|
1)
HOW NOT TO FIGHT GLOBALIZATION? A Tale of Two Cities (Nice and Porto
Alegre), by Alan Benjamin
2)
The World Bank, Alternative Forums, NGOs and "Civil Society",
by Frederic Thuillier
3)
Brazilian Teachers Slam "Participatory Budget", by the
Editors
4)
UN General Secretary Kofi Annan and the World Social Summit, by the
Editors
5)
Brazilian Workers Party (PT) Sweeps Municipal Elections: O Trabalho
Current of PT Charts Road Forward
********************
1) HOW NOT TO FIGHT GLOBALIZATION?
A Tale of Two Cities (Nice and Porto Alegre)
By ALAN BENJAMIN
In order to impose the lowering of labor costs and the destruction
of the labor force the world over, the international capitalist class is
resorting more and more to "neo-corporatist" structures and
institutions to co-opt the labor and social protest movements and to
destroy the trade unions.
In Seattle in December 1999, the WTO hosted a parallel Social Summit the
day before the opening of the WTO Conference with the goal of bringing
all the "opposition" forces on board the bandwagon of
"globalization with a human face." The objective was to lure
the unions and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) into the WTO
process by holding out the promise of introducing labor and
environmental standards into the core treaties and "free
trade" pacts promoted by the WTO, IMF, and World Bank.
In his keynote address to the Seattle Social Summit, new ILO
Director-General Juan Somavia put it this way. "What we need today
is a more fruitful collaboration between the ILO, the WTO, the IMF and
the World Bank with the objective of creating a Social Chapter within
the incipient structures of world governance. ... We need to create
structures where the fears and anxieties of civil society can be fully
aired and addressed."
Former WTO Director General Renatto Ruggiero was more to the point. He
warned the gathering that "if all actors in today's global economy
are not included to address the widening range of public concerns within
this global system ... they may turn to alternative solutions that could
possibly destabilize the entire architecture of the global
economy." And he concluded, "Certainly we must continue to
advance trade liberalization within the multilateral system. But unless
we achieve a consensus and cooperation with all the political actors, we
cannot build the necessary support for trade liberalization and the
global economy." [For a full report on the Seattle Social Summit,
see the Winter 1999-2000 issue of The Organizer.]
The Social Summit in Seattle collapsed as a result of the mounting
frictions between the industrialized countries and the countries of the
"Third World," which feared - with great reason - that the
introduction of labor and environmental standards within the WTO treaty
would be wielded for protectionist reasons against their countries. But
the drive to get the trade unions internationally to swallow the bitter
pill of the "free trade" agenda has not halted. Far from it.
In fact, this "neo-corporatist" drive has been given a big
impulse by two current events: one staged in Nice, France, on December
6-8, 2000; the other to be held in Porto Alegre, Brazil, at the end of
January 2001. Both these events should send a warning to all unionists
and activists genuinely concerned about waging a struggle to put a halt
to the "globalization" onslaught promoted by the WTO, IMF and
World Bank. The warning is simple: If you want to roll back the attacks
of the globalizers, don't fall prey to the trap of "globalization
with a human face."
Forging a European "Social Dimension"
In France, a whole array of NGOs joined the European Confederation
of Trade Unions (ETUC) in organizing a large demonstration and numerous
"counter-summits" in the city of Nice on December 6-8, 2000.
The largest action was a "March For a Social Europe" on
December 6 sponsored by the ETUC, an organization which, despite its
name, has nothing to do with the trade union movement but rather is a
direct construct of the European Union.
One week earlier, on November 30-December 2, a series of NGOs (ATTAC,
Friends of L'Humanité, Friends of Le Monde Diplomatique,
etc.) had sponsored in Paris an Alternative Social Forum titled
"One Year After Seattle." The event was aimed at building the
protest at the European Union's Summit in Nice and putting forward the
"movement's" proposal for a European Union with a "social
dimension." According to the forum appeal issued by the organizers,
the "European Union has the economic means to forge a social
dimension, on the basis of a Third Way, that could implement policies
against unemployment, insecurity, and the undermining of workers'
rights."
Consistent with this Forum Appeal, keynote speakers from the ruling
Socialist and Communist parties, as well as from the "far
left" -including the LCR, the French section of the United
Secretariat - spoke of "reorienting certain international
institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO ... so as to create a
globalization from below." They spoke of "building an
international citizen's movement, not to destroy the IMF but to reorient
its missions."
Needless to say, all these proposals mirror almost word for word the
proposals made in recent months by all the proponents of "trade
liberalization" - from the top officialdom of the WTO on down.
As projected, these demands for a "globalization from below"
and for a "reorientation of the IMF" were the central demands
of virtually all wings of the "protest" demonstrations in Nice
on December 6-9.
The December 6 demonstration in Nice called by the ETUC and joined by
scores of NGOs and "far left" organizations from across Europe
pushed for a "Social Europe" - that is, a European Union with
a "Social Charter." Keynotes speakers from the ETUC and NGOs
pointed out in unison that this was the first time that all the
proponents of a "Social Europe" had united around a
"common agenda."
But what is this common agenda?
One of the keynote speakers at the various rallies and
"counter-summits" was Walter Veltroni, general secretary of
the Italian PDS (formerly the Italian Communist Party). Veltroni told a
"counter-summit" that "after the great success of the
Euro [the new European currency], it is now necessary to construct a
European "social model" with a "social agenda." And
he went on to make clear what this agenda entailed. "What is
needed," Veltroni said, "is dialogue and cooperation among all
social actors. Only this way can we institute social peace, which is a
powerful factor to ensure economic growth." (quoted in Informations
Ouvrieres, Dec. 10-17, 2000)
In other words, according to Veltroni, the trade unions should cease to
function as trade unions defending the specific interests of their
members, and instead dissolve into the fray of the NGOs with the aim of
upholding the common interests of all civil society - including those of
the multinational corporations and the governments in their service.
Emilio Gabaglio, general secretary of the ETUC, echoed this theme in his
keynote address to the December 6 rally. "I am glad to be
here," he said, "because all components of civil society must
play a major role in the construction of the European Union. The message
of our demonstration is unmistakable: There needs to be the
incorporation of the trade unions and NGOs into the decision-making
structures in Brussels. ... We agree that Europe must become more
competitive, yes. But the new Europe must also contain a dignified
quality of life for all its citizens." (Ibid.)
French Workers Party responds
The French Workers Party, in a statement published in the November
29 issue of Informations Ouvričres [Labor News], took strong
issue with all these efforts to "democratize" or
"humanize" the European Union. It pointed out that the EU,
borne from the Maastricht Treaty, was set up precisely to attack
workers' rights, undo the so-called welfare state, and wipe out all
vestiges of national sovereignty enshrining the gains and conquests of
the workers' movement over many centuries of struggle. All these
anti-worker attacks, the statement noted, are being carried out
precisely in the name of making Europe "more competitive."
The French Workers Party pointed out that the World Bank and WTO are
themselves loudly championing the goal of "humanizing" the
institutions of international finance capital so as to co-opt the trade
unions into the entire web of globalization and to destroy them as
instruments for workers to defend their own specific class interests.
The Workers Party statement took issue with the concept of "civil
society" - which is being used increasingly to forward the notion
that social classes with antagonistic interests are a notion of the
past, and that it is now necessary, as a statement published by ATTAC
put it, "to create a participatory democracy in which all the
citizens, all social and economic actors (private and public sectors as
well as intermediate cooperative and associative sectors) can come
together to respond to the expectations and needs of all the
citizenry."
The French Workers Party exposed the myriad ways through which the
European Union and its directives attack workers' rights. In France, for
example, 50 new EU directives are to be implemented by the "Plural
Left" government in the coming months without even being discussed
or approved by France's National Assembly. The reason for this is that
the directives, all concocted by unelected technocrats in Brussels in
the pay of the World Bank and IMF, are considered "technical"
in nature.
These directives are anything but "technical." One calls for
reintroducing child labor at the age of 13. Another calls for laying off
women during their maternity leave and seriously restricting pregnancy
leave (in line with the recent revision of ILO Convention 103). Another
still calls for reintroducing night work for women (which had been
banned after bitter struggles by the trade unions more than 100 years
ago) - in the name of "equality between men and women."
The French Workers Party explained that the European Union could not be
democratized; it had to be dismantled. The treaty that gave rise to the
EU, the Workers Party continued, had to be repealed. And for this, the
trade unions had to remain fully independent and not be wooed by the
siren song of "globalization with a human face."
The statement of the Workers Party went one step further. It pointed out
that all the organizations participating in this Alternative Forum in
Paris - as well as the great bulk of the organizations participating in
the Nice "protests" and "counter-summits" - were
conspicuously silent about the specific 50 EU directives aimed at
dismantling the gains of the workers' movement.
Whereas the Workers Party had organized national demonstrations on
October 21 against these 50 EU directives, and whereas the Workers Party
had mobilized again on November 30 against the re-introduction of night
work for women, virtually all the participants in the Alternative Social
Forum were nowhere to be found in this struggle. "A mere
coincidence?" asked the Workers Party statement. Hardly. The bulk
of the sponsors of the Alternative Social Forum (and of the Nice
protests) were either members or "critical" supporters (or
even very critical supporters, such as the LCR) of the "Plural
Left" government.
When it comes to opposing the concrete policies implemented by the
governments in the service of the multinational corporations, the
proponents of "globalization with a human face" are rarely to
be seen.
This brings us to the second event that illustrates the dangerous trap
of "globalization with a human face" - and that is the World
Social Forum of Porto Alegre, Brazil, slated to take place January
25-30, 2001.
The World Social Forum of Porto Alegre
The World Social Forum has been convened by scores of NGOs
throughout the world. U.S. sponsors include 50 Years is Enough, Public
Citizen, Global Exchange, Labor Notes, and many others.
The World Social Forum presents itself as a grouping of "social
institutions and movements," NGOs, and trade unions. It claims to
represent the continuity of the "mobilizations in Seattle and the
April 2000 actions in Washington" - all of which "signaled the
emergence of a cross-border, citizens' movement ... that is slated to
become an international citizens' countervailing power."
The World Social Forum describes itself as the counter-summit to the
World Economic Forum held yearly in Davos, Switzerland: "Since
1971," according to the Manifesto issued by the Forum's organizing
committee, "the World Economic Forum in Davos has played a
strategic role in formulating the thinking of all those who promote and
implement neo-liberal policies the world over. Its basis of organization
is a Swiss foundation that has been granted advisory status in the UN
and that is financed by more than 1000 multinational corporations."
Hence the proposal that the World Social Forum should meet "every
year in Porto Alegre, the capital of the Brazilian state of Rio Grande
do Sul, during the same dates as the Davos Forum" with the purpose
of "formulating general perspectives, exchanging experiences and
setting up coordinating tactics and strategies among NGOs, social
movements, trade unions, associations and citizen groups."
What is the World Social Forum's political orientation? The answer is
contained in the Manifesto of the Forum: The purpose is to promote
"international trade with justice" and a "new trade
structure that is just and acceptable." The purpose is to
"democratize" the institutions of globalization, to ensure
that the "decision-making process of the international institutions
will be democratic and transparent."
Like the many "Social Summits" that preceded it (notably the
Copenhagen Social Summit of 1995) - all organized in tandem with the
majorinternational or European summits of the WTO, UN, IMF or the
European Union - this new World Social Forum does not represent a
challenge to global capitalism. It is therefore not surprising that the
World Bank web site is promoting the World Social Forum, reprinting its
documents for the information of all its readers and referring to the
event positively as "a new organizational perspective launched in
June 2000 in Geneva by the major organizations of civil society."
The choice of Porto Alegre, Brazil, as the location for the World Social
Forum says a lot in itself. This choice was in fact determined, say the
initiators in their own words, by the "rich experience" and
"example" of this city and state, which have been governed by
the "left wing" of the Brazilian Workers Party (PT), primarily
by the Brazilian section of the United Secretariat.
Ignacio Ramonet, editor of the French newspaper Le Monde Diplomatique
and one of the initiators of the WSF, referred to the choice of Porto
Alegre as follows: "Over the past few years, Porto Alegre has
become a model city, ... a sort of social laboratory that all
international observers are looking to with great fascination."
Among these international observers, as we noted earlier, is the World
Bank itself.
But what is the "rich experience" of Porto Alegre and Rio
Grande do Sul, which the organizers of the World Social Forum believe
should be emulated the world over as an example of how to fight back
against globalization? In what way are this city and state a model of a
"countervailing citizen's movement"?
To begin to answer this question one needs to examine the centerpiece of
the Porto Alegre "model" - and that is the city's
"Participatory Budget."
The "Participatory Budget"
Each year the state government of Rio Grande do Sul decides its
annual budget. The first thing they do is earmark a big chunk of the
budget - 17% in the year 2000 - to repaying their portion of the
country's $225 billion foreign debt.
The decision to continue paying the debt is hard and fast; it is not up
for discussion - given that the state has faithfully pledged to the
federal government that it will pay back its share of the national debt
to the international creditors - as stipulated by the federal
government's "Law on Fiscal Responsibility."
It should be pointed out that the repayment of the debt is in itself a
violation of the mandate of the people, who elected the Workers Party to
head the government of the state of Rio Grande do Sul in 1999 with the
demand that their social services be fully funded. Obviously, to the
extent that the state and municipal governments agree to pay their
portion of the federal debt, an amount that can reach the sum of
hundreds of millions of dollars each year, they must reduce the amount
of money allocated to schools, housing, healthcare and municipal
services.
Then, once the foreign debt allocation is taken care of, all the
"grassroots organizations" - that is, the associations
(including the employers' associations), the NGOs, and the trade unions
- are invited to "participate" in a marathon assembly to
determine the priorities of the budget. This is the "Participatory
Budget," which was first introduced many years ago by the PT-led
City Council of Porto Alegre and which today serves as the model for the
state government of Rio Grande do Sul.
Public sector workers, teachers, school administrators, shantytown
dwellers, and police officers are among the hundreds of
"participants" who are given time to argue why their
particular project or wage increase should be funded by the budget.
Every speaker with a request for funds is given a number. After all
presentations are made, the gathering proceeds to a vote. Each person in
the room is allowed to vote for one - and only one - priority. The
funding request with the largest number of votes is thus considered the
top priority. The other requests are ranked in decreasing order of
priority, though only the top three have any chance of being funded.
A trade union official who participated in a Participatory Budget
Assembly of the Rio Grande do Sul state government last October was
aghast at the way in which the workers were being pitted against each
other and against the community over an ever-shrinking portion of the
budget pie. "The inhabitants of the Vila Dique favella (or
shantytown) in Porto Alegre," the unionist stated, "pleaded
with the assembly to fund the titles to their lands to avoid their
eviction. They mobilized the entire community and hence outnumbered
everyone else. A large number of trade unionists with legitimate demands
for funding didn't even vote for their own request, out of fear of
seeing the shantytown dwellers forced off their lands and into the ranks
of the homeless." (quoted in Informations Ouvričres,
January 3-9, 2001)
Following the vote of the assembly, the elected officials are then
joined by delegates from the assembly (apportioned according to the
selected priorities) in a subsequent phase of the "Participatory
Budget."
There they must choose between repairing the sewage system (whose
collapse regularly results in deadly catastrophes in the favellas)
and paying the civil servants (who sometimes are not paid for up to
eight months). They must choose between closing the emergency rescue
centers in the neighborhoods (which are sometimes the only place where
tens of thousands of working families can receive minimum health care)
and putting off again until next year the installation of a running
water system.
At the end of the day, however, none of the priorities selected by the
assembly may be funded. All this depends on the amount of money
available, the feasibility of the project, and a series of other
factors. [See sidebar on the two-month Rio Grande do Sul teachers'
strike.]
But regardless of what budget item is finally funded, what is clear is
that the World Bank and IMF's dirty work has been carried out: The cuts
in wages and social services demanded by the IMF and World Bank have
been imposed with the full "democratic participation" of the
workers and community, who were lured into a trap by their misleaders.
This, in a nutshell, is "globalization from below."
Today, the trade union movement is being summoned with greater and
greater urgency by the institutions of global capitalism to buy into the
"globalization" process. Many union federations, including the
AFL-CIO, have taken important steps in this direction. The AFL-CIO, in
fact, has just been added to the list of endorsers of the World Social
Forum. But these union federations haven't yet traveled all the way down
the slippery path toward their self-destruction. There is still time to
pull back.
A full discussion of the dangers threatening the trade unions is needed
throughout the international trade union movement. It is necessary for
unionists at all levels to understand that the main institutions of
international finance capital (and all the governments in their service)
are hell-bent on dissolving the class line between workers and bosses.
They are hell-bent on destroying the trade unions (by transforming them
into one more NGO, among thousands) and creating a "participatory
consensus" around the implementation of capitalism's destructive
agenda.
********************
2) The World Bank, Alternative Forums, NGOs and "Civil
Society"
By FREDERIC THUILLIER
The World Bank published in early November a text titled
"Report on Development: 2000-2001" that includes a review of
its financial commitments to NGOs and "civil society." The
following information is provided:
o More than 70% of projects approved by the World Bank in 1999 included
the participation of NGOs and representatives of "civil
society." One seven-country project alone that was aimed at
bolstering activities of NGOs cost $900 million.
o A special budget was earmarked for NGOs that requested money (up to
$15,000 per organization) to participate in World Bank-funded seminars.
o The number of World Bank functionaries in charge of relations with
NGOs and representatives of "civil society" increased from two
in 1995 to 80 today.
So much for the World Bank. Another study published by the OECD in
October 1999 titled "Khateriimini" notes that "the
percentage of all aid supplied by OECD countries through the NGOs
increased from 0.7% in 1975 to 3.6% in 1985 to more than 5% in 1995 -
for a total of $2.3 billion. But this amount is far below the real sum,
according to the report, as it "does not include the financing by
the U.S. government to the NGOs."
These gigantic sums reveal the hoax of presenting the rapid growth of
NGOs as a "social phenomenon."
In years past, financing by international financial institutions and
governments went essentially to NGOs whose role was to accompany the
dismantling of public utilities and services (NGOs devoted to medical
care, education, garbage collection). What is new today is that an
increasing share of this financing goes to NGOs which the World Bank
refers to as Civil Society Organizations, or CSOs. According to the
World Bank, these are organizations that promote "social
causes" and "social protest movements" - in other words,
political action.
What is the mission confided to the CSOs. The World Bank "Report on
Development: 2000/2001" gives the answer. "Social tensions and
divisions can be eased by bringing political opponents together within
the framework of formal and informal forums and by channeling their
energies through political processes, rather than leaving confrontation
as the only form of release."
The report continues: "[The World Bank] acknowledges that it must
now pursue its strategies with entirely transparent procedures and that
it must engage in an open and regular dialogue with the organizations of
civil society, in particular those that represent the poor. The
international financial institutions and organizations have to support
poor people's coalitions around the world so that their voices can be
heard in the world debate."
In keeping with this mission of co-optation, the IMF itself reports the
following in a document titled "Globalization, NGOs and IMF: A New
Dialogue": "Criticisms made by NGOs against the system do not
necessarily target the IMF-recommended macro-economic stabilization
policies, because NGOs accept them generally as the necessary condition
for lasting growth." (September 19, 2000)
There you have it: "globalization with a human face." It's a
method aimed at getting the "citizens' protest movements" -
such as the ones staged at the European Union Summit in Nice in December
2000 and the World Social Forum of Porto Alegre of January 2001 - to
join the IMF and World Bank in jointly implementing the destructive
Structural Adjustment Plans.
********************
3) Brazilian Teachers Defy the "Participatory Budget"
In an interview published Sept. 7, 2000, in Rouge, the newsweekly of
the French section of the United Secretariat, André Passos Cordeiro,
general coordinator of the budget and plan of the Porto Alegre
municipality, described in great detail the workings of the city's
"Participatory Budget."
Toward the end of the interview, Cordeiro was compelled to acknowledge
that things don't always work according to script. For example, in May
2000, the public school teachers across the state of Rio Grande do Sul
waged a two-month strike to demand payment of back wages and a wage
increase to keep up with the rise in the cost of living. The state and
municipal governments led by the Workers Party had opposed the teachers'
legitimate demands, arguing that the federal Law on Fiscal
Responsibility prevented them from paying any more money for teachers'
salaries.
Cordeiro acknowledged the "understandable" concerns of the
teachers, but he went on to lament that the teachers chose to strike
instead of more fully utilizing "the entire breadth of the
democratic opportunity offered by a government of popular
participation."
What does this mean? It means that, according to Cordeiro, the teachers
should not have placed their specific interests ahead of those of the
rest of the other "civil society" participants in the
"participatory budget" process. Had they "better
understood" the character of the "participatory budget,"
they might have understood that it was necessary for them to tighten
their belts and accept the cutbacks, along with everyone else.
[In the January-February 2001 issue of The Organizer, we
will publish an extensive interview with Jorge Buchabqui, former Human
Resources Secretary of the Rio Grande do Sul state government, who
resigned from his post in protest of the state government's pro-IMF
policies and the fraudulent character of the "participatory
budget" - which, he said, had become "a straitjacket in the
hands of the government to contain all the demands of the
workers."-ed.]
But in reality, contrary to what Cordeiro would have us believe, the
teachers understood perfectly the phony role of this "participatory
democracy" - and that is exactly why they went on strike and why
they assailed the state government, demanding a wage increase - which
they eventually won. - A.B.
********************
4) UN General Secretary Kofi Annan and the World Social Summit
United Nations General Secretary Kofi Annan sent a message on Nov.
20 to the governor of the Rio Grande do Sul, Olívio Dutra, indicating
his full support for the World Social Forum, which will be held in Porto
Alegre at the end of January 2001. Annan's message states, in part:
"The declarations made by the head of states in the United Nations
Millennium Summit [held in New York last fall], and the common
declaration adopted by the meeting prove that the underlinement of the
unequal benefits brought by globalization and the building of actions to
better the lives of peoples over the world are in the top priorities of
the international community. ... I wish you all the success possible.
..." (source: WSF web site)
A closer look at the declaration adopted by the UN Millennium Summit
reveals that it is a document fully committed to the corporate
"free trade" agenda, which, its signatories all agree, is the
"only viable engine of economic growth and prosperity." Never
mind that in the name of "free trade" millions of jobs are
being destroyed the world over and that working and living conditions
are being driven back a few hundred years - only to provide prosperity
for a tiny minority of ruling rich.
In his address to the UN Millennium Summit titled "We the
People," Kofi Annan does not take issue with the corporate global
agenda. In fact he warns that "what is needed is not new shackles
for world trade." Instead he calls for "extending the benefits
of free trade" to those who have been left out. He proposes doing
this by creating a "Global Compact" between business, civil
society and the United Nations whose major task, he says, will be to
urge "the transnational corporations, which have been the first to
benefit from globalization, to now take their share of responsibility
for coping with its effects." (source: UN Millennium Summit web
site)
Let there be no doubt about the intentions of the heads of state who
signed the UN Millennium Summit declaration - all of whom in their own
countries are dutifully implementing the IMF's austerity and structural
adjustment plans. Their goal is not to promote economic justice for the
peoples of the world or to ensure genuinely fair trade based on full
respect of the sovereignty of the world's nations and peoples.
If these heads of state wished to accomplish these objectives they
could, without great difficulty, proceed to dismantle the WTO, repeal
the GATT treaty, abrogate NAFTA and the European Union's Maastricht
Treaty, ratify and implement in their own countries the 182 original ILO
conventions protecting labor rights, and cancel the crushing debt of the
"Third World" countries - to name but a few key measures to be
taken.
No. Their goal is altogether different. It is to enlist all members of
"civil society" - first and foremost the trade union movement
- into supporting the "free trade" agenda of the multinational
corporations and the governments in their service.
As the Appeal issued by the Open World Conference in Defense of Trade
Union Independence and Democratic Rights (OWC), which was held last
February in San Francisco, so aptly put it:
"The Millennium Summit has been convened by the United Nations,
with the full support of the WTO, with the explicit purpose of advancing
the integration-cooptation agenda of the multinationals. ... This Summit
is designed to bring together all the players of the so-called civil
society ... into a common framework to promote more 'democratic' and
'participator' free trade pacts and other anti-worker policies."
This is why, more than ever, it is necessary to maintain an unyielding
stance in defense of the independence of the trade unions, which is the
necessary condition for waging an effective fightback against the deadly
assault promoted by global capitalism. And that is why it is especially
important for unionists and activists to build massive support across
the United States and around the world for the International Conference
Against Deregulation and For Labor Rights For All, to be held in Berlin
in February 2002! - A.B.
*********************
5) Fulfill the Mandate of the People:
No the Debt, Satisfy the Workers' Demands!
(statement of O Trabalho)
The municipal elections have just taken place. Millions voted for the
Workers Party (PT) because they can no longer accept a life of untold
misery. They want land and an end to the dictatorship of the latifundio
[gigantic estates owned by a handful of feudal-type landlords-ed.]. The
workers want their rights. The youth want a future. With their votes,
millions said they want healthcare for all, education, jobs, better
wages, and a life with dignity.
That is why they voted for the PT - with millions of vote to signify:
Down with FHC [President Fernando Henrique Cardoso] and the IMF!
No to the destruction of the Brazilian nation!
No to the payment of the foreign debt, which is not our debt!
Who is FHC? He is a man at the helm of a government that has mounted one
attack after another against working people over the past five years.
The government has clubbed the public sector workers. It has increased
part-time and precarious work, having modified Article 7 of the Labor
Code. It has rolled back holiday pay, the right to the 13th month bonus
pay, and maternity leave. It has thrown more and more children and youth
into the streets, as schools are being closed in alarming numbers.
It is a government that is turning the entire Amazon region over to the
multinational corporations under a U.S. protectorate, permitting the
installation of CIA and U.S. military bases to pursue its Plan Colombia.
It's a government that supported Fujimori in Peru and that has backed
the imperialist policies in Palestine.
Today, the workers and peoples are rising up against Fujimori. They are
resisting the Plan Colombia. They are demonstrating in the streets
against the accords that target the Palestinian people.
In Brazil, this same movement was expressed with the millions of votes
for the PT - against FHC.
Today, 30 million Brazilians in 187 cities - including Sao Paulo, Recife,
Porto Alegre, Goiania, Belem and Aracaju - will be governed by the PT.
In 187 cities the people say: Oust the representatives of the FHC and
the IMF from the municipalities. Sť
And now what is to be done?
The president of Citibank in Brazil declared, immediately after the
election: "Henceforth, the PT will be under great scrutiny. We will
now be able to verify how it will act in government. The PT could very
well be an alternative in the 2002 presidential election if it behaves
well. This is the PT's big test."
What kind of proof is being demanded?
For the World Bank and the IMF things are clear: They demand that the PT
continue and deepen the policies of FHC; that is, policies that
privatize, deregulate rights, and destroy public services. They demand
policies aimed at permitting the municipalities to pay back their
portion of the foreign debt to the federal government.
But was this the mandate given by the people to the PT for governing the
municipalities? Clearly not.
The pressures on the PT will be enormous.
In Sao Paulo, for example, Marta Suplicy [newly elected mayor-ed.]
admitted having invited the PSDB - even if the latter refused the offer
for the time being - to join its municipal government. But what is the
PSDB? It is the party of FHC.
Today, also in Sao Paulo, Joao Sayad was named Financial Secretary of
Marta's new government. Who is Sayad? He is a banker and a direct agent
of the IMF.
Did the workers who voted for the PT vote for Joao Sayad and the PSDB?
No. They voted for the PT municipalities, without representatives of the
capitalist class, to stand at their side and champion the demands of the
workers and oppressed.
The IMF and World Bank - who in Brazil are represented by FHC - are
going to increase their pressure on the PT, urging it to implement its
anti-worker agenda, beginning with the payment of the foreign debt
apportioned to the municipalities. In the city of Sao Paulo, this will
mean the payment of close to 1 billion Reais [or US $185 million] in
2001 alone.
Did the workers who voted massively for the PT in Sao Paulo vote for
this money to be taken out of the allocations for healthcare, education,
wages of public-sector workers - all so that the debt could be repaid?
The answer is self-evident. Sť
Those who have agreed to abide by the federal government's Law on Fiscal
Responsibility say that there is no alternative but to repay the debt.
They say that the "reality of globalization" offers no other
realistic choice to the municipalities but to work within the parameters
of debt repayment established by the federal government.
We disagree. There is another choice to be made. It is possible to
confront the IMF and World Bank by seeking the support of the workers,
the youth, the people.
The millions of people who voted for the PT - the very same ones who
have mobilized in increasing numbers in powerful strike battles - gave
the PT a mandate to fight back. They are ready to fight back. They want
the people's mandate to be respected.
Each municipality is confronted with a choice: Either pay the debt or
satisfy the demands of the workers and the people.
To pay the debt is to satisfy the demands of the bankers and the IMF. It
is the policy of the "Participatory Budget" - which in the
state of Rio Grande do Sul has proven to be nothing but a weapon in the
hands of the IMF and the government to enlist the participation of the
workers' organizations in the actual implementation of the drastic cuts
in healthcare, housing, welfare and education. In fact, the teachers who
waged a bitter two-month strike last March against the state government
had to break with the straitjacket of this "Participatory
Budget" to win their demands.
To enact such a policy is to destroy the Workers Party.
In Sao Paulo, for example, the last Municipal Convention of the PT in
May 2000 adopted a resolution calling for the PT, in the event it won
the mayoral election, to cancel the payment of the debt to the federal
government.
So the choice is clear for the new municipal government that is about to
take office in January. Either it carries out the mandate of the people
- the mandate, moreover, that was approved by the highest body of the PT
in the municipality: its Municipal Convention - or it bends to the
exigencies of Citibank. Sť
If the PT municipalities, beginning in Sao Paulo, were to refuse to pay
the debt in order to meet the demands of the working population, this
would represent a first step on the path to a break with FHC-IMF. It is
a step that would be supported enthusiastically by working people. It
would open the way to large-scale mobilizations to build a nationwide
movement in the streets to defend the PT municipalities against FHC-IMF.
Sť
The road forward needed to carry out the mandate of the people requires
that the PT, incorporating the municipalities in a mass movement of
resistance and struggle, call for an end to the FHC government. It
requires that the PT make known its willingness to form an Emergency
Government, supported by the CUT [the trade union federation], together
with all popular organizations and all sectors willing, through their
actions, to break with IMF and the foreign debt. Sť The first task of
such an Emergency Government would be to convene nationwide elections to
a Sovereign Constituent Assembly that could conquer genuine democracy
and the sovereignty of the nation.
We in the O Trabalho current do not have interests different from those
of the workers and the oppressed, or different from those of the
membership of the PT.
We reaffirm: The debt is not the people's debt. The people gave a
mandate to their representatives: Cancel the debt! Meet the needs and
demands of the workers and poor!
Yes, another road is possible. The solution calls for relying on the
workers, youth, peasants, shantytown dwellers, and all the oppressed.
That is why we in O Trabalho will support all steps, all decisions, that
are taken to oppose the payment of the debt.
We call on all workers to discuss with us these proposals. Isn't it the
moment to say "No" to the payment of the debt? Isn't it the
moment to get rid of FHC and the IMF?
We call on all workers and youth who agree with this point of view - who
agree that the time has come to organize the fightback - to join the
ranks of O Trabalho, current of the PT, so that, together, we can be
more effective in organizing this fighting movement.
Sao Paulo, November 12, 2000
Back to
ILC Newsletter Index Back to
ILC Debate over WSF Index
|
Open World Conference of Workers