“It’s either socialism or death and we are choosing socialism. Zambia has become completely capitalistic, the ruling elite is a mere conveyor belt of capitalism, and these conveyor belts receive kick-backs from the capitalists. No change should be expected from today’s elite, we must actually stop them. We must stop the ruling elite from ruining our country and that is our mandate and that is why we are here. We shall never surrender until victory becomes possible,” said Dr Musumali.
(THE MAST ONLINE ZM) M’membe is SP’s 2021 presidential candidate
By Tobias Phiri
on March 31, 2018
THE Socialist Party has announced that former Post Newspapers editor-in-chief Fred M’membe is their presidential candidate for the 2021 general elections.
Speaking during the launch of the party in Lusaka, Socialist Party deputy general secretary Dr Cosmas Musumali said the majority of Zambians were in desperate poverty, which he said his party was resolved to end once voted into office in 2021.
He pledged that his party would transform the country once ushered into office.
“With this launch, we are declaring our total commitment and undivided attention to transforming Zambia along socialist lines in 2021. For the time being, to spearhead this process, I will serve as the party’s general secretary. And then we have Comrade Fred M’membe who will serve as deputy general secretary. Comrade Fred M’membe is also suggested as our presidential candidate for the 2021 elections,” Dr Musumali said.
“2021 comrades, you are getting state power. We commit and dedicate ourselves to solidarity with oppressed people wherever they may be, including beyond our artificial boundaries.”
Dr Musumali said the formation of the Socialist Party was based on the cries of the people from around the country.
“The party was finally registered on 16th October 2017 [and] we have since embarked on a campaign to recruit members to set up structures in all corners of our country and the birth of our party is a direct response to very strong and clear calls from the people across the boundaries of Zambia to chart a call out of capitalism. You will see a dramatic change in the Zambian politics starting from today, we will not compromise in terms of our principles…change must come,” Dr Musumali said.
“The majority of Zambians today are destitute, poverty has increased and the living conditions of Zambians are very desperate. The system that we have blindly glorified so much has never been and shall never ever be a system that will emancipate the poor from want. Capitalism is inherently a corrupt system that strives on greed and exploitation of the masses to benefit a few.”
He stated that the current government was corrupt and no change should be expected from them and they must be stopped before they destroy the country.
“It’s either socialism or death and we are choosing socialism. Zambia has become completely capitalistic, the ruling elite is a mere conveyor belt of capitalism, and these conveyor belts receive kick-backs from the capitalists. No change should be expected from today’s elite, we must actually stop them. We must stop the ruling elite from ruining our country and that is our mandate and that is why we are here. We shall never surrender until victory becomes possible,” said Dr Musumali.
And addressing Socialist Party members who turned up in numbers for the event also attended by Cuban Ambassador to Zambia Nelson Pages, Dr M’membe said the only hope for the Zambians was socialism because capitalism was only taking turns while changing shape exploiting the people.
“They say chameleon achinja fye colour but inkanda imo ine; a chameleon changes colour but the skin remains the same. That is how all exploitative systems are, that is how capitalist exploitation is. As long as capitalist exploitation is not totally uprooted, eradicated it, will just change form and all its evils will remain \ intact,” Dr M’membe said.
He recalled how over 120 years ago, Mpezeni’s son, Nsingu, the commander of the Ngoni forces, was assassinated for resisting capitalist takeover by Cecil John Rhodes.
“In December 1897, the British forces stationed at Kota Kota in Malawi attacked the Ngoni people for refusing to hand over their land so that Cecil Rhodes’ companies could prospect for and mine gold in the area…Capitalism kills, steals, subjugates and humiliates. It killed Nsingu and his 10,000 young Ngoni fighters, it stole their cattle and imprisoned and humiliated Mpezeni in order to exploit, subjugate, colonise them,” stated Dr M’membe.
“Many things seem to have changed since then, but the fundamentals, the key things remain intact – our people are still being killed, robbed of their land and minerals, neocolonised by capitalism, its enterprises and states…It is a struggle we have to continue in honour of commander Nsingu and his fighters; it is a struggle we have to wage for the future generations of this nation and indeed for our own liberation from today’s capitalist exploitation, subjugation and humiliation. Just as Nsingu and his comrades chose to die from Maxim-guns and Seven-pounders than to live under capitalist exploitation, subjugation and humiliation, we today commit ourselves to a struggle without respite against capitalism and for establishment of a more just, fair and humane society in our homeland. It is socialism and only socialism that can truly free our people, Nsingu’s people and homeland and all humanity from capitalist exploitation, subjugation and humiliation.”
Dr M’membe has been playing a background role in the political arena until last week when the Socialist Party announced his active involvement in their party and the subsequent announcement of his intentions to run for presidential office in 2021.
Labels: COSMAS MUSUMALI, FRED M'MEMBE, PF, SOCIALISM, SOCIALIST PARTY
Read more...
Socialist International approvals PF's membership
By Roy Habaalu
Sun 21 July 2013, 14:01 CAT
WYNTER Kabimba says the Socialist International's approval of the PF's membership will broaden its scope to participate in international issues.
The socialist international approved the ruling party's membership in February 2013 during a meeting held in Portugal.
Kabimba, who is PF secretary general, said they would use the membership to make their position known on world events.
"It's a very useful forum for PF to be able to be recognised and admitted to that organisation as a member. It broadens the scope of participation of the party from the local and regional level to an international level and for us as an infant political party that is just 11-12 years now we value our membership in the Socialist International, more so now this has been coupled with our membership into the Council of African Political Parties," he said.
Kabimba was elected president of the CAPP in Khartoum, Sudan this year.
He said Socialist International was a platform for political parties to interact and exchange experiences.
"It's a political forum where political parties meet to take positions on certain world events; on things like the world financial crisis, issues of environment, issues of world peace and on issues of democracy. It's also a platform used by political parties to exchange experiences with other political parties and also develop party-to-party relations," he said.
Kabimba said the PF applied for membership into the Socialist International in 2010 and in the first stage were given an observer status at a meeting in April 2012 in Cape Town, South Africa.
He said the application was referred to the council of the Socialist International for consideration by the general assembly.
Kabimba said the Socialist International was a grouping of political parties in the world that included the Labour Party of the United Kingdom and the African National Congress of South Africa.
The London-based Socialist International was established in 1955 and its secretary general is Louise Ayala from Chile.
Labels: PF, SOCIALISM, WYNTER KABIMBA
Read more...
France: The Rise of the "Left Front"
by Murray Smith
Global Research, August 22, 2012
Socialist Project and Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal
The Left Front (Front de Gauche) emerged onto the political scene at the beginning of 2009. As the Left Front to Change Europe, it was established by three organizations – the French Communist Party (PCF), the Left Party (Parti de Gauche, PG) and the Unitary Left (Gauche Unitaire, GU) – with the aim of standing in the European elections of June 2009.
These three organizations were not of anything like equal weight. The Communist Party, though much weakened over the previous 25 years, was nevertheless still a mass party with well over 100,000 members and thousands of elected representatives at every level. More than that, it was an inseparable part of the history of the French workers’ movement, which it had largely contributed to defining. The Left Party was a recent split from the Socialist Party, numbering at the time at most 2000 members. The Unitary Left was even smaller, having left the newly formed New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) just after its founding congress.
Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of the Left Party, and a leading candidate of the Left Front.
More important than numbers, however, were what the three organizations represented politically. In addition to being a mass party, the PCF represented the international current that had for decades been linked to the Soviet regime, though it began to take its distance from Moscow in the 1960s and has now pretty thoroughly settled its accounts with Stalinism. The Left Party came from the tradition of French social democracy, its principal leader, Jean-Luc Melenchon, having spent more than 30 years in the Socialist Party and the founding core of activists came from that party. The Unitary Left has its origins in one of the three main Trotskyist organizations in France, the Revolutionary Communist League (LCR). Never a mass force, the Trotskyist movement, and the LCR in particular, nevertheless had considerable political influence, especially after May-June 1968. So the Left Front brought together from the beginning political forces of different origins.
Prehistory
In what political context did it appear? The prehistory of the Left Front was certainly the mass – and successful – campaign against the European constitutional treaty in the referendum of 2005. The key element on the left was the united campaign involving the PCF, the LCR, the current of Jean-Luc Melenchon in the Socialist Party, and a range of ecologist and alternative left forces, whose emblematic figure was Jose Bove. This campaign was innovative in the way it both brought together different political forces. It would be an understatement to say that there is not exactly a tradition of the PCF conducting joint campaigns with Trotskyists. And while a considerable number of Socialist Party members publicly opposed the treaty and some campaigned against it in various ways, only Melenchon's current actively took part in the united campaign with the other forces. At the time people spoke of the campaign of the three Bs (Bove, Olivier Besancenot of the LCR and Marie-George Buffet, national secretary of the PCF). The M, however, was just as significant.
The unitary committees formed to conduct the campaign continued to exist afterwards and sought to be the crucible of a united left campaign for the presidential elections of 2007. The attempt was unsuccessful. It would take too long to go into all the details and the responsibilities of the different forces involved, but the outcome was failure and the unedifying spectacle of the competing candidatures of Besancenot, Buffet and Bove.
Out of this sad spectacle, however, emerged one “winner.” The LCR ran a dynamic campaign with the very capable and articulate Besancenot, who in the end won more than 4 per cent of the vote, as he had already done in 2002, whereas Buffet and Bove each had less than 2 per cent, as did Arlette Laguiller of Lutte Ouvriere, another Trotskyist party.
New Anti-Capitalist Party
On the strength of this result the LCR took the initiative of proposing the creation of a new anti-capitalist party, seeking to channel the combativeness and desire for unity expressed in the campaign. It had a very considerable echo and when the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) was formed in February 2009, it claimed, credibly, to have more than 9000 members, more than three times the forces of the LCR. The NPA was at the time widely perceived to be a broad party and comparisons were made with such formations as the Denmark's Red-Green Alliance and Portugal's Left Bloc. Wrongly, as it turned out, and it started to become obvious very early on. The moves toward building a credible force of the radical left were taking place elsewhere, in the Left Front, and the NPA, rather than contributing to the process, set itself in opposition to it, an orientation for which it would pay a heavy price.
At the beginning of the 2009 European campaign the Left Front was trailing well behind the NPA in the opinion polls. But at the finishing line it got 6.05 per cent in metropolitan France and the NPA 4.88. The difference was not enormous and the NPA failed by a whisker to get a member of the European parliament (MEP), while the Left Front got four. But the significant fact was that the dynamic of the Left Front was accelerating, while the NPA began to falter.
PCF
Let us now look at how the three forces that launched the Left Front got there. For the PCF, the creation of the Left Front was a decisive step in a process that had begun several years before. The party had experienced a long decline from the beginning of the 1980s with several causes, political and social, domestic and international, accelerated by the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc. From 1994, under the leadership of Robert Hue, the party underwent a process of political and organizational “mutation.” Some sort of mutation was certainly needed, but the treatment further weakened the party.
This was reinforced when in 1997 the PCF entered the “plural left” government led by the Socialist Party's Lionel Jospin. Unable to seriously influence a government that remained within the neoliberal consensus, the experience was negative for the PCF, electorally and within its own ranks. When Hue stood as PCF candidate at the 2002 presidential election, he achieved the exploit of being beaten by not one but two Trotskyist candidates. Many PCF members had openly announced their intention of voting for Olivier Besancenot.
At that time no one would have bet much on the survival of the PCF. Its future seemed to lie in gradual social-democratization and satellization by the Socialist Party. Indeed, if Hue had continued to lead it, that is no doubt what would have happened, with splits and fragmentation along the way. Hue himself left the party in 2008 and founded a small group that followed precisely that road. He supported the successful Socialist Party presidential candidate François Hollande this year. Marie-Pierre Vieu, a leading PCF member and former supporter of Hue, recently remarked ironically: “In his great humility, Hue compares himself to Gorbachev and considers that the future of communism is social democracy.”
However, Hue was replaced as national secretary in 2001 by Marie-George Buffet, and after the debacle of 2002 the PCF began to reorganize and discuss its future. The first decision was to maintain the party. But that in itself would only have served to slow, but not stop or reverse the party's decline. For that there gradually emerged, under the leadership of Buffet and her successor Pierre Laurent, an orientation that combined a willingness to work with other forces to the left of social democracy, a radical political orientation and an independence from the Socialist Party. It turned out to be a winning combination, and the decline was halted and reversed.
Melenchon
Melenchon, after a brief spell with the Trotskyist OCI in the 1970s, had spent the rest of his political activity in the Socialist Party, in a series of left currents. But after 2002 he began to reconsider his political perspectives. In 2004, he and his supporters took a step that was already putting one foot outside the party. They formed “For a Social Republic” (PRS). This was not an internal current of the PS but a political association or club that intervened both within and outside the Socialist Party and recruited some people who were not members of the PS. There followed the decision to take part in the unitary campaign over the European constitutional treaty. In the movement of committees that tried to find a joint candidate for 2007 Melenchon was present, but was not taken too seriously because he was still in the Socialist Party, though the idea of himself as a unity candidate was floated at one point.
Melenchon was looking for a way out of the Socialist Party, but lacked a credible perspective. The turning point was the evolution of the PCF. In the run-up to its 34th congress in December 2008 there was discussion as to how to formulate the party's willingness to open up to other forces on the left. The initial draft spoke of forming “fronts on the left with personalities.” Later, and after discussion with PRS, the words “and organizations” were added. For Melenchon that was important. That meant that the PCF was ready to ally with the party he intended to create, not just to put some ex-Socialist Party members on its lists as individuals. On the PCF side, it needed to be sure that Melenchon would actually break with the PS, and apparently doubted it until the last minute.
Melenchon announced his departure from the Socialist Party on November 6, 2008. He left the PS with essentially the forces of PRS (though some refused to leave), plus the deputy Marc Dolez and a few supporters. But the PRS members were largely experienced political cadres. The rapid creation of the Left Party was criticized by some who thought Melenchon should have taken time to discuss with and regroup broader forces.
But the decision was probably right. The fact that a new political force existed acted as a force of attraction, for existing Socialist Party members and former members, for former supporters of Jean-Pierre Chevenement and for people who had never been in the Socialist Party. The party grew quite rapidly to around 2000 members. A significant addition to the party came a year later with the entry of Greens deputy Martine Billard and her supporters. This reinforced and made more credible the ecological dimension of the Left Party.
UNIR current forms Unitary Left
A parallel process occurred with the principal minority of the LCR. One of its main leaders, Christian Picquet, had been part of the majority leadership of the LCR until 1999, when there was a recomposition of alliances within the party. He had been responsible for relations with other parties and as such had established good relations with the PCF and in particular those of its members who were the most open to working with the far left. As the LCR moved toward the orientation that would eventually lead to the NPA, Picquet became a leader of the UNIR current, which continued a dialogue with other forces including both the PCF and PRS. UNIR also began to recruit outside the LCR, often ex-members. Within the LCR it represented just under 30 per cent in 2003.
The dynamic of the NPA led many LCR members who were critical of the leadership to go along with it. Only about 15 per cent of delegates at the congress where the LCR dissolved itself opposed the majority position by proposing a broad alliance for the European elections. Subsequently Picquet and a group of leading members of the ex-LCR left and formed the Unitary Left. They were not the whole of the UNIR current, perhaps not even a majority, but they were sure that a Left Front would be formed and were determined to be part of it. Subsequent events vindicated the choice, but at the time it was far from guaranteed that the Left Front would make the breakthrough that it did.
Electoral Success
From 2009 on the Left Front went from success to success electorally. It was not a smooth, seamless progression but involved debates and choices. When the 2010 campaign for the regional elections loomed, the PCF consulted its members on the course to follow, via regional conferences and then a vote of all party members. In five regions the choice was to ally with the Socialist Party from the first round. In the 17 others it was to pursue the strategy of the Left Front, as the party leadership proposed. In the five pro-PS regions dissident PCF members allied with the Left Party and others to present unofficial Left Front lists.
It is worth comparing the 2010 campaign with the elections of 2004, when 14 regions chose a first round alliance with the Socialist Party. Among those who did not was the Parisian region where Buffet led a list that was genuinely open, with non-PCF candidates who were really independent, not just fellow travellers. It was a harbinger of things to come, and it was successful. But the evolution between 2004 and 2010 did not take place without discussion; party members had to be convinced of the new orientation. The success of the 2009 campaign helped.
After success in the regional elections and in local elections in 2011 the Left Front had to face up to the big test, the presidential election of 2012. First of all it was necessary to define and plan the campaign. The choice of candidate was not the least important. Over and above Melenchon's personal qualities, which largely contributed to the success of the campaign, there was the fact that he was not a PCF member. If the candidate had been a PCF member, given the weight of the party and the fact that it had 80 per cent of the candidates in the legislative elections, the Left Front would have appeared as simply as a front for the PCF. As it was it appeared as a front of which the PCF was part, a big part, but that there were other forces. The difference was important, and the vote of PCF members by a 60 per cent majority to accept Melenchon as candidate was a decisive step.
As with the elections in 2009, the only comparison could be with the previous results of the PCF, the only part of the Left Front that existed before, and in each of those years, in those terms, progress was made. But in 2012 just doing better than Buffet's 1.93 per cent in 2007 would hardly do. Or even equalling or slightly surpassing Besancenot's scores. The ambition of the Left Front was not to be a protest force. It was to constitute a new force on the left, one that could eventually contest the hegemony of the Socialist Party. For that the Left Front fixed the objective of reaching double figures, and with 11 per cent they attained it.
2012 Elections
The subsequent legislative elections were something of a disappointment. After the second round the Left Front had 10 MPs, as against 19 before the elections. This was clearly not a good result, but it was not as bad as one might think by just looking at the seats lost. In comparison with the results of the Communist Party in the 2007 elections there was a gain of around 600,000 votes, which is not so bad. But the result came as a shock to the Left Front. It had been widely expected that on the strength of the result of the presidential election not only would it keep its seats but win more. The figure of 30 seats was considered a reasonable objective.
So what happened? In the first place there was what might be called the objective factor of bi-polarization. There was a strong drive by left voters to give Hollande a good working majority. Whereas 30 per cent of Hollande's voters in April 22 first round are estimated to have hesitated between him and Melenchon, 38 per cent of Melenchon's voters voted Socialist Party in June 10 second round. However, there were also weaknesses on the part of the Left Front. In the presidential campaign, which was a national campaign par excellence, the difference in program between the Left Front and the Socialist Party was very clear. The legislative campaign was of course a national campaign, but it was also a sum of more than 500 local campaigns. And it appears that the central, national aspect was not sufficiently emphasised and that the case was not sufficiently made as to why it was necessary to have a strong group of Left Front MPs and not just a presidential majority in general. This was particularly necessary given that the first measures of the Socialist Party government led by Jean-Marc Ayrault were well received on the left – 70 per cent of Left Front voters were fairly satisfied with them and 23 per cent very satisfied.
It should also be underlined that the electoral system, one of the most undemocratic in Western Europe, completely distorts the relationship between votes and seats. With proportional representation the PCF would have had 25 seats in 2007 and the Left Front 40 in 2012. Today the Socialist Party would have less than a third of the seats in parliament, as against more than half. When we look at the Left Front results in terms of votes the picture looks brighter. Compared to the PCF in 2007, the Left Front progressed in 90 per cent of the constituencies in metropolitan France. In 330 it scored more than 5 per cent (135 in 2007). In 69 constituencies the score of the Left Front was between 10 and 20 per cent (37 in 2007). In 26 out of the 95 departments in metropolitan France the score in 2012 was more than double that in 2007 and in eight it more than tripled. However, at the top end of the scale the number of constituencies where the score was over 20 per cent fell slightly from 23 to 20, thus not reversing a long-term trend.
As the historian Roger Martelli put it in an analysis of the first round, the foundations are becoming stronger, but the roof is fragile. You don't need to be an architect to know that that is better than the other way around (which was the tendency before). But that's a long-term view and in the short term seats were lost. However, they were mostly narrowly lost. Less than 5000 votes, distributed in the right places, would have secured six more MPs, mostly the sitting ones who were defeated despite their vote rising by between 2 and 4 per cent compared to 2007 – but the Socialist Party vote rose more.
Following on the legislative elections the PCF took a decision on whether to participate in the Ayrault government. Whereas the other components of the Left Front had made it clear during the campaign that they would not go into government with the Socialist Party, the PCF had always said that it would take its decision after the legislative elections. However it was pretty clear what the decision would be for anyone listening to what PCF leaders were saying during the campaign.
The SP was not going to modify its program to accommodate the Left Front and the PCF was not going to go into government to apply the program of the Socialist Party. The only thing worth noting was the scale of the refusal. At a PCF National Council meeting on June 18, 2012, a three-point resolution was adopted. The first point stressed the importance of taking political initiatives and mobilising to impose radical policies. Second, it was decided that the conditions did not exist for the PCF to take part in the government, though leaving open the possibility that these conditions could change in the future. Third, the continuation and reinforcement of the strategy of the Left Front was reaffirmed. The resolution was adopted by 93 for, 11 against and 17 abstentions. A consultative vote of party members in their branches on June 18-19 produced a majority of 93.44 per cent. The final decision was taken by 500 delegates at a national conference on June 20, with four against and 16 abstentions.
Where Next?
Where does the Left Front go from here? It is faced with a number of challenges. First of all, there are no more elections until 2014. It will therefore have to act and build its forces and support through extra-parliamentary mobilizations. The circumstances in which it will have to do this are those of a left government with a solid majority in the National Assembly (less solid in the Senate, where it depends on the Left Front). Obviously no one expects Francois Hollande to conduct an anti-capitalist policy. He wasn't elected to do that. But he was elected to break with Sarkozyism and take measures in favour of working people.
In fact he is trying to conduct a policy where there will be some austerity for working people but also to repeal or modify Sarkozy's measures, raise taxes on the rich and seek to protect employment. He is much criticized for this, both by employers’ circles in France and internationally. So far he has sometimes wobbled; he has certainly not done enough, but not completely capitulated.
But he has capitulated on one thing. He has not succeeded in renegotiating the treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance (TSCG) and he is nevertheless proposing to have it ratified by parliament in September 2012. In this he is not only going back on his electoral promise, he is making a stick for his own back. He is giving the European Commission the right to exert pressure on his budget. And that is important in a situation where Hollande and his government will be subject to all sorts of pressure from European institutions, from other national governments, from the markets to get into line, to carry out labour reforms, pension reforms and cuts in the public sector – the well-worn litany. Some people in the Socialist Party will relay this pressure, some will resist it.
How should the Left Front act now? Carefully. The odds are that as time passes, the Hollande government will gradually cede to the pressures and get into line, and the Left Front will have to oppose that. But announcing today that it will be a left opposition to Hollande, as some on the far left do, is not the answer. The danger in the present situation is that the Socialist Party government will disillusion and anger its supporters and the right will come back in 2017, as it did in 1986, 1993 and 2002. And it will be a very dangerous right wing, closer to the extreme right. The Left Front cannot necessarily stop the drift of the Socialist Party. But it can oppose it from the left and not just oppose but systematically present the outlines of a left alternative. That implies being lucid as to the Socialist Party's limits, but ready to support any move in a left direction and only to move into sharp opposition as it becomes clearly (to many of those who voted for Hollande) necessary. Let us recall the figures already quoted: 30 per cent of those who voted for Hollande on April 22 hesitated about voting for Melenchon; 38 per cent of those who voted for Melenchon on April 22 voted Socialist Party on June 10.
That shows that there is a large body of opinion between the hard-core support of the Left Front and the Socialist Party, enough to shift the balance of forces on the left, one way or another. Indeed, within the PS itself there is a left current of about 22 deputies led by Benoit Hamon who may decide to vote against the fiscal pact, as did 23 SPD deputies with whom they are in contact. It would be unwise to have too many illusions there, but would be equally wrong to write them off in advance.
An indication of the tactical choices facing the Left Front is given by how it votes in parliament. When there was a vote of confidence in the Ayrault government, the choice was to abstain – no overall confidence, but not frontal opposition. As the government now presents a much revised (compared to the preceding government's) budget for the remainder of 2012, particularly concerning taxes on companies and wealthy individuals, the Left Front parliamentarians are voting for it, while pointing to the contradiction of adopting the fiscal pact. When the pact comes before parliament, the vote will certainly be against.
Organization
The other problem for the Left Front is how it will organize itself. The original three components have now grown to eight. They include the ex-Chevenementists of Republic and Socialism, the Federation for a Social and Ecological Alternative (FASE), and two currents from the NPA – Convergence and Alternative and the Anticapitalist Left. The first broke away after the regional elections and the 2011 NPA congress and involved mostly people already critical of the leadership. The second has only just joined the Left Front and involves about half of the leadership that led the process of dissolving the LCR and founding the NPA.
One challenge is to get all these components working harmoniously together. The other is what to do with the not inconsiderable number of people who support the Left Front and would join it individually if it were possible. That would be a step forward, but a big step. It is one thing to organize individual supporters during an election campaign, as was done. It is another to say that what began as a cartel of organizations will now have individual members. But calls for this are being made and it might happen.
Of course, the simplest thing would be for the Left Front to become a party. But that would be a huge step and it seems clear that most members of the PCF in particular are not ready for that. It might also be difficult to reconcile the different ways of functioning of the PCF and the Left Party. But things can evolve. Speaking of the process that is underway of transforming Greece's SYRIZA coalition into a party, now supported by an overwhelming majority, party spokesperson Panos Skourletis remarked that “the crisis has changed all political parties, and things that would have once taken decades to achieve come to fruition much more quickly.” Let us hope it will not take decades for the Left Front to become a party, but if it happens, it will certainly take more than a few months.
Left Criticism
In the criticisms of the Left Front by the NPA and others, in France and internationally, we find characterizations that range from it being “left reformist” and “anti-liberal” (hence not anti-capitalist) to “institutional.” This is essentially sterile and designed to draw a line of demarcation, implying that those who make such criticisms are themselves the real revolutionaries and anti-capitalists.
“A revolutionary party is not a party which is for the revolution, it is a party which has a program and a strategy for making the revolution. ”
Guillaume Liegard, a leading member of the NPA and now of the Anticapitalist Left group wrote last year, in a contribution to the debate on strategy in the NPA, that “a revolutionary party is not a party which is for the revolution, it is a party which has a program and a strategy for making the revolution. It is an understatement to say that it is quite presumptuous of us to think that we have those two things.”
Liegard is quite clearly right, and what he says punches a hole in the idea that there are “strategic differences” between the NPA and the Left Front. If you do not have a strategy how can you have strategic differences? You can of course have concrete differences; you can also have ideological generalizations and preconceptions which do not take you very far.
Does the Left Front itself have a worked-out strategy and a program? Not at this stage. But it has a definite anti-capitalist objective and a practice that combines electoral campaigns and work in representative institutions with extra-parliamentary mobilizations, seeking to combine the two, and it can evolve further. It will be judged now by its ability to face up to the challenges in the new political situation. The first test will be to see how strong a campaign can be waged against the signing of the fiscal pact.
Lastly, the Left Front is part of a process of a new rise of the radical left in Europe. It is uneven, there are difficulties in Germany and Italy, for example, and successes in Spain, Denmark, the Netherlands and above all Greece, as well as in France. But the overall trend is positive, the contacts are regular, particularly through the European Left Party, and people follow and analyse what is happening elsewhere. That, as well as the effects of the ongoing European crisis, can serve to accelerate the process. •
Murray Smith is a member of the anti-capitalist party Dei Lenk (The Left) in Luxembourg. This article first appeared on the Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal website.
Global Research Articles by Murray Smith
Labels: FRANCE, SOCIALISM
Read more...
Hollande's election progressive - Chitala
By Allan Mulenga
Thu 10 May 2012, 17:40 CAT
DR Mbita Chitala has asked newly-elected France President Francois Hollande to come up with progressive policies towards African countries.
Commenting on Hollande's election as France's first left-wing President in 17 years, Dr Chitala, who is Zambia Research Foundation executive director, said the victory was a clear testimony that social democracy was on the rise.
"The election of Francois Hollande as France President is obviously very progressive. You can see that social democracy is on the rise.
They had this issue of austerity and making people suffer should not be the function of governments and states. The purpose of governments is to make people happy and that is why even the conservatives in London, United Kingdom during the last elections lost by more than 400 councils and Labour Party, which has a social programme was elected," he said.
Dr Chitala, who is also former ambassador to Libya, said Nicolas Sarkozy was rejected because of bad policies, particularly towards African countries.
"As you know he was a person who even caused the invasion of Libya, where I was last ambassador in a sphere where the African Union was seeking for diplomatic solutions. For us really it is good for Africa and we also hope that Mr Hollande can come up with progressive policies towards Africa. He has not yet announced what programmes he has for Africa particularly in Franco-Africa where they had used troops in Ivory Coast and we need to know," he said.
Dr Chitala hoped that President Hollande would be supportive to the AU and the entire continent.
"By and large, the election of President Francois Hollande appears to be a progressive thing. We are looking forward that he will be much more supportive of the African Union and formulate programmes which powerful countries are involved in," said Dr Chitala.
Labels: ELECTIONS, FRANCE, MBITA CHITALA, SOCIALISM
Read more...
PF should put food on people's tables, says Mulongoti
By Kombe Chimpinde
Wed 04 Apr. 2012, 12:57 CAT
THE PF must not pre-occupy itself with political ideologies but strive to put food on people's tables, says Mike Mulongoti.
Commenting on the PF's decision to apply for membership to the Socialist International Organisation, Mulongoti, the former minister of works and supply, said Zambians were not keen on issues of political ideology but with inclusive policies that would advance national development.
"Over the years, Zambians have not been laid by ideological differences and I think that has not been a factor, any political observer on our landscape cannot claim that…Our position has been that political parties must articulate policies of course other parties with emphasis on agriculture or other areas and so forth...," Mulongoti said.
"My view is that our concentration must be to put food on the table of people."
He, however, said inclination to certain political ideologies was welcome if it helped move the country's national agenda forward.
r
"So those who want to be with ideologies, they are free to do it but my worry is that we should pre-occupy ourselves with putting food on our tables.
[It wasn't during the 2 decades that you were in power. During the MMD's rule, the only priority was stealing from the state, selling off Zambia's future for cents on the dollar, and telling everyone who with good ideas to 'go away', 'start your own party', 'you're just jealous of us', 'we have a mandate, now go away for the next 5 years'. That, with a very short and reversed reprieve during President Mwanawasa's term in office, is the legacy of the MMD in power. - MrK]
Whether that ideology is capitalist, socialist or communist, what is important is that if we make a commitment to uplift the lives of people, it is important that that agenda is articulated. I do not know why PF has applied because I don't know unde what circumstance that has prompted that, as far as I am concerned, the agenda must be putting food on the tables of Zambians."
Mulongoti said the big issue confronting Zambia was how to uplift the lives of Zambians.
"If there is need now for people to align themselves officially in that way, the challenge is for them to tell the Zambians why they feel that way because I don't think when you go to campaigns to push an agenda, and later when elected, mid-way you change and say 'now this or that'," he said.
Mulongoti said Zambians voted for the party that had a nationalist agenda and commitment to uplift their lives.
"I believe Zambia must develop, and that can only be done if policies can enhance development," said Mulongoti.
The Socialist International Organisation, made up of political parties that have a socialist inclination, is scrutinising the PF's application for membership to the institution.
Its current membership stands at 162, of which 50 are governing political parties.
According to secretary general of the organisation Luis Ayala who was in the country as part of the scrutinising process of the application, the PF's application is expected to be confirmed at this year's congress, which will take place in Africa for the first time on August 30, after scrutiny of the organisation's ethics committee.
And Vice-President Dr Guy Scott said the organisation would create a platform for the party to share experiences of other member states on various common challenges faced by people worldwide today.
Labels: GUY SCOTT, MIKE MULONGOTI, PF, SOCIALISM
Read more...
PF and socialism
By The Post
Sun 01 Apr. 2012, 13:00 CAT
THE Patriotic Front's decision to join the Socialist International, an organisation whose members include the United Kingdom's Labour Party and South Africa's African National Congress and 48 others, is highly welcome. It is a good thing to belong to a political grouping that is anchored on very strong principles and standards and common aims and values like the Socialist International.
We say this because if the Patriotic Front applies to our country the principles, standards, aims and values of the Socialist International, we will start to see some progress in all areas of human endeavour in our country and the ordinary citizens will be protected against the abuse of power.
If socialism means democracy, as Luis Ayala, the secretary general of the Socialist International, says, then nobody should have objections to it. If socialism means democracy, and democracy means that governments are closely linked to the people, arise from the people, have the support of the people and devote themselves entirely to working and struggling for the people and the people's interests, no one should have any objection to it.
If socialism means, as it should, that the interests of the majority of Zambians are paramount and if it includes a model of an economic system planned with national interests in mind, in solidarity with and providing for increased participation by the people, no one should have any objections to it.
Any social programme that guarantees that the country's wealth and resources will be used for the common good and that improves the quality of human life by satisfying the basic needs of all the people seems to us to be a just programme.
If socialism means the injustice and traditional inequalities between our urban areas and our rural areas, and between the have and have-nots, will be progressively reduced, and if it means the participation of all our people in the fruits of their labour, overcoming economic alienation, then there is nothing in it that is at odds with the expectations of the great majority of our people.
If socialism implies that power is to be exercised by the majority, and increasingly shared by the organised community, so that power is actually transferred to the popular masses of our people, then it should meet nothing but encouragement and support.
If socialism leads to cultural processes that awaken the dignity of the masses and give them the courage to assume responsibility and demand their rights, then it promotes the same type of human dignity proclaimed by the Christian faith of the great majority of our people.
The Christian faith of our people tells them of the urgent responsibility to subdue the earth, and transform the land and all other means of production in order to allow everyone to live fully and make of Zambia a land of justice, solidarity, peace, and freedom in which the Christian message of the Kingdom of God can take on its full meaning.
We hope that the socialist policies of the Patriotic Front will be something original, creative, truly Zambian, and in no sense imitative. For what we, together with most Zambians, seek is a process that will result in a society completely and truly Zambian, one that is neither dependent nor undemocratic.
If the Patriotic Front's socialist policies, as some may imagine, become distorted, denying persons and communities the right to decide their own destinies, and if it attempts to force persons to submit blindly to the manipulation and dictates of individuals who hold power, then it will be difficult for most of our people to accept such false socialism. They will not accept a socialism which oversteps its limits and attempts to take away the individual's rights.
The Socialism that the Patriotic Front wants to pursue should also generate new values that will pave the way for a society that evinces more fellowship and brotherhood; a society in which all our people should shoulder their proper role with new dignity.
There are more evangelical values in socialism than probably in any other outlook or social system. The fact is that socialism offers new hope that humanity can be more complete, and hence more evangelical - that is, more conformed to Jesus, who came to liberate us from any and every form of bondage.
And fidelity to the gospel of Jesus Christ today requires Christians to commit themselves to thoroughgoing and urgently needed social transformations. Any and every effort to fashion a more humane society, to eliminate poverty by promoting the common good demands the support of those who are committed to human liberation as Christians are or should be.
Of course, this support can and should be offered through serious-minded criticism with a genuine concern for the common good. We should therefore aim towards the creation of a qualitatively different society.
By this we understand a society wherein the willingness of justice, of solidarity and equality reigns, one that will respond to generous aspirations and the search for a more just society and where values, particularly freedom, responsibility and an openness to things spiritual, which will guarantee the integral development of humankind will be realised.
In order that this kind of a society be developed, it is necessary that the education of all the people include the social and communal meaning of human life, in the total context which includes culture, economics, politics and the whole society.
That is why many Christians today recognise in socialist currents certain aspirations which they hold within themselves in the name of their faith. Education thus conceived will lead to the creation of a new human being and a new society - social humankind and a communal society, where democracy is real through the effective political participation of the members of a society, through the human concept and realisation of work, through the submission of capital to the needs of the whole society.
Christians must show that authentic socialism is Christianity lived to the full in basic equality and with a fair distribution of goods, retracing the Christian roots that lie behind the moral values of solidarity and fraternity.
Instead of opposing it, we must learn to accept joyfully a form of societal life that is better adapted to our times and more in tune with the spirit of the gospel. When a system ceases to promote the common good and favours special interests, we must not only denounce injustice but also break with the evil system.
We must be prepared to work with another system that is more fair, just, humane and more suited to the needs of the day.
If socialism is the future, let us build it now because tomorrow is built on the threshold of today.
Labels: GUY SCOTT, PF, SOCIALISM
Read more...
PF seeks to join the Socialist International
By Kombe Chimpinde
Sun 01 Apr. 2012, 12:59 CAT
THE Socialist International Organisation is scrutinising the PF's application for membership to the institution. The organisation's secretary general Luis Ayala who is in the country to scrutinise PF's application to the Socialist International Organisation said politics need to deliver in a different and meaningful way to the people today.
Ayala, who paid a courtesy call on Republican Vice-President Dr Guy Scott on Friday, said people expect modern politics to bring responsible governance with solutions to common national problems that people were facing.
"By those solutions, we need to make a difference and I think the victory of the PF in the last election reflects that…this new look at politics," Ayala told Vice-President Scott who was in the company of PF secretary general Wynter Kabimba.
"The PF, if you read their manifesto, some of the driving ideas for the manifesto for the last elections are inspiring, they set forward a programme that brings the same principles, the same values as those of our political parties. We believe strongly in fairness, living in a society of inclusion, of equal opportunities for our citizens, good governments that deliver to the people, that deliver descent jobs, that deliver health, that protect our citizens, that delivers education because that is where you have more or less equality among citizens."
Ayala said many people had different interpretation of socialism but that for the organisation, their common belief was that socialism meant democracy.
"We belong to a family where socialism has only one big meaning and it is democracy. Our agenda hails governments that are socially responsible, governments which observe regulatory, sound policies and a good market economy too. We need to create jobs, open opportunities to our citizens," Ayala said.
He said he was pleased that the PF had identified the organisation as a family where they will feel comfortable and be able to share experiences.
Ayala also said the PF membership to the party would bring the agenda and expectations of the Zambians on the international arena.
"I think it is a good thing that the Socialist International Organisation will be part of the reference in the political life of the Zambian people. Many problems are beyond the reach of nations, we need to work internally and bring about common platforms on the big issues," said Ayala.
The Socialist International Organisation's current membership stands at 162, of which over 50 are governing political parties.
These include parties that have a socialist inclination such as the British Labour Party.
The PF's application is expected to be confirmed at this year's Congress, which will take place in Africa for the first time on August 30, after scrutiny of the organisation's ethics committee.
The Congress held after every four years will be hosted by the African National Congress party, and President Michael Sata has been invited.
And Vice-President Scott, who is also PF's vice-president, said the worst the PF could do is make mistakes that other governing parties had made.
He said it was better to learn from relevant experiences of other parties so as not make the same blunders.
Vice-President Scott also expressed optimism that the application of the PF to the organisation would be accepted.
Labels: GUY SCOTT, PF, SOCIALISM
Read more...
Fidel maintains confidence in Cuban socialist model
By Larry Moonze in Havana, Cuba
Sat 11 Sep. 2010, 11:50 CAT
CUBAN revolution leader Fidel Castro has maintained his confidence in the Cuban socialist model.
Launching the second volume of his memoirs at the University of Havana on Friday, Castro said contrary to the interpretation of US journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, the capitalist system could not work for socialist country like Cuba.
Castro, the leader of the Cuban Communist Party, confirmed that in his long interview with Goldberg he was asked if he believed that the Cuban model was still worth exporting.
“It is evident that this question implicitly carried the theory that Cuba was exporting the Revolution,” Castro said.
“I responded “the Cuban model does not work anymore even for us.” I expressed this without bitterness or worry. I now enjoy myself seeing how he interpreted it to the letter and consulted with Julia Sweig, analyst of the CFR Council of Foreign Relations who accompanied him and elaborated the theory he explained. But in reality my answer meant the exact opposite of what the two American journalists interpreted about the Cuban model.
"My idea as everybody knows, is that the capitalist system does not work not even for the United States or the world, which it drives to crisis after crisis, which are ever more grave, global and repeated, of which it cannot escape. How could such a system work for a socialist country like Cuba?”
Castro noted that Goldberg’s short story detailed that he Castro had made a mistake in a crucial moment during the Missile Crisis by asking then Russian premier Nikita Khrushchev to launch nuclear rockets against the United States first.
“It is true that he touched the issue and asked me the question,” Castro narrated. Textually as he puts it in the first part of his report his words were: “I asked him: at some point it seemed logical that you recommend to the Russians bombing the US. Did what you recommended still seem logical this time? Fidel responded: After having seen what I have seen, it was absolutely not worth it.”
Castro explained that “I had explained clearly if the US were to invade Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons, in these circumstances one should not let themselves suffer the first strike such as was aimed at the USSR when in 1941 the German army and all the forces of Europe attacked the USSR. It can be observed that from this brief reference to the subject, in the second part of the delivery of this news to the public the reader could not realise that if the US invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons”, in this case I was recommending avoiding the enemy’s first strike, nor did they realize the irony of my answer…of having known what I now know…In obvious reference to the betrayal committed by a Russian Prime Minister who, saturated by ethylic substance, handed over to the US the most important secrets of that country.”
Meanwhile, Castro said many of his Arab friends upon hearing that he had been interviewed by Goldberg got worried.
“From all this it can be deduced that great confusion exists in the world,” he said.
“I hope for that reason that what I say about my thoughts becomes useful. The ideas explained by me are contained in the 333 Reflections. Of them, the last 26 exclusively refer to environmental problems and the imminent danger of a nuclear war outbreak. I have always condemned the holocaust and have clearly expressed that in a few of them. I have never been an enemy of the Hebrew peoples of whom I admire the capacity to withstand dispersion and persecution for over two thousand years. Many of the most brilliant talents, Karl Marx and Albert Einstein, were Jews because it is a nation in which the most intelligent survived by virtue of the law of nature. In our country and in the world, they were persecuted and slandered. But this is just a fragment of the ideas that I defend.”
And Castro continued warning the US against attacking Iran militarily.
He said even if the war against Iran was of a conventional nature (non nuclear) it would be better for the US to switch off the lights and bid farewell.
“How could they withstand a war against 1.5 billion Muslims?” Castro asked.
“Defending peace for a true revolutionary does not mean giving up the principles of justice, without which human life and society would lack meaning. I still think Goldberg is a great journalist capable of explaining his points of view that force debate with amenity and mastery. He does not invent phrases. He transfers and interprets them.
"I will not mention the content of the many other aspects of our conversation. I will respect the confidentiality of the issues we covered while I await his extensive article with interest. I consider that all the peoples have the right to peace and the enjoyment of the goods and natural resources of the planet. What is happening in many countries of Africa is a shame.”
About the second volume of his memoirs which he calls The Strategic Counteroffensive, Castro describes in detail how the barely 300 rebels were able to sustain and defeat the fierce offensive of the 10,000-strong army of Fulgencio Batista.
The second book of the Strategic Victory launched in early August is an epic tale of the actions of the rebel army in the home stretch of the liberation struggle against the dictatorship.
It refers to the invasion by the guerrilla columns commanded by Camilo Cienfuegos and Ernesto Che Guevara and groups that were expanding into other provinces in addition to the actions taken by the three fronts around the eastern province of Santiago de Cuba. - Post Online
Labels: AUTOBIOGRAPHIES, FIDEL CASTRO, SOCIALISM
Read more...
Winnie asks how ANC will 'realistically' implement change
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA Aug 08 2010 13:50
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela lashed out at the African National Congress for failing to implement its own policies -- especially those concerning women -- in an interview published on Sunday.
"It is time for the
ANC to go back to the drawing board and to assess how it will realistically implement policies," Madikizela-Mandela said in the article in City Press.
She said the party needed to revisit their strategies and tactics in the upcoming national general council meeting in September, by getting concrete suggestions from ministries as to how they would deliver on their promises.
Madikizela-Mandela also passed judgement on the country's record of gender empowerment, saying that Lilian Ngoyi, a women's liberation icon, would be turning in her grave.
In the interview she did not directly attack Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya, the Minister for Women, Children and People with Disabilities, for failing to empower South African women. Instead she questioned the power that Mayende-Sibiya had in delivering real change.
"It should be within Mayende-Sibiya's purview to lean on key ministries such as justice, health and police, where implementation of policy continues to thwart women's access to protection, justice and health".
Madikizela-Mandela however was not disillusioned but rather critical, saying that the World Cup proved that the ANC could have done much to prevent the ills of society that effect women.
"I wouldn't say the ANC has failed women ... it's the responsibility of every South African to transform society", she said.
Madikizela-Mandela told City Press the problems of South African women were a lot more complex and would take more than annual women's rallies to solve their inequality. - Sapa
Labels: ANC, SOCIALISM, WINNIE MANDELA
Read more...
Mesa urges Cubans to forge towards fair, efficient Socialism
By Larry Moonze in Havana, Cuba
Saturday May 03, 2008 [04:00]
CONTINUE walking the path towards a fair, more humane and efficient Socialism, Cuban Workers Confederation (CTC) secretary general Salvador Valdes Mesa has urged. And Cuban President Raul Castro Ruz presided over the colourful May Day activities at Havana’s Revolution Square attended by some 1,386 guests from 173 labour and social organisations from 61 countries.
Addressing the workers on Thursday, Valdes who is also member of the Cuban Communist Party political bureau urged Cubans to maintain the achievements made by the 1959 Revolution.
“Let us ratify our determination to continue walking the path opened by the founder of the Revolution Fidel Castro towards a fair, more humane and efficient Socialism,” he said.
"It is fundamental to concentrate efforts on increasing production and productivity above all of food, the quality of construction and services given to the population.”
Valdes used the day which marked the 70th year of the labour movement in Cuba to urge Cubans to increase exports and at the same time reduce imports.
He said that could be achieved through a rational use of material and financial resources.
Valdes also called for implementation of cost-reducing and more efficient economic policies.
“We have to undertake a tenacious fight against all kind of social indiscipline, crimes and corruption undermining our workers' moral and ethical integrity,” he said.
Valdes said the world faced many challenges but he urged workers the world over to continue defending what was right.
He conveyed the CTC’s solidarity to all workers and peoples fighting for a better world.
Valdes said Cuba was aware of its challenges, particularly in the face of harsh US policy against the island.
He said Cuba had recognised what it lacked and what the island needed to go ahead.
Valdes said given the complex time that the world was under, discipline was important in order to build a sustainable society.
He said the wide ideological processes currently taking place within the Cuban working class were oriented toward increasing the country’s economy and productive development.
Valdes expressed confidence in the integration process under the Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America and the Caribbean.
He also saluted the Five Cuban anti-terrorist fighters jailed in the United States since September 1998.
Valdes said Rene Gonzalez, Gerardo Hernandez, Antonio Guerrero, Fernando Gonzalez and Ramon Labañino were an example of the Cuban people's unbreakable will to resist any hardship.
On his part, President Raul Castro did not utter a single word. He waved to the sea of Cubans who included representatives of the Young Communist League, survivors of the 1953 attacks on the Moncada and Carlos Manuel de Cespedes garrisons, members of the 1956 Granma yacht expedition from Mexico to Cuba, labour heroes and relatives of the Cuban Five.
Immediately after Valdes’ address, the march past led by a bloc of youths and students ensued with banners of the year’s May Day slogan Unity, Strength and Victory.
In an interview, 65-year-old Margarita Solor said she was ever more confident in President Raul Castro steering Cuba to better heights.
Solor, a retired restaurant cashier, said Cubans were better off under the socialist revolution.
She said May Day in Cuba was meaningful because the people were free.
“I am happy that within this week, the government announced the raising of pension,” Solor said. “Social security is important, it is another form of help to the people.”
Solor said earlier in the morning she heard someone saying revolutionary leader Fidel Castro was in attendance.
“We love Fidel,” said Solor. “And we are confident in Raul. There are reforms taking place… it is necessary that these changes continue gradually. We are not in a hurry. It is not like running but focused adjustments.
We have a country and a people to protect.”
Labels: CUBA, SOCIALISM
Read more...
