Mediaboss Marketing

Chileans vote today between two presidential candidates: one that could be the most radical leftist since Salvador Allende or another easily as reactionary as far-right dictator Augusto Pinochet.

The outcome of this contests stark contrast between left-wing Gabriel Boric of the Social Convergence Party and Jos Antonio Kast of the Republican Party a name inspired by the United States GOP will have impacts beyond Chile. The viability of Chiles major recent upheavals against neoliberalism, including the social uprising in 2019 that sparked the election of a constituent assembly to replace the dictatorship-era constitution, is being tested in this race. Whichever side wins will likely carry momentum into upcoming regional elections elsewhere in Latin America, like Colombias and Brazils presidential contests next year.

The two second-round presidential candidates are both out of the Chilean mainstream and in relatively new political parties, but the similarities end there. Boric is a thirty-five-year-old former student leader who rose to prominence during the Chilean Winter, a 201113 youth uprising against neoliberal education reform that culminated in the last decade with him and other young leftists in the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) coalition winning congressional office alongside more historic left parties. Borics coalition, Apruebo Dignidad (Approve Dignity) has deep ties to popular movements new and old.

Kast, two decades Borics senior, is the son of a former German officer with ties to the Nazi Party. The ultraright-winger was the only major presidential candidate to stand against the constitutional process and has continued to oppose abortion, gender, and sexual rights while Chile liberalized laws on issues like same-sex marriage.

These two candidates have opposing visions for Chile: Borics program might, in the short term, move the country toward social democracy, while Kasts could send Chile back to Pinochet-era repression. But reading the US media, youd think both were equally dangerous. As Ari Paul summed up in FAIR, mainstream American journalists have created a false equivalency between the two, where each takes the country down a different but equally destructive path.

A major reason Chileans have these two options today is that the first round of the presidential election in November demonstrated the collapse of the historic center-left and center-right blocs. Since the return to democracy around 1990, Chile has been governed by two coalitions made up of the Christian Democrats, social democratic parties, and, rarely, the Communist Party or two mainstream right-wing parties. Last month, these two coalitions finished not only behind Boric and Kast but also behind Franco Parisi a newcomer excluded from the debates, partly due to him living in Alabama. (Some suspect he has not returned to Chile to avoid revealing his assets.) His vote total mostly reflects a protest against the status quo, but also demonstrates the lack of faith voters have in the former governing coalitions after thirty years.

Of the seven candidates who ran in November, the right-wing contenders held a slight majority of the votes in the first round. Still, despite the disappointing results, there is a strong chance for Boric to win today. He has received the open support of the center-left parties and other major progressive candidates. Kasts hard-right positions are now under more scrutiny and have weakened his support. Boric can consolidate the left-wing votes among those committed to the constitutional process and those fearful of a return to Pinochet-era repression, winning a majority that escaped him before.

Boric continues to slightly best Kast in the polls as well. While these surveys can be unreliable, they did accurately predict Kast would take a slight lead in the first round. As polling becomes somewhat unpredictable as fewer and fewer potential voters respond to calls, neither side is too confident it can rely on surveys for an accurate level of support. In this election, as the saying goes, the only poll that matters is on election day.

The axiom is more relevant given that Chile bans releasing of public polling about two weeks before the presidential vote. In my time in Santiago as the official Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) representative among international observers, I have met with traditional left parties and the newer ones, all of which are supporting Boric. (DSA recently issued a statement in support of Apruebo Dignidad.) Those who are still receiving internal polling have said that the race is neck and neck.

Chilean law also prohibits electioneering in the forty-eight hours before election day starts. On Thursday, both campaigns held closing campaign rallies to demonstrate support across the country. Borics Santiago rally was estimated by Frente Amplio to have tens of thousands in attendance who came to hear not just him but famous Chilean musicians such as Ana Tijoux and Illapu, plus elected leaders such as Santiagos young Communist mayor Irac Hassler Jacob. The event had a rock concert atmosphere; Kasts closing events, meanwhile, were much smaller.

The large crowd was notable, as the first rounds closing campaign rallies were much tinier in comparison, according to people close to the races, with some events last November only reaching several hundred militants. The hope is that this surge demonstrates, at the very least, an uptick in youth enthusiasm to vote. In such a tight race, neither side can afford to lose any votes, and young people turning out could swing the election in favor of Boric.

Coincidentally, also on Thursday, Pinochets infamous widow and money launderer Mara Luca Hiriart Rodrguez died at age ninety-nine. Kast has used the opportunity to attack those celebrating her death as a threat to security. At Plaza Dignidad, I saw firsthand the gathering of nearly a thousand people to cheer her passing. Shortly afterward, the police closed the streets. It is the same playbook everywhere: a few protesters can lead to a massive police overreaction and the right wing taking advantage to play on some of the publics concerns about security.

These dynamics matter in such a close contest. If Kast can play on the publics fears, real and manufactured, he can pull through. Boric will need a base that goes beyond those fearful of a return to Pinochet-era rule in order to win. This is doubly true as Kasts supporters are now adopting the Donald Trump playbook, pledging to challenge the election results in the final days if Kast doesnt win.

Whoever wins today will not find governing easy. Congress, whose elections were set last month, is nearly evenly divided. The constitutional process continues and will be up for another plebiscite. While Boric will likely not face the street protests that Kast may, he will need to find a way to resolve the issue of pardoning political prisoners currently in jail, and work with a national police force he is seeking to reform and a military not known for its commitment to democracy. Kasts illiberal democratic efforts will undoubtedly be met with serious resistance, both electorally and through movements beyond the Left.

No matter the victor, only the Chilean people will determine their future. Their choice truly is between democracy and authoritarianism, socialism and barbarism.

Read this article:
For Chileans, the Choice in Today's Election Is Socialism or Barbarism - Jacobin magazine

Latin America is going bad; it is going very bad. These laconic words of Nobel Laureate Mario Vargas Llosa, one of Latin Americas most revered and respected intellectuals, came at the closing of a program on the relations between the United States and Ibero-America organized and hosted by Fundacin Internacional para la Libertad(FIL), the foundation he created to work for freedom in Spain and the Americas. I have known and collaborated with Vargas Llosa for almost three decades, and I do not recall hearing him so pessimistic - albeit realistic - in the diagnosis for a continent that he truly loves.

Nobel Laureate Mario Vargas Llosa speaking at the forum on the relations and perspectives of US ... [+] Ibero-American relations. December 10, 2021, Coral Gables. To his left, Alvaro Vargas Llosa

The event in question took place last December 10th, in Coral Gables, Florida. Two former presidents, Lenin Moreno of Ecuador and Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico, spoke and attended the event in person. Francisco Santos, former vice president of Colombia, was also there. Other major Latin American figures who participated virtually included Marta Luca Ramirez, vice president of Colombia; Mara Corina Machado, the lady Liberty of Venezuela; and Laura Chinchilla, former president of Costa Rica.

The event started with speakers from Brazil, which represents half of the economy and population of South America. The two speakers came from different lines of the Brazilian political scene: former judge and Minister of Justice Sergio Moro and Congressman Luiz Philippe of Orlens-Bragana. Both had a chance to grow in political notoriety with the popular movement that brought Jair Bolsonaro to the presidency.

Sergio Moro, who achieved fame through his courageous prosecution of corrupt politicians and businessmen and later became Minister of Justice of during the first two years of the Bolsonaro government, has joined a party with a new name that exudes virtue signaling: Podemos. Podemos means the same in Spanish and Portuguese: we can or yes we can. It is the slogan used by the populist left-wing party of Spain. For an audience with several libertarians and anti-socialists present, Moro was quick to clarify that his Podemos label follows Obamas yes we can slogan, not the Spanish socialists. This did not calm all the fears of those present that his candidacy will play to the advantage of former President Lula, convicted by independent judges and, as Mario Vargas Llosa remarked, jailed for being a proven thief.

Sergio Moro, former Minister of Justice, and current running for President in the Brazilian ... [+] "Podemos" political party, was the first speaker at the Fundacin Internacional para la Libertad program, December 10, 2021

Lula was released from prison and today he is seen as the likely winner of a hypothetical election against President Jair Bolsonaro. The latter, who was swept into office thanks to his promise to fight corruption and the establishment that supported it, has lost major support by appearing to yield to the power of entrenched bureaucracies both in congress and the judiciary. Many of the corrupt have been released and reforms have stalled, and thus many who in the past supported Bolsonaro have embarked on the effort of neither Bolsonaro or Lula. I have had opportunities to spend time with several key players in this camp, among them retired General Santos de Cruz, Deltan Dallagnol, Helio Beltro, and Kim Kataguiri. Since, due to the multiplicity of candidates, Brazilian elections usually go to a run-off, Podemos supporters hope is that a potential second round will be between Lula and Moro or - the best possible alternative - Bolsonaro and Moro. But many consider this wishful thinking.

An indication of this came in Vargas Llosas summary of his expectations for Latin America. Despite his respect and preference for Sergio Moro, when Vargas Llosa spoke about Brazil, he presented the probable second-round election as being between Bolsonaro, whom he considers a clown, and Lula, whom he considers a dangerous thief. Most of those attending the event have a deep admiration for the talents of Bolsonaros Minister of Economics, Chicago Boy Paulo Guedes. But some see his performance being weakened by Bolsonaros presidency and the powers which he was not able to rein in.

The other major economy of Latin America, Mexico, also had a prominent role in the program. Mexico is still the United States leading trading partner, and with the growing population of Mexican origin in the United States, it is becoming ever more relevant in the cultural sphere as well. Former President Zedillo was not optimistic about Latin America. As an example, he mentioned that the World Health Organization appointed him to the commission to study the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and how to come out of it. He said that of the ten worst countries in dealing with the issue, six are the largest Latin American economies. I have only been able to read the report of WHOs executive board, so I have yet to study the components of their analysis. Among countries with the highest rate of deaths per capita we see Peru, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico.

Most Mexican policy leaders I know were, and are, vehemently opposed to Trump. This includes Zedillo. He lamented, however, that he has not seen any notable change in direction with Bidens presidency. Zedillo recommended that policy players in the Americas focus on efforts to improve the rule of law and economic liberties in the region. But he stressed that rule-of-law efforts should bear in mind the stark inequalities existing in Latin America, where being born in one household or another can predict so many outcomes regarding human flourishing. Mario Vargas Llosa has praised Zedillo and regards him as a hero. But sadly, he concluded, many of the past victories achieved for true democracy in Mexico have been lost.

Another Mexican speaker, who joined virtually, was former foreign minister Jorge Castaeda. He complained that Bidens proposed plan to provide subsidies to U.S. manufacturers to produce electric cars would have a devastating effect on the Mexican car market. Brazil also has a large car manufacturing sector, but it is less integrated with the United States.

Peru, which currently has a populist left-wing president, Pedro Castillo, has the worst record in dealing with the pandemic (approximately ten times the world average of deaths per capita) and is on the verge of falling into a socialism which might bring back the violence that Peru suffered in the 1980s. Many regarded the election that brought Castillo to power as fraught with fraud. Castillo now faces serious accusations of corruption, and his future, like that of the country, is in doubt. As Peru is Mario Vargas Llosas native country, it is understandable that he is greatly concerned.

In the final round of the election that brought Pedro Castillo to power, and in a decision that brought criticism from the left (who wanted the French Academy to rescind Vargas Llosas recent nomination to the Academie Franaise) the Nobel laureate endorsed Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of his favorite villain, former president Alberto Fujimori (still alive but in prison due to corruption and human rights abuses). In the final election, and with a contested result, Castillo edged Fujimori in the final vote (by less than half of a percentage point).

Colombia, one of the U.S.s closest trade and security partners in the region, is also under threat. A new study released by the Heritage Foundation describes how Colombia confronts an asymmetric warfare by illicit armed non-state actors and urban terrorist affiliated with Venezuela, Cuba and Iran. The authors of the study, who included Celina Realuyo of the National Defense University and Joseph Humire of the Center for a Secure Free Society, call on the Biden administration to strengthen security assistance and encourage more trade and investments. A turn to the left in Colombia is a real possibility, and it will have dire consequences in the entire hemisphere.

Although I have followed Ecuador closely and have collaborated with several people in the current administration of President Guillermo Lasso, the event in Coral Gables was my first time with former President Lenin Moreno. Despite his first name and the presumption that he was going to pave the way for the continuity of a leftist government, he broke ranks and chose an independent road. I never would have thought that I would hear Moreno quote Isaiah Berlin (1909-1997), the brilliant philosopher and historian of thought and defender of liberalism, about how socialism tries to destroy individuality. Moreno also made a detailed list of the false promises of socialism, old and new.

In Bolivia, the civil society of several of its regions, especially Santa Cruz de la Sierra - a province larger than Germany - are in open defiance of the road to socialism down which the national government wants to lead the nation. I have no time to mention the countries of all who spoke at FILs Coral Gables event, but the entire program (over four hours) can be seen on YouTube (in Spanish). If you follow the Americas, and do not want to be fooled by imaginary constructs or biased analyses, I recommend you watch it.

According to Vargas Llosa and many experts, only tiny Uruguay which makes up approximately 1% of Latin Americas GDP and, for the time being, Ecuador seem safe from imminent danger. Uruguay currently ranks as the best country in Latin America in rule of law and second in economic freedom. Ecuador ranks much lower, but its president and several on his team have solid credentials favorable to a free economy. Most of the rest of Latin America, however, might fall.

I have left Chile for last - the country that, in the Americas, has consistently ranked first in measurements of economic freedom and rule of law combined. I label that the freedom with justice index. Despite Chilean achievements, a combination of well-orchestrated attacks by those who favor socialism, together with the failures of current President Sebastin Pieras administration, have brought Chile to the brink of returning to the dark days of Salvador Allendes socialism. In their first round of the elections, disappointed with the establishment, the electorate gave their votes to candidates that were the farthest apart. One, Jos Antonio Kast, is like a more outspoken Mike Pence of Chile, with similar economic and social views. The other finalist for the presidential election, Gabriel Boric, a young Chilean of Croatian descent, is like an old communist ideologue, but with a narrative and image closer to that of Obama and the AOC branch of the Democratic party in the U.S.

The final election was yesterday. The loss by Jose Antonio Kast, gives even greater disillusionment to those who work for a free society. How things will develop is hard to say. Friends of a free society, those who favor social order based on private property, personal and national security, and proven values, with institutions that protect individuals from the government, have considerable work to do.

Chile's President elect Gabriel Boric, of the "I approve Dignity" coalition, celebrates his victory ... [+] in the presidential run-off election,in Santiago, Chile, Sunday, Dec. 19, 2021. (AP Photo/Matias Delacroix)

The leaders of western democracies have not figured out how to deal with autocrats and regimes who, after an electoral victory, manage to take control of important institutions, persecute or jail opponents, and perpetuate themselves in power. Venezuela and Nicaragua are cases in point. Other countries are in line. As Jos Francisco Lagos, leader of Chilean think tank Instituto Res Publica, told me some days ago, today, winning elections is not enough. Enemies of the free economy are well prepared to wage war and destabilize any meaningful opponent. Can the anti-socialists join forces and stop socialist tactics in the Americas?

Will Latin Americans be able to reverse what seems to be a fall into even more socialism, corruption and misery? Many are pessimistic, but some have hope that an important awakening and a more energetic and strategic mobilization by anti-socialist actors in civil society can prevent the worst.

Read more here:
Latin America Toward The Abyss: Chilean Socialist Victory Reinforces Negative Trend - Forbes

The Dutch Reformed pastor Jannes van Raalte served congregations on both sides of the German border in the years leading up to World War II. Many of his parishioners viewed National Socialism as an understandable reaction to the injustices Germany had suffered in Europe, and they recoiled from comparisons between what they considered the relatively benign National Socialism and the evils of socialism and communism. Van Raalte disagreed, staunchly opposing Nazism from the outset. Already in 1932, he began to systematically expose fascisms philosophical underpinnings: National Socialism is radical, not in fighting against sin but in its glaring violence. Socialism, Bolshevism, and National Socialism are fundamentally akin to each other.

Three months after the Nazis took over the Netherlands, they arrested Van Raalte. His arrest warrant stated, Er war immer ein fanatischer Gegner des National-Sozialismus (He always was a fanatic opponent of National Socialism). After spending half a year in prison in Arnheim, he was transferred to Buchenwald, and he spent the last three years of the war in terrible conditions in Dachau. When the Americans arrived there on April 28, 1945, Catholic prisoners erected an altar draped with flags of the many nationalities represented, with a 65-foot cross placed at the center. The staunchly Calvinist pastors published memoirs, In het concentratiekamp, gratefully recall the Catholic mass, noting that the cross conquered the hell of Dachau.

This blog is written in loving memory of Rev. Jannes van Raalte (18941982), who was my maternal grandfather. I often think of him. These days, when I browse his memoirs, I wonder whether in our lifetime we will endure similar experiences.

The internet abounds with comparisons between todays vaccine mandates and the treatment of Jews and dissidents in Nazi Germany. The response is usually that these comparisons demean the Holocaust and may even signal anti-Semitism. This response is not without warrant. Unlike yellow stars, QR passports are not used to send people to their death in concentration camps. While the Holocaust killed millions of Jews, vaccines presumably serve the opposite purpose of protecting the vulnerable. Todays situation is not like that of Nazi Germany.

But could it be that our situation is more like 1932 than, say, 1943? Recent developmentsin particular the imposition of QR-controlled mandatesshould give us pause.

American courts have been on the alert and have checked the Biden regimes most blatant attempts at imposing vaccine mandates. But for a glance at what the future may hold, Americans would do well to look to Europe and Canada.

European nations are rapidly introducing the so-called 2G rule. Starting this February, only Germans who have been vaccinated (geimpft) or healed (genesen) will be allowed in restaurants, theaters, and many stores. Moving beyond mere incentivizing, the German government will make vaccinations mandatory for all. Outgoing chancellor Angela Merkel insists the new rules are a matter of national solidarity. Austrias government, envisaging a similar regime, is ready to impose $4,000 fines and even jailtime for stubborn refusals of solidarity.

Canada has not yet made vaccines mandatory, but all air and train travel in the country now requires the QR code. Provinces too have restricted the lives of the unvaccinated. Restaurants, cafes, bars, and theaters are out of bounds for many Canadians who refuse the jab. New Brunswick has gone so far as to allow even grocery stores to bar the unvaccinated: No jab, no food.

Churches too are pressured to conform and demand vaccination: While retrograde churches in British Columbia are limited to using 50 percent of their seating capacity, churches are allowed to operate at full capacity if they do the governments bidding and impose vaccine mandates. Quebec is even more unequivocal: It recently demanded that churches close their doors to anyone without a data passport. Fr. Raymond de Souza has rightly observed that the new rule bulldozes the very first of our fundamental freedoms, namely, religious liberty.

These mandates violate the unity of the body of Christ; as such, they are a most egregious denial of the heart of the gospel. The sad reality is that while Canadian church leaders have been at the forefront of encouraging the faithful to get vaccinated as an act of love, until now they have mostly been silent when it comes to protecting the integrity of the body of Christ.

None of this proves beyond doubt that we are headed toward totalitarian control. Incremental coercive restrictions on freedom do not inevitably have totalitarianism as their endpoint. But, to adopt Giorgio Agambens terminology, the signs of impending totalitarian biosecurity are everywhere. The speed of recent developments is breathtaking. Who would have thought two years ago that we would regularly be required to show QR codes along with personal ID?

It is also increasingly obvious that health concerns are not the primary factor behind the QR passports. A recent study in The Lancet suggests that with the Delta variant, the vaccinated are just as likely to be infected and to transmit COVID as the unvaccinated. And since the vaccinated are more likely to be asymptomatic than the unvaccinated, data passports are actually becoming counterproductive. With Omicron apparently evading vaccines for the most part, the argument for passports dissipates even more, while there is simply no argument at all for vaccinating children.

Indeed, when caught off-guard, officials admit the obvious: Transmission concerns are not the real reason for excluding the unvaccinated from public life. The question, then, seems unavoidable: If health concerns do not drive the push to universalize data passports, what could be the real motivating factor?

At the conclusion of his book, Van Raalte opines about the possibility of history repeating itself: I do not know if we will again have concentration camps at some point in the future. Lets hope not, but we cannot preclude the possibility. Writing in 1946, he was thinking of a possible Soviet takeover. Mark Twain once commented, History never repeats itself, but it rhymes. The push for vaccine mandatesnow extended to children ages five and up, and likely soon to include boosters for adultsshould make anyone with a sense of history sit up and take note. As Bruce Hindmarsh suggests, the harshest restrictions are likely still to come.

It is possible that a few years from now, we will look back with a sense of relief: Sanity may prevail, and governments may give up the nearly universally imposed system of QR passports. But lets not be nave. They will not do so without strong pushback against vaccine mandates and QR passports.

Hans Boersma is the Saint Benedict Servants of Christ Professor in Ascetical Theology at Nashotah House Theological Seminary.

HelpFirst Thingscontinue to speak the truth in love.Support our 2021 year-end campaign with a tax-deductible contribution today.

Clickhereto subscribe toFirst Things.

Photo by karel291 via Creative Commons. Image cropped.

See the original post here:
Control by QR Code | Hans Boersma - First Things

The growing wave of strikes and protests by Sri Lankan workers is rapidly moving towards a political confrontation with President Gotabhaya Rajapakses government and the entire capitalist class.

The global crisis triggered by COVID-19 has sharply impacted on the Sri Lankan economy, propelling workers and the poor into struggle against the intolerable social conditions and attacks on democratic rights imposed by the government and its big business partners.

More than a million workers have been involved in strikes and demonstrations since the beginning of this year, including hundreds of thousands of teachers, health workers and other public sector employees, as well as plantation workers. This social unrest has intensified across the country in recent weeks.

On the same day over 500 Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), port and petroleum corporation workers jointly demonstrated in central Colombo in protest against governments moves to privatise these enterprises.

Parallel to this industrial action, tens of thousands of poor rural peasants are maintaining protests that began in August to demand fertiliser and other agricultural subsidies.

The scale of this years industrial action and number of protests have not been seen since the betrayal of the public sector employees general strike by the trade unions in July 1980.

This years strikes and protests have united workers across Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim ethnic lines, highlighting a common class determination to defend living standards and social conditions.

These struggles, and their betrayal by the unions, starkly reveal, however, that militancy alone is not enough. Workers can only defend their rights by mobilising independently on a socialist program. The unions, which are tied to the capitalist system and the state, are opposed to any such struggle and are doing everything to prevent it.

The trade unions were compelled to call this years industrial action in response to popular anger over the pandemic health crisis, food shortages, the skyrocketing cost of essentials and government austerity measures. The unions soon betrayed the strikes, negotiating rotten deals with the government or big business.

On July 12, over 250,000 educators began the 100-day strike as part of their decades-long demand for higher wages. The government flatly rejected any salary increase.

The teachers and principals unions, including the Ceylon Teachers Union and the Ceylon Teacher Services Union, called various protests to deflect teachers anger. They then made a deal with the government, shutting down the strike and accepting just one third of the originally demanded salary rise, an increase that has not yet been implemented. The unions also agreed to the unsafe COVID-19 reopening of schools beginning on October 21.

This year, health workers have participated in at least 30 strikes and protests separately called by the unions, or under the Health Employees Trade Union Collective. In June, the union collective accepted a meagre allowance payment from the government and agreed to postpone a long-demanded wage increase.

The Sri Lanka Public Officers Trade Union Federation, which called the one-day national strike on December 8, initially wanted an 18,000-rupee monthly wage increase. But it told President Rajapakse that, considering the crisis of the government, it would reduce its pay demand to just 10,000 rupees. Finance Ministry Secretary S. R. Attygala flatly rejected the unions new claim, declaring that the treasury had no money.

Similarly, private sector unions have backed the wage and job cuts and high productivity demands of the big plantation corporations and the free trade zone companies.

All these unions have facilitated the Rajapakse governments relentless imposition of the economic crisis on working people. Slavishly appealing to the government and big business, the unions promote the illusion that workers can pressure the government and force them to increase wages, improve conditions and stop privatisation.

The government, however, confronts an unprecedented economic crisis and has no room to compromise. The growth rate last year fell to negative 3.6 percent, foreign reserves dropped this month to about $US1.6 billion, and the government on the verge of defaulting on foreign loans.

Finance Minister Basil Rajapakse recently warned of foreign currency shortages into next year, but reassured the public that the government would not allow famine in the country. In reality, mass starvation is around the corner in Sri Lanka with many already going hungry. These worsening conditions are part of the global crisis of capitalism with no national escape route for any country.

The Rajapakse regime is doing everything possible to ensure big business and investors boost profits, while assuring international financiers that it will maintain repayments on its huge foreign debts.

In October, the Rajapakse government began removing price controls, unleashing rampant inflation. The price index rose to 9.9 percent in November, measured on a year-on-year basis, the highest in 12 years. In contrast to these brutal social attacks, the government has given big business and foreign investors big tax cuts and other concessions. Listed companies reaped a combined profit of 292 billion rupees in the first nine months of this year, surpassing all historical records.

The entire policy of the government is that peoples lives are expendable. This is shown in its criminally negligent response to the pandemic that has led to nearly 15,000 deaths from COVID-19 and over 577,000 infections, even according to the highly undercounted official figures.

The Omicron variant, which is raging across the US, UK, Europe, Australia and other countries, is now in Sri Lanka. Colombo has completely ignored the highly infectious variant and continues with its murderous living with the virus policies.

The Rajapakse governments reaction to the rising militancy of workers and the rural poor is to utilise the unions to derail these struggles, while rapidly preparing for a brutal state crackdown.

This preparation includes the imposition of the draconian Essential Public Service Act, which covers about one million state workers and bans strikes and other industrial action with heavy fines and lengthy jail terms. None of the unions have opposed this draconian law.

Early this month, amid the deepening political and economic crisis, President Rajapakse suddenly prorogued parliament from December 12 to January 18. Sri Lankas big business Dailyft supported the decision, declaring that it would allow the president to take stock so as to better reflect the current and emerging economic scenario and articulate tangible measures [for] greater stability. The greater stability, demanded by the ruling elite is for ruthless suppression of working class.

Throughout his presidency, Rajapakse has stepped up the militarisation of his administration. Colombo insists that it has no money for salary increases, public health and education or fertiliser subsidies for farmers, while lavishly boosting defence expenditure.

At the same time, the unions and pseudo-left groups continue their efforts to tie workers to the opposition bourgeois parties, such as Samagi Jana Balawegaya and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, claiming that a broader front is needed to pressure the government.

These parties, which have a long record of suppressing the rights of workers and the poor, have no fundamental differences with the Rajapakse regime and would implement similar austerity measures if they were in power.

The working class faces enormous dangers and needs to take political matters into its own hands.

Firstly, workers urgently need to build action committees, independent of the unions and with their own democratically elected representatives, in order to take forward their struggles.

Second, workers need to break from every faction of bourgeoisie and their pseudo-left hangers on, and build a movement to take forward a political struggle against the Rajapakse regime and the capitalist profit system.

All foreign loans must be repudiated. The economy has to be reorganised from top to bottom to serve the needs of the majority, not the profit interests of a few. All large companies, plantations and banks should be nationalized and put under the democratic control of the working class.

To implement this program, workers must rally the rural poor and fight for a workers and peasants government, as part of the broader struggle for international socialism. Such a fight can only be carried out by uniting with the international working class. There is no national solution. The source of the attack on workers in every country is the crisis of global capitalism exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

To organise this international struggle, action committees must join the International Workers Alliance of Rank-and-File Committees launched by the International Committee of the Fourth International. This is the perspective of the Socialist Equality Party (SEP). We urge you to study our program and join us in this fight.

Sign up for the WSWS email newsletter

More here:
To oppose government austerity, Sri Lankan workers need to build action committees and fight for socialist policies - WSWS

In our times, expressionism is often conflated with the movement that succeeded it in the United States abstract expressionism. Mid-century painters like Jackson Pollock and Mark Rothko blurred away all traces of realism in a highly expressive, and individualistic, mode of painting that aligned with US propaganda during the Cold War. Decades before drip painting and the Seagram murals hit the American art world, expressionist artists in Europe were concerned with a figurative style capable of responding to war and economic hardship at the turn of the twentieth century.

Among the most prominent of these artists was Kthe Kollwitz (18671945). Coming of age amid rapid industrialization in Germany, Kollwitz worked across painting, sculpture, and printmaking, helping to give expressionism its radical consciousness.

In lithographs, etchings, and woodcuts, Kollwitz portrayed scenes of poverty and class warfare, devoid of color, using only line and shadow. As a propagandist and educator, she worked with socialist organizations to criticize inequality and oppression under the German Empire, Weimar Republic, and Third Reich. Her monochromatic designs, which appeared on posters and pamphlets, revived an aesthetic form of protest developed during the German Peasants War. That she herself produced an iconic print cycle on the sixteenth-century uprising speaks to her sustaining the old cause with the old tools.

Kollwitz was the first woman admitted to the Prussian Academy of Arts. However, her success was cut short when the Nazis banned her work. Dying just sixteen days before Victory in Europe Day, she never saw the ban lifted. Her experience losing children in both world wars led to a preoccupation with motherhood as the first line of defense. From peasant matrons sharpening scythes to mothers leading a weavers revolt, Kollwitzs women subjects transcend their traditional gender roles to rebel against the capitalist order that necessitated their poverty. Despite the many trials she experienced, Kollwitzs faith in socialism speaks to her sacrifices as a working artist who brought print to a higher plane of social commentary.

Kthe Schmidt was born into a progressive religious family in conservative Prussia. Her maternal grandfather, Julius Rupp, founded the first Free Religious Congregation, and her father, Karl, was a Marxist member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). Together, these men influenced her intellectual development. Father was nearest to me because he had been my guide to socialism, she wrote to a friend. But behind that concept stood Rupp, whose traffic was not with humanity, but with God. . . . To this day I do not know whether the power which has inspired my works is something related to religion, or is indeed religion itself.

Little Kthe, as her family called her, was the fifth of seven children, three of whom died young. Her mother Katharinas stoicism was formative for Kthes early notions of parenthood. The artist was prone to anxiety attacks and suffered from dysmetropsia, or Alice in Wonderland syndrome, which distorted her perception of size and self. These early experiences marked her introduction to art-making.

Originally trained in painting, Kthe was drawn to the work of the realist artist Max Liebermann who painted Germanys working class as well as the naturalist literary movement. It was after reading Max Klingers essay Painting and Drawing that she delved into printmaking, thanks to Klingers championing of the medium and its potential for poetic invention. Her earliest series, monochromatic line etchings adapted from mile Zolas 1885 novel Germinal, brought together these influences by depicting a miners revolt violently suppressed by the French police and military.

In 1891, Kthe married Karl Kollwitz, a doctor and SPD councilman who ran a clinic for Berlins working class. Through Karl, she met impoverished mothers and children, who would stay after their appointments to chat with her. Kollwitz soon became a mother herself, giving birth to sons Hans and Peter. Despite the labor of motherhood, Karl worked to ensure that Kthe could sustain an art career while they raised children.

Kollwitzs first artistic breakthrough came after experiencing Gerhart Hauptmanns naturalist play The Weavers, which dramatized an 1844 workers uprising against poor living conditions and low wages. Her print cycle A Weavers Revolt (189397) adapts the story across six sheets. The first three provide exposition: a family watches over a dying child in a cramped house filled with weaving looms, leading the father to conspire with fellow workers in a dimly lit barroom. The next two sheets exchange darkness for daylight, showing workers marching with pickaxes and mothers carrying children. In Storming the Gate, women lead an attack on a capitalists home. Kollwitz juxtaposes their dirty clothing with the lavish gate design, which is overtaken by workers hands.

Men carry away dead weavers in the final sheet, revealing subtle Christian themes of martyrdom and suffering. Biographer Martha Kearns notes that A Weavers Revolt transformed Kollwitz into an artist who celebrated revolution. After seeing the work at the Great Berlin Art Exhibition, a Prussian awards jury proposed nominating her, but Kaiser Wilhelm II refused. This decision, along with a highly publicized closing of Edvard Munchs first major exhibition, led Kollwitz and several jury members including Liebermann to organize the Berlin Secession. From then through the German Revolution, Kollwitzs art became inextricably linked with anti-imperialism, leading to further breakthroughs that converged with personal tragedy.

The turn of the twentieth century brought Kollwitz to Paris and London, where she studied European art history. While abroad, she created the large-scale etching La Carmagnole, which depicts a scene of French revolutionary women dancing to a battle hymn from Charles Dickenss A Tale of Two Cities. That same year, she began her second major print cycle inspired by Wilhelm Zimmermanns illustrated history of the German Peasants War, which Friedrich Engels viewed as the first revolutionary worker uprising of the modern era.

The seven screens of Peasants War (19018) follow a similar narrative to the weavers. Two opening sheets show a plowman bending to the earth and a woman embedded in dirt after being raped. The next frame, Sharpening the Scythe, portrays a tense older woman with tired eyes running a whetstone across a long blade. Only two sheets show the actual war, with a sea of peasant warriors fighting night and day, led by a peasant named Black Anna. This is followed by the haunting Battlefield, in which an elderly woman makes contact with a young mans corpse; her veiny hand and his face appear illuminated at the point of contact. The series concludes with survivors tightly packed in an open-air prison.

Peasants War was a major success, and Kollwitzs work was quickly acquired by institutions like the British Museum and New York Public Library. She ensured wide accessibility to her work by producing in high volume and selling at low cost. This meant allowing her work to be reproduced, and, in 1908, she began contributing to Munich satire magazine Simplicissimus, which was committed to publishing visual and literary work critiquing economic inequality.

She also designed propaganda that addressed working-class issues. Her 1906 poster for the Exhibition of German Cottage Industries, showing an exhausted working woman, was so distasteful to Empress Augusta Victoria that she refused to visit. Another for the Greater Berlin Administration Union, which denounced the citys housing shortage, was banned by an association of landlords.

After the assassination of Spartacus League leaders Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg by the Freikorps in 1919, Kollwitz attended Liebknechts funeral with thousands of supporters and became sympathetic to the Communist Party of Germany (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands, or KPD). Her memorial to Liebknecht is one of the results of that experience. It shows his pale corpse lying flat in the style of a Christian lamentation, surrounded by black-clad mourners. His side profile appears to glow, emanating bright streaks into the coat of a sobbing man who seems not to notice.

In 1913, Kollwitz cofounded the Organization of Women Artists, coinciding with her foray into sculpture. One year later, and just three months into World War I, her son Peter was killed in action. This sent the artist, who spoke with so many ailing mothers, into a deep melancholy that informed the remainder of her career. While working in a cafeteria for the unemployed, she experienced a long period of creative stagnation that lasted until the revolution.

As poet Richard Dehmel urged further action in the war, Kollwitz published a dissenting letter in the German press that quoted Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: Seeds for sowing should not be ground. Following armistice, her woodcut series The War (19181923) provided a searing critique of the conflicts effects on family life. One sheet, simply titled The Mothers, shows a group of women holding each other as one. This piece, which looks almost sculptural, became the archetype for her many sculptures of mothers protecting children, and an enlarged version is prominently displayed at the Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany to the Victims of War and Tyranny in Berlin.

The peak of Kollwitzs career came in 1927 with recognition by the Weimar Republic. She visited the Soviet Union with Karl to commemorate ten years since the October Revolution and became the head of the Master Studio for Graphic Arts at the Prussian Academy, but her tenure was short-lived. When the National Socialists came to power, Kollwitz signed an appeal with Karl, Heinrich Mann, Albert Einstein, and other intellectuals to align the SPD and KPD against the National Socialists, followed by a second attempt led primarily by Mann and Kollwitz in 1933.

Coverage in a Moscow newspaper led the Gestapo to question Kollwitz and threaten imprisonment, and eventually led to the removal of her work from German museums and her forced resignation from the academy. The Nazis stored her art in the basement of the Crown Princes Palace throughout World War II, claiming that mothers have no need to defend their children. The State does that.

Some critics have argued that Kollwitzs work was not political because she never portrayed the oppressor. Others have alleged that her style was out of touch during the birth of abstract expressionism. For Louis Marchesano, this notion is a result of the aesthetic purification that took place during the Cold War in North American and West German cultural institutions.

But Kollwitzs art, grounded in her radical commitments, and with its representations of working-class history, was deeply political. She aligned herself with many of the largest democratic and anti-war organizations. She was a member of the communist-led Womens International League for Peace and Freedom as well as the Workers International Relief. She designed posters for the International Labour Union, and her Never Again War illustration for the Central German Convention of Young Socialist Workers became an icon of the anti-war movement after her death.

Kollwitz embraced negative space, wielding shadow to define her scenes before expressionist filmmakers popularized this aesthetic. The darkness of daily life took its toll on her, but optimism persisted. This is evident in one of her last letters, to her daughter-in-law Ottilie, in 1944:

Every war is answered by a new war, until everything, everything is smashed. The devil only knows what the world, what Germany will look like then. That is why I am whole-heartedly for a radical end to this madness, and why my only hope is in a world socialism.

Read the original here:
The Radical Printmaking of Kthe Kollwitz - Jacobin magazine