Re: [Marxism] Re: EU: LCR (Ligue CommunisteRévolutionaire) statement

[Michael Sims <mjsbpmagen-mxmail@xxxxxxxx>]

Lueko Willms wrote:
> replying to:
> # Subject: [Marxism] EU: LCR (Ligue CommunisteRévolutionaire)
> statement
> # From: Michael Sims <mjsbpmagen-mxmail@xxxxxxxx>
> # Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 10:35:57 +0200
>
>    Just noting that besides the vague reference in "A Europe of
> peace, cooperation and solidarity with the South" there is no mention
> of the French troups stationed throughout Africa and the remaining
> French colonies in South America, the Caribbean, and the Pacific and
> Indian Oceans, nor of the need to cancel the debt of the "Third
> World" countries.

The cancelling odf third world debts has no place in a constitution and,
in any case, if you have followed the manoevring of Washington on this
matter, well you will have seen that they are trying their best to turn
that into poisoned chalice - but that discussion really does not belong
 in a matter concerning the constitution.

The NO vote means no European Army being sent into battle with a mere
majority of the votes as opposed to the present arrangement in the NATO
which requires a unanimity of votes.

Hence if one did vote YES - then under the new constitution, French and
German troops would now be in Iraq.

With regard to French troops in Africa and the colonies - what are your
proposals and where are they written into the present constitution.

However, whatever the response, that is not the main isuue - our prime
concern is for that of the workers - wherever they are - and a society
in which publically owned social services and utilities may exist - if
that is the wish of the people - and that these matters shall not play
second fiddle to the wishes of a small minority of bourgoise who see the
themselves as the new absolutist aristocrats of the 21stC!

>    The LCR comrades may be proud of their campaign, but in the ballot
> box there is no differentiation against the "produisons français"
> ("let's produce French") of the CP, or the workers who voted NO in
> order to shut off the borders of the French nation state against the
> workers from Portugal or Eastern Europe, who are willing to work for
> lower wages, or against the bosses relocation of factories to such
> countries, or China ("delocalisations").

First, for the benefits of our non-european comrades here: In the EU at
present you can work anywhere in the EU and whether or not you earn less
than the locals depends on national law (eg minimum wages law and union
tariffs).

Under the new constitution, under Article III-144 it would be illegal to
restrict the sales of "services" from one country in another country of
the EU. This means that workers in one country can be sub-contracted to
work in another country but not be subject to that country's labour law
but to those of the home country. Hence agencies in Poland can
sub-contract their workers to companies in Germany, but the worker
receives none of the benefits of German work laws, (and is thus doubly
exploited) while the german workers are being under cut and the laws for
which they fought for are now made meaningless.

The only ones to gain are the employers.

By the way, NOT to vote NO just because the conservative right also
votes NO, (because they are against ANY integration of Europe) is called
in english, "cutting off your nose to spite your face".

The analysis of the vote, which I hope to post later after I have the
permission of the comrade who wrote it, shows a clear working class vote.

Also this factor of the right is being exagerated as are the claims that
workers are pre-occupied with foreign workers. It was part of the YES
vote campaign, which consisted, fundementally, in scaring people into
voting YES.

The far-right are always "opportunist" in anycase since their mandate is
to attract and steal votes from the left. (read Wolfgang Ruge' "Das Ende
von Weimar").

Would one vote against better social security because the fascists also
voted for it?

To say one cannot distinguish the motives for NO vote applies to the YES
vote. Are we thus to assume that all the YES vote are pro-bourgoise and
ultra-liberal? Of course not. They have been subject to a huge massive
cmpaign in which all the bourgoise parties, the Party Socialist, the
Greens, the press and TV - ALL - campaigned for the YES vote.

The difference between the yes and no vote is that the yes says yes to
the complete EU constitution whereas the NO vote means a NO against
various different parts and requires that the constitution be
re-written, but this time in consultation with the people instead of
presenting them with a fait accompli.

The final lesson, which has been well demonstrated, is that the NO
campaign of the left managed to turn around public opinion (which the NO
of the right had failed to do) and that they did that by working
together and not weakening themselves with childish, petty inter-party
bickering.

Let's try and learn from them  - the times are changing, as we well
know, and not only in France, but also in Germany and the UK, the Left
are learning to unite instead of letting themselves be divided.

As Lenin said (What Is To Be Done), those who cannot work with other
parties cannot do so because they are not sure of THEMSELVES - not
because they are not sure of the other party.

As long as we are aware, especially when together with reformists and
those further right, then we should join forces to achieve our aims.

Otherwise we are just like Marx's philosophers who merely interpret (and
analyse, analyse...) rather than those who want to change things.

In 1848 in Germany, what was originally a bourgoise revolution with
support of the workers turned into a workers' revolution.

Like the current EU constitution, the Constitution being discussed then
involved uniting Germany and assuring democratic rights etc.

The workers were for a united Germany - but when they discovered that
neither they nor their rights were not even mentioned in the proposed
constitution they revolted (again).

150 years later and nothing has changed. A constitution to unite in some
form a collection of states, which hitherto had been kept apart by their
conservatives, and is now being driven to unification by their liberals
- and oops thay forgot the workers.

Not q-u-i-t-e true - they remembered to forget them and then phrase the
worker unfriendly laws of the constitution into innocuous paragraphs
which refer to the prohibition of all restrictions on free enterprise
and which allows the existance of state owned public services ONLY AS AN
REMOTE EXCEPTION.


No, sorry, this matter is too important to be the subject of petty and
childish party rivalries.

Michael

p.s. re-the last paragraph. I am not in the LCR nor in an affiliated
party but in a party which "competes" with an affiliate of the LCR!

Where I am living, I am now pushing that we on the left co-operate and
organise around such issues as EU constitution - and I am doing that
after the magnificent results which the LCR,LO etc have achieved by
_working_together_!

        

        
                
_____________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de stockage pour vos mails, photos 
et vidéos !
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism