January 23, 2006

Elections in Canada

There is an Alternative to Fascism and War

Federal elections will take place in Canada on January 23. As part of its on-going work to politically organize the people, the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) is running candidates, organizing discussion meetings and building Marxist-Leninist Party Clubs. As the Party’s TV ad states: “In this election the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada is calling on the workers, women and youth to be very active in creating a future for themselves. We think that the dangers of fascism, of war, which lie ahead, can only be countered by the organized force of the Canadian working class and people. We are calling on Canadian workers, women and youth to oppose annexation and vest sovereignty in themselves. There is an alternative to the status quo. There is an alternative to fascism and war. And it’s very important that together we fight for that alternative. Elect the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada candidates. And elect candidates from small parties so that we can start building the alternative in this country. Vote Marxist-Leninist!”

In this issue Buffalo Forum is providing materials on the elections from MLPC, including statements from candidates, reports on the work and stands of the party. We urge our readers to follow developments and support these efforts as part of our common struggle against war, annexation and for empowerment of the people.

* Note that for election purposes, CPC(M-L) is registered as the Marxist Leninist Party of Canada, MLPC.

[TOP]

Crisis of Stelco’s Restructuring Plan:

It is Time to Consider USW Local 1005’s Plan

Paul Lane, Marxist-Leninist Candidate, Hamilton Mountain

The present chaotic situation of the Stelco Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) process is of deep concern to all those directly connected with Stelco, the people of Hamilton and the workers and people of the entire country. The main contenders in the Stelco restructuring process have reached an impasse which reveals what USW Local 1005 said from the outset.

The entire CCAA process had nothing to do with sorting out Stelco’s real or perceived economic difficulties and turning it into a viable company. Right from the beginning, Stelco’s CCAA process became a battlefield of competing speculators hoping to profit quickly from a company that obviously has great potential. The recent offer to purchase Dofasco for $4.8 billion has stimulated even greater infighting over control of Stelco’s assets. Control of Stelco’s equity upon emerging from CCAA has now become a billion dollar dogfight. The CCAA process cannot control the wrecking impulse when so much easy money is at stake.

Now in the last few weeks, the CCAA process has reached new levels of chaos and incoherence, as secured lenders, senior and junior bondholders, major shareholders and this or that plan proponent squabble among themselves over who is going to end up with the lion’s share of Stelco’s assets. Every time a plan is announced, one of the contending groups demands changes in its own favor. It has even been revealed that Tricap purchased Stelco’s debt to EDS (a computer company) for over $48 million which gives it voting rights on the final plan and creates a conflict of interest as a plan sponsor and financial provider. The bonds and convertible debt have been targets of considerable speculation as companies with no connection to the steel industry, Hamilton or Canada have bought Stelco debt and equity since the CCAA process began in hopes of making a quick profit. The Brookfield/Tricap plan itself was ill conceived and costly, and had no chance of passing in the form it was presented. The 40th Monitor’s Report states that Stelco is now paying the Tricap break fee of over $11 million as the agreed-upon plan has been substantively changed.

The original projections of an -imminent liquidity crisis based on dubious and subjective actuarial reports were quickly proved false as the company has made record profits in spite of having to pay almost $100 million in CCAA -restructuring fees.

In this election, I call on the workers in Hamilton to take a stand against a process which permits secret deals to be cooked up behind their backs and at the expense of their interests. The experience of Local 1005 throughout this CCAA process proves that the bankruptcy process is fraudulent. It is designed to permit a company to be restructured in a manner that enables the wealthy elite to abscond with more and more of the wealth we produce, while our conditions of life and work become increasingly insecure. The same is the case with the system of party government and what is called the democratic process. All the affairs which concern our society and determine our quality of life and the role government plays nationally and internationally are outside our control. As we have done at Local 1005, the decision-making power must be vested in the people whose lives are affected. At Stelco, it is high time Local 1005’s proposal to create a viable Stelco is considered. In this election, I call on the workers to take up politics themselves and together determine what stands serve our interests. I call on you to vote Marxist-Leninist in this election.

[TOP]

Questions from Flamborough Review and Dundas Star News

“Why Should Residents of this Riding Vote for You?”

Jamilé Ghaddar, Marxist-Leninist Candidate Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale

The Marxist-Leninist Party is fighting to address the urgent need for a renewal of the political system. The current political system is in contempt of a modern conception of democracy, where every citizen has the right to elect and be elected and where the majority rules. The current system empowers an elite of political parties, representing the interests of an elite in Canada, to come to power, instead of empowering every citizen to participate in decision-making. The MLPC puts forth that everyday citizens should present themselves in elections as alternatives to the status quo parties. A vote for the MLPC is a vote to affirm the need for democratic renewal in Canada. A vote for the MLPC is a bold step in defense of the rights of all. We call on all Canadians to be active and join the work of MLPC to present an alternative to the status quo.

"Where does your party stand on crime and punishment?"

Many people are under the impression, whether true or false, that crime is on the increase. Certainly, the media gives that impression. Firstly, it is important to not just accept things at face value. Rather, the matter should be investigated in a calm manner to determine whether crime is on the increase, what type of crime is increasing and what sectors of society are most affected. It is a fact that crime emerges when people’s needs are not being met, where poverty and powerlessness are the order of the day. The solution is to make sure that everyone’s basic needs are being met and everyone is given real power to participate in society on all levels. If after an impartial investigation, certain age groups or communities are more involved in crime, then that is just an indication of where more effort is required to meet the needs of people.

[TOP]

Call to the Youth of the Outaouais and All Quebec

Statement of Marxist-Leninist Youth Candidates in Hull-Aylmer & Pontiac and the Outaouais MLPC Youth Committee

Here we are on the eve of election day. What we have seen in this election is just how ready the youth are for democratic change in the Outaouais, Quebec and Canada. Behind this demand for change is the desire to get rid of the corrupt from their strongholds. It can be done! Let's go all out to vote on January 23 and call on everyone we know to do the same.

What Is at Stake

In this election, we are witnessing a fraud even bigger than the sponsorship scandal. The notion that the Conservatives are now the alternative has been concocted by the media at the instigation of the economic elite and inspired by the program of the U.S. ruling circles to impose a culture of impunity worldwide, including Canada.

The Conservatives, an alternative?! An alternative to what?! What is this alternative proposing? All the high-sounding words about "open federalism" to "end fiscal imbalance" do not in themselves clarify anything. If this is an alternative, why does the media not inform the electorate by explaining what it consists of?

While in Quebec there is the Bloc to represent the consensus of the Quebec National Assembly in the federal Parliament, the rest of Canada went into the election without an alternative. Efforts to distance Paul Martin from the corruption revealed by the sponsorship scandal, even though he was exonerated by Justice John Gomery, have not really succeeded. Unless something changes between now and Monday, he will have failed to emerge as the champion of the interests of Canada's ruling elite. And thus Stephen Harper is presented as the alternative. The media think that through this manipulation the Conservatives will succeed in winning enough seats across Canada to form a "national" and "representative" cabinet. Should they succeed, they think they will have found a champion for their cause. What a fraud!

Let's go into action to make sure that this fraud does not take hold in the Outaouais, Beauce, Saguenay, Quebec City or elsewhere. It must not pass! Let's not allow the ruling class to put a face to this fraud in the Pontiac or anywhere in Quebec.

Quebeckers should realize that the Conservatives' plan for a "new federalism" to resolve fiscal imbalance and their proposals for decentralization of federalism make common cause with Jean Charest's restructuring of the state. The Conservatives, like the Liberals and NDP, are for the neo-liberal agenda and for suppressing, by force if necessary, Quebec's right to self-determination. Quebeckers have rejected all the measures taken by the Charest government since it was elected. Now we must make sure a Conservative government cannot take hold in Ottawa because it will implement an agenda to restructure the state and destroy the social fabric of Quebec and the entire country.

These are the plans of the financial oligarchy and its political representatives at the federal and provincial level, no matter what party forms the government. The Charest-Harper plan, just like the Martin-Layton plan, is to facilitate the right-wing agenda, which means economic, military and political annexation of Canada and Quebec to the United States. While they talk about "Canadian values," the essence of their commitment is to allow a for the regime of impunity and retrogression which reigns in the United States -- what the most reactionary forces that control the economy and political system are imposing on the entire world. All their high-sounding words are in vain -- their program is in essence to facilitate a United States of North American Monopolies which sanctions torture, imperialist wars of aggression, military occupation of foreign countries and a regime that favors this in Canada.

Let us use the occasion of this election to defend our democratic rights by affirming ourselves and acting as a sovereign people. Vote for candidates who defend this position! Adopt the program for democratic renewal: Stop Paying the Rich -- Increase Funding for Social Programs!

The Youth Must Play Their Decisive Role in Nation-Building!
Who Decides? We Decide! Whose Future? Our Future!
The Working Class Must Constitute Itself as the Nation and Vest Sovereignty in the People!
Everyone Cast a Ballot on January 23!

[TOP]

Verdict of Canadians on the 39th General Election...

Martin, Harper and Layton are flying on the Executive Airbus to a gathering in British Columbia when Martin turns to Harper and says, chuckling, "You know, I could throw a $1000 bill out the window right now and make someone very happy."

Harper shrugs and replies, "Well, I could throw ten $100 bills out the window and make ten people happy."

Not to be outdone, Layton says, "Well I could throw a hundred $10 bills out the window and make a hundred people happy."

The pilot rolls his eyes and says to his co-pilot, "Such arrogant jerks back there. Hell, I could throw all three of them out the window and make 32 million people happy."

* Paul Martin is current Prime Minister of Canada, from the Liberal Party, Stephen Harper is candidate of the Conservative Party, Jack Layton is candidate of the New Democratic Party.

[TOP]

Windsor MLPC Involves Youth in Political Affairs

The Windsor Marxist-Leninist Party Club is participating in events organized during the election such as all-candidates forums and interviews and organizing its own forums to involve Canadians in the program for democratic renewal.

One of the features of this election in the Windsor area is that many all-candidates forums are being used by community organizations to educate the candidates about the problems facing the area. The CAW Regional Environment Council, for example, organized a forum to ensure that candidates were informed about the problems of pollution in the region and its adverse effects on the people’s health. At the forum, Marxist-Leninist candidate in Windsor-Tecumseh Laura Chesnik presented on the issue in the context of the need to empower Canadians so that they can take control of the decision-making process and exercise control over their lives.

The Marxist-Leninist candidates in Windsor have received enthusiastic responses among the youth. At Belle River High School, a small town in Essex County, an all-candidates debate was organized by Civics teacher April Roy with the aim of informing grade 9 and 10 students on the views of the different parties on issues pertaining to the youth and how youth can get involved in the different parties. Showing that the youth are definitely political and eager to discuss, before the forum started a group of youth approached Marxist-Leninist candidate Enver Villamizar (Windsor West), asking the views of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada on democracy.

During the debate, Villamizar explained that the MLPC is running 14 youth candidates across the country. The MLPC is calling on the youth to take their place in society by gaining their experience and fully participating in all aspects of politics, he said. He opposed the notion that the issue of low voter turn-out amongst the youth is a matter of making voting “cool” so as to appeal to the youth. He pointed out that the youth want to have a say but in Canada’s political system they are not provided with a way to participate in deciding what kind of Canada they want.

In this election, Villamizar pointed out, the only discussion about the youth is the need for stiffer penalties for young offenders. The economic, social, cultural and political problems facing the youth and the whole society are being dealt with through law and order measures. Villamizar opposed this, explaining that the youth of Canada should not wait for someone to represent them, instead they should organize to represent their own interests and those of society. This was met with rousing applause.

The Windsor MLPC also participated in a panel organized by the Journalism Department at St. Clair College. Questions prepared from a student panel focused on issues that have come up in the media regarding the elections. One question was about sovereignty over the north.

The Windsor West Liberal candidate expressed his concern over the polar bears and their health in the Arctic region and the problems of global warming. MLPC candidate Enver Villamizar discussed the problem from the standpoint of Canadian sovereignty and the need to oppose the annexation of Canada to the U.S. He pointed out that both Liberal leader Paul Martin and Conservative leader Stephen Harper promote that Canada should join a North American Security Perimeter with the U.S. He informed the audience about the various agreements such as the SMART Border initiative and the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement which reveal the violation of Canadian sovereignty in the name of “integration.” He called on students to consider this in terms of what is stake in this election and the need for Canadians to actively oppose such developments.

At the University of Windsor, Engineers Without Borders and the University of Windsor Students’ Alliance teamed up to organize an all-candidates forum. The event was well attended with close to 200 university students and students from Assumption High School participating. The students were eager to ask questions of the candidates, dealing with topics such as the need for actual solutions to the lack of adequate healthcare and to the way in which Canada views foreign aid and child poverty.

In one exchange, the MLPC candidate pointed out that commitments about ending child poverty internationally will ring hollow until a nation-wide campaign is taken up to end child poverty in Canada. He pointed out that in cities such as London, Ontario there are some of the highest homeless rates in all of Canada amongst the youth, as well as some of the highest rates of mental and other illnesses. He discussed the fact that child poverty in other countries is used to cover up what is taking place in Canada. He went on to state that one immediate step to ending child poverty would be for Canada to withdraw from Afghanistan and Haiti and to stop stealing the resources of the developing countries of the world. This he stated would assist in allowing all peoples to use their national territories and resources for their own development. This was met with resounding applause.

At a forum organized by the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, Marxist-Leninist candidate in Essex Bob Cruise reflected the conviction of industrial workers to stand shoulder to shoulder with farmers who are facing the onslaught of monopoly right and who are determined to resist. Farmers wore brightly colored t-shirts and signs which read “Farmers Feed Cities” and wanted immediate government attention for two-year economic relief measures until new arrangements could be worked out to ensure a viable agricultural sector in Ontario. By the end of the forum the audience clearly identified with the fact that the MLPC opposes the violation of farmers’ rights by the large agro--monopolies based mainly in the U.S. and the silence of governments in the face of dumping and the destruction of the family farm it leads to.

Another feature of the election has been the continued marginalization of small parties and independent candidates as a result of Canada’s political system which divides parties into “fringe” and “major.” This is used to block small parties and independents from all-candidate debates as well as from objective media coverage. In order to create an alternative, the Windsor MLPC has been using its weekly radio show to interview small-party and independent candidates in the region to discuss their parties’ platforms and their own views on issues of importance to the Canadian people. On January 3, MLPC Radio featured interviews with the MLPC candidates in Windsor, Essex and London. The candidates discussed the work they do and gave their views on the role of women in the elections, the Liberal-Labor Alliance, the role of Canada internationally and the significance of the elections vis-à-vis the U.S. project of annexation.

On January 10, the show featured interviews with the Green Party candidates Catherine Pluard and Jillana Bishop in Windsor as well as Progressive Canadian candidate Chris Schnurr. Showing the involvement of youth, students and young workers in the small parties, Pluard and Schnurr are both students in Windsor, while Bishop is a skilled trades worker in Old Castle. The discussion focused on the experiences of the candidates in the elections and the various blocks the political system imposes to keep people like them from participating on an equal footing.

To continue the discussion during the election and bring forward the significance of how problems pose themselves, the Windsor MLPC is also organizing political affairs discussions on different topics.

[TOP]

Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group Launches 2006 Election Series

A modern form of politics is beginning to emerge in Sudbury. It is politics in which people work together with respect and dignity to discuss the problems facing the Canadian polity. This is what was exhibited in the first session of the 2006 Election Series of the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group held on January 4. It is the starting point for a modern political process in which every member of society can participate in developing and implementing an agenda that serves their interests.

In spite of a snowstorm which prevented some candidates and people from coming, five small-party candidates from Sudbury, Nickel Belt and Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing and twice as many voters participated. The political affairs discussions are organized by the Sudbury Marxist-Leninist Party Club in order to provide a forum for Sudburians to collectively express their political concerns and open up a path to the progress of society through the democratic renewal of the political system. The discussions are being held weekly during the election period.

The theme for the night’s discussion was that the crisis of the party-run parliamentary system reveals the necessity for renewal. Everyone present contributed to the discussion which made for a lively forum. It also brought out many features of the current party-run political process in Canada that will be examined further by the group.

One thing the discussion revealed is the importance of discussion itself. The party-run parliamentary system is so thoroughly unrepresentative that it is impossible for the electorate and people to put their concerns on the government agenda and to have political solutions that favor the interests of the workers and people. This is presented as a normal state of affairs. Take the situation at Algoma Steel in Sault Ste. Marie, where speculative New York hedge funds are attempting to extract hundreds of millions from the company and the community. Even when the sitting MP is onside, the party-dominated political system prevents the government from defending the common good and stopping such outrages.

Now we are in the middle of an election which is nothing less than an all-out offensive organized by the rich and their parties that run Canada’s parliamentary system. Conclusions are drawn and election promises are bandied about before any problem which is an obstacle to progress is even posed, let alone fully examined. The election is presented as a horse race in which there are only two main contenders and any other vote is portrayed as a wasted vote. The workers and people are cancelled out of the equation. Far from being a method by which the public will is expressed, in reality, the election is a massive exercise in disinformation and obstruction to keep the electorate and people from dealing with the problems they face, to marginalize them and to keep them out of decision-making.

Participants were enthused with the group’s method of work. Typically, election meetings such as all-candidates’ debates degenerate into cat-and-dog fights where the aim is to score political points by putting down opponents. Members of the public are normally reduced to the role of spectators and cheerleaders and often the organizers control the questions that are asked of candidates. The Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group did not perpetuate this artificial divide between candidates and voters. All members participated on the same basis with each taking the time to develop and present their views on the issues of concern. The spirit of sectarianism and unprincipled partisanship was absent from the discussion and a spirit of respect and dignity for all was developed.

Enabling serious and principled political discussion is the aim of the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group. By organizing this kind of discussion where problems facing the society and the polity are fully examined, the workers and people can inform themselves, draw warranted conclusions from their actual experience in Canadian society, and on that basis, decide for themselves what course of action will best serve their interests.

This is the valuable contribution that the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group is making to political discourse in Sudbury and surrounding areas. The 2006 election series will continue on Wednesday, January 11 when the significance of the Gomery Inquiry will be discussed. Everyone is invited to participate.

[TOP]

Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group

Significance of Gomery Inquiry and the Need to Oppose Attempts to Isolate Quebec

On January 11, the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group held the second session of its 2006 election series on the topic of “The Significance of the Gomery Inquiry and the Need for Political Renewal and a New Constitution.” The discussion was led by Pierre Chénier, Secretary of the Workers’ Center of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist).

Chénier began his presentation by saying how happy he was to participate in a meeting of a group that is making a significant contribution to the democratic renewal of Canada’s political system. This contribution is being made by discussing substantive issues and encouraging -everyone to participate, irrespective of their political affiliation, ideological beliefs or any other consideration, in an atmosphere of respect and dignity for all. Chénier suggested that one of the most immediate tasks faced by everyone is to prevent the current election from being used to inflame passions and create tensions amongst the workers and people on the issue of Quebec. “How is it even possible to think that attacking Quebec will solve the political crisis affecting Canada at this time?” Chénier asked.

He challenged the view presented by the monopoly media and by the Liberals, Conservatives and NDP, according to which the corruption that was investigated by the Gomery inquiry was an issue of a few bad individuals and corrupt party officials. “If this is the case,” he said, “then let’s just put these people in jail, and let’s get on with our lives. But this is not the way the problem poses itself.” Chénier elaborated the view that if the political nature of the corruption is not highlighted but simply dismissed out of hand, then there is no way that the problem is going to be solved, and that this election will not solve it either.

Two main issues were presented in this regard. First, the electoral process puts political parties into power, not the people themselves. The people are kept out of power, and the “major” political parties are being increasingly transformed into public relations machines that need millions of dollars to run their campaigns in order to access the spoils of power and to rule on behalf of the rich and implement the neo-liberal agenda. With this frantic need for money, even though the established parties receive millions of dollars from the state treasury, it is no big surprise that the Liberals used the sponsorship contracts to fill their coffers with illegal money.

Secondly, the sponsorship scandal was one of the schemes used to deprive the Quebec people of their right to decide their future. It came about as a direct result of the near victory of the Yes campaign in the 1995 Quebec referendum. The three “major” parties in Parliament refuse to deal with that political reality and renew the Canadian federation as a free and voluntary union of sovereign peoples: the First Nations, the nation of Quebec and the rest of Canada. Instead they fanatically insist the status quo is the only solution and beat the war drum against “separatists.”

Affirmation of sovereignty does not necessarily equate to separation, Chénier pointed out. He said that the hysteria being whipped up about separatists breaking up Canada diverts attention from the fact that the status quo is actually leading to Canada’s annexation to the U.S. He said this could very well happen through provincial annexation or through annexation of Canada as a whole. He pointed out that for the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, the strivings of the Quebec people for sovereignty and to control their destiny is a great weapon against annexation. The same applies to the native peoples and to Canadians across the country who also want to be sovereign in their own country.

“People who fight for sovereignty are very likely to be eager to defend it against annexation. Can we say the same or put our trust in those who say that Canada’s destiny should be decided by secret deals between political parties or between Canada and the U.S. and other countries? With these deals, we could very well learn one day in the newspapers that Canada or one of the provinces has become a U.S. state,” Chénier said.

“If the Liberals, Conservatives or the New Democrats really want to renew federalism, as they claim, nothing prevents them from doing so. But why is it that every time these secret deals are examined, such as the health accord signed between Martin and the provinces, we find that the deal is actually funneling billions of dollars into the pockets of the rich, through privatization and other schemes, at the expense of the people that the deal was allegedly going to assist? There is a flaw here that has to be addressed.”

Chénier concluded his presentation by pledging that the Workers’ Center of CPC(M-L) will not permit tensions and conflicts between the workers and people to be created and inflamed, especially between the Ontario and Quebec workers.

The presentation was well received and followed by a lively discussion. One participant pointed out that it is timely to discuss these things during the election when some politicians — such as Liberal Michael Ignatieff who has been parachuted into the riding of Etobicoke-Lakeshore as a “star candidate” and potential prime minister — are openly calling for the use of force to prevent the people of Quebec from vesting sovereignty in themselves under the hoax of preventing the break-up of Canada. Ignatieff is also calling for Canada’s full participation in U.S. wars of aggression against the peoples of the world and is an advocate of the use of torture against those who oppose the U.S. dictate. Ignatieff’s call to use force against the people of Quebec has been echoed by at least one local Liberal incumbent, the participant pointed out. This represents not the strength of the Liberals but their desperation, he said, and their -willingness to foment civil strife in order to stay in power. To oppose this hysteria is particularly important in Sudbury and northeastern Ontario, he said, where approximately one-third of the population is of Franco-Ontarian origin.

Many pointed out that in order to oppose these pressures and to be able to grasp how a problem poses itself, people have to be politically organized, adding that the existence of the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group is a real contribution to that.

The third and final session of the Sudbury Political Affairs Discussion Group’s Election Series will be held on Wednesday, January 18. The theme is the program of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada: Stop Paying the Rich! Increase Funding for Social Programs! The session will take place at the Sudbury Arts Council, 124 Cedar Street at 7pm. It will be preceded a joint press conference of alternative party candidates in Sudbury, Nickel Belt and Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing under the theme: “Make Your Vote Count! Vote for a Candidate of the Alternative!” Everyone is invited to participate.

[TOP]

Reject More Violence Against the Youth in the Form of Repression and Prisons!

Together Let Us Build a World Where Our Youth Have Pride of Place and Their Rights Are Guaranteed!

The Liberals, Conservatives and New Democratic Party (NDP) have spoken on youth violence. They accuse some youth of having bad attitudes and being responsible for an anti-social consciousness that leads to gun violence, theft and other delinquent behavior. Those three privileged parties vying for federal political power propose to strengthen punishment severely for anti-social activity of some youth.

In the wake of the tragic shooting death of a Toronto high school student, the mass media have echoed the call for longer jail terms for crimes involving guns. The parties in the House of Commons and Ontario legislature and the mass media refuse to lead the people in a discussion of the source of anti-social activity that leads to gun violence and criminal gang behavior. They themselves exhibit the most aloof anti-social consciousness. They rehash the views of the U.S. failed state, which has the highest rate of incarceration of its members internally of any state in the world and has not solved the problem of violence. The U.S. also routinely uses imprisonment and killing of its oppressed people at home, the torture of opponents of its empire-building worldwide and engages in political destabilization, invasion and occupation to force sovereign nations to follow its dictate. This is hardly the example to follow. In spite of this, the “law and order” agenda is shamelessly promoted as the solution to the security problems facing our communities.

The level of official discussion over youth violence is so backward that the origin of consciousness is suggested to be a phenomenon of individual invention, control or even heredity, slipping dangerously close to Nazi eugenics to go with state-organized racism. Canadian official opinion clumsily repeats the same unscientific and self-serving line of the U.S. that social being and the ideas of the ruling elite play little or no role in shaping individual consciousness and behavior.

The bankruptcy of those in Canada who are vying to form the government is nowhere more apparent than in their pandering to the “law and order” agenda in lieu of guaranteeing the rights of the Canadian youth and people. It is a dangerous agenda which the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada calls on all justice-minded Canadians to actively oppose in this election.

Reject the advocates of the “law and order” agenda! Together let us build a world where our youth have pride of place and their rights are guaranteed!

[TOP]

MLPC Elaborates Election Program

Humanizing the Social and Natural Environments

The core of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada’s platform is the need to activate the human factor/social consciousness so that both the social and natural environments are healthy. Humans must produce to live. How they engage in production and relate to one another in the process are the focus of politics and a central concern of the MLPC.

Production in Canada is social in nature involving most everyone in a cooperative effort applying science and technology to the productive process. Decisions taken in one enterprise or sector of the economy have a profound effect on other sectors, regions and the people. For example, the decision to transform heavy oil into usable fossil fuel to be exported to the United States greatly affects the social and natural environments well beyond Alberta and into the future, sending air pollution eastward to Manitoba and the means to wage war into the hands of the U.S. Empire.

Social production and science allow thinking Canadians using their ability to abstract absence to employ methods and make decisions that take into account the consequences of economic activity on the social and natural environments. However, the social character of production and science is subverted by the private ownership of the productive forces which totally negates people’s ability to actively participate in exercising control over their lives.

The private narrow concerns of the owners of the productive forces to expand their own capital block thinking Canadians from developing public institutions and methods that would allow them to make rational decisions regarding the organization and development of social production and social life in general. This contradiction is expressed in the constant struggle of Canadians to humanize their natural and social environments and the doggedly powerful opposition to those efforts by the private owners of the means of production, mainly monopolies, which are singularly motivated to serve their private interests. The oil monopolies, for example, block the sovereign Canadian people and their institutions from even discussing a National Energy Policy let alone implementing one that would bring such an important economic sector under the control and guidance of the people and their public institutions.

Environmental and social concerns must be basic considerations of any productive enterprise. Those concerns must be objects of constant public scrutiny and the rigors of scientific debate and development for which funds from added-value must be set aside. But those basic considerations are blocked by monopoly right that declares the people and their public institutions have little or no power over private economic enterprises and their often destructive secret agendas.

Alternatives such as renewable energy, public transport, etc., hold merit but the private owners of the means of production, who exercise an iron grip over the party-dominated political process of representative democracy, block the Canadian people from positions of political power, tackling problems and solving them to serve the public good. Public transport and rational distribution of population and economic development have little chance of flowering in a Canada where the foreign auto monopolies spend hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising to promote the car culture and their private commodities, and spend millions more cultivating privileged “main” political parties and individuals who dominate Canadian political institutions and serve the narrow interests of the monopolies and not the public good.

Our duty as thinking Canadians is to oppose in an organized collective way all the narrow private decisions of the monopolies that harm the social and natural environments; to organize ourselves to force a change in the political institutions to allow thinking Canadians and the polity generally into positions of political power; and, to bring the relations of production, which are now based on private ownership of the means of production, into harmony with the social forces of production.

[TOP]

Bolivia

"For the First Time, We Are Presidents" Indigenous Leader Wins Presidency with Big Majority

The National Electoral Court (CNE) released official results, with an estimated 84.5 percent of the electorate voting. Morales, leader of the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS), won with 53.7 per cent of the vote, followed by conservative Jorge "Tuto" Quiroga of the Social Democratic Party PODEMOS with 28.6 per cent and businessman Samuel Doria Medina of National Unity (UN) with 7.8 per cent. MAS also won 72 out of 130 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, and 12 out of 27 seats in the Senate. This makes Morales' victory the most resounding in the history of Bolivia, where democracy was reestablished in 1982 after two decades of dictatorship and the indigenous peoples have been subject to civil death by racist laws for centuries.

"We have already won. Aymaras, Quechuas, Chiquitanos and Guaraníes -- for the first time we are presidents," Morales declared to the fervent cheers of his supporters. He stated that his victory would initiate "the struggle for natural resources and to change our history." He called on Latin America's social and political movements to rebuild the "great homeland" envisioned by Simón Bolívar and the "Tawantinsuyu" of the Inca Empire. At the same time, he also promised a non-exclusive government that would "never extort anyone who wants to invest in our country."

Speaking to the Brazilian daily O Globo, Morales reaffirmed his willingness to open a dialogue with the United States but clearly stated that no U.S. interference would be tolerated. He also called for balanced economic and commercial relations with the U.S., not relations based on U.S. dictate in which the only role for Bolivia is to submit.

 

Actions were held in La Paz and throughout Bolivia in May and June 2005 calling for the nationalization of gas.
Strikes and blockades brought large parts of the city to a standstill and virtually isolated it from the rest of the country.

  

[TOP]

Evo Morales, New President of Bolivia

We Must Strengthen Anti-Imperialist Thinking

Evo Morales, elected by majority vote in Bolivian elections December 18, was inaugurated as President of Bolivia on January 22. Below is a speech he gave at the international conference “In Defense of Humanity,” December 24, 2005. The conference, in Caracas, Venezuela, brought together artists and intellectuals from around the world.

* * *

Thank you for the invitation to this great meeting of intellectuals "In Defense of Humanity." Thank you for your applause for the Bolivian people, who have mobilized in these recent days of struggle, drawing on our consciousness and our regard in reclaiming our natural resources.

What happened these past days in Bolivia was a great revolt by those who have been oppressed for more than 500 years. The will of the people was imposed this September and October and has begun to overcome the empire's cannons. We have lived for so many years through the confrontation of two cultures: the culture of life represented by the indigenous people, and the culture of death represented by the West. When we the indigenous people ­ together with the workers and even the businessmen of our country—a fight for life and justice, the State responds with its "democratic rule of law."

What does the "rule of law" mean for indigenous people? For the poor, the marginalized, the excluded, the "rule of law" means the targeted assassinations and collective massacres that we have endured. Not just this September and October, but for many years, in which they have tried to impose policies of hunger and poverty on the Bolivian people.

Above all, the "rule of law" means the accusations that we, the Quechuas, Aymaras and Guaranties of Bolivia keep hearing from our governments: that we are narcos, that we are anarchists. This uprising of the Bolivian people has been not only about gas and hydrocarbons, but an intersection of many issues: discrimination, marginalization, and most importantly, the failure of neoliberalism.

The cause of all these acts of bloodshed, and for the uprising of the Bolivian people, has a name: neoliberalism. With courage and defiance, we brought down Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada -- the symbol of neoliberalism in our country -- on October 17, the Bolivians' day of dignity and identity. We began to bring down the symbol of corruption and the political mafia.

And I want to tell you, companeras and companeros, how we have built the consciousness of the Bolivian people from the bottom up. How quickly the Bolivian people have reacted, have said, as Subcomandante Marcos [of the Zapatistas in Mexico] says, ¡ya basta! enough policies of hunger and misery.

For us, October 17th is the beginning of a new phase of construction. Most importantly, we face the task of ending selfishness and individualism, and creating -- from the rural campesino and indigenous communities to the urban slums -- other forms of living, based on solidarity and mutual aid. We must think about how to redistribute the wealth that is concentrated among few hands. This is the great task we Bolivian people face after this great uprising.

It has been very important to organize and mobilize ourselves in a way based on transparency, honesty, and control over our own organizations. And it has been important not only to organize but also to unite. Here we are now, united intellectuals in defense of humanity -- I think we must have not only unity among the social movements, but also that we must coordinate with the intellectual movements. Every gathering, every event of this nature for we labor leaders who come from the social struggle, is a great lesson that allows us to exchange experiences and to keep strengthening our people and our grassroots organizations.

Thus, in Bolivia, our social movements, our intellectuals, our workers --even those political parties that support the popular struggle – joined together to drive out Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. Sadly, we paid the price with many of our lives, because the empire's arrogance and tyranny continue humiliating the Bolivian people.

It must be said, companeras and companeros, that we must serve the social and popular movements rather than the transnational corporations. I am new to politics; I had hated it and had been afraid of becoming a career politician. But I realized that politics had once been the science of serving the people, and that getting involved in politics is important if you want to help your people. By getting involved, I mean living for politics, rather than living off of politics.

We have coordinated our struggles between the social movements and political parties, with the support of our academic institutions, in a way that has created a greater national consciousness. That is what made it possible for the people to rise up in these recent days.

When we speak of the "defense of humanity," as we do at this event, I think that this only happens by eliminating neoliberalism and imperialism. But I think that in this we are not so alone, because we see, every day that anti-imperialist thinking is spreading, especially after Bush's bloody "intervention" policy in Iraq.

Our way of organizing and uniting against the system, against the empire's aggression toward our people, is spreading, as are the strategies for creating and strengthening the power of the people. I believe only in the power of the people. That was my experience in my own region, a single province -- the importance of local power. And now, with all that has happened in Bolivia, I have seen the importance of the power of a whole people, of a whole nation. For those of us who believe it important to defend humanity, the best contribution we can make is to help create that popular power. This happens when we check our personal interests with those of the group. Sometimes, we commit to the social movements in order to win power. We need to be led by the people, not use or manipulate them.

We may have differences among our popular leaders -- and it is true that we have them in Bolivia. But when the people are conscious, when the people know what needs to be done, any difference among the different local leaders ends. We have been making progress in this for a long time, so that our people are finally able to rise up, together.

What I want to tell you, companeras and companeros, what I dream of and what we as leaders from Bolivia dream of, is that our task at this moment should be to strengthen anti-imperialist thinking. Some leaders are now talking about how we, the intellectuals, the social and political movements, can organize a great summit of people like [Cuban President] Fidel Castro, [Venezuelan President Hugo] Chavez and [Brazilian President] Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, to say to everyone: "We are here, taking a stand against the aggression of the US imperialism." A summit at which we are joined by [Guatemalan leader] companera Rigoberta Menchu, by other social and labor leaders, great personalities like [Argentina’s] Adolfo Pérez Ezquivel. A great summit to say to all our peoples that we are together, united, and defending humanity.

We have no other choice, companeros and companeras, if we want to defend humanity we must change the system, and this means overthrowing US imperialism.

[TOP]

For George W. Bush, A Victory by Morales Could Not Come at a Worse Time

- Pastor Valle-Garay*, VHeadline.com, December 18, 2005 -

Anything short of a deserved, absolute victory for Evo Morales and his Socialist Movement Party on Sunday's presidential elections would throw Bolivia into chaos once again.

No stranger to political upheaval, Bolivia has experienced more revolutions in its 180-year history than Presidents who have completed their terms in office.

For quite a long stretch of time, Bolivia had an average of one armed revolution per year. It does not come as a surprise when considering the marked contrasts between rampant governmental corruption, unchecked greed among the very few and the wretched living conditions of the majority of the Bolivian people.

Not much has changed today...

With well over 60% of its population living in poverty, ranking it as one of the poorest nations in South America, and a 70% indigenous population struggling to barely survive under some of the harshest conditions in the planet, Bolivia is rife for change.

A win for Morales, 46, would give the Hemisphere its first indigenous president and, just as importantly, Morales would become the first elected leader to represent the interests of the vast majority of Bolivians and a promise of a brighter future.

It has been a long, tortuous road for the coca farmer and labor organizer. And it is likely to get tougher. Washington objects to Morales' leadership as a result of his close ties with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Cuban President Fidel Castro. Not that it makes much difference to Morales, who has no intention of running Bolivia at the pleasure of the United States.

It matters little to Bolivia's indigenous population who has survived worse hardships.

Last century Bolivia's rich tin mines, run by local tin barons on behalf of U.S. corporations, exploited thousands of miners to death with a combination of inhumane working conditions and starvation wages. The Bolivian army regularly resorted to violence and murder to put down miners' protests or to stop their attempts to unionize the mines. These circumstances drove Ernesto Che Guevara, the legendary guerrillero in the Cuban revolution, to Bolivia. Guevara decided to organize a revolutionary movement that would set Bolivia's population free from the oligarchs and their corporate foreign allies.

On October 8, 1967 the Bolivian Special Forces' Rangers Battalion, staged a military operation organized by the Central Intelligence Agency. Che Guevara was wounded and captured alive. The Rangers held him prisoner near the town of La Higuera. Bolivian President René Barrientos ordered Guevara's summary execution the following day. Che knew he would be killed. As his executioner, a Bolivian sergeant, hesitated pulling the trigger, Guevara told him "Shoot, coward, you are only killing a man." Guevara was shot. He was also right. Thirty eight years after Barrientos' bullet put an end to his life, the revolutionary hero's ideals now cast a giant shadow of hope over the person of Evo Morales. For the White House this is clearly an unwelcome case of deja vu. Che is back!

For George W. Bush a victory by Morales could not come at a worse time.

Bush continues to trip on his own web of lies regarding the invasion of Iraq, and as the Senate rejects entire sections of his infamous Patriot Act Bush takes another plunge in a downward spiral.

Obviously Morales is no more sympathetic to Bush's plight than President Chavez would ever be.

At the recent Summit of the Americas in Mar de Plata, Argentina, Morales condemned such U.S. policies as the free trade agreement and open trade for "exploiting the working poor of Latin America." He has also repeatedly challenged the U.S. influence in the Hemisphere.

According to Morales, "The hour has arrived when we liberate ourselves completely. I feel a wave of uprising and rebellion all around Latin America and a growing courage to stop our subjugation at the hands of the North American empire."

Washington could well interpret Morales' statement as fighting words from an up-and-coming socialist or, more wisely, as another one on a long list of signs which point to the White House losing its grip on Latin American's political reality. Larry Birns, executive director of the liberal Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs, put it more succinctly, "Washington feels like things are getting out of hand in Latin America and Evo is part of that. There is a tremendous apprehension in the Bush administration over the alliance Evo Morales would want to strike with Chavez."

Perhaps.

Perhaps Washington should wake up and smell the Latin American coffee. The days when U.S. presidents decided on what alliances Latin Americans presidents should follow have long been over.

Since its independence Bolivia has been ruled by its elitist establishment or by military strongmen at the beck and call of Bolivia's oligarchs and U.S. corporations. Last century Bolivia's indigenous people lived and died young while extracting tin from the nation's rich mines on behalf of local and foreign tin barons.

In this century the production of tin has been replaced by Bolivia's vast natural-gas resources.

While an infinitesimal minority of already wealthy Bolivians accumulated enormous bank accounts, the working poor did not reap any benefits from the wealth generated by tin or natural gas. Morales reasonably concluded that "we must change this neoliberal policy that has left us in poverty. We must stop the looting." He has announced that natural gas will be nationalized. Private property will remain untouched but landlords who illegally obtained large tracts of land can expect to be held accountable.

So far Washington has strived to maintain a wait-and-see attitude in the elections. However U.S. support of the next Bolivian President comes with strings attached. U.S. State Department spokesperson Adam Ereli warned that U.S.-Bolivian relations depend on Bolivia's commitment to continue fighting the drug traffic. "Whoever wins the presidential election" must keep the anti-drug commitment, stipulated Ereli. (Last year Washington gave Bolivia US$90 million to keep drugs from reaching international markets).

Morales on the other hand will request that the United Nations remove coca leaves from the UN list which prohibits them as an illicit substance.

The U.S. statement is designed to intimidate.

Obviously the White House intends to wield its mighty lever against a Bolivian government which, in the opinion of the White House, fails to control the drug traffic. Anything remotely connected to drugs would be used to destabilize the Bolivian government, just as the White House has tried, and failed, against Venezuela in the past.

No doubt Morales will keep an eye peeled for Big Brother.

What Washington does not realize, largely as a result of its abysmal ignorance of Latin America's current political changes, is that Morales is nobody's fool. He is not about to drop the political ball and provide Washington with an opportunity to interfere in Bolivia's internal affairs. Those days have also gone by the wayside. Today's Latin America's leaders are much wiser in local and international political affairs than their Washington counterpart.

They also are aware that what truly gripes President Bush and corporate America is that while they bomb Iraq into democratic submission, there is a growing and formidable list of sovereign nations in this Hemisphere which through free, democratic elections and without the benefit of U.S. intervention, have peacefully moved to the left of centre and initiated social, educational, health and work programs that benefit their population.

These changes give the lie to Bush's strategy on bringing democracy by force to Iraq.

In any event, a triumph on Sunday by Morales would make Bolivia the latest on that growing list which next year will likely see Chile and Nicaragua join the current left-of-center governments of Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Panama, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Not a shot was fired to put these governments in place.

Che Guevara would be immensely pleased.

A different story would occur, however, if some damn fool attempts to rob Morales of a legitimate win in Bolivia's presidential elections. All hell would break loose. Bolivia would be back to square one, whre it spent the better part of the last 180 years.

* Pastor Valle-Garay is a Senior Scholar at York University in Toronto. He served as Consul General of Nicaragua to Canada on behalf of the Nicaraguan-Sandinista government.

Voice of Revolution
Publication of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization

USMLO • 3942 N. Central Ave. • Chicago, IL 60634
www.usmlo.org • office@usmlo.org