M.K Gandhi puts so much emphasis on gradual, peaceful, non-violent change. He believed that a new social order could not be forced, if change was brought through force, it would be a remedy worse than the disease. Gandhi did not wish to slacken the pace of change, but it had to be an organic growth, not a violent superimposition. The organic growth itself was to result in a thoroughgoing, radical social reordering.

The present Government has not only vanished the concept of Bapu(Gandhi) regarding secular and tolerant India but has also surpassed all the records of state sponsored atrocities upon religious as well as social minorities . In  Kashmir in every alternate day there are incidents of gashing of eyes, use of ever-new methods of persecution during unending curfews, torching of their villages along with crops and destruction of their business as well as economic life in utter defiance of international human rights laws. The present Govt is also attempting to change the demography of Kashmir . It is pertinent to mention that on 14 June 2018, UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights ZeidRa’ad Al Hussein, released first ever report on the “human rights situation” in Jammu and Kashmir from July 2016 to April 2018 based on “allegations of widespread and serious human rights violations were received, notably excessive use of force by Indian security forces that led to numerous civilian casualties”. The Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) ZeidRa’ad Al Hussein “called on Indian security forces to exercise maximum restraint, and strictly abide by international standards governing the use of force when dealing with future protests.” He also advised that “It is essential the Indian authorities take immediate and effective steps to avoid a repetition of the numerous examples of excessive use of force by security forces in Kashmir”. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres had backed the human rights commissioner.

Although  constitution of India  protects freedom of religion and prohibits discrimination based on one’s faith, instances of violence against religious minorities have been increasing in recent years.

Religious minority groups in India are consistently subjected to inhuman and intolerant treatment at the hands of growing violent and extremists. Violence and denial of constitutional rights are the usual tools with which Indian minorities are preyed by extremists .

Recently at an event titled ‘Religious Freedom in India, Religious freedom activists from across the U.S.  Criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his failure to stop the violence carried out by Hindutva groups against religious minorities, including Muslims and Christians. At a  Briefing on Capitol Hill’, organised by the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC) on the Capitol Hill in Washington D.C., the activists urged the Indian prime minister to condemn such violence against religious minorities as well as take all necessary measures to curb the riseof Hindutva extremism and punish those involved in violence.

Hamid Ansari former Vice President of India who had served the chair for 10 whole years  said, “The Muslims in the country are experiencing a feeling of unease. A sense of insecurity is creeping in as a result of the dominant mood created by some and the resultant intolerance and vigilantism.”

For instance in state of Uttar Pradesh ,Since the election of Aditya Yogi as UP CM. The wave of intolerance and vigilantism started with increasing activities of extremist outfits. The threat has started its manifestation in many shapes. Schools and other educational institutions including Curriculum is being systematically changed, followed by ban on “Beef”, change in Names of Muslim areas .

Muslims face lynching’s , Christians are subjected to vandalism of Churches, Sikh community is denied separate socio-religious status, whereas, Scheduled castes and other communities face different intimidating tactics at the cruel and barbaric hands. Threats of communal violence increase when local forces wait for orders before acting, or worse, are instructed not to act. These problems are compounded when responsible officials are not held accountable after the fact.

No democracy can be a real democracy where the constitutional secular fabric of society, pluralistic tradition faces such serious challenges.

Corporate Exploitation- Prime Hindrance of Sustainable Development

Harasankar Adhikari

Every one of our policy makers of government, quasi government and private or other sectors in India says proudly about sustainable development or they plan towards achievement of sustainability of the particular programme. But their desired expectation is theoretically a mouthful word. It is perhaps a political demand, and it is only a politically correct concept because practice tells different and there is hidden weakness towards achievement of sustainability.

According to Brundtland of Commission of the United Nations, 198), “Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.  It indicates an inclusive, sustainable and resilient future for people and planet.  It consists with triple challenges- challenges of accountability, fairness and dignified living. These triple challenges have to fight with modernity, technology, and corporate exploitation. The last one is prime responsible factor because of lack of ethical sensitivity towards others- future generations.

We see that we are gradually coping with modernity based on development and progress in science and technology. Time bound need and demand of our country has been determined and all progress is to ensure a modern life comparing with the global aspect. For this purpose, Electoral reforms, police reforms, judicial reforms, and educational reforms and others are significantly going on( it may be sometimes involved with the strict agenda of the particular political parties in government).

But sustainable development is always a big question to all of us. The corporate exploitation and lack of ethical sensitivity are the prime factors of weakness of failure because we do not imagine corruption-free governance. Corporate exploitation is, we see, particularly attached to exploitation and it is a determinant factor of corruption. There is no ethical responsibility towards future generations. The corporate is trying to gain today’s profit. In India, the political patronage are desperate and open because of  personal gain. At present, a small contractor/developer has to pay cut money for work order for which this contractor/developer is allowed to do poor quality of work. The incident of sudden collapse of bridge and improper repairing & maintenance is very common. Surprisingly, our government and policy-makers have no attention of ethical responsibility because they are the patron of this.

Further, we forget that religious, state, language, caste etc, should not be allowed to interfere with progress and development

How can we dream for making in India? Where sustainability is derided on make for India?

Here, we see that our democracies are not liberal, but these are prone to corruption. Sustainable development is only possible in a liberal democracy.

The Demise of Modi`s Arrogance and Acrimonious Politics

Rahul Kumar

A recent inglorious defeat of Modi/Shah combine in three Indian states: Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and victory of Rahul Gandhi, once labeled immature, part-time politicians by the BJP/RSS, shows that no leader or government can befool the intelligent Indian voters for a long time. Insulating day and night Gandhi family from the public platforms by Modi/RSS/VHP/Bajrang Dal made sick the people of India. The victory of Rahul Gandhi also shows that Modi/Shah combine can no longer win future elections merely on empty rhetoric.

There is a long list of failures on the part of Modi/RSS combine. Apart from Demonetization, GST the rate of unemployment among the graduates is high. Nothing substantial has been done to generate employment avenues for millions of young graduates. The litany is
that Ph.D. degree holders are forced to look for fourth class jobs such as peon, steno etc. Numerous flagship programmes such as Skill India, Start-up India launched by Modi government did not work well to help the young population. The voice of millions of struggling farmers is not heard. Central government teachers` salary is not paid on time but to talk of state governments which are struggling due financial crunch. Research centers are almost on the verge of collapse due to financial paucity. The development and good governance stand nowhere under Modi/RSS divisive politics.

It is on record that Indian intelligent voters are impatient. At the same time, Indian voters gave a full term to Modi/RSS to address the issues like unemployment, skyrocketing prices, fuel prices, farmer distress etc. All these issues are directly pinching the pocket of a common man. But unfortunately, BJP/RSS leaders utilized their time and energy to polarize the society on the basis of religion and caste resulting in social chaos and anarchy. This social chaos and anarchy as generated byModi/RSS in almost all states of India have further lead to societal disintegration. People belonging to the minority groups are publicly beaten by the goons of RSS/VHP/Bajrang Dal. Muslims are killed; Christians are suppressed; Sikhs are labeled Khalistanis`.

On corruption front, Indian intelligent voters were expecting from Modi/RSS to root out corruption from the face of India but data shows that no file is moved unless a bribe is paid. The digitization of the government department has furthered created problems for the common people. Officers working in the government departments are taking advantage of digitization. Nothing is done without paying the bribe. Touts and middlemen rule the roost.

On the foreign policy front, Modi as a Prime Minister

of India wasted the taxpayer money while making visits to several countries. In the current scenario, almost all European countries are struggling with their own social and economic problems. It is also a fact that when a country is struggling to make her own citizens happy one cannot expect foreign investment. On the other hand, the USA under the Presidentship of Donald Trump wanted “America First”. China under Xi Jinping wanted Chinese goods to be traded rather than establishing manufacturing units in India. India under Modi/RSS Hindutva ideological orientation lost credibility to attract foreign investment. There are two major reasons working against India under Modi/RSS (1) Political instability (2) Social anarchy.

Today, a foreign investor is reluctant to come to India. There is no denying the fact that Narendra Modi as Prime Minister of India has wasted valuable five years of a young population of India. Now time is over for Narendra Modi to address the impending issues concerning the common man since 2019 Lok Sabha elections are approaching. The current mood of the Indian voters indicates that Modi`s chimera must be annihilated and be buried once for all.

Number of UK households in energy debt increases by 300,000, owing nearly £400 million

Dennis Moore 

Research published by the consumer web site Uswitch reveals that, as winter’s cold weather bites, the number of households already in debt to energy suppliers in the UK rose by 300,000 in the past year.

The outstanding debt owed to power companies in October this year totalled £393 million, an increase of nearly a quarter on the same time last year. It is usually expected that households should be in credit at this time of year, with the expectation that as the colder months ahead arrive, consumers will have the money to pay for higher winter bills.

The debts themselves have been in large part due to increased price hikes from the major power suppliers that have taken place over the last two years, with the six biggest suppliers putting up tariffs twice this year.

Fuel poor households are defined as those households with above average energy costs, with their income falling below the official poverty line after paying for lighting and heating their homes.

Peter Smith, director of policy and research at National Energy Action (NAC), said, “Millions of people are approaching this winter with dread and will face unimaginable situations. Those who are repaying large or growing energy debts don’t turn the heating on at all, despite knowing it could badly damage their or their family’s health.”

The rise in fuel poverty takes place despite the utilities price cap for millions of vulnerable households that started in April 2017.

A study carried out earlier this year by NAC, and the climate change charity E3G, found that up to 3,000 people are dying each year in the UK because they cannot afford to heat their homes, with the UK having the second worst rate of winter deaths in Europe, after Ireland.

The study found that of the 168,000 winter deaths that have taken place over the previous five years in the UK, nearly 17,000 died as a direct result of fuel poverty. A further 36,000 deaths were attributed to conditions related to living in a cold home.

That would mean the number of people dying from cold each year is similar to those dying from prostrate and breast cancer.

The researchers pointed to the wider impact of living in cold homes—as well as increased fatalities, the greater demand on health service infrastructure, placing more pressure on GP surgeries and Accident and Emergency departments.

Infants living in cold homes have a 30 percent greater risk of being admitted to hospital or primary care facilities and are three times more likely to suffer from coughing, wheezing or respiratory illnesses.

The governments Annual Fuel Poverty Statistics 2018 shows that the highest level of fuel poverty (19.4 percent) is in households in the private rented sector, compared to 7.7 percent in owner occupied properties.

The numbers of households in employment who are defined as fuel poor stands at 47.4 percent, and households where the reference person is unemployed are four times more likely to be fuel poor than the national average.

The largest household group in fuel poverty in 2016 was single parent households, at 26.4 percent, 10 percent above any other group.

The problem of fuel poverty is not restricted to towns and cities. According to government figures, 11 percent of those living in households in rural areas of England are fuel poor. This increases to 14 percent for those living in rural villages, hamlets and isolated dwellings, who are deemed to have a higher level of fuel poverty than those living in semi-rural or urban areas.

Research by National Energy Action and the Campaign to Protect Rural England found that energy efficiency in homes in rural areas is five years behind urban areas, meaning that some people were having to pay up to 55 percent more on fuel.

In response to the rise in rural fuel poverty, the Axewoods Co-Operative was set up. This is a scheme set up to provide free wooden logs in East Devon. It works on a similar basis to a food bank—providing logs from cut down local trees to residents to burn in open fires and wood burners.

Alan Dyer, chairman of the scheme said, “It’s not aimed at people who might turn up in their Range Rover, load up and say: ‘Thanks very much for the free logs’,” Dyer said. “Fuel poverty is a real problem in rural areas. In the south-west where wages are low and costs are high ordinary people are struggling to keep themselves warm. If they have access to a log burner or open fire, the wood we provide could make all the difference”

According to the Citizens Advice Bureaux charity (CAB), Britain's households now owe a staggering £19 billion in debt, with many falling behind with essential bills for the first time. The CAB said missed bill payments had now overtaken credit card repayments for the first time and were considered a major worry by many consumers.

The data was collated from government records and from the CAB’s own records of more than the 690,000 people it helped last year, who were having trouble repaying household bills. The CAB estimate that as much as £18.9 billion is owed to the government and utility companies, including gas, electricity, water bills, and also unpaid taxes and fines.

The utilities companies were owed a total of £3.3 billion by consumers, with water companies owed £2.2 billion and electricity and gas providers being £1.1 billion.

The increased stress and anxiety that individuals and families face when they cannot repay debts can lead to mental health problems, and then to additional borrowing. The CAB said that a third of people in debt are likely to be out of full-time employment, with one in three experiencing problems with their mental health.

It is an indictment of capitalism that in the 21st century millions of people are worried about putting their heating on, for fear of the bill that will arrive. Heating, lighting and all basic utilities are a requirement of civilised life and a social right, and their provision cannot be dependent on affordability.

Fighting reported in Yemeni port, despite cease-fire

Bill Van Auken

Residents of the embattled Red Sea port of Hodeidah in Yemen reported Friday that renewed fighting had broken out on the city’s outskirts, despite a cease-fire agreement signed just the day before by the US- and Saudi-backed puppet government and the Houthi rebels.

Reuters cited witnesses who reported that the sound of missiles and automatic weapons fire had been heard from the eastern suburb of the Houthi-controlled city, which has been under siege by forces led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) since June.

United Nations agencies and humanitarian aid groups have warned that the siege of the city threatens to tip Yemen, already facing the worst humanitarian catastrophe on the planet, into mass starvation. Some 14 million Yemenis are already on the brink of famine, while the entire population is dependent upon imports for 90-95 percent of its food staples, up to 80 percent of which flow through Hodeidah. Saudi shelling and ground attacks had cut food imports in half and hindered aid groups from accessing and distributing what had already been delivered.

The siege also was the key factor in driving civilian casualties to a record high of over 3,000 in November, roughly the same number as were dying at the height of the Iraq war in 2006. An estimate released Wednesday by a monitoring group, the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), placed the death toll from January 2016 (nine months into the Saudi-led offensive) to November at 60,000, with the total from the beginning of the conflict likely to rise to roughly 85,000.

While aid groups and regional powers—including Saudi Arabia, the main aggressor in the conflict, and Iran, which has provided limited support to the Houthis—expressed optimism that the Hodeidah cease-fire signaled a possible path toward ending the war, previously declared cease-fires have broken down.

There was widespread speculation that the Saudi monarchy was pushed to agree to the cease-fire by growing pressure from Washington, which found its sharpest expression in a pair of resolutions approved by the US Senate on Thursday. The first, passed by a vote of 56 to 41, with seven Republicans joining all the Senate Democrats, invoked the 1973 War Powers Act in calling for an end to US support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen. The second, a non-binding resolution approved unanimously, blamed the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, for the gruesome murder and dismemberment of journalist and former Saudi insider Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2.

The movement on the Yemen resolution, which had languished in the Senate for roughly a year, was largely bound up with the Khashoggi assassination and concern within the US ruling establishment that President Donald Trump’s defense of the Saudi crown prince and refusal to acknowledge the incontrovertible evidence of his direction of the killing was discrediting Washington. Fears have grown within both major parties that the acceptance and coverup of this crime serve to rob US imperialism of any ability to posture as a champion of human rights and democracy as it pursues its predatory interests and militarist interventions on a world scale.

While exposing the deep divisions within the US ruling class and its growing concern that the Trump administration’s policies are threatening to destabilize and undermine US capitalist interests at home and abroad, the immediate impact of the two resolutions is negligible.

The Yemen measure will not be taken up by the House, whose leadership introduced a procedural measure this week to prevent it from being considered. While the incoming Democratic-led House may take up the resolution next year, Trump has issued a public statement vowing to veto it. Like previous presidents, he has rejected the constitutionality of the War Powers Act as an infringement on the powers of the president as “commander-in-chief.”

Democrats, along with the nominally independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who together with the right-wing Republican senator from Utah, Mike Lee, introduced the resolution, have discovered the slaughter in Yemen only after the election of Donald Trump, and have brought it to the fore only after the assassination of Khashoggi.

The Democratic administration of President Barack Obama initiated US aid to the near-genocidal Saudi war against the people of Yemen, providing mid-air refueling of Saudi warplanes so that they could continue non-stop bombing of schools, hospitals, vital infrastructure and residential neighborhoods, while offering intelligence, targeting information and US naval support for a deadly blockade of the impoverished country.

Similarly, the corporate media largely ignored the slaughter and mass starvation in Yemen until the killing of Khashoggi, who was a US resident and columnist for the Washington Post .

Sections of the US ruling establishment see the fallout from the Khashoggi assassination as an opportunity to readjust Washington’s relations with the Saudi monarchy, subordinating it more directly to US domination. While Riyadh has served as a lynchpin for imperialist reaction in the region and as a principal ally in the US anti-Iranian axis—not to mention a major source of profits for US arms manufacturers—the policies of the House of Saud have at times cut across US interests.

As for the war in Yemen, there are clearly no guarantees whatsoever that the ceasefire in Hodeidah signals an end to the brutal war, or, for that matter, that Washington will end its support for the Saudi-led slaughter.

Negotiators for the Houthi rebels claimed the agreement over Hodeidah as a victory in that it leaves the port city under the control of allied local militias and was the outcome of the inability of forces mobilized by the Saudis and the UAE to take the city.

However, they pointed out that the Saudis had rejected proposals for a nationwide ceasefire, meaning that Riyadh intends to continue its attack on Yemen.

The head of the Houthi delegation, Mohammed Abdul Salam, issued a statement reiterating the demand for “a full withdrawal of all foreign forces from Yemen in accordance with international laws and the Yemeni constitution.”

Neither Washington nor Riyadh is prepared to accept this demand. Without foreign backing, the puppet regime of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi, overthrown in 2014, would have no means of asserting power. For its part, the US has insisted that, no matter what level of support it maintains for the Saudi intervention, it will keep its own forces in Yemen under the pretext of combatting Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula, which has functioned as an ally of the Saudis.

China’s economic slowdown: The political issues confronting the working class

Nick Beams

Figures released yesterday, showing a marked slowdown in the Chinese economy, highlight the enormous dangers confronting the working class in the US, China and internationally arising from the reckless and dangerous economic war being waged by the Trump administration against Beijing.

According to data from the Chinese government, retail sales grew in November at their slowest pace in 15 years while industrial production rose by the lowest level in almost three years. The Chinese auto market, a key component of retail spending, is on track for its first annual sales decline since the 1990s. Significantly, the effects of the trade war measures of the Trump administration are only now starting to show up in economic data, meaning that growth rates are set to fall further in the coming months, after this year hitting their lowest level since the global financial crisis of 2008–2009.

The China slowdown is part of a global process. Growth in Europe, after rising in 2017, has fallen to its lowest point in four years and Japan has experienced a contraction in the third quarter. These figures expose the fraudulent claim that the global economy had finally “turned the corner” after the deep recession produced by the financial crisis a decade ago.

The response of Trump to the news of the Chinese slowdown underscored that once again the world economy is fracturing in a manner that recalls the disastrous decade of the 1930s that deepened the Great Depression and created the conditions for World War II.

“China has just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them,” he wrote on Twitter. “US is doing very well. China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!”

From the standpoint of the “America First” perspective of the Trump Administration, the world economy is a kind of zero sum game in which losses incurred by its rivals represent an American gain. But this reactionary viewpoint is contradicted by economic facts. The world economy is not the sum of a series of separate national parts, in which one part gains at the expense of the other, but an ever-more closely integrated whole in which the labour and the economic fate of billions of working people are inextricably bound together.

The reactionary nostrums of economic nationalism produced a disaster in the 1930s. Now they are creating the conditions for an even bigger crisis because the level of economic integration has increased exponentially from what existed more than eight decades ago.

The notion advanced by Trump during his election campaign, and subsequently that the American economy could somehow be decoupled from the world economy and that American workers could benefit by “making America great again” at the expense of its rivals, is being shattered by events. The announcement of mass layoffs in the auto industry and the threat of more to come is but one indication of this economic fact. Another is the turmoil in financial markets produced by the global slowdown and the trade war—the Dow was down by 500 points yesterday on the economic news from China—which threatens to set off an even bigger crisis than that of 2008.

Workers in the United States and in Europe, which has been shaken by the upsurge of class struggle reflected in the “yellow vests” movement, and in all the major capitalist countries are being brought face to face with the fact that they confront a common global enemy—the capitalist system.

Likewise, the deepening economic crisis raises fundamental questions of political perspective for the Chinese working class.

More than 40 years ago, the Chinese Maoist-Stalinist leadership, confronted with the economic dead-end produced by its nationalist dogma of “socialism in one country,” undertook a turn to the capitalist market as the basis for the economic organisation of society.

The prospect was held out that the restoration of capitalism—carried through with a bloody repression of the working class as took place in 1989—would allow China to enjoy a “peaceful rise” and escape the grip of imperialist domination.

But the undoubted economic growth over the past 30 years and the transformation of China into the world’s leading manufacturing centre, has not overcome the great historical problems that have confronted the Chinese masses. On the contrary they have raised these problems to new and even more explosive forms.

The dependence of the fate of the Chinese workers on the world economy and their connection to workers internationally was underscored by the global financial crisis of a decade ago when the Chinese economy plunged and more than 23 million workers lost their jobs virtually overnight.

The regime responded with a vast government investment program and one of the largest expansions of credit in world economic history in order to sustain economic growth and maintain its rule.

But this program, which led to massive housing construction and infrastructure development, has seen debt rise as a proportion of gross domestic product from 143 percent to more than 260 percent today.

Faced with the fact that a continuation of this program would lead inexorably to a financial disaster and the eruption of massive social struggles, the Chinese regime, under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, has sought to provide a new foundation for the economy through the advance of the country’s industrial and technological development—the basis of its “Made in China 2025” program.

This program, however, has run headlong into a conflict with US imperialism which is determined to prevent the economic rise of China and its development of key areas of advanced technology, regarding it as an existential threat to its economic and military predominance.

Washington is determined to counter that prospect by all means necessary, including crashing the Chinese economy, as indicated by Trump’s latest celebratory tweet, and if necessary by military means, reflected in the ongoing and deepening preparations by the US military and intelligence establishment for war. The only policy it will accept is one which turns China into an economic semi-colony of the US.

But the opposition to this imperialist program cannot be based on another nationalist turn or support for the economic, political and military manoeuvres of the regime of billionaire capitalist oligarchs headed by Xi Jinping. A new, independent, political perspective must be advanced grounded on the logic of the class struggle.

There are growing signs of an upsurge of the Chinese working class and these struggles are certain to take more overt forms in the coming period as Chinese workers, like their counterparts in the US and internationally, confront mass layoffs and deepening attacks on social conditions.

Just as the program of economic nationalism is a reactionary dead-end for workers in the US and the other major capitalist countries, it is no less so for the multi-millioned Chinese working class.

Recognition of this economic and political fact of life, which receives daily verification in the events now unfolding, must become the starting point for the advancement of a new political perspective, based on the recognition that there is no way forward within the capitalist profit and nation-state system.

The only viable program for the working class in the US, China, and internationally is socialist internationalism—the common struggle by the world working class to end the outmoded capitalist profit and nation-state system, the source of war and economic devastation, and the building of the International Committee of the Fourth International, the world party of socialist revolution, to lead it.

Thomson Reuters Foundation Reporting Rural Poverty and Agricultural Development Workshop for African Journalists (Funded to Rome, Italy) 2019

Application Deadline: 2nd January 2019

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To Be Taken At (Country):  Rome, Italy

About the Award: In order to ensure the daily issues faced by rural poor people and their communities are acknowledged, it is important that their stories are heard and their voices are amplified.  With funding from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the specialised UN agency, we will bring together journalists from around the world in Rome to attend IFAD’s event on innovative approaches to inclusive financing for rural transformation.
Being at the conference will allow journalists access to high profile delegates, leading experts in the issues, including IFAD and UN technical experts, as well as a number of small holder farmers who will be invited.
IFAD works with those most affected by poverty, food security, gender inequality, environment and climate change.

Type: Workshop

Eligibility: 

• An opportunity for journalists from across Africa.
• Applicants must be full-time journalists or regular contributors to a media organisation. Applicants must be able to demonstrate a commitment to a career in journalism in their country, and should have at least two years’ professional experience and have a good level in spoken and written English.  Facilitators will also speak French.
• We would also like to see professional evidence of your interest in the field of rural peoples’ issues and development.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Bursaries would include air travel expenses (economy class), accommodation, local transfers and meals. Please note that you need to check visa requirements and ensure you have the necessary documentation required.  The cost of your visa and any other related costs will be the responsibility of the participant. This arrangement is subject to variation.

Duration of Program: 12 February to 15 February 2019

How to Apply: Please provide the following:  Statment explaining your motivation to attend; your CV or biography; and two examples of your work.

APPLY

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars Programme 2019 for International Researchers (Fully-funded to Canada)

Application Deadline: 5th February 2019

Eligible Countries: All

To be taken at (country): Canada

About the Award: The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR), a Canadian-based global organization, brings together more than 400 researchers from 16 countries who are pursuing answers to some of the most difficult challenges facing the world. The CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars program provides funding and support to help early career researchers build networks and essential skills to position them as leaders and agents of change within academia and beyond.

Fields of Research: In 2019, the eligible programs are:

• Azrieli Program in Brain, Mind & Consciousness
• Bio-Inspired Solar Energy
• Gravity & the Extreme Universe
• Humans & the Microbiome
• Molecular Architecture of Life

Type: Research/Grants

Eligibility: 

• Applicants can be from anywhere in the world, but must hold a PhD (or equivalent) and be within five years of their first full-time academic appointment.
• Scholars’ research interests must be aligned with the themes of an eligible CIFAR research program.
• Be available to attend a two-day in-person interview* on June 26-27, 2019 in Toronto, Canada. Travel costs will be covered by CIFAR.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Program: CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars receive:

• $100,000 CDN in undesignated research support
• A two-year appointment to a CIFAR program aligned with their research interests
• Mentorship from experienced researchers
• Specialized leadership and communications skills training

Duration of Program: 2 years. The term will begin on September 1, 2018.

How to Apply: Applications are submitted online through CIFAR’s application system and must include three letters of recommendation from at least one faculty member or equivalent and preferably one non-academic leader.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research

Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Imomoh Scholarship 2019/2020 for African Students

Application Deadline: 15th April 2019

Eligible Countries: African countries included in the SPE African Region list (See in link below)

To be taken at (country): USA

Field of Study: Petroleum Engineering and other related Degrees related to the oil and gas industry. The Gus Archie Scholarship is restricted to first-year petroleum engineering students.

Type: Masters

Eligibility: 

• Must be pursuing a master’s degree in petroleum engineering
• Must be from a country in the SPE Africa Region
• Comply with sanction policy (View in link below)
• Complete the electronic application submission process

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: USD 2,000

Duration of Scholarship: single payment

How to Apply: 

• Submit the online application form by noon CDT (UTC-5) on 15 April.
• You must submit at least one recommendation and documentation for entry exams (if applicable).

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Egbert Imomoh

FAO/Government of Switzerland International Innovation Award for Sustainable Food and Agriculture 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 28th February 2019

Eligible Countries: International

About the Award: Agricultural innovation is the process whereby individuals or organizations bring new or existing products, processes or ways of organization into use for the first time in a specific context in order to increase effectiveness, competitiveness,resilience to shocks or environmental sustainability and thereby contribute to food security and nutrition, economic development or sustainable natural resource management. 
The Federal Government of Switzerland is pleased to sponsor an International Innovation Award for Sustainable Food and Agriculture (the Award). FAO has agreed to provide its technical support to the Award for the nomination period 2017-2018.

Type: Entrepreneurship

Eligibility: As the award is funded by the Government of Switzerland, the award shall be limited to innovations related to agriculture and pastoral systems only, as per the requirements and technical competencies of the Swiss Federal Office of Agriculture. 
In the spirit of United Nations Decade of Family Farming and aligned to the aspirations and goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the candidates should demonstrate the important role of their innovation for the future of sustainable food and agriculture and the improvement of food security and nutrition for all, particularly in the face of increased environmental challenges. The Award specific criteria are as follows :

• Award for Digitalization and innovation for Sustainable Food Systems (USD 40 000):
  • The innovation must impact more than one level of supply chain from farmers to consumers.
  • The innovation must strengthen the link between farmers and consumers, e.g. through tracking sustainability features of traded food and agriculture products.

• Award for innovations that empower youth in agriculture and food systems(USD 20 000):
  •  The innovation must strengthen the role of youth (under 35) in agriculture and food systems.

The Award General criteria are as follows:

• Quality and merit of the innovation
• Potential benefit, impact and sustainability         
• Scalability           
• Value for money 

1. Eligibility and General rules

• Both categories of the award consider innovations that have been successfully implemented and validated. The Award is conferred for innovations implemented during the biennium preceding the current one. 
• Individuals, private companies and institutions responsible for an innovation that has demonstrated particular efficiency and used novel tools, products or services to enhance and promote sustainable food and agriculture can apply.
• Nomination forms that are incomplete, do not comply with the terms and conditions, or are submitted beyond the deadline, according to the instructions provided, will not be considered.

• No applicants under the age of 18 will be considered for the Award.
• The submission of a Nomination Form is free of charge.
• By submitting a Nomination Form,applicants agree that personal data, especially name and address may be processed, shared, and otherwise used for the purposes and within the context of the Award nominations. The data may also be used to verify the applicants’identity, postal address and telephone number or to otherwise verify the applicants’ eligibility to submit a Nomination Form.
• If the nomination is made by a private company or institution, the nomination form should be signed and presented by the legal representative and confirmation of his/her authorization to present the nomination should be provided.

Number of Awards: 2

Value of Award: The award is open to individuals,private companies or institutions and comprises two categories:

• The first prize, USD 40,000, is awarded for excellence in digitization and innovation for sustainable food systems
• The second prize of USD 20,000 recognises an innovation that empowers youth in agriculture and food systems.

The recipient of the award will also receive a scroll describing his/her achievements and/or an award.
How to Apply: Proposals for nominations should be submitted using the attached Nomination Form by 28 February 2019 to the Secretariat of the Award at the following email address: Innovation-Award@fao.org for endorsement and submission to the Screening Committee.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Britain’s Homeless Crisis

Graham Peebles

Under the suffocating shadow of economic austerity, homelessness in Britain is increasing, poverty and inequality deepening. Since the Conservative party came to power via a coalition government in 2010, then as a minority government in 2015, homelessness has risen exponentially.

Whilst it is impossible to collect precise statistics on homelessness, these widely available figures, which exclude the ‘hidden homeless’, paint a stark picture of the growing crisis: In 2010 1,768 people were recorded as sleeping rough, whilst 48,000 households were living in temporary accommodation. By December 2017, according to A Public Accounts Committee report, there were almost 9,000 rough sleepers, and, The Guardian states, “nearly 76,000 households were living in emergency temporary accommodation such as bed and breakfasts, of which 60,000 were families with children or pregnant mothers” – an increase of 58% on the 2010 figures.

Whilst someone rough sleeping in a doorway is a loud and painful declaration of homelessness, a person is also regarded as homeless if they are staying with family or friends or ‘sofa surfing’ (the ‘hidden homeless’), as well those living in temporary accommodation provided by a local authority. Councils have a legal duty to house certain people – such as pregnant women, parents with dependent children and people considered vulnerable (single people rarely qualify). If, after investigating a case, the council concludes they do not have a legal duty to provide housing, nothing permanent is offered and the temporary accommodation is withdrawn. The only option then is to find somewhere in the private sector, which is becoming increasingly difficult in many parts of the country, including rural towns as well as London and other major cities. Rents (and deposits) are high and landlords are more and more demanding, refusing to rent to people on state benefits, often asking for a guarantor and only offering Assured Shorthold Tenancies (AST).

The Thatcher government introduced AST’s as part of the Housing Act of 1988, prior to which fair rents (as opposed to market rents) and protected tenancies existed, providing a high level of security of tenure. The Thatcher legislation changed all that; AST’s (usually six months) provide virtually no security to the tenant and, in line with the maxim of the market, set no limit on the level of the rent. Consequentially most landlords charge as much as they can get, many do not properly maintain the property, and are within their rights to raise rents and take possession of the property whenever they feel like it. The ending of an AST is now one of the most common causes of homelessness.

Austerity and Homelessness

Those in receipt of state benefits or on a low income can claim housing benefit (HB), which is paid by local authorities to help with rent payments. In 2010, shocked by the national HB bill, the coalition government initiated reforms to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) for tenants in ‘the deregulated private rented sector’ – the key word here is deregulated. Within broader public spending cuts the policy changes set a cap on the level of housing benefit that can be paid. LHA levels are fixed well below market rents, which results in shortfalls in rent payments leading to arrears, subsequent evictions and homelessness; according to the homeless charity Crisis, “all available evidence points to Local Housing Allowance reforms as a major driver of [the] association between loss of private tenancies and homelessness”

Instead of taking measures to regulate the private housing market and deal with the extortionate rents charged by greedy landlords, the policy penalized the tenant and set in motion a system which, coupled with benefit freezes and the dire lack of social housing, has caused homelessness to grow at an alarming rate; Another example of government incompetence or social hardship by design? If the HB freeze remains in place until 2020 as planned by the government, the charity, Shelter says that “more than a million households, including 375,000 with at least one person in work, could be forced out of their homes.”

The cap on HB is one aspect of the government’s austere economic programme. Through the implementation of economic austerity the Conservative government is waging a violent assault on the poorest members of British society and ripping the heart out of the community. The justification for such brutality is the need to ‘balance the books’, however, the national debt is greater now that is was in 2010, The Office for National Statistics states that “UK government gross debt as of December 2017 was £1.7 trillion – equivalent to 87.7% of gross domestic product (GDP),” – compared to 60% of GDP in 2010. Austerity is an ideological choice not an economic necessity. Financial cuts have been applied in the most severe manner; budgets to local authorities, schools, the NHS (National Health Service), the Police and to the benefit system, among other areas. The consequences are homelessness and widespread economic hardship.

Nationwide food-banks run by the Trussell Trust provided 1.3 million food parcels last year, up 13% on 2016 – before the financial crash in 2008/9 the concept of “food banks” was virtually unknown in Britain. Shelter estimates that more than 130,000 homeless children will be living in temporary accommodation over Christmas, almost 10,000 of who will be in hostels or hotels “where in many cases their family will have been put up in a single room, sharing bathrooms and kitchens with other residents. Overall, 50,000 more children in England, Wales and Scotland are homeless compared with five years ago, a rise of 59%.” The government is doing nothing to alleviate the homeless crisis, on the contrary their policies are fuelling it; Labour MP Meg Hillier, who chairs the Public Accounts Committee, says the government’s approach to tackling the problem of homelessness has been an “abject failure”.

The right to a home

Homelessness is one of the most destabilizing and painful experiences anyone can go through. It fuels psychological and physiological insecurity, places a person in situations of physical danger, erodes any positive sense of self and causes physical and mental health illness; Crisis records that 46% of homeless people suffer from a mental health illness compared to 25% of the general public; and while this figure is itself extremely high, when asked, a staggering 86% of people who are homeless report suffering from one or other mental health illness. Perhaps unsurprisingly, research shows “that as a person’s housing becomes more stable the rate of serious mental illness decreases.”

Rough sleepers and people begging for money are routinely ignored and treated with disdain, police are instructed to move beggars on and so erase images of social hardship from the gentrified streets – it’s bad for the cities image – and hostile architecture makes even rough sleeping difficult. Shelter relate that the three main reasons for becoming homeless are: “parents, friends or relatives unwilling or unable to continue to accommodate them; relationship breakdown, including domestic violence and loss of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy.” These are causes that anyone could be the victim of, they should not result in homelessness, indeed within a healthy, compassionately organized socio-economic order, homelessness would not exist at all.

Housing, like education and health care, should be safeguarded from the Madness of the Market; limits should be placed on the rents that private landlords can charge, and a nationwide building program of social housing initiated under the stewardship of local councils, not housing associations. At the same time tenancies need to be lengthened, tenants’ rights strengthened, and fair rents re-introduced.

A house or flat is a home, and a home is a basic human right – enshrined as such within that triumph of humanity, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: it is not and should not be regarded as a financial investment. At the root of the ‘housing crisis’ in Britain and elsewhere is the poison of commodification; whether it be a house or a forest, a school playground, library building or a public park, all are regarded in monetary terms, how much is it ‘worth’ – meaning how much is anyone willing to pay for it. The result is the commercialization of all areas of life including housing, and the promotion of an ugly way of life rooted in material greed and financial profit, no matter the impact on people or the natural environment.

This ideologically rooted approach to life is at the heart of many if not all of our problems, including the most pressing issue of the time, the environmental catastrophe. Government policies consistently add fuel to the fires, politicians lack vision and imagination, but it is the socio-economic ideology that underlies and fashions policy that is the problem; the system and the values it promotes need to be fundamentally changed, and a new order introduced that cultivates social justice, cooperation and tolerance.