Increasing violence in Australian public schools

Sue Phillips

Educators and students in Australia’s public schools are experiencing a sharp rise in violence. Although media coverage often tends to sensationalise the most extreme incidents, longer-term data highlights a growing and alarming trend, reflecting deeper economic, social and political issues.

A high school classroom in Byron Bay, New South Wales, Australia [Photo: Lynn D. Rosentrater/Flickr]

Incidents have included students violently assaulting their peers, bullying, sexual harassment, school suspensions, and students and parents confronting and assaulting teachers and principals. 

In the country’s most populous state, for example, the New South Wales (NSW) Department of Education recorded 1,517 assaults in schools in 2023, up from 843 in 2022. Incidents involving weapons increased from 241 in 2022 to 728 in 2023. In the same year, the police were called to schools almost 20,000 times, including for weapons-related incidents, 66 of which involved a knife, sword, scissors or screwdriver, while 7 involved a pistol or a shotgun.

This has created unsafe and toxic school environments, negatively affecting the physical and emotional well-being of both students and educators. As a result, there has been a rise in students refusing to attend schools, school lockdowns and teachers leaving the profession further deepening the crisis in public education.

The Australian Catholic University’s 2023 The Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey reported that violence directed at school leaders and teachers has increased markedly. When the survey began in 2011, of the 2,005 principals interviewed, 760 reported threats of violence (37.9 percent) and 547 reported physical violence (27.3 percent). In 2023, with 2,307 principals interviewed, 1,243 experienced threats of violence (54 percent) and 1,112 experienced physical violence (48 percent). More than half of the school leaders interviewed indicated they often seriously consider leaving their jobs due to workplace violence and stress.

A 2024 Monash University of Education study, Australian Teachers’ Perceptions of Safety, Violence and Limited Support in Their Workplaces reported similar results. The study, published in the Journal of School Violence, surveyed over 8,200 teachers in 2019 and 2022. The number of teachers feeling unsafe at work rose from 19 percent in 2019 to 24.5 percent in 2022. Primary sources of safety concerns included aggressive behaviours from students and parents, coupled with a perceived lack of support from school leadership and educational systems.

A comment from a teacher quoted in the Monash study report provided an insight into the seriousness and complexity of some of the related issues confronted by educators:

The classroom and a school are unpredictable places these days. I have had experiences of students walking into my classroom having slit their wrists, I have dealt with a student attempting to jump from the building, I have faced disclosures of rape and teen pregnancy. I have had to mitigate family violence, peer violence, and volatile parents. I have had to apologize to students and parents for managing my classroom. No one has ever asked after these events if I am ok or followed up with me. I’ve managed other staff breaking down or looking to me for support. Most of the reason I need [to] seek private therapy is because of work. I am not ok.

This testimony underscores the often overwhelming mental and emotional strain placed on educators, who are forced to handle both academic responsibilities and serious challenges within their classrooms. As schools, particularly public schools, reflect the broader problems in society, working on the frontlines of the social crisis, teachers are left to manage difficult student crises and growing economic disadvantage, striving to create a safe and supportive learning environment—without the necessary training or resources.

What the media covers up is the deeper systemic issues fueling this development and the inadequate support in schools and society at large. A serious analysis of school violence must consider its roots in the broader social crisis under capitalism, involving intensifying social inequality, the impoverishment of entire communities, and the normalisation of violence.

The seemingly knee-jerk response from the media and governments consists of a punitive approach, as implemented by the state Labor government in NSW, where schools can increase the length of student suspensions without necessary approval from the Education Department and are introducing programs where police attend schools on a weekly basis. In Victoria, that state’s Labor government has given schools the right to ban some parents from school grounds and from contacting teachers.

Economic distress

Working-class families are increasingly struggling to survive and make ends meet. Economic factors, particularly the soaring cost of living, higher interest rates, rising rents and real wage cuts, are leading to increasing poverty and financial strain. 

Many students and parents facing financial hardships necessarily have feelings of frustration and anger. Surviving from one day to the next leads to stress within families, which can spill over to the school environment. Students who experience food insecurity, unstable housing, or lack of access to basic necessities struggle to focus on education and can sometimes resort to disruptive or violent behaviours as coping mechanisms.

Child poverty is rising in Australia, with 823,000 children (14.5 percent) below the poverty line in 2022—an increase of 102,000 from 2021. A Foodbank Australia report found nearly a million households are struggling to afford food, with parents skipping meals to protect their children. Severe food insecurity affects 870,000 households on incomes of less than $30,000 annually, up 5 percent from 2022, with single-parent families hardest hit. 

Public schools have a grossly disproportionate number of students from disadvantaged and low socio-economic backgrounds. They enroll 80 percent of students deemed disadvantaged, 80 percent of low SES (socioeconomic status), 84 percent of indigenous, 86 percent of extensive disability and 82 percent of remote area students. 

A recent research paper showed that the percentage of students from families deemed low socio-educationally advantaged in public schools is nearly 200 percent higher than in Catholic schools, and 285 percent higher than in other private schools.

This is contributing to an accelerating transfer of students to lavishly-funded private schools, while public schools remain starved of basic resources. More than 40 percent of secondary students are now in private schools.

Public schools are shouldering the weight of the social crisis. Teachers are overwhelmed, understaffed and have unsustainable workloads, driving many experienced educators out of the profession. Staffing shortages have exacerbated tensions within the schools, with classes cancelled and merged, and class sizes increased. Yet, the resources to support students suffering social disadvantage and mental health struggles are woefully inadequate.

The shortage of mental health resources and school psychologists is particularly alarming. The Australian Psychological Society (APS) recommends a ratio of one psychologist per 500 students, requiring more than 8,000 professionals nationwide. However, current estimates indicate just one per 1,500 students. 

Access to child psychological services is severely delayed. Wait times for private psychologists averaged 34 days in 2019. By 2022, adolescents faced an average 94-day wait for mental health treatment. In regional areas like Western Australia’s Pilbara, wait times stretched to 344 days. Even the ratios proposed by APS go nowhere near dealing with the shortage.

Such appalling conditions are the responsibility of successive Labor and Liberal-National governments, federal and state. The federal Albanese Labor government and state Labor governments are channeling millions of dollars into the private school system at the expense of public education. 

Alongside budget cuts to public education, the Australian Education Union (AEU) and its state and territory affiliates have rammed through workplace agreements that have systematically cut wages in real terms and worsened conditions. Despite this record, the AEU has repeatedly sought to defuse educators’ anger by channeling opposition behind the Labor Party’s federal and state election campaigns, falsely claiming Labor to be a “lesser evil.” 

Despite the teacher unions being fully aware of the escalating violence, their response, as typified by an Australian Capital Territory (ACT) AEU “Violence in Schools” position paper, is limited to advising members to develop individual behavioural management plans for students and seek training on behavioural classroom management. The union officials also advise educators to report violent incidents using official departmental channels, seek medical attention, consider lodging compensation claims and access counselling services, such as Employee Assistance Programs, for support. They also suggest contacting police if needed.

Normalisation of violence and war

These conditions have been compounded by the imposition of a regime of standardised testing and other regressive programs. The curriculum has been narrowed through the sidelining of history, music, the arts and programs promoting critical thinking. 

At the same time, the world beyond the classrooms and playgrounds is exploding in ongoing war and genocide, and with political bullying normalised at the highest levels of government. 

A student born in 2008 has grown up in a world shaped by economic breakdown, intensifying social inequality, environmental catastrophes and military conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Ukraine and Gaza, with growing threats of nuclear retaliation and a third world war. The horrific Gaza genocide, with the daily murder of women and children through bombing and starvation, the demolition of schools and universities and cultural erasure, highlights the global ruling elite’s complete disregard for the lives of ordinary people. 

This murderous contempt also has been displayed in the COVID-19 pandemic, with close to 30 million people senselessly dying since 2020. The criminal thinking and neglect of the ruling class was summed up by the then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson who stated in the midst of mass death, “let the bodies pile high.” 

A culture of violence, brutality, nationalism and social backwardness is both celebrated and normalised, epitomised by figures like Donald Trump and Elon Musk. War criminals such as Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu are protected. Gratuitous violence, including torture, is communicated through the media, movies, the entertainment business and social media—permeating every pore of official society. Such violence aims to desensitise and brutalise individuals. 

The multi-billion IT companies consciously create addictive gaming experiences that can harm young people’s mental health and behaviour. Many games promote war, violence and aggression, desensitising players to real-world consequences, while reinforcing dopamine-driven engagement loops. While games may not directly cause violence, research shows they can cause aggression and reduce empathy, especially in vulnerable youth.

Militarism is increasingly promoted in primary and secondary schools, with students steered toward defence industry careers—a clear goal of the Labor administrations. Major weapons manufacturers and the Department of Defence shape curricula, especially in STEM, seeking to create a steady pipeline of students to support the war effort.

The same governments insist that there is not enough money for decent education, mental health services, basic health care and social safety nets, while hundreds of billions of dollars are channeled to fund war and war preparations—where the rich also profit off the exploitation of the working class. It is not difficult to see how thousands of students and families, frustrated and alienated, betrayed over decades by the Labor and the unions, feel powerless in dealing with the situation, left to deal with the situation as individuals, and can mistakenly respond through violent outbursts.

European powers plan massive assault on the working class to ready militaries for war

Jordan Shilton

Top-level discussions this week, including meetings of military commanders and five European defence ministers in Paris, about a “coalition of the willing” to intervene in Ukraine underscore that the European imperialist powers are on the war path. Berlin, Paris, London, and other European governments intend to reduce their military dependence on the US by implementing unprecedented attacks on the working class.

A total of 34 NATO and non-NATO member states were represented at Tuesday’s meeting, which French President Emmanuel Macron billed as a major step in his initiative—supported by British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer—to create a military force capable of providing Kiev with “security guarantees” in the event of a ceasefire. Underscoring the rift that has deepened between Washington and the European powers since President Donald Trump came to power, the United States was not invited. Germany’s Der Spiegel noted that it was the first time since World War II that European chiefs of staff met in Paris without the presence of an American representative. Beyond the European NATO members, representatives from Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and Canada also participated.

French President Emmanuel Macron, right, shakes hands with chiefs of staff of the European Union and NATO armies during a meeting on the conflict in Ukraine at the Musee de la Marine as part of the Paris Defense and Strategy Forum in Paris, March 11, 2025 [AP Photo/Sarah Meyssonnier/Pool via AP]

No concrete commitment to deploy troops emerged from the discussion, which was supposed to include a session where participants would detail how and what they would contribute to the operation. The Elysee Palace released a pro forma report on the event, with Macron cited as saying that it was necessary to draw up a plan to “define credible security guarantees” for Kiev. “This is the moment when Europe must throw its full weight behind Ukraine, and itself,” he added. Macron acknowledged that the meeting had decided that any “security guarantees” would “not be separated from NATO and its capabilities.”

The following day, defence ministers from Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Poland held a further meeting. At a press briefing, French Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu indicated that any military force assembled by the “coalition of the willing” would likely be deployed to the Polish-Ukrainian border rather than Ukraine proper, according to Germany’s Tagesschau. He stated that 15 NATO members had indicated a readiness to contribute to the deployment, but provided no details. A further meeting was planned for 15 days later.

German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius stated that three main areas were agreed at Wednesday’s meeting: joint European contracts for future ammunition to give the defence industry “planning security,” a review of national certification for military equipment to facilitate Europe-wide collaboration, and the development of European standards for weapons systems.

Ukraine and Russia

The European imperialist powers face a major geopolitical crisis following Trump’s turn to direct negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin. They staked everything on the transatlantic relationship during the build-up to and after the US-instigated Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, including by breaking off much of their economic relations with Moscow, particularly the direct import of cheap natural gas. The European powers now fear being isolated between Washington on the one hand, possibly in alliance with Moscow, and Russia and China on the other.

On Ukraine, they worry that a peace agreement concluded following talks between Trump and Putin will cut them out of plundering natural resources that US imperialism hopes to hoard through a colonial-style agreement with the Zelensky regime.

Ukrainian servicemen of the 3rd Separate Tank Iron Brigade take part in an exercise in the Kharkiv area, Ukraine, Thursday, Feb. 23, 2023, the day before the one year mark since the war began. (AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda) [AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda]

Putin has also promised Washington opportunities to exploit natural resources on a far greater scale within Russia and the territory it holds in Eastern Ukraine containing 40 percent of Ukraine’s rare earths. The Europeans had hoped to seize Russia’s rich natural resources in alliance with Washington through their war to subjugate the country and reduce it to the status of a semi-colony.

Russian officials, among them Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, have repeatedly stated that the presence of NATO troops on Ukrainian territory is unacceptable.

Zelensky has declared that a force of 200,000 troops would be necessary to enforce a ceasefire. The European powers could at most supply by themselves a force in the low tens of thousands, with a recent New York Times article noting that even if Europe deployed 30,000 to 40,000 troops to Ukraine, it “could undercut NATO’s ability to deter Russia from testing the alliance in the Baltics.” Talk is now of a “stabilisation force” that would not be made up purely of troops, of which none would be on the “frontline”.

These challenges will not dissuade the European imperialists from seeking to use all means at their disposal to defend their interests in Ukraine and elsewhere. Macron and Starmer are forced to pitch their “coalition of the willing” as an initiative to be presented to Trump for his approval, but the course they are taking means deepening conflict with Washington and the readiness to wage open war with Russia, even without US support.

To equip themselves for these prospects, the European imperialists will have to massively intensify the onslaught on workers’ living standards.

Europe’s military dependence on the United States

The geopolitical crisis for the European imperialists, focused on Ukraine but embracing the pursuit of their interests in a violent redivision of the world that is well underway, is compounded by their dependence on American military assistance to conduct major operations. For decades, the European powers have directed their defence spending and military assets chiefly through NATO, which the US has dominated since its founding at the beginning of the Cold War. Most European countries, with the exception of France, rely on US-produced equipment for their most high-powered capabilities, like fighter jets, air defence systems, and drones—and including Britain’s nuclear weapons.

The European imperialist powers’ military dependence on the US includes the ability to produce and maintain significant types of weaponry and mobilise adequate personnel. A study by the Bruegel and Kiel Institute for the World Economy estimates that the European powers would have to increase military spending by €250 billion each year, or 1.5 percent of the European Union’s (EU) GDP, to compensate for an American withdrawal of military resources from the continent. As Jim Townsend, a former US deputy assistant secretary of defence, told the New York Times, “European armies are too small to handle even the arms that they’ve got now. The British and the Danes, to pick two examples, are good militaries, but they would not be able to sustain intense combat for more than a couple of weeks.”

The US-made F-35 fighter jet, for example, requires regular software updates to continue operating, raising concerns in European capitals that Trump could disable the aircraft, much like his recent suspension of military aid to Ukraine, to get what he wants in a dispute with Europe. In Germany, discussions about withdrawing from a contract to purchase 35 F-35s for the country’s “nuclear sharing” of US nuclear weapons is underway, with former Munich Security Conference head Wolfgang Ischinger, among others, indicating that the proposal to abandon the deal is worth considering. Under “nuclear sharing,” German planes have been equipped since the Cold War with American nuclear weapons, which German pilots would fire if Washington gave the order. The possible breakdown of this arrangement prompted Macron to suggest recently that France could extend its “nuclear umbrella” to Germany.

Two Air Force F-35 Lightning II aircraft arrive at Ämari Air Base, Estonia, February 24, 2022. The air base is 1,100 kilometers, or 676 miles, to the east of Moscow. [Photo: US Department of Defense/Courtsey Photo]

But to realise their desire to act independently, Europe’s imperialist powers would have to reorganise civilian industries for military production on a much broader scale. A report released earlier this week by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found that European NATO members more than doubled their imports of military equipment during the period 2020-24 compared to the previous five years. 64 percent of total imports came from the US, as opposed to 52 percent between 2015 and 2019. Pieter Wezman, the study’s lead author, pointed out that the US supply of arms to Europe has “deep roots.” “European NATO states have almost 500 combat aircraft and many other weapons still on order from the USA,” he said.

A war on the working class

To strengthen their ability to act independently of and potentially in opposition to Washington, the European powers are committed to a savage continent-wide onslaught on the working class.

Incoming Christian Democrat German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is currently in talks with the Social Democrats to adopt a financial package worth at least €1 trillion to invest in military rearmament and the modernisation of infrastructure to make the country war-ready. The proposal would remove all military spending of more than 1 percent of GDP from Germany’s debt brake, allowing unlimited borrowing for war.

From left: Markus Soeder, chairman of Bavarians Christian Social Union party, Christian Democratic Union party chairman Friedrich Merz and the Social Democratic Party leaders Lars Klingbeil and Saskia Esken, attend a news conference in Berlin, Germany, Saturday, March 8, 2025. [AP Photo/Markus Schreiber]

An estimate by the Federal Audit Office (Bundesrechnungshof) found that annual interest rate payments on the €500 billion infrastructure fund will amount to €12 billion after its 10-year lifetime expires, while the blank cheque for military spending could entail at least €25 billion in annual interest, assuming defence spending grows by €500 billion and is not increased further. This would mean the removal of close to €40 billion every year from the regular budget just to pay the interest on the loans, not the loans themselves. This would amount to more than 20 percent of Germany’s current annual budget for social services of €180 billion.

In France, Macron indicated after the summit of European leaders organized by Starmer in London March 2 that Paris would present a new proposal for the defence budget to parliament. French government officials admit that the plan to double the country’s defence spending by 2030 is inadequate given Washington’s looming reduced presence in Europe. Macron vowed that Paris would have to “review and increase” its defence spending targets. “For the past three years, the Russians have been spending 10 percent of their GDP on defence,” Macron told Le Figaro. “We need to prepare what comes next, with an objective of 3 to 3.5 percent of GDP.”

At the European level, EU Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen has unveiled a package of measures aimed at investing €800 billion in military spending, including €150 billion in loans provided by the EU and a relaxation of debt rules expected to facilitate investments worth €650 billion from EU member states. By removing defence spending from the requirement that governments borrow no more than 3 percent of their GDP, the EU has created additional pressure to cut budgets elsewhere.

Echoing Nazi “Madagascar plan,” US and Israel seek to displace Palestinians to East Africa

Andre Damon

Palestinians walk amid the rubble of destroyed homes and buildings in Jabaliya, northern Gaza Strip on Friday, March 14, 2025. [AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi]

The US and Israeli governments have opened up discussions with officials from Sudan, Somalia and the internationally unrecognized breakaway Somaliland over the mass expulsion of Palestinians in Gaza and their forcible relocation to those countries.

The talks were first reported by the Associated Press (AP) Friday and separately confirmed in a report in the Financial Times.

The ongoing discussions mirror the “Madagascar Plan,” the proposal by officials of Nazi Germany to resettle Europe’s Jews to Madagascar, the then-French island colony just off Africa’s southeast coast. The plan marked a key transition point to the Holocaust, in which the leaders of Nazi Germany carried out the mass extermination of the Jews instead of merely deporting them.

Somalia has one of the lowest Human Development Index rankings in the world, with widespread poverty, food insecurity and lack of access to healthcare and education. Sudan has experienced decades of civil war, triggering ethnic killings, sexual violence and mass displacement affecting millions of people.

The AP reported that “The contacts with Sudan, Somalia and the breakaway region of Somalia known as Somaliland reflect the determination by the US and Israel to press ahead” with Trump’s plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza.

Asked to comment on the revelations by the AP, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Israel was building a “very large emigration department” within the Ministry of Defense.

In February, Trump announced his plan to ethnically cleanse and annex Gaza for the United States. “We’re going to have Gaza,” Trump said. “We don’t have to buy. There’s nothing to buy. We will have Gaza. ... We’re going to take it,” Trump said on February 11.

The AP reported that separate outreach efforts by the United States and Israel to the three potential destinations began last month, shortly after Trump and Netanyahu introduced the Gaza plan. The officials also noted that Israel was primarily leading these discussions.

The AP reported:

Two Sudanese officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive diplomatic matter, confirmed that the Trump administration has approached the military-led government about accepting Palestinians. One of them said the contacts began even before Trump’s inauguration with offers of military assistance.

Trump’s plan to displace the people of Gaza is a flagrant violation of the prohibition under the Fourth Geneva Convention of the forcible transfer of civilians during armed conflicts. And his plan to steal their land violates the 1970 United Nations treaty, ratified by the United States, which stipulates that “The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force.”

Michele Zaccheo, a UN spokesperson in Geneva, responded to the AP’s report by saying:

Any plan that could or would lead to the forced displacement of people or any type of ethnic cleansing is something that we would obviously be against, as it is against international law.

Last weekend, Finance Minister Smotrich said the Israeli government is creating an administration for the “voluntary” migration of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. “We are establishing a migration administration, we are preparing for this under the leadership of the Prime Minister and Defense Minister” he said.

Endorsing Trump’s proposal for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, he continued, “If we remove 5,000 a day, it will take a year,” adding, “The logistics are complex because you need to know who is going to which country. It’s a potential for historical change.”

The ongoing preparations for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza take place as Israel continues its total blockade of food, water and electricity into Gaza which is aimed at either starving the population of Gaza to death or forcing them to relocate through famine. For 13 days, no food or water has entered Gaza, and food insecurity and starvation is spreading.

Gaza’s government media office reported that 80 percent of its citizens have lost access to food sources, and 90 percent of the population is without reliable access to clean water. A quarter of Gaza’s remaining bakeries have been forced to shut down due to shortages of supplies, while others are on the verge of closing. The office reported that 150,000 people are suffering from either chronic disease or war wounds and are facing major shortages of medical supplies.

Olga Cherevko, a spokesperson for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), told Al Jazeera that there is “fear, alarm and concern that supplies are running out.”

She continued, “The water and sanitation situation was already dire with most of the facilities destroyed during the months of fighting.” She added that the Israeli cutoff of electricity to Gaza “reduces access to drinking water to about 600,000 people.”

On Thursday, the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry (COI) on the Occupied Palestinian Territory accused Israel of genocidal acts targeting the reproductive rights of Palestinians. The report was the first time that a UN committee officially and formally asserted that Israel has committed genocidal acts.

The commission declared:

Israeli authorities have destroyed in part the reproductive capacity of the Palestinians in Gaza as a group, including by imposing measures intended to prevent births, one of the categories of genocidal acts in the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention.

The report explained:

Sexual and reproductive healthcare facilities have been systematically destroyed across Gaza, including maternity hospitals and maternity wards of hospitals and Gaza’s main in-vitro fertility clinic. … The Commission finds that the Israeli authorities have destroyed in part the reproductive capacity of the Palestinians in Gaza as a group, including by imposing measures intended to prevent births, one of the categories of genocidal acts in the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention.

The mounting evidence of Israel’s plans to ethnically cleanse Gaza and systematically exterminate the Palestinian population only underscores the criminality of the drive by the Trump administration to persecute opponents of the Gaza genocide, including Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, who was arrested this week and is being held incommunicado and facing deportation for opposing the Gaza genocide.

Facing record unpopularity and multiple disasters, Peru’s president turns to austerity and repression

Francis Portocarrero

President Boluarte poses with Peruvian National Police during a ceremony in Lima, February 20, 2025 [Photo: Presidencia]

In the face of deteriorating social and economic conditions, along with a series of environmental and infrastructure disasters, the Peruvian government of President Dina Boluarte has shifted ever more aggressively to the right.

Speaking before the Peruvian Congress Tuesday, Economy Minister José Salardi proposed a “deregulatory shock” to consolidate business confidence. This new policy, including the revision of labor legislation favorable to private investment along with corporate tax cuts, is to be combined with “austerity” measures that will further degrade living standards for the broad masses of the population. 

Taking as models the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) headed by the fascist oligarch Elon Musk in the US, as well as Javier Milei's “chainsaw” against jobs and social spending in Argentina, the Peruvian bourgeoisie is preparing a massive offensive against the working class. The “shock” proposed by Salardi can only be imposed by a further development of dictatorial rule against the working class.

The turn toward intensified repression has seen the Boluarte regime impose a state of emergency in three provinces of the La Libertad region: Virú, Trujillo and Pataz. This dictatorial measure, which was extended for another 60 days on March 10, allows the deployment of the armed forces alongside the police in the name of upholding “public order” against rising crime rates.

The rightward trajectory of the Peruvian government was spelled out at the end of January, when Boluarte participated in the World Economic Forum in Davos. There she offered large mining corporations and global financial capital unhindered exploitation of the country's natural resources, while signaling the unreserved submission of her corrupt and repressive regime to the new administration led by Donald Trump in Washington.

Boluarte ranks as the most unpopular president in the world, and not a day goes by without corruption or political scandals with their far-reaching effects on society.

Despite official claims of an economic recovery, projections have appeared in various media outlets indicating the government overestimates economic growth. Real wages have not risen in the private sector and only minutely in the public sector, without having recovered their pre-pandemic level. Nor has the situation improved for the three million plunged into poverty during this period.

In 2024, private investment grew by just 2 percent. Current state expenses are lower than in 2022, and there has been no boost in public investment.

The worsening conditions faced by Peruvian workers have been exacerbated by a series of catastrophic events resulting from the dismantling of the country's infrastructure. The Civil Defense Institute (Indeci) reported that 1,605 homes were destroyed and about 10,000 were declared uninhabitable as a result of intense rains and landslides in the north, center and south of the country. The rains left 62 dead, nine missing and 23,743 victims in total throughout February 2025.

On February 12, there was a new oil spill on the North Peruvian Pipeline affecting indigenous communities in the Amazon. It was the second oil spill in less than a week.

Although urgent solutions are demanded from the affected communities, their requests fall on deaf ears. The OEFA (Environmental Assessment and Control Agency), while claiming to be  investigating, refuses to act, as in other cases. According to the law, both the OEFA and PETROPERÚ must respond, but inefficiency, the relaxation of controls and impunity continue.

On February 21, the roof of the Real Plaza de Trujillo, which belongs to a chain of shopping centers nationwide, collapsed, leaving eight people dead and 84 injured.

This tragedy was the result of a series of deficiencies in the construction of the plaza, owned by one of the richest men in the country, Carlos Rodríguez-Pastor. The lack of state oversight and the political pressure exerted from Congress to suspend sanctions imposed on the company, despite the obvious dangers, became evident and scandalous.

Housing is another issue that reveals the abandonment and lack of planning over decades by the Peruvian State. In the last two decades, Peruvian cities grew by 50 percent, a rate higher than the Latin American average (30 percent). However, more than 90 percent of this urban expansion has been informal, through illegal occupations and informal subdivisions.

Amid endless disasters, corruption scandals and waves of mass protests, Boluarte has become a hated figure with an approval rating of less than 5 percent, a record low. How can such a regime remain in power and pursue its agenda?

Social opposition is growing, but fails to find channels to express the anger of Peruvian workers. All of the union bureaucracies and pseudo-left political tendencies are pro-business, that is, they do not defend the interests of Peruvian workers and merely advance proposals that seek to underpin the weakened institutions and the dead end of capitalist politics.

The protests that rocked Peru in the final months of 2024 around the issue of organized crime and growing violence, revealed deeper problems. On February 6, 2025, Peru experienced its fifth national strike in less than 12 months, but it had less participation than the previous ones. From the beginning, these strikes have been dominated by business organizations representing both small operators and large transport companies. There are 117 unions representing public transport drivers in Lima, but they did not play a significant role.

The government and the leaders of these demonstrations have tried to pass off the strengthening of the police state as a response to the demand raised by the protests for an end to the insecurity caused by organized crime and its extortions. However, the existence of gangs is rooted in Peru’s rampant social inequality. They have political connections, generate profits for a wealthy elite, and can recruit from among masses of impoverished youth who can neither find work nor afford to continue their studies.

On February 25, the main trade union, the General Workers' Confederation of Peru (CGTP), tightly controlled by the Stalinist Peruvian Communist Party, called for a “national mobilization” against mass layoffs. As on previous occasions, this “national mobilization” was only carried out in Lima. Despite the union’s efforts to contain the movement’s scope, workers from different branches of industry mobilized.

The CGTP’s protest sought to channel the growing social opposition of the working class against a wave of mass firings behind futile appeals to change the director of Prevention at the Ministry of Labor. 

Citizen insecurity, natural disasters caused by rains and tragedies due to the collapse of public and private infrastructure have all created a breeding ground for anger among workers and the impoverished population. Protests, strikes and social uprisings will inevitably grow. For that reason, the government is preparing to spend millions of dollars more to build up the Armed Forces and the police. 

Elections are being organized as a means to contain mass discontent within the political system. There are already more than 40 candidates for the 2026 presidential election. The traditional parties of the Peruvian bourgeoisie have collapsed, existing only as empty shells. The nominal left, including Together for Peru (JPP), the Maoist-led Workers and Entrepreneurs Party (PTE), Free Peru, and New Peru, among others, is also preparing to participate electorally. None of these forces provide a means of opposing the drive to authoritarianism, remaining quiet, for instance, about unpopular electoral laws approved ad hoc by the right-wing controlled Congress to elect a bicameral legislature and allow the re-election of existing members. 

The only solution for the masses of workers and youth in Peru facing this social catastrophe is to mobilize independently. It needs to shake off the yoke of conciliatory bureaucracies. The decisive question is that of revolutionary leadership. The latest protests were dominated by petty-bourgeois tendencies due to the absence of a genuinely socialist leadership in the working class. The historic betrayals carried out by the Stalinist-led trade union apparatus, the diversion of social struggles towards bourgeois politics by the nominal left, and the bitter experiences with guerrilla movements, have all contributed to a political disorientation that Peruvian workers need to overcome.

Crucial lessons must be learned. No faction of the Peruvian ruling class, from the right-wing Fujimoristas to populist demagogues like ousted President Pedro Castillo, is capable of solving any of the basic economic and social problems faced by the working class and the rural poor in Peru or, for that matter, across South America. All national bourgeoisies of semi-colonial countries such as Peru are intertwined with and subordinated to foreign finance capital, with national sovereignty existing in name only.

Trump escalates tariff war against Europe

Nick Beams

US President Trump has escalated his trade war against the European Union with the threat to impose a 200 percent tariff on champagne and wines coming from Europe.

The threat, announced on his social media platform yesterday, came in response to the imposition of a 50 percent tariff by the EU on a range of products, including whiskey, which were imposed in retaliation for the 25 percent US tariff on steel and aluminium.

Champagne on ice [Photo by Harald Bischoff / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY 3.0]

Denouncing the EU decision as “hostile and abusive,” Trump declared: “If this tariff is not removed immediately, the US will shortly place a 200 percent tariff on all wines, champagnes, and alcoholic products coming out of France and other EU represented countries.”

There is little likelihood of the EU backing down as it has set out a plan for retaliation, the first phase of which will go into effect on April 1.

It will be followed by a series of measures directed against US agricultural products that will come into effect in the middle of the month, targeting rural areas which form a base of Trump’s support. The plan was drawn up in the expectation that Trump would respond as he has.

In a post on X yesterday, Laurent Saint-Martin, the French foreign trade minister, said: “We will not give in to threats and we will always protect our sectors.” Trump “is escalating the trade war he chose to unleash.”

Nor is there any sign of an easing of the economic war against Canada. After it had sent a delegation to Washington yesterday aimed at trying to calm the situation, Trump said: “I’m not going to bend at all.”

In an example of how day-to-day decision-making is taking place in the White House, in a Bloomberg interview yesterday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick warned countries against provoking Trump.

“If you make him unhappy, he responds unhappy,” he said.

But he then went on to at least indicate the underlying logic of the growing economic madness. Some countries, he claimed, such as Britain and Mexico, had thoughtfully examined their relationship with the US. As for others, which responded with tariffs, pointing to the EU, “the president’s going to deal with them with strength and power.”

The overriding aim of Trump’s economic war is to form a bloc, centered on North America, but including others as well provided they bow to the US, which can take on China, which the US regards in the longer term as the greatest threat to its global hegemony. Those that do not comply and are also seen as threats to the US, such as the EU, will be dealt with.

The Trump tariff war is causing chaos for large sections of US industry unsure of what is going to happen from one day to the next, let alone undertake longer-term planning. The stated aim of the Trump regime is to force corporations to locate their operations in the US.

But the economic irrationality of this perspective in a world of globalized production was highlighted in a letter from Tesla, the Elon Musk owned company, to the US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer earlier this week.

The letter was unsigned because, as one person familiar with its drafting told the Financial Times, “nobody at the company wants to be fired for sending it.”

The company said that while it supported fair trade—a nod to Trump’s bogus claim that he is making the global system fairer because the US has been taken advantage of—it warned that US exporters were “exposed to disproportionate impacts when other countries respond to US trade actions.”

Pointing to the situation which faces a myriad of US firms, it said that “even with the aggressive localization of the supply chain, certain parts and components are impossible to source within the US.”

It called on Greer to “further evaluate domestic supply chain limitations to ensure that US manufacturers are not unduly burdened by trade actions that could result in the imposition of cost-prohibitive tariffs on necessary components.”

The growing chaos in US industry and the fears that tariffs are going to bring a surge in inflation as well as recession is starting to impact heavily on Wall Street.

Yesterday, the S&P 500 index, the market’s leading indicator, extended its fall and entered what is known as “correction” territory—a fall of 10 percent since its previous record high barely three weeks ago on February 19. In that time, some $5 trillion has been wiped off the total market capitalization.

In another sign of growing uncertainty, gold has continued its steady ascent and yesterday reached a new all-time high of $2,985 per ounce, bringing its total rise this year to 14 percent.

The market selloff has hit stocks hard with the tech-heavy NASDAQ index already having fallen by more than 10 percent. The stock price of Tesla, one of the so-called Magnificent Seven, is down by 40 percent since the start of the year.

It is not only tech stocks that have been hit. The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies has fallen 18 percent since its high last November and is on the edge of entering bear market territory—a decline of 20 percent.

Previously, there have been claims that the reaction of the stock market – in the absence of any opposition from the Democrats, the trade unions, and the complicity of the courts – would form a kind of “guard rail” to curb the Trump regime, that it would pull back from some of its economic madness if Wall Street started to fall.

But so far, the administration has brushed off what the New York Times has characterized as “the market turmoil.” Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he was focused on the “real economy” and was not concerned about “a little bit of volatility over three weeks.”

In fact, the real economy is presenting a rapidly darkening picture. Consumer confidence is falling, consumer spending was down in real terms at the start of this year, business surveys indicate a fall in new orders, and business investment plans are being put on hold because of the lack of certainty about the direction of the real economy. And the latest job surveys show a major spike in layoffs for the first two months of the year.

Growth estimates are being revised down, with the Atlanta Federal Reserve warning that the US could experience a contraction of more than 2 percent in the first quarter. Goldman Sachs has cut its forecast for US gross domestic product from 2.4 percent to 1.7 percent.

Connecting the fall in the markets to the underlying real economy, Kristina Hooper, chief market strategist at the investment management firm Invesco, told the Times: “I think what the markets are telling us is that they are very concerned about the potential for a recession. That is certainly not what markets expected going into 2025.”

Trump steps up tariff war as US recession threat grows

Nick Beams

US President Trump has proceeded with the imposition of a 25 percent tariff on aluminium and steel imports, refusing to grant any carve-outs or exemptions for long-time US allies, including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Australia.

The European Union (EU) has responded with a series of retaliatory measures imposing tariffs on $26 billion worth of goods, including Kentucky bourbon whiskey and Harley-Davidson motorcycles. Further tariffs are to be imposed in April.

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters next to Air Force One after arriving back at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, Sunday, February 2, 2025. [AP Photo/Ben Curtis]

In a further escalation, Trump said yesterday the US would take countermeasures.

“Of course I’m going to respond,” he told reporters. “The problem is our country didn’t respond. Look, the EU was set up to take advantage of the United States.”

Following the Oval Office clash with Ukrainian President Zelensky, the tariff war is another blow to the all but collapsed post-war Transatlantic alliance.

The response in Australia is no less significant. While the economic fallout is not so great—Australia is only a minor exporter of steel and aluminium—the political consequences are enormous. The refusal of the US to grant an exemption, or even to take a phone call from Prime Minister Albanese, is being regarded as an existential blow to the US-Australia alliance that has been foundational to the post-war political order.

The tariff measures went ahead, despite lobbying from US businesses concerned they will have a major impact on the economy. The lobby group even included the country’s largest aluminium company, Alcoa, which warned that the tariff hikes could threaten tens of thousands of jobs and raise prices for American consumers.

In its explanation of the refusal to grant exemptions, the White House pointed to the central issue of China. It said that carve-outs, such as those that had been made in the past, “inadvertently created loopholes” which allowed Chinese-made steel to come into the US via those countries duty-free.

The intensity with which Trump is proceeding with his global economic war was illustrated on Tuesday in a social media post issued in response to a threat by Canada, since withdrawn, to impose a surcharge on power supplies.

“If other egregious, long-time tariffs are not likewise dropped by Canada, I will substantially increase, on April 2nd, the tariffs on cars coming into the US which will, essentially, permanently shut down the automobile business in Canada. Those cars can easily be made in the USA!” he wrote.

April 2 is the date on which a range of government departments will report on the implementation of the central thrust of his tariff war, the so-called “reciprocal tariff” program.

This goes far beyond the imposition of like tariffs on countries such as India which have relatively high tariffs on US goods. It will set in motion retaliation via tariffs for the internal policies of individual countries that are deemed to be inimical to US corporations.

For Europe, this includes measures such as the Value Added Tax (VAT), environmental regulations and measures to impose taxes and regulations on the activities of the social media and high-tech giants. In Australia, even the pharmaceutical benefits scheme (PBS) which the US has long opposed, could be a target for “reciprocal” action.

The global Trump tariff war will accelerate the recessionary trends already showing up in the US economy. These were highlighted in the report on job tracking by the firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas issued last week, which detailed the largest number of job losses since the financial crisis of 2008–2009.

“US-based employers announced 172,017 job cuts in February, the highest total for the month since 2009 when 186,350 job cuts were announced,” the report said.

It was the highest total for any month since July 2020, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, when 262,649 cuts were announced.

Perhaps even more significant than the overall numbers is the rate of increase in job cuts.

“February’s total is a 245 percent increase from the 49,975 cuts announced once month prior. It is a 103 percent increase from the 84,638 cuts announced in the same month last year,” according to the report.

Commenting on the numbers, Andrew Challenger, senior vice president of the firm, said: “Private companies announced plans to shed thousands of jobs last month, particularly in retail and technology.”

With the impact of DOGE actions “as well as cancelled government contracts, fear of trade wars, and bankruptcies, job cuts soared in February,” he continued.

Retail has been the hardest-hit sector, reflecting a downturn in consumer confidence and spending. Total job cuts for the first two months of the year were 45,375, an increase of 572 percent from the 6,571 job cuts announced for the same period in 2024.

Fears of a recession were fueled by an interview given by Trump to Fox News last Sunday, in which he declined to rule out either inflation as a result of his tariff hikes or a recession. Asked to comment on the possibility of a recession—the Atlanta Federal Reserve has warned of a 2.8 percent contraction in the first quarter—Trump dodged the issue.

“I hate to predict things like that. There is a period of transitions, because what we’re doing is very big. We’re bringing wealth back to America. That’s a big thing, and there are always periods, it takes a little time.”

Trump’s sudden reluctance to make predictions stands in marked contrast to his “snake oil” electioneering rhetoric promising a new “golden age” virtually from day one.

Asked to comment on the potential for tariffs to cause inflation, Trump replied: “You could get it. In the meantime, guess what? Interest rates are down.”

But, contrary to Trump, the fall in interest rates, as reflected in the decline in the yields on 10-year Treasury bonds, is not a sign of economic health but is the outcome of the pricing in by investors of the likelihood of a recession.

At the start of the year, with the US Federal Reserve indicating that it was in no hurry to lower rates, the market consensus was that there would likely be only one interest rate cut this year. The consensus now is that there will be three, totaling three-quarters of a percentage point by the end of the year, because the Fed will be forced to intervene to try to prevent the economy falling into recession.

At the centre of what has been characterised as the “exceptional performance” of the US economy over the past three years, compared to other major economies, has been the growth of consumption spending.

However, this has been a highly skewed picture because analysis of Fed data has shown that spending by the top 10 percent of income earners—households making $250,000 a year or more—accounts for 49.7 percent of all consumption spending, comprising almost one-third of gross domestic product.

Now the worsening conditions for the vast majority of the population are starting to show up in consumption spending data.

Nominal personal spending fell 0.2 percent between December and January as against an expected rise of 0.1 percent, the largest fall since the beginning of 2021. Adjusted for inflation, personal consumption was down by 0.5 percent with the biggest falls coming in consumer durable goods, particularly cars.

The index of consumer confidence issued by the Conference Board fell seven points in February to 98.3, the sharpest fall since August 2021 and well below the prediction of 102.5.

Conference Board senior economist Stephanie Guichard said it was the third consecutive monthly decline. “Views of current labour market conditions weakened. Consumers became pessimistic about future business conditions and less optimistic about future income,” she said.

“Pessimism about future employment prospects worsened and reached a tenth-month high.”

In another indication of growing economic stress, the Financial Times reported that “serious delinquencies on credit card balances hit a 13-year high at the end of last year, with steep interest rates increasingly squeezing households.”

Another purported factor in American exceptionalism was the strength of the private sector dynamism as reflected in a “strong” labour market.

However, in a recent article titled, “The US economy is headed for recession,” FT columnist Tek Parikh noted that “government, healthcare and social assistance accounted for two-thirds of new jobs created since the start of 2023 (and half of the 151,000 non-farm payrolls added in February.)”

The full effect of the sweeping DOGE cuts has yet to be felt, but according to an estimate by the financial firm Evercore ISI, the cuts could total half a million jobs this year, possibly rising to 1.4 million.

On top of the decline in the real economy, there is the ever-present fear that the sell-off on Wall Street can precipitate a financial crisis. The S&P 500 index has declined almost 10 percent from its high recorded on February 19, and total market capitalisation has dropped by $4 trillion since then.

The Trump regime is signaling that it is determined to press ahead both with its tariff war against the world, which has thrown business planning into chaos, and the attack on all forms of government spending which in any way benefit the broad mass of the population.

In remarks on the weekend, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent dismissed the idea that Trump would ease some of his savage cuts as a result of an adverse reaction on the markets.

“There’s going to be a natural adjustment as we move away from public spending to private spending,” he said. “The market and the economy have just become hooked. We’ve become addicted to this government spending. And there’s going to be a detox period.”