Indian Farmers on the Frontline Against Global Capitalism

Colin Todhunter

In a short video on the empirediaries.com YouTube channel, a protesting farmer camped near Delhi says that during lockdown and times of crisis farmers are treated like “gods”, but when they ask for their rights, they are smeared and labelled as “terrorists”.

He, along with thousands of other farmers, are mobilising against three important pieces of farm legislation that were recently forced through parliament. To all intents and purposes, these laws sound a neoliberal death knell for most of India’s cultivators and its small farms, the backbone of the nation’s food production.

The farmer says:

“Corporates invested in Modi before the election and brought him to power. He has sold out and is an agent of Ambani and Adani. He is unable to repeal the bills because his owners will scold him. He is trapped. But we are not backing down either.”

He then asks whether ministers know how many seeds are needed to grow wheat on an acre of land:

“We farmers know. They made these farm laws sitting in air-conditioned rooms. And they are teaching us the benefits!”

While the corporations that will move in on the sector due to the legislation will initially pay good money for crops, once the public sector markets (mandis) are gone, the farmer says they will become the only buyers and will beat prices down.

He asks why, in other sectors, do sellers get to put price tags on their products but not farmers:

“Why can’t farmers put minimum prices on the crops we produce? A law must be brought to guarantee MSP [minimum support prices]. Whoever buys below MSP must be punished by law.”

The recent agriculture legislation represents the final pieces of a 30-year-old plan which will benefit a handful of billionaires in the US and in India. It means the livelihoods of hundreds of millions (the majority of the population) who still (directly or indirectly) rely on agriculture for a living are to be sacrificed at the behest of these elite interests.

Consider that much of the UK’s wealth came from sucking $45 trillion from India alone according to renowned economist Utsa Patnaik. Britain grew rich by underdeveloping India. What amount to little more than modern-day East India-type corporations are now in the process of helping themselves to the country’s most valuable asset – agriculture.

According to the World Bank’s lending report, based on data compiled up to 2015, India was easily the largest recipient of its loans in the history of the institution. The World Bank thus exerts a certain hold over India: on the back of India’s foreign exchange crisis in the 1990s, the IMF and World Bank wanted India to shift hundreds of millions out of agriculture.

In return for up to more than $120 billion in loans at the time, India was directed to dismantle its state-owned seed supply system, reduce subsidies, run down public agriculture institutions and offer incentives for the growing of cash crops to earn foreign exchange.

The plan involves shifting at least 400 million from the countryside into cities.

The details of this plan appear in a January 2021 article by the Research Unit for Political Economy, ‘Modi’s Farm Produce Act Was Authored Thirty Years Ago, in Washington DC’. The piece says that the current agricultural ‘reforms’ are part of a broader process of imperialism’s increasing capture of the Indian economy:

“Indian business giants such as Reliance and Adani are major recipients of foreign investment, as we have seen in sectors such as telecom, retail, and energy. At the same time, multinational corporations and other financial investors in the sectors of agriculture, logistics and retail are also setting up their own operations in India. Multinational trading corporations dominate global trade in agricultural commodities. For all these reasons, international capital has a major stake in the restructuring of India’s agriculture… The opening of India’s agriculture and food economy to foreign investors and global agribusinesses is a longstanding project of the imperialist countries.”

The article provides details of a 1991 World Bank memorandum which set out the programme for India. It adds:

“At the time, India was still in its foreign exchange crisis of 1990-91 and had just submitted itself to an IMF-monitored ‘structural adjustment’ programme. Thus, India’s July 1991 budget marked the fateful start of India’s neoliberal era.”

It states that now the Modi government is dramatically advancing the implementation of the above programme, using the Covid-19 crisis as cover: the dismantling of the public procurement and distribution of food is to be implemented by the three agriculture-related acts passed by parliament.

The drive is to drastically dilute the role of the public sector in agriculture, reducing it to a facilitator of private capital and leading to the entrenchment of industrial farming and the replacement of small-scale farms. The norm will be industrial (GMO) commodity-crop agriculture suited to the needs of the likes of Cargill, Archer Daniels Midlands, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge and India’s retail and agribusiness giants as well as the global agritech, seed and agrochemical corporations. It could result in hundreds of millions of former rural dwellers without any work given that India is heading (has already reached) jobless growth.

As a result of the ongoing programme, more than 300,000 farmers in India have taken their lives since 1997 and many more are experiencing economic distress or have left farming as a result of debt, a shift to cash crops and economic liberalisation. The number of cultivators in India declined from 166 million to 146 million between 2004 and 2011. Some 6,700 left farming each day. Between 2015 and 2022, the number of cultivators is likely to decrease to around 127 million.

We have seen the running down of the sector for decades, spiraling input costs, withdrawal of government assistance and the impacts of cheap, subsidised imports which depress farmers’ incomes.

Take the cultivation of pulses, for instance. According to a report in the Indian Express (September 2017), pulses production increased by 40% during the previous 12 months (a year of record production). At the same time, however, imports also rose resulting in black gram selling at 4,000 rupees per quintal (much less than during the previous 12 months). This effectively pushed down prices thereby reducing farmers already meagre incomes.

We have already witnessed a running down of the indigenous edible oils sector thanks to Indonesian palm oil imports (which benefits Cargill) on the back of World Bank pressure to reduce tariffs (India was virtually self-sufficient in edible oils in the 1990s but now faces increasing import costs).

The pressure from the richer nations for the Indian government to further reduce support given to farmers and open up to imports and export-oriented ‘free market’ trade is based on nothing but hypocrisy.

On the ‘Down to Earth’ website in late 2017, it was stated some 3.2 million people were engaged in agriculture in the US in 2015. The US goverment provided them each with a subsidy of $7,860 on average. Japan provides a subsidy of $14,136 and New Zealand $2,623 to its farmers. In 2015, a British farmer earned $2,800 and $37,000 was added through subsidies. The Indian government provides on average a subsidy of $873 to farmers. However, between 2012 and 2014, India reduced the subsidy on agriculture and food security by $3 billion.

According to policy analyst Devinder Sharma subsidies provided to US wheat and rice farmers are more than the market worth of these two crops. He also notes that, per day, each cow in Europe receives subsidy worth more than an Indian farmer’s daily income.

The Indian farmer simply cannot compete with this. The World Bank, World Trade Organisation and the IMF have effectively served to undermine the indigenous farm sector in India. The long-term goal has been to displace the peasantry and consolidate a corporate-controlled model.

And now, by reducing public sector buffer stocks and introducing corporate-dictated contract farming and full-scale neoliberal marketisation for the sale and procurement of produce, India will be sacrificing its farmers and its own food security for the benefit of a handful of billionaires.

Tens of thousands of UK National Health Service workers fall ill with COVID-19

Rory Woods

As COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations surge across the UK, tens of thousands of National Health Service (NHS) workers are becoming the victims of the virus. The consequences for patient care and safety are chilling.

More than 100,000 people have died from COVID-19, with more than 3.3 million people infected since the pandemic started. Yesterday, Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson admitted that “on Tuesday we saw 4,134 admission to hospital on a single day, the highest at any point in this pandemic. There are now more than 37,000 COVID patients in hospitals across the UK…”

A nurse being fit tested for FFP3 masks in a National Health Service hospital (credit: WSWS media)

More than 650 health and social care workers have died of COVID-19 in the UK according to Office and National Statistics data.

Nearly 50,000 health care workers have contracted the virus and thousands more are isolating or shielding. Significant numbers of health workers have been suffering from the debilitating effects of Long Covid and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) since the first wave of the pandemic.

In December, there were reports that staff absence in some hospitals had doubled or tripled from the normal level of 4 percent. This means well above 100,000 of the 1.3 million NHS workforce could be absent currently. The remaining health workers, already burnt out from the first wave, are now being overwhelmed by the massive flood of cases and struggling to fulfil patient need.

Addressing its members this week, the chair of the British Medical Association, Dr Chaand Nagpaul, revealed the scale of the crisis. He wrote that there are “over 46,000 hospital staff off sick with Covid-19.” This was “heaping additional pressure on an already overstretched workforce struggling to manage even current critical care demand.”

The Guardian reported: “Across the country hospitals, GP surgeries and care homes are reporting abnormally high staff absence levels. In Kent, one of the hardest hit areas of south-east England, about 25% of clinical and administrative staff are believed to be absent. John Allingham, medical director of the local medical committee, which represents GPs in the county, said in some practices as many as half of staff were absent, which was having an impact on vaccinations.”

At the Royal Bournemouth Hospital (RBH), health workers are contracting the virus at an alarming rate. In some wards only a few have not been struck down by the virus. There are outbreaks in the majority of wards and units in the hospital. Lack of planning and resources has led to these outbreaks. Staff have become victims of substandard personal protective equipment (PPE) guidelines and a lack of infection control measures.

Patient numbers and the number of staff with COVID-19 have doubled over the last three weeks. On Thursday, there were 365 COVID-19 patients, including 25 patients in ICUs in the NHS trust, which includes RBH and Poole hospitals. On Tuesday there were 530 staff unavailable for work. By Thursday, this had risen to 575 staff unavailable. 285 of these were in self-isolation with COVID symptoms, 230 were in self-isolation due to COVID cases among family members, and 60 health workers were absent due to shielding.

An intensive care nurse at RBH told the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS), “Our unit has now been expanded to theatres. One to one care for critically ill patients is no more. I had to look after two critically ill patients during my 12-and-a-half-hour shift today. Every day we run without adequate staff. I am really worried about patient safety.”

The huge infection rates among health and social care workers are an indictment of the Tory government. Years of running down the NHS and the acceleration of its privatisation had created widespread staff and bed shortages and a lack of resources even before the pandemic hit. However, the exacerbated staffing crisis the NHS is now facing is a direct result of the PPE guidelines of the Tory government.

According to experts, consistent use of full-body PPE—along with other infection-control measures—can diminish the risk of infection for health care workers. But Boris Johnson’s government ignored this advice and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.

When the pandemic began to rip through the population, there was a severe shortage of the required PPE. This was a result of years of underfunding of the NHS and social care. Between 2013 and 2016, the national stockpile of PPE was slashed by 40 percent as a part of £20 billion in NHS “efficiency savings.”

Instead of fulfilling demands for PPE, the Tories and Public Health England—along with the Health and Safety Executive—changed the guidelines amid the outbreak. The government downgraded COVID-19 to a non-High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID) from March 19, 2020—reducing the level of what constitutes safe PPE for staff. A month later, the government amended guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) to cut down on the use of Face Filtering Piece masks (FFP3, FFP2), again in breach of WHO recommendations.

As a result, many health workers have been forced to look after patients with highly contagious coronavirus without adequate PPE. They have to wear flimsy aprons, simple surgical masks, visors and gloves even though they carry out tasks such as personal care, turning of patients, feeding, oxygen therapy, nebulisations and physiotherapy. Only the health workers who conduct aerosol generating procedures, in intensive care and theatres for example, are allowed to wear highly effective FFP3 masks and gowns, along with gloves and visors.

The government and Public Health England did not change the guidelines even after a new and virulent variant of COVID-19—which is now the UK’s dominant strain—was found in September last year. Neither did they change them in response to growing concern among experts over the airborne transmission of coronavirus.

In the summer, in a motion in parliament, government MPs watered down proposals to test all NHS workers weekly for COVID-19.

Recently, hundreds of health professionals including doctors, nurses and consultants issued an open letter to political leaders demanding higher-grade PPE. They point out that healthcare workers on the general wards are about twice as likely to contract COVID-19 as intensive care unit staff, who have the best equipment.

These demands have fallen on deaf ears.

A Department of Health and Social Care spokeswoman claimed: “The safety of NHS and social care staff has always been our top priority and we continue to work tirelessly to deliver PPE to protect those on the frontline. UK guidance on the safest levels of PPE is written by experts and agreed by all four chief medical officers. The guidance is kept under constant review based on the latest evidence and data.”

Public Health England guidelines are in breach of World Health Organization guidance. As a result, many health workers have been forced to look after patients with highly contagious coronavirus without adequate PPE..

These lies have fallen flat in the face of the reality health workers up and down the country confront.

A senior health care assistant in Liverpool Hospital told the WSWS, “I think PPE has always been insufficient and that corresponds to the downgrading of COVID by PHE. As they began to run out of stock, they downgraded a highly contagious and unknown virus which was criminal and driven by economics. I picked up on it back in March and was appalled by it and the fact that what Public Health England was doing was criminal and putting health care workers’ lives at risk. This needs to be emphasised and explained to workers. On a purely rational perspective it made no sense. I was shocked by it. So all our PPE, or lack of, flowed from this criminal decision that cost lives.”

Commenting on the 46,000 NHS staff that fell ill with COVID, he said “that's quite a significant figure, on an already stretched workforce. It's going to have, or is already having, a massive impact. The ward I work on has gone red again. This is the third time since last March. We are only taking COVID-19 positive patients now. I work in clinical gerontology, but the pressure is beginning to be felt again.”

The murderous conspiracy by the Tory government against health and social care workers would not have been possible without the support of the trade unions and Labour Party. The unions, despite their own findings through surveys showing the immense dangers employees face in the workplace from COVID-19, have done nothing but whimper and prostrate themselves before the government.

British government rejected visa-free EU touring for musicians to bolster hostile immigration policy

Paul Bond

The Independent newspaper revealed this week that the British government, far from arguing for visa-free touring access to Europe for musicians as it claimed, rejected proposals for such access in the Brexit negotiations because it cut across their hostile immigration policies.

Touring musicians have been hit hard by the chaos around new border regulations following Britain’s exit from the European Union (EU). Previously, British musicians could tour the EU without additional paperwork. Now, like every other sector, they are caught up in what Cabinet Secretary Michael Gove casually described as “significant border disruption.”

Tim Burgess in a concert with The Charlatans at the Petrus stage in Sofienbergparken. The concert was part of Piknik i Parken and took place on 13. June 2019 in Oslo (Photo: Tore Sætre /Wikimedia)

Musicians were given repeated pledges that any Brexit deal would protect them. Deborah Annetts, chief executive of the Incorporated Society of Musicians (ISM), said that throughout 2020 “we were given assurances that the government understood how important frictionless travel is for the performing arts.”

The new arrangements provide nothing of the sort, putting musicians to the additional cost and bureaucracy of visas for them and their support crews. The impact is potentially devastating. Naomi Pohl, of the Musicians’ Union (MU), pointed out that for an orchestra, “you’re talking about 70 musicians needing to get a work permit.”

The government claimed it had “pushed for a more ambitious agreement which would have covered musicians and others, but our proposals were rejected by the EU.”

An EU source told the Independent, however, that it had proposed its “standard” provision to exempt performers from visa requirements for 90 days to facilitate touring, enjoyed by many other third-party countries. Whitehall rejected this.

The EU source said, “It is usually in our agreements with third countries, that [work] visas are not required for musicians. We tried to include it, but the UK said no.”

The reason was made clear: “The UK refused to agree because they said they were ending freedom of movement. It is untrue to say they asked for something more ambitious … there has to be reciprocity.”

The question of “reciprocity” links the decision to Home Secretary Priti Patel’s immigration crackdown. In February last year—before the impact of the pandemic had essentially ended all touring—it was reported that this was already an obstacle to negotiations.

Patel, apparently in conflict with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) at the time, demanded that EU musicians be subject to the same punitive visa regime as that imposed on artists and cultural professionals from outside the EU in 2018.

The conditions require them to apply for visas for visits of more than 30 days, as well as providing proof of savings and a sponsorship certificate from an event organiser. These conditions had already been used to prevent performers and scholars from visiting Britain.

It is understood that the UK asked the EU for this 30-day exemption period and rejected the EU’s standard 90 days because it did not match its hostile immigration policy. The result was no agreement.

There have been demands for a full account of what took place during the negotiations. Tim Burgess of the Charlatans rock band wrote, “We need clarity. What exactly did they ask for? How come an agreement couldn’t be made? We make noise for a living. We’re not going to go quiet now.”

The DCMS protested that the Independent story was “incorrect and misleading speculation from anonymous EU sources,” and stood by its claims to have “pushed for a more ambitious agreement… on the temporary movement of business travelers, which would have covered musicians.”

The evasion is clear, however, as the disagreement was evidently over how long a period “temporary movement” covers. This was made plain by Cabinet Office minister Lord True, who told the House of Lords the UK’s proposals covered “permitted activities for short-term visitors [which] would have delivered an outcome closer to the UK’s approach to incoming musicians, artists and entertainers.”

Musicians and other artists, already crippled by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, reacted furiously. Thom Yorke, singer of rock band Radiohead, denounced MPs in a tweet. Referring to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Portishead’s Geoff Barrow launched the hashtag #BorisKilledMusic.

The Ivor Novello award-winning musician Nitin Sawhney drew a direct connection with the impact of the pandemic, tweeting: “Why the hell is this government so keen on destroying the music industry??? They give no money to struggling artists (none of the £1.7 billion [ Cultural Recovery Fund ] was for artists themselves) and this after lockdown robs musicians of live performance income. Why???”

Musicians and promoters made it clear that the devastating impact of this move will not only be felt by current performers, but also be an obstacle to emerging performers in the future.

Isle of Wight Festival boss John Giddings explained to the NME website how the increased costs would work: “If you have to import and export your equipment in and out of each country, it’s going to take longer to do. There will be more travel days, and every day you’re on the road you have the overhead of staff, hotels and everything that goes with it. It will increase the overall cost of everything.”

This is manageable for big acts, he said, “but if you’re the average or emerging artist then you’re hand to mouth.” The additional costs and time involved mean that for those artists “it’s not going to be financially possible.”

Mark Davyd of the UK Music Venue Trust called it “basically a tax on new and emerging musicians.”

The arrangements will put an end to the possibility of small one-off events. Calculating the costs of paperwork for multiple visas, carnets for moving instruments and equipment across borders, import and export tax on merchandise and payment of social security locally, Davyd estimates that for touring Europe to be economically viable artists would have to play at least 10 shows to venues of no less than 800 capacity. “Anything below that and everyone loses money.”

Music industry figures were warning of the implications at the time of the 2018 escalation over freedom of movement. Michael Dugher, CEO of UK Music, wrote then that “the ending of free movement with no waiver for musicians will put our fast-growing live music sector… at serious risk.”

Few have expressed illusions in government, with Giddings saying, “Counting on the government for anything is the biggest waste of time going.” The NME reported Chris McCrory of the band Catholic Action saying, “we’re all going to lose our ability to live, work and travel visa-free in 27 countries for the sake of right-wing political careers and bank balances.”

This exposes the weakness of the MU’s demand simply that the Culture Minister “urgently confirm one way or another whether it was the UK Government that blocked the deal.” The MU is also appealing for “genuine support for musicians who are still falling through the gaps in #Covid19 financial assistance,” under conditions where the government has already made clear its contempt and disregard for the arts.

The MU has launched a petition for an “affordable, multi-entry and admin-light” Musicians’ Passport for artists working in the EU post-Brexit. Even with its obvious limitations—the petition specifies that it “be free or cheap,” which is a hostage to fortune under the present climate—the petition has gained more than 111,000 signatures to date.

A petition calling for the negotiation of a “free cultural work permit” for visa-free travel for music touring professionals, and carnet exception for touring equipment has so far received 257,000 signatures.

Mark Davyd noted that “The immigration bill is proposing to end freedom of movement altogether and to have a points-based system. Musicians fall under the same category as fruit pickers. They don’t get paid very much and they do seasonal work.”

The assault on the rights of musicians enshrined in the Brexit deal is inextricably bound up with the bourgeoisie’s attack on all the social and democratic rights of the working class, as the ruling elite moves to impose its reactionary agenda. They are seeking to transform the UK into a Singapore on Thames low-wage, low-tax haven for big business, with every aspect of life subordinated to the rapacious drive for profit.

The Labour Party has no essential differences with the Tories over Brexit. The day after the Independent story, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer—who was a leading figure in the Remain campaign in the 2016 Brexit referendum to keep the UK with the EU—told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that his previous pledge to fight for the restoration of freedom of movement within the EU was “unrealistic.” He signaled acceptance of Patel’s restrictions, saying “I don’t think there’s an argument for reopening those aspects of the treaty.”

Three million in Los Angeles County have been infected with COVID-19 as workplace outbreaks reach all-time high

Kevin Martinez

Officials in California now believe that 3 million Los Angeles County residents have contracted coronavirus, or one-third of the population of the most populous county in America. This estimated figure is three times the number of cases confirmed through testing, according to a Los Angeles Times report. At least 13,000 residents are confirmed to have died, in what is among the most severe outbreaks of coronavirus in the world.

The virus is so widespread, according to the Times, that the infection rate has likely been slowed down by the large numbers of people who have already contracted it and developed a temporary immunity.

Motorists queue up to take a coronavirus test in a parking lot at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles, on January 4, 2021 (AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu, File)

Health experts estimate that 75 percent of LA County residents will need to be vaccinated in order to slow down the spread of the virus. One official, Dr. Roger Lewis, director of COVID-19 hospital demand modeling for the LA County Department of Health Services, told the Los Angeles Times that even if half of LA County was vaccinated, without proper social distancing measures “we will still have a very, very devastating pandemic.”

Last week, LA county had a daily average of 15,000 new confirmed COVID cases a day, one of the highest rates yet seen in the pandemic. Health officials, pushed to the breaking point, have been forced to ration care among the sick and injured, having to choose which patients receive life-saving ventilators and which patients only receive care to lessen their suffering.

By far, the greatest source of transmission has been workplaces throughout the region and yet the government has not ordered the closure of non-essential businesses. Even with the grossly inadequate $300 weekly supplemental unemployment benefits passed by Congress last month, workers still face the impossible choice between working and risking contracting and transmitting the virus to their loved ones or staying home and risking financial destitution.

County officials are currently investigating 538 workplace coronavirus hotspots, the highest number yet. The county launches such an investigation when at least three laboratory-confirmed cases have been reported. Nearly every type of workplace is now being investigated, including warehouses, offices, factories, distribution centers, police and fire stations, courthouses, retail stores, car dealerships, restaurants and supermarkets.

As one official put it during a news conference held Monday, “there are outbreaks everywhere.”

Large retail stores have been especially prone to contagion. A combined 349 workers tested positive at 15 Target stores in LA County, followed by 263 workers at nine Home Depots, 92 at six Whole Foods Markets and 383 at nine Costco outlets. According to county data, more than 11,800 workers have been infected at workplaces currently under investigation.

County officials and company spokespersons insist that the outbreaks are not necessarily tied to any safety lapses. However, during safety inspections, officials noted how some businesses did not comply with capacity limits or made sure that employees and customers were wearing face masks and maintaining safe distances from one another.

The county has issued a mere 83 citations since January 3, bringing the total number of citations written since last August to 613. Businesses that were ticketed include hair salons, gyms, restaurants, churches and malls, according to public health officials.

LA County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer told the Times that people who live in crowded dwellings (i.e., workers) were especially susceptible to the virus saying, “All it takes is one mistake and soon, five, 10 or 20 other people become infected.”

She added, “A great deal of transmission happens in household ... [people] go to work, they’re an essential worker, they become infected, they’re asymptomatic, and then they get a high-risk family member infected.”

The county is expected to pass the 1 million mark of confirmed coronavirus cases likely this week. The rate of infection in the county has increased so rapidly that as many people became infected last month as were infected during the first 11 months of the year.

While new COVID-19 hospitalizations have leveled off for now, hospitals are still stretched beyond capacity with extremely high rates of hospitalizations. For example, the ICU at Memorial Hospital of Gardena is operating at 320% capacity.

Over the last few weeks, an average of 700 to 850 new patients every day have been admitted to LA County hospitals. Dr. Christina Ghaly, LA County director of health services, told the Times, “That’s three times higher than what was seen earlier in the pandemic.”

While the numbers may have temporarily stabilized, this may reflect a stabilization of transmission brought by the stay-at-home order officials issued after Thanksgiving, but before Christmas. It will take more time before the effect of the Christmas and New Year gatherings can be observed in the hospitals.

Ghaly said, “We just don’t have the information available at this point in time to determine whether or not that surge happened and, if so, how steep those numbers will climb.”

She added that if there was a surge during the holiday season, “this would be absolutely devastating to our hospitals.”

Ghaly noted that before any relief could be expected for hospital workers, there would have to be a significant decline in hospitalizations for one to two months, “at a minimum.” She also said that even if transmission over the holidays was limited to one infected person passing on the virus to just one other person, the county could expect to see “very high continued demand” for emergency services, like ICU’s, over the next four weeks.

The situation in many hospitals is already without precedent in modern history. In Ventura County, there were a total of 1,002 patients hospitalized, with 448 infected with coronavirus. More than 388 people have died from the virus in the county alone, with half of them, 189, reported since mid-December.

Ventura County Supervisor Carmen Ramirez told the Times, “Many of us watched what happened in New York and Italy and saw horrific scenes. And we’re getting close.”

Hospital morgues are reportedly full in some cases, with delays of up to three days in getting a body into a mortuary. Some mortuaries face a backup if they receive more than four bodies per day. One mortuary, which only dealt with seven to eight families a week before the pandemic, is now reportedly dealing with 50 every week.

US State Department designates Cuba state sponsor of terrorism

Alexander Fangmann

On Monday, the Trump administration announced it would be placing Cuba back on the US State Department’s list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. One of a number of aggressive and provocative foreign policy moves made in the weeks following Trump’s loss in the November election, the placement of Cuba on the list is an attempt to more permanently shift American imperialism’s Cuba policy back toward one of explicit regime change, in line with the drive to roll back the influence of Russia and China in the Western Hemisphere.

In a statement, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, among the most reactionary and loyal members of Trump’s cabinet, made this clear, writing, “The Trump Administration has been focused from the start on denying the Castro regime the resources it uses to oppress its people at home, and countering its malign interference in Venezuela and the rest of the Western Hemisphere.”

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and President Donald Trump at a press briefing in March, 2020. (Image Credit: AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The State Department’s designation places further restrictions on US foreign assistance and exports to Cuba. Originally placed on the list in 1982 by US President Ronald Reagan for its support of the Nicaraguan Sandinistas and El Salvadoran Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front, Cuba was removed in 2015 during the normalization of relations carried out by then–US President Barack Obama and Cuba’s then-President Raúl Castro.

In another anti-Cuba announcement made Friday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also announced sanctions against Cuban Interior Minister Lazaro Alberto Alvarez for “human rights abuse.”

Given the steady tightening of sanctions by Trump since entering office in 2017, the change will have little immediate practical effect, although it does make it harder for the expected incoming administration of Joe Biden to return to the Obama-era policy of normalization.

Among the first moves made by the Trump administration after taking office was to again restrict travel to Cuba by US nationals. Since then, restrictions have tightened even further, with direct flights to cities outside of Havana shut down in 2019, along with cruise ship stops to the island. Just this year, the US government released a list of Cuban hotels from which US nationals are banned because of alleged ties to the Cuban government and military.

One of the most directly damaging moves to the Cuban economy has been the cut-off of remittances. Totaling around $3 billion annually, remittances represent an important portion of the foreign currency reserves Cuba requires to finance imports of basic commodities. The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) had first put a strict cap on remittances of $1,000 per quarter, limited to family members, before banning entirely any remittances flowing through the Cuban government’s Fincimex agency.

The cut-off of remittances has exacerbated the island’s economic crisis, already battered by the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated collapse in tourism. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Cuba’s economy is expected to contract by 8 percent in 2021, after having contracted 11 percent in 2020. Because Cuba imports 80 percent of its food and fuel needs, the fall in tourism has led to shortages of basic goods around the country.

Cuba is now suffering the worst COVID-19 outbreak since the beginning of the pandemic. Even though it has had only around 160 total deaths so far, one of the lowest totals in the Caribbean region, the island has set daily records for infections for the sixth day in a row, with 550 new cases. This has led to new restrictions throughout the capital, including the closure of schools and a clampdown on movement and public transportation.

More than 14,600 people are under observation for possible infection, with 70 percent of infections occurring after the reopening of the airport to international travel on November 15. Under economic pressure to reopen tourism, there are 6,262 international travelers in Havana alone.

Just as elsewhere, the COVID-19 pandemic has served as a trigger event to accelerate plans already under way. Among the most significant of these have been the announcement by the Cuban government of the easing of restrictions on foreign ownership of companies and moves to unify its currency system and impose a devaluation. Both are aimed at integrating the country more fully into the global market and securing a future for the bankrupt bureaucrats in the Cuban Communist Party.

The currency changes implemented on January 1 have proved to be a big shock. The long-planned change has eliminated the Cuban convertible peso (CUC), long-pegged to the dollar at a one-to-one rate, in favor of the Cuban peso (CUP). The dual currency system served as a kind of subsidy for Cuban state-owned companies, as they were allowed to exchange the CUC and CUP at a one-to-one rate, even though the official exchange rate was 25 CUP per CUC, making imports and production inputs artificially cheap.

As Pavel Vidal, a former economist at Cuba’s central bank and a professor at Colombia’s Universidad Javeriana Cali, said, “They are going with a ‘big bang’ exchange rate adjustment, although they will try to regulate the impacts with administrative measures and repressing inflation.”

The end of the dual currency system is leading to a sharp increase in prices and will likely lead to the failure of many state-owned companies as well as mass layoffs. According to reports, electricity prices have risen more than 500 percent in some cases. Basic necessities are being priced out of reach, even with an announcement that wages and pensions would be quintupled. However, this will not help the 40 percent of Cubans considered to be “self-employed” or working for private businesses.

So-called dollar stores have proliferated even as dollars themselves have become much harder to acquire. Economy Minister Alejandro Gil has signaled that more devaluations are coming.

At an online 2020 Business Forum held in Havana, Cuba’s Foreign Trade and Investment Minister Rodrigo Malmierca announced it would now be possible for state-owned companies to take a minority share in any joint enterprises with foreign investors. Most industry sectors are apparently going to be opened up, outside of natural resource extraction and public service.

John Kavulich, president of the US-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, said, “If the Díaz-Canel administration can successfully implement a unification and devaluation, sources for direct foreign investment will be supportive, as will governments.”

Worried that US companies might be cut out of any potential windfall in the opening up of Cuba to further exploitation by foreign capital, New York Congressman Gregory Meeks, the new chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in relation to Cuba’s addition to the terrorism list, “It is essential that the State Sponsor of Terrorism list be used judiciously to maintain its seriousness and integrity, and that a country is never added to the list unless it meets the legal standard.” Meeks also urged Biden to “add the reversal of today’s foreign-policy failure to his long ‘to do’ list when he takes office.”

For its part, the Biden administration has said little, with a member of his transition team telling the Wall Street Journal Biden “will render a verdict based exclusively on one criterion: the national interest.” It is in fact entirely possible that Pompeo and the extreme right are banking on Biden not reversing this measure out of his desire to curry favor with the Republicans and their base in South Florida.

Australian government invokes “national security” to ban Chinese infrastructure investments

Mike Head

It was revealed this week that the Liberal-National Coalition government cited “national security” concerns to reject a $300 million takeover of building contractor Probuild by one of China’s largest construction companies, the state-owned China State Construction Engineering.

The Australian Financial Review reported that the Probuild decision was just the tip of the iceberg. “The government has been privately rejecting other Chinese engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractors from local infrastructure and energy projects,” it declared.

Josh Frydenberg, Treasurer of Australia [Credit: Wikimedia Commons]

In effect, Chinese investment is now being banned across most of the economy. In the words of one unnamed investment banker, quoted by the newspaper, “most of the economy is now not available to the Chinese.”

The banker’s statement reflects concern in sections of the Australian capitalist class about the impact on their lucrative exports to China. But the government is committed to ramping up the deepening conflict with Beijing, regardless of the fallout. Its previous bans on Chinese investment and other anti-Chinese measures have already triggered apparent Chinese measures to curb Australian exports, now including coal.

Both the timing of the announcement and the extension of “national security” assertions to the civilian construction industry are highly significant. The timing dovetails with escalating economic sanctions imposed on China by the Trump administration, and points to expectations in Canberra that a Biden administration will intensify the confrontation.

The invocation of national security by Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s government, to cover basic construction activity, is another indication of preparations being made for US military conflict with China. Australia would be on the frontline of such measures, because of its integration into US war plans throughout the Indo-Pacific region.

Probuild is a large South African-owned building company operating in Australia. According to corporate media reports, Probuild’s construction of “sensitive” buildings, including the Victorian Police headquarters and the Melbourne offices of biotech company CSL, were key factors in Treasurer Josh Frydenberg rejecting its takeover.

This is the latest such decision, each effectively accusing Chinese companies of operating as espionage or sabotage fronts for Beijing. Chinese firms are being barred from any industry that would need to be mobilised for the war effort in the event of conflict.

Another recent ban involved a large Chinese power-generating firm, bidding for the construction of EnergyAustralia’s planned 400-megawatt gas plant at Tallawarra near Wollongong, south of Sydney. The government told the parties it did not intend to approve the deal, leaving other bidders to compete for the tender.

As of January 1, the guidelines applied by the government’s Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) have been drastically widened, responding to US complaints about some previous failures to block Chinese investments, including the 2015 purchase of a lease over the civilian port in the strategic northern city of Darwin.

All foreign investments, no matter how small, are now subject to FIRB review, and the industries covered extend across much of the economy. Assets defined as a “sensitive national security business” include banking and finance, communications, commercial construction contractors and commercial real estate.

Also on the list are “critical” minerals, critical service providers, critical technologies, defence providers, energy, electricity, gas, liquid fuels, energy market operators, health, higher education facilities, information technology, data and the cloud, nuclear, space, transport and water and sewerage.

The FIRB is now chaired by Australia’s former top intelligence chief—and ex-ambassador to China—David Irvine, who has close connections to the US military-intelligence apparatus. In addition, the new head of Treasury’s FIRB-linked foreign investment division, Tom Hamilton, has a military background.

The FIRB’s new rules specifically insist that there are national security risks in the construction sector, including firms holding contracts with government agencies and infrastructure providers, with access to information such as building blueprints and supply chains.

“Such information may be of value to foreign intelligence services,” the FIRB’s website states. “Foreign intelligence services may also pre-position for future intelligence activities such as by building surveillance equipment into the premises during construction, in order to gather information on intended sensitive tenants.”

The Probuild ban is a measure of the deepening anti-China shift since 2015, when US President Barack Obama personally rebuked then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull for not consulting Washington about the Darwin port lease.

In 2015, by contrast to the Probuild decision, Turnbull’s government approved the China Communications Construction Company’s $1 billion purchase of a major construction company, John Holland, which is building the Victorian state government’s $11 billion Melbourne Metro rail tunnel and other large infrastructure projects.

John Holland was previously one of the Australian Defence Department’s key providers of construction services and worked on military bases. Since being acquired by the Chinese company, it has been forced to withdraw from military projects.

Among recent Chinese investment bans are the refusal in April last year of China Mengniu Dairy Co’s proposed $600 million acquisition of Lion Dairy & Drinks, and Hong Kong-based CK Group’s $13 billion bid for Australia’s east coast gas pipeline owner, APA Group, in 2018.

The most prominent and provocative measure was to bar China’s Huawei, one of the world’s largest telco equipment suppliers, from any involvement in Australia’s proposed 5G network. That ban, imposed in 2018, was demanded by Washington and mirrored by other US allies.

All the moves against China have been backed by the Labor Party opposition, which is equally committed to participating in the US drive to prevent China from challenging the economic and military supremacy that Washington secured in World War II. The last Labor government—of 2007-13—also blocked certain Chinese takeover bids, including Chinalco’s proposed merger with Rio Tinto, a major mining company.

Just last month, Labor helped the Morrison government rush unprecedented legislation through parliament to give the government sweeping powers to prohibit any agreement, or cancel any existing agreement, signed by a state, territory or local government, or a public university, with China.

As anticipated, the Probuild prohibition further antagonised China’s government, which said Canberra had “weaponised the concept of national security.” Beijing’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said it was “the latest example of how the Australian government has been politicising trade and investment issues, violating market principles and the spirit of the China-Australia free trade agreement, and imposing discriminatory measures on Chinese companies.”

Last year, China issued a public 14-point complaint against Australia, which included the Huawei and other investment bans. While the Australian media has falsely presented China as the aggressor in this conflict, denouncing Chinese moves against Australian exports, the US-backed Australian offensive has had a crippling impact on Chinese investment in Australia.

By the latest official statistics, Chinese investment fell 36.3 percent, or $8.2 billion, in 2018, reducing it to around 2 percent of foreign investment in Australia.

This confrontation with China, which is being accompanied by barrages of anti-Chinese propaganda, can be understood only in the context of Washington’s preparations for war against its perceived economic rival. Even in its apparent final days, the Trump administration this week intensified the economic and diplomatic offensive against China. It announced new sanctions on the China National Offshore Oil Corporation and further restrictions on Chinese tech firms, including the widely-used social media platform TikTok.

Another close US ally, the Canadian government, last month took similar action to that of Australia, citing “national security” to block the takeover of gold miner TMAC Resources Inc. by China’s state-owned Shandong Gold Mining Co. Ltd.

These governments know full well that any incoming Biden administration will only take the confrontation with China to a new level. Last month, Biden’s nominated officials protested and sought to halt a European Union-China agreement on an investment treaty. That deal threatens to cut across Biden’s stated aim of constructing a global anti-China front.

Patients die of asphyxiation as hospitals in Manaus run out of oxygen

Tomas Castanheira

Amid an explosive growth in COVID-19 hospitalizations, the Brazil’s Amazonian capital, Manaus, is experiencing days of terror with a collapse of the oxygen supply in its hospitals.

An entire wing of University Hospital patients died on Thursday night due to lack of oxygen, six people in total. The deaths were reported by the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), which also stated that there was a lack of oxygen in 200 ICU beds that same day. The MPF does not rule out that other people died under similar circumstances.

Shocking images of desperate health professionals, unable to prevent the death of their patients, have caused a national commotion. Videos of the arrival of oxygen tanks in collapsed hospitals, while relatives clamored for the lives of their loved ones, circulated on social media this Friday.

A woman whose father is hospitalized with COVID-19, cries during protest outside the 28 Agosto Hospital, in Manaus, Brazil, Thursday, Jan 14, 2021 [Credit: AP Photo/Edmar Barros]

Although new oxygen supplies have arrived in the city, the critical situation continues. According to the Ministry of Health, 480 people are waiting in line for an ICU bed. Fiocruz Amazonas infectious disease specialist Jesem Orellana reported that “some health professionals this morning [on Friday] were afraid that the amount of oxygen would not be enough to reach midnight with all patients adequately ventilated.”

Manaus’ largest hospital, the 28 de Agosto, was surrounded by the Military Police to prevent desperate family members from forcing their way into the crowded unit. The surgery supervisor at 28 de Agosto, José Francisco dos Santos, told the Correio do Povo: “There are people dying on ambulance stretchers because there is no way to get into the hospital... The poor management of  health care by the state is what permitted things to arrive at this point.”

The Correio do Povo also reported that the hospital is asking patients’ families to bring their own oxygen tanks. Santos said that doctors are decreasing patients’ oxygen flow to deal with the shortage: “It is an emergency measure, but it also has consequences. Patients will be left with sequelae for remaining for a long time with low oxygen flow. We are still fighting a war.”

The company responsible for Manaus’ oxygen supply, White Martins, declared that the demand for oxygen has increased five times in the last 15 days due to the growth in hospitalizations. The demand for oxygen reached 70,000 cubic meters per day, more than double what was required at the first peak of the pandemic in May, when it reached 30,000. The local production capacity is only 28,000 cubic meters.

While hospitals collapse without oxygen, infection rates are growing rapidly. On Thursday, the state of Amazonas had a record of 3,816 new infections in a single day, indicating that overcrowding in the health care system can reach even more explosive levels.

COVID patients waiting to be seen at the overcrowded 28 de Agosto Hospital in Manaus, Brazil [Source: Twitter]

An ominous factor in the rising infection rates is the circulation of a new Brazilian variant of the coronavirus, discovered in Manaus in December. The Brazil-UK Centre for (Arbo)virus Discovery, Diagnosis, Genomics and Epidemiology detected this variant of the virus in 42 percent of infected patients tested in Manaus between December 15 and 23. The researchers indicate that it has genetic characteristics similar to the new more infectious variants recently discovered in the United Kingdom and South Africa.

The epidemiologist Jesem Orellana told the BBC: “[It is] quite likely that this possible new variant is one of the causes of the strong viral spread of COVID-19 in Manaus and therefore a threat not only to Brazil, but to mankind.”

The calamitous situation in Manaus has incited anger throughout the country against the administration of Brazil’s fascistic President Jair Bolsonaro. The hashtag #ImpeachmentBolsonaroUrgente (or, urgent impeachment of Bolsonaro) reached first place on Brazilian Twitter’s trending topics this Friday.

Bolsonaro and his government undeniably have a criminal responsibility for the catastrophe in Manaus, which he cynically denies. With his characteristic disdain, the president declared to his supporters on Friday morning: “Problems. We are always doing what we have to do. Problem in Manaus. Terrible, the problem in Manaus. Now, we have done our part. Resources, means.”

In addition to systematically supporting the herd immunity policy, which is responsible for the resurgence of high levels of infection in Manaus, Bolsonaro openly incited the defiance of orders to shut down economic activity in the face of an eminent collapse of the city’s health care system.

On December 28, in response to a protest organized by retail employees, which served as a pretext for the government of Amazonas stepping back from minimum restriction measures at the end of the year, Bolsonaro celebrated the fact that “in Manaus the people ignored the governor’s decree,” adding, “We can no longer stand lockdowns, more restrictive measures that break the economy.”

Bolsonaro’s government is under criminal investigation for having imposed upon the health care system in Manaus the “preventive” administration of drugs without proven efficacy for the treatment of COVID-19, chloroquine and ivermectin. This happened in recent weeks, already in the midst of the collapse.

In an official letter to the City Hall of Manaus, the Ministry of Health, headed by Gen. Eduardo Pazuello, asked to visit the coronavirus treatment centers last Monday, “to spread and adopt early treatment as a way to reduce the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the disease.”

The document continues: “We take the opportunity to emphasize the scientific evidence on the role of antiviral medications recommended by the Ministry of Health, thus making inadmissible, given the gravity of the health situation in Manaus, the non-adoption of such guidance [our emphasis].”

Having personally incited mobs to challenge restrictions on economic activities, and imposed the  the use of anti-scientific treatments, Bolsonaro’s government is also responding to the calamity in Manaus by promoting its militarist campaign.

Brazil’s vice president, Gen. Hamilton Mourão, indicated that the lack of oxygen in Manaus was directly related to the lack of resources for the Armed Forces, such as large airplanes: “A time like this arrives and we see that we cannot leave what is our last reserve, the Armed Forces, without capabilities,” he declared.

As in every part of the planet, the fight against the pandemic in Brazil, has proven to be a fight of the working class against capitalism and the ruling class drive toward dictatorial forms of rule.

French government rejects lockdown as COVID-19 deaths sweep Europe

Alex Lantier

On Thursday, French Prime Minister Jean Castex and Health Minister Olivier Véran unveiled health measures decided by President Emmanuel Macron at a national security meeting the day before.

There is overwhelming public support for a full lockdown to stop the hurricane of COVID-19 deaths sweeping across Europe. An Elabe poll found 83 percent of French people expected a lockdown, and 75 percent preferred a lockdown to a 6 p.m. evening curfew. Despite the torrent of media propaganda opposing a lockdown as a threat to corporate profits, 52 percent preferred a nationwide to several regional lockdowns.

A nurse holds a phone while a COVID-19 patient speaks with his family from the intensive care unit at the Joseph Imbert Hospital Center in Arles, southern France, Wednesday, Oct. 28, 2020 [Credit: AP Photo/Daniel Cole]

Nonetheless, trampling upon public opinion, the government decided to only impose a nationwide 6 p.m. curfew, keeping open schools and nonessential industries. With Health Ministry statistics showing that two-thirds of COVID-19 transmission occurs in schools and workplaces, this guarantees that mass infections will escalate—even as the far more contagious British variant of the coronavirus spreads across Europe.

The policies of the European Union (EU) and of Macron, endorsed by union bureaucracies who signed to approve multitrillion-euro bank and corporate bailouts, are politically criminal. It is ever more apparent to masses of working people that their lives count for nothing in Macron’s calculations. Only independent action by the working class can impose a scientifically grounded policy to stop the pandemic.

At the conference, Castex began, “We are today a bit above 15,000 daily cases, that is three times the goal of 5,000 daily infections we had set ourselves.” He also reported “2,500 daily admissions to hospital” due to COVID-19. He said the situation in France is better than in several neighboring states—including Britain, which is devastated by the new strain, and Germany, which now sees over 1,000 daily deaths, compared to around 400 in France.

In fact, what is taking place is an international catastrophe. Europe this week passed the mark of 600,000 COVID-19 deaths, after seeing the 300,000 mark reached on November 12, 400,000 on November 28 and 500,000 on December 22. With approximately 100,000 people dying in Europe every three weeks, the number of deaths in Europe could easily reach one million this winter. Even if the pandemic did not accelerate in France, it would see nearly a half million cases, 75,000 hospitalizations, and 12,000 deaths in January alone.

Nevertheless, Professor Jean-François Delfraissy, who heads the National Scientific Council, insisted, “We are not in an extreme emergency situation.” While noting that there would be “three difficult months” and that the situation would only improve “after the summer,” Delfraissy opposed a lockdown. “We recommend continuing the return to school. We think that data on the spread of the English virus are not clear enough to push us to close the schools.”

Castex and Véran therefore insisted that—while keeping sites like restaurants, bars, gyms, and artistic venues closed—schools and nonessential industrial production should stay open. Castex in effect argued that halting the virus is less important than vaccinations: “We can now count on a more powerful weapon, the vaccine, which is our main source of hope to exit from this crisis.”

Vaccination in France is disastrously slow, however. The Macron government became a global laughingstock when it emerged that only 5,000 people had been vaccinated in France by January 6. Castex hailed this delay—due to focusing vaccinations on rest homes and imposing a lengthy procedure to obtain consent, ostensibly to respect elderly residents with dementia—as a “choice to respect the principles and priorities set by the National Health Authority.”

While admitting to “not having today’s figures” on vaccinations, Véran pledged, “We are aiming for one million people vaccinated by the end of January.” He said vaccines would be made available to all those over age 75. However, even if the Macron government attains this pace, this still means that around 66 million people in France would not be vaccinated and would still be at risk.

Based on this contempt for public well-being, Castex rejected a lockdown: “Throughout the country, a curfew will go into effect starting at 6 p.m. on Saturday, for at least 15 days… This aims to further reduce social contact at night but allow continued economic activity, education and movements during the day.”

Castex made clear that he would not allow school closures, as this would disrupt the economy by keeping parents from working. With schools fully open, he said universities will reopen to first-year students for smaller classes, and then gradually to the entire student body. He said: “The closure of schools can be considered only in the last extremity. I know certain countries did this. My position is that, in effect, the health situation must be very serious to close schools, as we know the consequences—including health consequences—of closing schools are horrific.”

The Macron regime’s staggering indifference to mass deaths testifies to an increasingly fascistic character. While Castex claims the situation is not “very serious,” and Delfraissy denies there is “extreme emergency,” over 100,000 people die each month in Europe of COVID-19.

The government’s argument that the British variant of the coronavirus does not pose enough of a threat to take serious action is a lie contradicted by scientists. Already, they estimate that around two percent of infections in France are from the new variant, which is 50-70 percent more contagious and has led to a surge of deaths in Britain. This proportion rises to six percent in the Paris area, five percent in the Marseille region, and three percent in the Lyon region.

Epidemiologist Vittoria Colizza bluntly said, “We will need stricter measures.” She explained: “The situation will very rapidly become quite critical. As this variant is more contagious, it could become dominant by March… We must act start now, because by then the incidence will be extremely high and the circulation of the virus will be far harder to control.”

Epidemiologist Pascal Crépey said, “There is the impression that the epidemic is under control, but the British variant will change that.” Calling for 100,000 vaccinations per day—three times the speed Véran proposed—he added, “The campaign really must speed up… If there are supply problems, we should vaccinate until we run out. Vaccines are more effective in patients’ arms than in refrigerators.”

Averting an even greater disaster requires the political mobilization of the working class. Mass wildcat strikes spreading from Italy across Spain, France, Britain and beyond in the spring of 2020 imposed lockdowns that nearly stopped transmission of the virus. However, the premature exit from lockdowns in May—after which EU governments set up no effective system to identify, test and trace contacts for COVID-19 cases—allowed for its mass resurgence.

At that time, EU states insisted that lockdowns’ economic cost was too high, citing the impact on small business. This has been exposed as a fraud, aiming to give a false veneer of popularity to a policy of enriching the financial aristocracy. To keep COVID-19 from totally swamping hospitals, the state has closed small businesses while nonessential industrial production was kept open to pump profits to the banks and major corporations, who received €2 trillion in EU bailouts.