Thursday, August 31, 2017

Republicans Want to Cut One Billion Dollars From Disaster Relief to pay for Trumps' Wall

On the New Soviet Constitution: Viacheslav Molotov Speech delivered at the extraordinary eighth Congress of Soviets of the USSR.

The strength of socialist democracy lies precisely in the fact that, having arisen as a result of the victory of the proletarian dictatorship, it is growing and expanding day by day, particularly with the growth of culture among the masses. And this reflects the mighty growth of our strength. After the complete victory of socialism in our country the democracy of the Soviet system is developing with greater force and on a wider scale than ever; and, in its turn, it serves as a powerful lever for the further acceleration of the growth of the forces of socialism. The development of democracy in our country reveals the superiority of socialist democracy over the democracy of bourgeois states.

But here I must make a slight digression and deal with a very peculiar form of “democracy”, that of German fascism.

In order to free the hands of the ruling capitalist oligarchy, the German fascists are consistently imbuing the masses, and all the members of the National-Socialist Party itself, with the following idea: “My leaders know what they want. And if they do not know, how can I know and decide?” In other words, this is “democracy” according to the principle: “Don’t dare think for yourself, it will be the worse for you.”

That is why all the Nuremburg congresses are so unlike real congresses. They are-not congresses but something else.

These “congresses” meet only to listen to two or three speeches by “Fuehrers”. No discussion or debates are permitted at these “congresses”. No decisions or resolutions are voted on. The masses are permitted to do only one thing and that is to put up with the consequences of such congresses…

A comparison between Soviet democracy and the democracy .of bourgeois countries, even in its best forms, reveals the radical difference between them and the superiority in principle of the former over the latter. One thing is clear, and that is that socialist democracy alone is democracy for the toilers, democracy for the real masses of the people who have emancipated themselves from the rule of the exploiters.

Whoever wants to convince himself of the democratic character of our system must not forget the main thing. And the main thing in the Soviet system, as you know, is what is set forth in Article 6 of the Constitution:

“The land, its deposits, waters; forests, mills, factories, mines, railways, water and air transport, banks, means of communication, large state-organized agricultural enterprises, such as state farms. (sovkhoz), machine and tractor stations and the like, as well as the principal dwelling fund in the cities and industrial localities, are state property, that is, the property of the whole people.”

Today all this belongs to the whole people. What more consistent democracy can anyone desire?

Let any other state introduce such measures. If it does we shall admit that the democracy of that state is genuine, universal democracy, such as the democracy in the U.S.S.R.

The new Constitution now gives all citizens of the U.S.S.R. equal rights. It may even be said that the former property-owners have returned-although in a special way-to the administration of property. But today, in taking part in this work through the medium of the toilers’ Soviets, they have become immeasurably richer, for they are now taking part in the administration not of private property but of the property of the whole people.

Of course, there is a deep thought at the back of the minds of the toilers of our country on this matter. They say: “The ‘former rich’ are receiving rights, that’s not bad; but we expect them to work honestly!”

Comrade Stalin emphasized the democratic character of our system by yet another remarkable fact. He said:

“The Soviet government liquidated the landlord class and transferred to the peasants more than 150,000,000 hectares of former landlord, government and monastery land; and this was over and above the lands that were already in the possession of the peasants.”

We would like to see any bourgeois state, transferring to the peasants without compensation; not 150,000,000 hectares, perhaps, but only 15,000,000 hectares of landlord and other land. We would then be prepared to admit that such a state was beginning to make a serious approach to the position of real democracy, democracy for the toilers.

And yet, somehow, we do not hear that the landlords, the nobility and the monastic hierarchy, consider, from their class point of view, this transfer of land to the peasants to be “democratic”. It must be admitted that revolutionary democracy is alien to them.

In 1917, Socialists such as the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks were in power in our country. Everybody knows that they did not use their power for the purpose of transferring the land to the peasants, but for the purpose of procrastination in this matter.

Here, too, they proved to be the direct allies of the landlords and the bourgeoisie. And yet, how they boasted about their devotion to “democracy”! Hence, in our times, Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary “democracy” plays into the bands of the capitalists, landlords, kulaks, nobility and the priests. Hence, “democracy” as conceived by the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries has nothing in common with genuine democracy, which the people need so much.

  One other example of Soviet democracy.

The celebrated author A. N. Tolstoi spoke here, just before me. Who does not know that this is ex “Count Tolstoy? And now? One of the best and most popular authors in the Land of Soviets is Comrade Aleksei Nikolaevich Tolstoi. `History is to blame for this.’ But the change was in the right direction. On this all of us, including A. N., Tolstoy himself, are agreed.

The new Constitution will consolidate our profoundly democratic system more than ever. And by the fact that, side by side with the distinct reference to the definite duties of the citizens of the USSR, it firmly guarantees such right as the right to work, the right to rest and leisure, the right to material security in old age, the right to education, complete equality of rights for men and women, complete equality for the nations and races in the USSR etc., we loudly proclaim how socialist democracy should be interpreted.

Even the most perfect forms of democracy in bourgeois states are in reality very restricted and tightly compressed within the limits of what is actually the rule of the bourgeois minority over the people. No form of democracy under capitalism extends, nor can extend, beyond the limits of the rule of the privileged minority of the bourgeoisie; it fits the rights and liberties of the people to the hard bed of Procrustes.

With the aid of its ideologists and its press the bourgeoisie succeeded in acquiring for wretched capitalist democracy, the democracy of ‘the bourgeois states, fame as democracy in general, as the “above-class” form of democracy, and even as the “human” form of democracy. In this respect the dexterity of the bourgeois and Social-Democratic politicians and “theoreticians” has been brought to the perfection of that of a juggler.

In actual fact, however, not a single bourgeois state grants, or has ever granted ‘the toilers, even a fraction of the genuine democratic rights and liberties which are enjoyed by the toilers of the USSR, and which they will enjoy to an even greater degree under the new Constitution.

In the guise of “people’s democracy”, bourgeois democracy eulogizes what at best, are the extremely, restricted and extremely curtailed rights of the toilers under the bourgeois system, under which the press, the print shops, printing paper, premises, all the capital and all the power, and hence, actually all rights, belong to the ruling classes. The toilers merely get the crumbs from the rich man’s table.

Nevertheless, the workers and the other working strata of the population have learned to use even these “curtailed” bourgeois liberties, even these restricted democratic rights in their own interests for the political enlightenment of the masses, and for the preparation of the forces necessary for the impending battles. One can understand, therefore, why. the workers, and all democratic elements in capitalist countries, are waging such a determined struggle to preserve, and to enlarge, even minor bourgeois-democratic rights and liberties.

On the other hand, it is precisely for this reason that, in those countries where they have already lost confidence in, the possibility of influencing the masses the ruling bourgeois classes are adapting the fascist methods of open bourgeois, terrorist dictatorship. It may be said, of course, that one cannot hold on for long by means of terrorism and by committing endless acts of violence against the masses. But evidently the fascist bourgeoisie reasons as follows: “Even if it’s only a day, it’s mine.”

Is it surprising, therefore, that not only the workers and peasants but all honest democratic elements among the petty bourgeoisie and even among the middle bourgeoisie more and more openly refuse to support fascism and fascist-inclined groups?

The rapidity with which the pillars of fascism are being undermined is evident from a number of facts. Not only do the fascists today refuse to tolerate any survivals of democracy, in their own countries, where, as it is, the people, are “silent, for they prosper”, but, it is characteristic that they regard the very existence of democracy, even democracy in other countries, as a danger to themselves.

Therefore, utterly disregarding state frontiers and violating all international laws and customs, the fascists of countries well known to. all are interfering with sword in hand, and. with German “Heinkels” and Italian “Savoys” in the air, in the internal affairs of another country, the people of which refuse to tolerate such gentlemen. It is not without reason that certain good folk, seeing all this going on, say compassionately about the fascists: “Poor fellows, they seem to be in a desperate hurry. Pray God they don’t break their necks.”

Our attitude toward democracy as one of the most precious boons to the toilers is well known. The successes of democracy in any country are near and dear to us. We rejoice when democratic rights are won no matter where the masses of the people are marching, forward, along this road.

We can have no common language with fascism, the danger of which we do not intend either to belittle or to exaggerate. But we are heart and soul and, what is more, in actual practice, with those who are fighting the fascist reactionaries. We are entirely on the side of those who have at heart the interests of “the whole of advanced and progressive humanity”. (Stalin)

The adoption of the new Constitution will further enhance the significance of the USSR as the bulwark and beacon of democracy.

The adoption of the new Constitution, with its complete democratization of the state, which increases the possibilities of achieving further and still greater success in improving the life of the peoples of the USSR will render invaluable assistance to international socialism, and will give an impetus to the struggle of the workers, peasants and all the oppressed for their rights, for their complete emancipation from fascism, and from capitalism, which engenders and fosters fascist regimes.

The more deeply the Stalin Constitution permeate our lives, the more widespread will be its influence as the, Constitution of socialism and of consistent democracy, not only in the USSR, but far beyond its frontiers-and the wider will its revolutionary influence spread among the masses of the toilers who are fighting for their emancipation from fascism, imperialism and colonial oppression.

Source: V. M. Molotov, On the New Soviet Constitution. Moscow:

Cooperative Publishing Society of Foreign Workers in the U.S.S.R, 1937

Original Source: Rech tov. V. M. Molotova o novoi konstitutsii, Pravda, 30 Nov 1936

Warlords of the World Assemble at UK Arms Fair

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Domenico Losurdo on Liberalism - A Thinker for the 21st Century ?

Interview with Domenico Losurdo on Liberalism for The Platypus Review, conducted by Pam Nogales and Ross Wolfe (3-17-2012) from Platypus Affiliated Society on Vimeo.

Democracy and Class Struggle appreciates many of the historical insights of Domenico Losurdo on Liberalism but we strongly disagree with the market being a good legacy of liberalism - this has led Domenico Losurdo to support Dengist revisionist China.

We have outlined elsewhere the two hundred year two line struggle between competitive market socialism and collective socialism particularly in our book Marxism Against  Market Socialism and we have criticized Domenico Losurdo before for his views on political economy.


US Refuses to Accept Iran as a Regional Power : U.S. Attempts to Destabilize Iran Have Failed

Democracy and Class Struggle says the sanctions on Iran accelerated the Iran Nuclear Program cannot help think about North Korea and the sanctions on North Korea and their effect.

On the imperialist interventions in Syria and Kurdistan by Voie Proletarienne

Democracy and Class Struggle shares the same concerns as Voie Proletarienne about the Kurdish Leadership and Imperialism and welcome the criticism and support of Kurdish struggle by the Turkish and Kurdish communist and revolutionary organisations, such as the TKP/ML or the MLKP

Our own study of the Prison Writings of Abdullah Ocalan are leading us to the same conclusion of the Maoist Communist Party of Italy that Abdullah Ocalan has made a "Fashion capitulation" on the question of Gender and Marxism which he see's as the fundamental contradiction.

Furthermore Ocalan's  works are one sided in the portrayal of Marxism Leninism let alone Marxism Leninism Maoism as mechanistic and ignores the dialectical tradition in Marxism Leninism and especially Marxism Leninism Maoism because it does not fit his straw man critique of Marxism Leninism.

Ibrahim Kaypakkaya is the genuine voice of Marxism Leninism Maoism on the national question and Imperialism and Fascism and the living proof of the revolutionary dialectical character of Marxism Leninism Maoism which is spurned by Abdullah Ocalan in favour of a mish mash of Anarchism and Marxism which far from bringing clarity like Ibrahim Kayapakka brings confusion and the swamp of revisionism to the revolutionary communist movement.

PS:Democracy and Class Struggle  do not share the same views as Voie Proletarienne who see Assad as Fascist

PCm: We speak about intertwining of class oppression and gender. But, while saying that they develop together, Ocalan 'forgets' the class oppression. 

Indeed, he does worse: the ideology (masculinity) produced the “ruling gender” and the State. 

So the male, not the class, has become the state. Hence the conclusion is inescapable: we have to overthrow neither the state or the ruling capitalist system, but “kill the ruling male” ... and this is passed off as “the fundamental principle of socialism” 

But what a kind of socialism?

Democracy and Class Struggle says Abdullah Ocalan has lifted up the stone of the critic of mechanistic Marxism Leninism to drop it on his own feet by treating the gender class relationship in a mechanical way where gender becomes fundamental and not in a dialectical way where they intersect and interconnect and intertwine with class.


It might have been expected that a crisis on the scale of that currently underway in Syria and Iraq would have led to a large-scale imperialist overland intervention. But the Obama administration said no. Looking back on their failure in Iraq, the Americans have realised that it is not enough to invade a country in order to solve this kind of problem, needing as well to set up a base there and maintain a stable government. This is what we hear referred to as ‘the Obama doctrine’ in the media.

The imperialists have not (re)invaded Syria and Iraq on a massive scale because they are aware of their political weakness despite their military might, to which should be added the fact that invading these two countries would be bound to provoke reactions from Russia and Iran. The US cannot afford to embark on costly military occupations and diplomatic confrontations. Nor could France ever aim so high, being incapable of occupying a country like Syria or Iraq.

By heightening the contradictions between imperialist versus dominated countries, we have already stated that imperialist military, economic and diplomatic interventions – be they direct or indirect – are what lead to such uncontrollable crisis situations. Such interventions can only further fan the flames or at the very least sow the seeds of chaos. This is far from the intention of the imperialist in spite of what certain people of a conspiracist bent claim, overestimating the ability of the imperialists to master the contradictions. It is nothing more than the inevitable result of imperialist interventions. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (ex-Zaïre), where bloody militias have controlled whole areas for decades, is an example of how this kind of situation can drag on. This stands as proof of the crisis of imperialism. The attacks we suffer at home are also a consequence because the centres of imperialism cannot hope to remain untouched. It is fair to say that what we suffered in Paris on 13 November or in Nice on 14 July pale into insignificance compared with what the Congolese or the Syrians face on a daily basis (the Aleppo airstrikes).

The ‘Obama doctrine’ also shows that the imperialists are weaker than we think and unable to keep everything under control. That is objectively encouraging for those who are oppressed and exploited, even if the weaknesses on the part of the imperialists do not automatically correlate with a strengthening of the people’s struggle.

It is also important to combat opportunistic pseudo ‘anti-imperialism’ which involves supporting the Fascist Assad regime or the Russian and Iranian military interventions in Syria under the pretence that all alliances are justified in order to halt the hegemonic drive of the American super-power. Being opposed to the US, France and Great Britain does not make the Syrian regime a substantial anti-imperialist power, bearing in mind that it is enjoys the backing at arm’s length of Russia, unquestionably an imperialist power (competing with the United States), in an attempt to maintain and broaden its sphere of influence.

On the military alliance between the Kurds and the imperialists

Several questions are raised by the links that exist between the PYD, the leading party in Rojava, and its armed units, the YPG/YPJ [1], with the imperialists. VP has always defended the general principle of opposing all military interventions, both direct and indirect, in dominated countries.

Today the YPG/YPJ maintain an open military alliance with the imperialist coalition in Syria [2] which grew up during the siege of Kobanê. At that time, had it not been for the massive airstrikes by the Western powers in favour of the besieged Kurdish forces, it is likely that Rojava would have been crushed by Daesh. The imperialists also came to realise that the YPG were the only force of any consequence fighting Daesh on the ground and their attempts to set up units under the control of the Free Syrian Army only met with failure.

Imperialist policy in the face of Daesh as it stands today is short-sighted, offering support to the Kurds as the only effective anti-Daesh force, whilst at the same time backing Turkey, a NATO member, which in turn is fighting the Kurds.

And while the Turkish army also entered Rojava more with the intention of the fighting the Kurds than Daesh, the USA have, however, sought for Turkey and the Kurds in Rojava to reach an agreement of kinds regarding the share of control over Northern Syria whilst stating that they would be against an independent Kurdish state.

Following the failure of all of their strategies geared to setting up forces under their control (the Free Syrian Army, the Syrian National Council, etc.) to overturn Assad and destroy Daesh, they have been obliged to negotiate with the Syrian regime and to back the already existing forces in order to at least contain Daesh despite their differing political agendas. Yet another sign of a relative weakness on the part of imperialists. At the same time, they no doubt hope to be able to side-track the Kurdish movement into abandoning its initial aim, rendering it a clearly pro-imperialist force similar to the Iraqi pseudo ‘Kurdistan Regional Government’ entrusted by the imperialists to Barzani and his clique.

The United States have supplied them with arms. Special Western (US, Great Britain and France) forces are fighting alongside the YPG/YPJ and are perhaps even training them. These special forces are also there to coordinate the Western airstrikes with the YPG/YPJ-led offensives against Daesh to the point where Turkey has even complained that the US special forces wear YPG insignia [3]. These imperialist troops have even set up their own permanent bases in the territory of Rojava with the approval of the government. All of that is public knowledge and recognised by the YPG/YPJ. Articles in the press (drawing on statements by the Syrian regime and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights) also claim that the Americans have either built or are in the process of building an air base in the northeast of Rojava. However, the sources are unreliable and the YPG has denied such reports [4].

Support for the International Freedom Battalion in Rojava

The position adopted by VP is to support the peoples’ freedom movements, especially the Kurdish people, whilst at the same time not side-stepping the surrounding debates. Some will use this alliance as a pretext to throw the baby out with the bathwater, demeaning the struggle of the Kurdish people and refusing them the right to self-determination, while others will claim that because we must support the Kurdish people we should avoid any criticism of the organisations leading the struggle.

As in the case of the struggle of the Palestinian people, there is a clear distinction between the principle of supporting the liberation struggle of the Kurdish people and the different forces involved, with our active support going first to the Turkish and Kurdish communist and revolutionary organisations, such as the TKP/ML or the MLKP [5].

Support for the Kurdish national liberation movement must first and foremost take the form of political support for the revolutionary forces rather than essentially humanitarian support.
Humanitarian support is necessary in so far as it serves as a basis for international solidarity, but it should always be led by politics. Nor does support preclude a frank and honest criticism of the Kurdish organisations as and when divergences arise, as occurred with the OCML VP when it joined the campaign in support of the Freedom Battalion (IFB) in Rojava launched by International Red Aid [6]. This battalion founded in June 2015 under the military command of the YPG/YPJ is made up of foreign anarchist and communist revolutions fighting side by side with the Kurds in Rojava [7].

This is exactly the opposite of the stance adopted by the ICOR in its ‘International Brigade for Kobanê’ campaign [8], a political campaign in support of the Kurdish people devoid of criticism towards the PYD, effectively rendering it a flat and apolitical humanitarian campaign (project for the building of a hospital).

The International Freedom Battalion and its different parts has an independent political expression. In its declarations, it has openly denounced imperialism [9] and one of its brigades has questioned US military support [10]. Other forces within the Battalion such as the TKP/ML [11] have also warned of the dangers of this alliance.

When the OCML VP joined the campaign in January 2016 it was because we believed that it contained a clearly anti-imperialist and revolutionary position vis à vis the situation in the region, whilst at the same time supporting the revolutionary forces active in the conflict. Since then, we have organised and taken part in several events [12], collected thousands of euros, helped spread the views of the International Battalion in French [13], etc.

It provides a concrete way of engaging discussion on the situation in the Middle East with the people around us, demonstrating that progressive and revolutionary forces exist and convincing that even if it is all happening thousands of miles away, we are not powerless : it is a way of fighting despondency and resignation. This campaign has proved a success and has allowed us to collect thousands of euros in Europe, sending hundreds of haemostatic dressings and spreading information about the International Battalion.

If we are to level legitimate criticisms and uphold our own point of view, it is not enough to sit on the side-lines. We must be engaged in the struggle, as we strive to do.

Is a pact with "the devil" possible ?

A basic contradiction exists, therefore, between opposing imperialist interventions on the one hand and recognising the need for an alliance at certain times on the other. What determines the key factor to be taken into account can only ever be the situation on the ground, the balance of power between the different parties involved and whether the progressive forces can rely on their own means without having to resort to such an alliance.

Any military alliance with imperialism involves a huge risk. Because the aims of imperialism are diametrically opposed to those of the emancipation of the peoples and hopes that its alliance with Rojava will allow it to gain a permanent foothold in Syria. Because imperialism is responsible for the overall situation in the Middle East. From the historical perspective, the contradiction with imperialism remains the main contradiction for the peoples of the region and the current alliance can only be tactical and temporary.

The brutal military tactics of the imperialists can already be seen to contrast with the military tactics deployed by the Communists, with the Western airstrikes in support of the Syrian Democratic Forces causing civilian massacres. Accepting the presence of imperialist troops in Rojava means taking a risk, allowing then to find their bearings, engage in espionage and attempt to attract determined forces. And there is no doubt that that is what they’re up to. The time will come to make a decision, when the PYD will have to choose between an alliance with imperialism and the pursuit of the national and democratic rights of the Kurdish people. Nor do the imperialists, led by the United States, conceal the fact that this couldn’t be further from their true intentions, as they have shown so many times before [14].

It would be going too far to say that the YPG/YPJ are fighting ‘under the command of the imperialists’. High-ranking leaders of the PKK and the PYD [15], such as R?za Altun [16], Cemil Bay?k [17] and Saleh Muslim [18] have publically stated that the imperialist interventions primarily serve their own vested own interests rather than those of the peoples, that they commitments are not to be trusted, etc.

However, it is not sufficient for the leadership of the Kurdish movement to public express its distrust of the imperialists. Two things are essential : firstly, what are the limits placed on the penetration of the imperialist forces in Syria ? And, secondly, to what extent are the masses educated in an anti-imperialist spirit ?

We can already begin to be concerned by the fact that the government in Rojava still appears not to have set any clear conditions regarding the increased involvement of the imperialist forces. First of all the Kurdish forces accepted air support, then arms supplies, then the presence of US and French special forces and finally these troops to set up bases there with the arrival of their own armoured vehicles. It was US troops which often acted as a buffer during the border clashes between the YPG/YPJ and the Turkish army. Where does military aid which can be accepted without endangering the democratic power of the people end and allowing imperialist forces to carry out a coup de force in the near future begin ? Even in Rojava there are essentially reactionary forces which are obliged to accept the leading role of the democratic forces today, such as the chiefs of the Arab tribes and a part of the Kurdish population faithful to the Barzani clan, but which tomorrow could fall into line behind the imperialists should they turn against the democratic forces. This conflict will inevitably happen if the government in Rojava maintains its democratic line.

Furthermore, while the central leadership of the Kurdish movement has an anti-imperialist outlook, at least in words, that is not the case for all of its structures. In Europe, for example, these structures defend positions that we cannot subscribe to because they fail to clearly address what imperialism entails, i.e. in the final analysis an enemy of the peoples, holding out false hopes of what the Kurdish people could expect, for example, from the French government or the European Union [19].

The clash with imperialism is inevitable

The alliance between the revolutionary movements and the imperialist states is sometimes justified, as for example during the Second World War when it was legitimate for the anti-fascist front to join forces with the United States and Great Britain. The military alliance between the people’s resistance and the allied armies was just, as was the exchange of intelligence, the supply of arms, etc.

At the time, the Chinese Communist Party had accepted arms and military training from the Americans, as well as the presence of air bases in the red bases to bomb the Japanese.

Elsewhere, however, the partisan movements led by the Communist parties in Yugoslavia, Albania and Greece were strong enough to liberate their countries on their own, resorting to very little foreign aid.

That would have been unthinkable in France in 1944, whereby it was right for the resistance under the leadership of the Communist Party (PCF) to ally itself tactically with the allied powers. However, the PCF fell prey to opportunism by submitting to de Gaulle and the leadership of the anti-fascist movement (Jean Moulin), ending in betrayal by the time of the Liberation by maintaining a united front with the bourgeoisie and helping it rebuild French imperialism.

All alliances are feasible if and when the revolutionary forces have a clear vision of the limits of the alliance and are aware that one day it will be necessary to break with the alliance in order to move forwards. That must be clearly explained to the masses. When temporarily justified, any military alliance with imperialism also calls for a harsh criticism of imperialism, combatting any false hopes both inside and outside the ranks of the movement. In France as in Rojava the duplicity of the imperialists must be denounced, showing how they are responsible for the situation in the first place. The contradictions of imperialist policy must be clearly underlined, showing that all they are really interested in is defending their hold over the region rather than the rights of the peoples. Their support for the reactional fundamentalist forces must be exposed [20] despite them supposedly combatting Daesh, revealing their duplicity regarding the Assad Regime, their support for the Turkish regime, etc. The masses be taught what imperialism is and how to fight it.

There is also an imperious need for the revolutionary movement to maintain its political and organisational independence, avoiding becoming dependant on the imperialists in any way. Despite the existence of an alliance, it is vital to maintain political and military independence and to keep secrets under cover. While the oppressed and the exploited must take advantage of the alliance to advance and strengthen their organisations, they must primarily rely on their own forces : that is the golden rule of the revolutionary movement. The government in Rojava is the representative of the Kurdish people in Syria. Its democratic and anti-fascist programme have shown themselves to be politically the most progressive in the whole of the Middle East, objectively standing in the way of the imperialists’ aims. And while it holds out a flicker of hope for societies marked by feudalism, patriarchy and fascist regimes, we must nevertheless remain on our guard concerning the way the political contradictions and the alliances evolve as well as interference by imperialist forces in their ongoing quest to corrupt the national and democratic forces.

The OCML VP will continue to support the legitimate resistance of the Kurdish people, denouncing the imperialists, first and foremost French imperialism, as the enemies of the peoples in the region, whilst at the same time supporting the revolutionary forces on the ground which defend a political project geared to national and social liberation [21].

OCML Voie Prolétarienne, August 2017

In French : HERE
In Italian : HERE

[1] YPG : People’s Protection Units. Armed branch. YPJ : Women’s Protection Units. Women’s armed branch.

[2] See : (in English)

[3] See : (in English)

[4] See : (in English)

[5] TKP/ML : Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist–Leninist. MLKP : Marxist-Leninist Communist Party.

[6] The aim of the campaign by International Red Aid (Secours Rouge International) is primarily to buy haemostatic dressings to stop the bleeding caused by bullet wounds at the front. For more information see : (in English)

[7] Notably the TKP/ML and the MLKP.

[8] The International Coordination of Revolutionary Parties and Organisations is an international body which we declined to join. See : (in English). For more information of the campaign : (in French)

[9] Video of the founding declaration of this battalion, June 2015 : (in English)


[11] We published an interview with a combatant of the TKP/ML TIKKO in Partisan Magazine including his criticisms on this question. See : (in English)

[12] For example, we organised a meeting/concert entitled ‘Kurdistan : Feminism and Resistance’ in Toulouse in February 2016 within a broader campaign which drew over 200 people. See : (in French)

[13] See : (in French)

[14] Especially their strategic support for Turkey, a member of NATO.

[15] Democratic Union Party, the movement effectively at the head of the Autonomous Region of Rojava.

[16] Founder of the PKK and Spokesperson of the Executive Council of Koma Civaken Kurdistan (KCK), an international body made up of different organisations under the leadership of the PKK.

[17] Founder of the PKK and President of the KCK.

[18] Co-President of the PYD

[19] See for example : (in French)

[20] For example, while the imperialists refused entry to the PYD at the ‘Peace Conference’ held in Geneva in January 2016 at the same time they invited Saudi Arabia in representation of the al-Nosra Front (previously a member of Al-Qaeda). See : (in French)

[21] This is the case of the solidarity campaign with the International Freedom Battalion. However, we do not support the ideology of Democratic Confederalism by the PYD. Read our criticism here : (in French


Saturday, August 26, 2017

How Nikita Khrushchev pardoned Ukrainians in the 1950s

Democracy and Class Struggle has always taken a keen interest in the National Question in the Soviet Union and Andrei Fursov's views above in video should be contrasted with Yuri Slezkine here.

The Democracy and Class Struggle view of Nikita Khrushchev is that he was a recidivist of Trotskyism - the view of Lazar Kaganovitch who helped Khrushschev cover his trotskyist past - in his memoirs/interview before his death Kaganovitch regretted his mistake in enabling Khrushschev rise to power - we of course are living with the consequences of Kaganovitch's mistake in the destruction of the revolutionary CPSU (B) by Khrushschev.

Military Drills in Venezuela - Smash US Imperialism

The 1953 Coup in Iran : A Blueprint for Venezuela

Brazil's Donald Trump -Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's bombastic, homophobic, sexist, and dictatorship-defending presidential candidate is rising in the polls. Mike Fox reports from Brazil

Arizona Local's React to President Trump pardoning former Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Friday, August 25, 2017

"The Vyborg Side" 1939 - Remembering the October Revolution in 1917 in 2017

Democracy and Class Struggle says a lesson in dealing with sabotage of Bourgeois Bankers - the struggle for finance in early  Soviet Power

Thursday, August 24, 2017

Indigenous Mapuche People Evicted From Their Own Lands : Welsh Mapuche Solidarity a Solidarity of People's not Colonizers

Yr Aflonyddwch Mawr -- The Great Unrest in Wales says should we should not forget the injustice of Welsh Colonizers in Patagonia which was Mapuche territory - the struggle against English Colonization of Welsh Land continues to this day  - but in no way justifies Welsh People Colonizing other Peoples Lands - like those of The Mapuche in Patagonia.

Welsh - Mapuche Solidarity a Solidarity of Peoples not Colonizers.

Afghans Speak Out on Trump's Threats

Trump and the Dysfunctional American State

John Prysner of the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition has traveled to North Korea as a tourist and says US propaganda demonizes North Korea

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Is Trump Threatening Pakistan ?

Speech by Tomi Mäkinen. Communist Workers' Party of Finland

Democracy and Class Struggle appreciates the contribution of Tomi Makinen and his revolutionary practice even if he has not fully embraced Marxism Leninism Maoism - we see that as only a matter of time as the Marxist Leninist Maoist Movement develops in Europe.

Red Salute to Tomi Makinen from Democracy and Class Stuggle

Alex the "Arsebarker" Jones : Example of Info Wars Seattle Street Interview

Democracy and Class Struggle says time for some fun - Alex Arsebarker Jones doing the Chimp Run in Seattle.

Trump's New Afghanistan Strategy: Windfall for the Military Industrial Complex

Monday, August 21, 2017

Hitlers American Model : How American race law provided a blueprint for Nazi Germany

How American race law provided a blueprint for Nazi Germany

Nazism triumphed in Germany during the high era of Jim Crow laws in the United States. Did the American regime of racial oppression in any way inspire the Nazis? The unsettling answer is yes. In Hitler's American Model, James Whitman presents a detailed investigation of the American impact on the notorious Nuremberg Laws, the centerpiece anti-Jewish legislation of the Nazi regime. Contrary to those who have insisted that there was no meaningful connection between American and German racial repression, Whitman demonstrates that the Nazis took a real, sustained, significant, and revealing interest in American race policies.

As Whitman shows, the Nuremberg Laws were crafted in an atmosphere of considerable attention to the precedents American race laws had to offer. German praise for American practices, already found in Hitler's Mein Kampf, was continuous throughout the early 1930s, and the most radical Nazi lawyers were eager advocates of the use of American models. But while Jim Crow segregation was one aspect of American law that appealed to Nazi radicals, it was not the most consequential one. Rather, both American citizenship and antimiscegenation laws proved directly relevant to the two principal Nuremberg Laws—the Citizenship Law and the Blood Law. Whitman looks at the ultimate, ugly irony that when Nazis rejected American practices, it was sometimes not because they found them too enlightened, but too harsh.

Indelibly linking American race laws to the shaping of Nazi policies in Germany, Hitler's American Model upends understandings of America's influence on racist practices in the wider world.

James Q. Whitman is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School. His books include Harsh Justice, The Origins of Reasonable Doubt, and The Verdict of Battle. He lives in New York City.


"Hitler’s American Model delivers a powerful and timely reminder that it is not only liberal legal orders that look abroad for normative instruction. Profoundly illiberal law travels just as well as liberal law."--Lawrence Douglas, Times Literary Supplement

"Eerie. . . . [Whitman] illustrates how German propagandists sought to normalize the Nazi agenda domestically by putting forth the United States as a model."--Brent Staples, New York Times

"In his startling new history, Whitman traces the substantial influence of American race laws on the Third Reich. The book, in effect, is a portrait of the United States assembled from the admiring notes of Nazi lawmakers, who routinely referenced American policies in the design of their own racist regime. . . . Whitman’s book contributes to a growing recognition of American influences on Nazi thought."--Jeff Guo, Washington Post

"A small book, but powerful all out of proportion to its size in exposing a shameful history."--Kirkus

"Interesting and eye opening. . . . In spite of the Nazis’ disdain, to put it mildly, for our stated and evident liberal and democratic principles, they eagerly looked to the United States as the prime example for their own goals of protecting the blood, restricting citizenship, and banning mixed marriages. Reading this book could make many Americans doubt the possibility of ever forming a more perfect union with such a legacy."--Thomas McClung, New York Journal of Books


A Note on Translations ix

Introduction 1

Making Nazi Flags and Nazi Citizens 17
The First Nuremberg Law: Of New York Jews and Nazi Flags 19
The Second Nuremberg Law: Making Nazi Citizens 29
America: The Global Leader in Racist Immigration Law 34
American Second-Class Citizenship 37
The Nazis Pick Up the Thread 43
Toward the Citizenship Law: Nazi Politics in the Early 1930s 48
The Nazis Look to American Second-Class Citizenship 59
Conclusion 69
Protecting Nazi Blood and Nazi Honor 73
Toward the Blood Law: Battles in the Streets and the Ministries 81
Battles in the Streets: The Call for "Unambiguous Laws" 81
Battles in the Ministries: The Prussian Memorandum and the American Example 83
Conservative Juristic Resistance: Gürtner and Lösener 87
The Meeting of June 5, 1934 93
The Sources of Nazi Knowledge of American Law 113
Evaluating American Influence 124
Defining "Mongrels": The One-Drop Rule and the Limits of American Influence 127
Conclusion 132
America through Nazi Eyes 132
America's Place in the Global History of Racism 137
Nazism and American Legal Culture 146
Acknowledgments 163
Notes 165
Suggestions for Further Reading 197

Index 201

Tens of Thousands Oppose Hatred and Racist Policies in United States

The Provocations Against North Korea Begin Again - China and Russia ask for a Freeze in Military Drills in Exchange for North Korea Nuclear Freeze

Democracy and Class Struggle says there has been a Peace Offer from North Korea on the Table for some years and China and Russia echo that proposal - but US has put assassins into South Korea to kill the North Korea leadership called the Naval Seals - so who in the world would TRUST the USA.

There are also other specialist US Units in South Korea for subversion of North Korea as well as some specialist South Korean Units.

The fact that the military control of US Nuclear Bombers from Guam discussed making a nuclear attack on North Korea from outside South Korea because of objections of nuclear attack from South Korean territory by President Moon Jae-in should send shivers down anybodies spine - remember we have an unstable individual in the White House and remember China would aid North Korea in event of a nuclear attack.

Smash the US Asian Pivot in North Asia and win the battle for Peace.

50 Years of Naxalbari: A Path for Alternative Development by Purnendu Sekhar Mukherjee

50 Years of Naxalbari: A Path for Alternative Development
Purnendu Sekhar Mukherjee

In November, 2008 just as the people’s movement against state repression began in Lalgarh, a Peoples’ Committee against Police Atrocities was formed, comprising of five male and five female members representing each village, which soon spread from village to village. Equal participation of men and women in the committee generated enormous support from local women and the movement spread like a wild fire in the entire region. Within two weeks journalist Shyamsundar Das of The Statesmen wrote an article in which pointing out the most remarkable aspect of the movement he mentioned- “A parallel government has emerged in the district. Just like the Maoists run village committees in Andhra and Chattsigarh, the Peoples’ Committee have set up village committees in different villages of Belpahari, Binpur, Lalgarh, Jamb0ni, Salboni, Goaltore and surrounding areas. The village administration will be run according to the directives of the village committee and no government projects can be started without their permission. It is quite evident that in coming days implementing government projects in these villages will be difficult.”

Six months after the publication of this article, Snignendu Bhattacharya of the Hindustan Times published an article on the parallel governance and developmental system in the Lalgarh area. He wrote- “In areas of Medinipur bordering Odisha, in the last 8 months in an area spanning almost thousand square kilometers, the Maoists have silently developed a new weapon against the Indian state. Drinking water, irrigation, road, health centres … Hindustan Times witnessed the second liberated zone of India in this area kept carefully away from public eyes, a Maoist-ruled system where the villages populated by almost 2 lakh inhabitants are witnessing a pace of development unprecedented in the last 30 years of Left rule. Together with taking over the state machinery including the administrative and justice systems, Maoists have constructed 50 kilometres of rural roads, installed tubewells, developed the irrigation system and are running health centers with the assistance of the local population.”

Although Lalgarh was a guerilla zone and calling it a liberated zone was an exaggeration on the writer’s part, both the articles along with many similar reports portrayed the essence of the revolutionary politics underlying the establishment of such village-based peoples’ administrations.

Lalgarh is not the central topic of this essay. The Lalgarh movement is merely an important and instructive episode in the 50 years long history of Naxalbari politics. However, Lalgarh needs special mention as almost after 40 years of Naxalbari, the Lalgarh movement has shown people that Naxalite politics doesn’t only mean capturing state power through armed struggle, the path of Naxalbari also means the building of an alternative socio-economic model by the people themselves. In which development will be based on local needs, on the consent of the local population, not on the demands of international finance capital.

We need to clearly understand that the aim of the Maoists is to destroy the prevailing unequal socioeconomic system and establish in its place a system that will ensure the equitable distribution of national resources among all sections of the society. Destruction and construction are both of equal importance in this politics. Construction has to proceed simultaneously with destruction. Without the dreams and plans of construction, destruction is nothing but anarchy. On the contrary the life blood of Maoist politics is the dream of building a new society.

50 years of Naxalbari stands for 50 years of a dream of building a new India.

The Beginning of the Naxalbari Movement: Struggle for the Right of the Farmer to Land and Crops

Four months after the beginning of the Naxalbari movement in March 1967, when West Bengal was reeling under acute food shortage and rampant black marketeering, Charu Mazumdar declared to a journalist of the newspaper Jugantar that the 20000-25000 farmers of Naxalbari do not have a cause for concern as they have food stores to last them an entire year. Rather the land issue is at the centre of the movement.

The central issue of the Indian agrarian revolution is the redistribution of land by the peasant committees based on the slogan “Land to the tillers”. Although the parliamentary parties also consider land reforms as a just demand, but in reality it has been seen that it is all but impossible to realize this demand by peaceful means. The reason is that the ones who own most of the land run the administration. Therefore the police-administration-landlords nexus tried its best to nip in the bud this attempt of Naxalite politics to overturn this agrarian production relations. However, the struggle was not limited only to the demand for land as it was realized that unless the whole system was changed, and brought in support of the masses, it would not be possible to hold on to land or crops.

In the 2nd edition, 9th issue (5th September, 1967) of the Dakshin Desh magazine it was said- “What is the theoretical basis of this movement of the peasants of Naxalbari? The struggling peasants of Naxalbari believe that the completion of the agrarian revolution is a prime objective among the revolutionary tasks of the peoples democratic revolution. The peasantry along with other friendly revolutionary forces under the leadership of the working class will have to work towards this direction. The peasants have seen that there is no liberation for them unless the feudal exploitation by the rural landlords ends. And this feudal exploitation is supported by the state apparatus and its three pillars- the landlords -moneylenders, the big capitalists and imperialism.

The revolutionaries of Naxalbari have started to destroy this state apparatus under the leadership of the Communist Party. ”

Four decades after this, in 2010, when journalists asked Dr. B.D. Sharma, the adivasi-friendly intellectual and ex-bureaucrat, about the chances of success of the talks between the Indian government and the Maoists, the ex-District Magistrate of undivided Bastar and ex-SC/ST Commissioner said- “Wait and watch the reaction of the government when the Maoists raise the demands of complete land reforms and policy changes regarding industrialization.

Also observe the reaction of the government when the Maoists in Jharkhand, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh and Chattisgarh demand the cancellation of the mining agreements with the multinational corporations. The talks are sure to break down on these two questions.”

Therefore, the question is not of guns, it is of principles. The question of how the society is going to be. For this sole reason, the government, the reactionary feudal landlords, the comprador bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie press have always tried to equate Maoist politics with violence. They realize that if people get the opportunity to experience the alternate model it will become impossible for multinational finance capital to plunder the human and natural resources of the country.

The attempt to build this alternate model started almost two decades prior to that of Naxalbari in Kakdwip in West Bengal and in Telangana in Andhra Pradesh. During the Tebhaga movement, Laylagunj in Kakdwip came to be called as Lalgunj where 5000 bighas of land was captured and distributed among the landless in 1949. All ponds were declared as common property and all agricultural equipments and bullocks of farmers were brought together to start collective farming and build collective stores. Separate committees of villagers were formed to look after administration, justice and defence. The repression of the combined forces of landlords and the administration spread throughout the country . On the other hand has developed the struggle to destroy the current state system and build a far better alternative.

What is the alternative model?

Briefly, the Maoists are against the international capital and technology driven developmental model geared to the demands of the rich in the society. Instead the Maoists believe in a developmental model which is driven by local and mass needs, generates employment and is environmentally sustainable. They support that development model which will take the fruits of development to the broader masses of the country – the workers, peasants, middle class, small traders and the national bourgeoisie. They are against all such policies which serve the conditions and interests of international finance capital, which help the Tatas, Ambanis, Essars, Vedantas, Adanis and their likes to expand and fatten on the wealth of the people. The Maoists oppose those policies which burden the common people with foreign loans and the conditions laid down by the multinational corporations.

What are the policies of the Janatana Sarkar? The policies include radical land reforms which will capture lands from the landlords and redistribute to the landless, bring fallow and waste lands into agriculture and put an end to uncontrolled deforestation. The Janatana Sarkar will lay stress on handicrafts and cottage industries producing soap, shoes, jaggery, edible oil and other small scale products both under cooperative and private ownership. In parallel, emphasis will be laid on construction of water reservoirs and digging of ponds, irrigation canals and drainage systems and construction of bridges, schools, health centers and veterinary clinics. And all these will be constructed by the voluntary labour of the common people.

In the present policy document of the Janatana Sarkar of Dandakaranya the outline of the future peoples democratic government has been traced which includes some notables policies and principles such as:

• All lands belonging to landlords and religious institutions will be confiscated. Based on the “land to the tiller” policy these lands will be redistributed among the poor, the landless peasants and agricultural labourers. Lands belonging to rich peasants will not be confiscated.
• The oppression by money lenders will be stopped.
• All banks, industries and other institutions belonging to the imperialists and comprador capitalists will be confiscated. All debts to the imperialists will be cancelled.
• All unjust treaties with imperialists will be declared invalid.
• All such capitalist production that does not adversely affect the life of common people will be allowed to continue.
• Private property will not be confiscated.
• Medium scale enterprises operated by the national bourgeoisie will be regulated.
• Caste discrimination will be annihilated.
• Special attention will be given towards eradication of patriarchy and the end of discrimination against women.
• Mining projects of imperialist MNCs will be stopped.
• Adivasi societies will have autonomy.
• The Janatana Sarkar believes in the right to self determination of nationalities and will therefore accept decisions of nationalities to secede. However, the Janatana Sarkar will work towards the unity of nationalities.
• The development of backward areas will be prioritized.
• Religion will be a personal matter and the state will have nothing to do with religion.
• A scientific and democratic culture will be built up in opposition to the existing imperialist and semifeudal cultural practices.

The model which budded in Naxalbari and had spread to Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Kerala, Bihar and Maharashtra, the model which was again seen during the Lalgarh movement in Bengal wherein local people by their voluntary labour built roads, revived irrigation canals and ponds, ran health centers, established cooperative farms in the Ayodhya hills of Purulia has become a full grown tree in the form of Janatana Sarkar in Dandakarnaya.

In 1967, the path that was shown by Naxalbari in which guerilla squads were formed by snatching the weapons from the mercenary forces of the landlords, established peoples’ courts to try the exploiters-oppressors, establish ownership over land and crops by struggling with the landlord armies, set up cooperative stores of crops, the path which led to the establishment of “Bengal’s Vietnam” in Kanksa, its is the same path by which the oppressed has today tasted their own power in the villages of Bihar, Jharkhand, Andhra, Odisha, Chattisgarh and Maharashtra.

In the last 50 years several thousand marginal farmers have been martyred in the hands of mercenary armies of landlords or the police just to establish their rights over land and its produce. In 1977-78 when there were efforts to revive the revolutionary movement in Andhra Pradesh, when thousands of peasants were getting together in Karimnagar and Adilabad to establish their rights on their lands and crops, there were no option in front of them except to retaliate against the joint attacks by the feudal lords and the police administration. At around the same time, similar efforts were started to establish revolutionary peasant committees in south Bihar (present Jharkhand). Simultaneously, dalit landless farmers from central Bihar organized under the revolutionary Communist forces faced massive violence from the mercenary armies of the landlords. The police and the parliamentary political parties as expected joined hands with the landlords.

In the 80’s while continuing to fight the combined attacks of these reactionary forces, practices such as cooperative farming, cooperative animal husbandry and community ownership of forest resources were established in different parts of Dandakaranya with the objective of making the villages self-reliant. In 1995, the village government committee or Janatana Sarkar was established. Meanwhile huge tracts of land have been distributed among the landless. The loot of the forest resources by the jungle mafia has been restricted and the rights of the adivasis over forest produce have been established while ensuring regulated use of such resources.

From 1996, in order to restrict the dependence of the adivasis over forest resources and hunting, they have been encouraged to practice fruit and vegetable farming. Both individual and cooperative farming was encouraged by distributing seeds of fruits and vegetables among individuals/families and communities. Both forms of farming, private and collective, were allowed simultaneously so that people could select one after assessing the pros and cons of both. It is to be remembered that the new democratic revolution in India does not envisage the end of private enterprise, rather it wants that private enterprises are run keeping in mind the needs of the broader masses.

Within two years of this collectivization of animal resources such as cows, buffaloes, oxen, goats, ducks, chicken etc. was initiated. Cattle and other animals of landlords and moneylenders were confiscated and all animals were shifted to a designated place. The excreta of such animals was collected in a place and used as organic manure. Such practices kept the villages clean and reduced the requirement of chemical fertilizers.

Success of such policies infuriated the local landlords, traders and moneylenders and they tried to repress the movement with the help of the police administration. The primary reason for their anger was the confiscation of their lands and furthermore due to the redistribution of the land to the landless, it was difficult for them to get cheap agricultural labour for their land. Moreover the forest officials and local politicians in nexus with the jungle mafias lost their regular sources of income.

Furthermore, as the farmers could keep their entire produce, it released them from the dependence on local moneylenders. This gave rise to a chain reaction. For example, if the third world succeeds in putting an end to the exploitation by the multi-national corporations, such corporations will be forced to increase the exploitation and repression of the American people which will then push the American people towards revolutionary politics. Similarly, the cooperative farming and animal husbandry model in the adivasi villages created alarm in the towns and cities. All reactionary forces joined hands to destroy the Janatana Sarkar. In order to resist these attacks, the guerilla army of the oppressed people also increased in size and power. And the Janatana Sarkars got further strengthened based on the strength of this guerilla army.

In 1997-98 itself the inhabitants of 238 villages in Dandakaranya dug 110 ponds by giving voluntary labour. Simultaneously 47 large water reservoirs were created, some for irrigation, some for fish cultivation and some for the needs of cattle. During August-September of that year, nearly 3 lakh fish spawn and some thousands of prawn seeds were used to start extensive pisciculture. In 1998 the peoples’ government started distributing fish spawn in a large scale among the local population, which soon became a basis of the local economy. Now there are water reservoirs or ponds in the area of most revolutionary peoples’ committees. In the same areas where agriculture was once very limited now there is extensive cultivation of fruits such as papayas, bananas, mangoes, lemons and guavas and vegetables such as onion, garlic, brinjal, gourds, pumpkin, ladies finger, cauliflower, maize, spring onion, tomatoes etc.

The revolutionary peoples’ committees (RPC) have taken the initiative to train the local population in agricultural practices, develop irrigation systems, protect cattle and develop animal husbandry, convert forest land into agricultural land and arrange for collection and preservation of fertilizers, seeds etc. In the Mad area of Dandakranya, which was once the most backward area, today there is cooperative agriculture and cooperative farms under the direction of RPCs. Every year during January-February, the work to level the land is taken up for 10-15 days. Cultivation of herbs is being expanded keeping in mind the health needs of the people. A number of local health centres have come up, together with mobile health centres. The mobile health centres provide free basic health services to people over a large area.

In the schools under the RPC, text books have been developed in eight subjects, mathematics, social sciences, political science, Hindi, culture, biology, general science and the history of Dandakaranya for students from classes one to five. Most significantly, with great effort Gondi, the language of the adivasis, has been restored and primary curriculum in Gondi language has been started. Remarkably, a dictionary in the Gondi language has also been written. Efforts are being made to even restore the more backward Halvi language. More than 25 magazines are published regularly just from Dandakarnya. In the areas under the Janatana Sarkars, Indian-made foreign liquor is banned although there is no ban on country liquor, hadia etc. However, drinking alcohol is forbidden in the revolutionary organization and campaigns are run to build public consciousness against the drinking of country liquor, smoking etc.

In those areas of Dandakaranya where peoples’ governments have been set up till district level, the struggle began with the establishment of peoples’ rights over the fundamental aspects of rural economy – land, crops, cattle and water bodies. Private property has not been ended but land has been taken from landlords and distributed among the peasants.

A gram sabha is a fundamental unit of the Janatana Sarkar. The gram sabhas look after the local administration of each village and all inhabitants of the village except those belonging to the enemy camp are its members. Every year each gram sabha organizes at least two meetings. In the first meeting decisions are taken while they are reviewed in the second meeting. If the villagers are unsatisfied with the functioning of an individual in the gram sabha they have a right to recall and they can remove the person from the working committee.

Three to five such villages or roughly 500-3000 individuals constitute a Revolutionary People’s Committee (RPC). Ten to fifteen such RPC’s constitute a regional RPC or regional government which comprises of roughly 10000- 20000 individuals. Finally 3-5 such regional RPC’s make up a divisional or district level RPC.

There are 9 departments under the administration of a district level RPC-

1. Defence, 2. Finance, 3. Agriculture, 4. Small scale industries 5. Justice, 6. Education and Culture, 7. Health and Social development, 8. Forest protection 9. Mass communication
Seven or nine or eleven members constitute local or regional RPCs. There are 15 members in the district committee which comprise of a president, a vice president, a representative of the PLGA, individuals responsible for the functioning of the 9 departments and 3 representatives of the area committee of the Party. In the fundamental unit or the gram sabha all villagers except class enemies elect the committee members and decide upon the agenda to be considered for development work. The villagers have a right to recall an elected committee member if she/he fails to perform an assigned duty.

In 2008, a Dandakaranya Special Zonal preparatory committee was formed to coordinate between the 2 district level RPC’s. In spite of the Salwa Judum operational from 2005-2008 and the Operation Greenhunt, which was instituted by the reactionary central and state governments to crush the Janatana Sarkars, these peoples’ governments are being able to continue functioning as the basis for the popular support for them is the alternative model of development based on popular participation which tries to ensure the equitable distribution of wealth.

Just because the Maoists want to subvert the present system it does not mean that they oppose the welfare projects of the State. In areas where the Janatana Sarkars have not been established, the Maoists engage themselves in movements to ensure the proper implementation of government schemes such as 100 days work, water harvesting, state subsidies for small scale industries, housing schemes for the poor etc. The Maoists demand the proper implementation of all such welfare projects by the government which they themselves want to take up on a larger scale.

The Maoists want the utilization of national resources in such a manner that the benefits of welfare schemes reach the largest number of people. For the same reason the World Bank opposes the 100 days work (MGNREGA) scheme as it considers that if the peasants get some income they will not be available as cheap labourers in cities.

On the other hand the Maoists have always demanded the proper implementation and expansion of the MGNREGA project. The Maoists are not against the extraction of ore from mines but they are against policies that allow the displacement of inhabitants of forests and hills, the indiscriminate deforestation and facilitation of the loot of valuable mineral resources by the multinational corporations, all in the name of mining and industrialization.

It is to be clearly understood that the current aggressive nature of global capitalism is taking the world towards a disaster, it is taking us towards a situation in which natural resources are going to get over, environment is going to be degraded, human disease will increase and in order to increase humanity’s suffering and sick lifestyle life saving drugs and health services will become even more expensive. In order to prevent this disaster and to save the future of the world what is of utmost need is to build an alternative environment friendly, self-reliant, employment generating and non-wasteful political-economic system.

The Jantana Sarkars, under the leadership of the Maoists, are fighting to establish such a society. And till today, the inspiration for this struggle comes from the historic Naxalbari movement that happened 50 years ago, a movement that showed the path of liberation to the working masses of India.

(The author is a former member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and has been a political prisoner)

As US President Donald Trump prepares to announce his administration’s strategy for the stalemate in Afghanistan later on Monday, the South Asian country’s $3 trillion wealth of natural resources has taken the center of attention

As US President Donald Trump prepares to announce his administration’s strategy for the stalemate in Afghanistan later on Monday, the South Asian country’s $3 trillion wealth of natural resources has taken the center of attention.

While the US Department of Defense’s estimates have put Afghanistan’s untapped wealth of gold, copper, uranium and other rare-earth minerals at well around $1 trillion, Afghan officials’ latest geological studies hint at figures three times larger.

The number can probably explain Washington’s willingness to continue the war in Afghanistan, which has dragged on for 16 years and has cost the US economy more than $714 billion dollars, according to the Pentagon's Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) July report.

The second longest war in the US history has also killed over 2,000 American soldiers and injured 20,000 more.

And now Trump is set to address a problem that vexed his two predecessors.

His administration has been under overwhelming pressure to “turn the tide in Afghanistan,” to borrow Senator John McCain’s words.

Recuperating US money

Although opinions vary on whether the US president would authorize an increase in US troop levels in Afghanistan, there is a common consensus that the Trump administration is exploring ways to recoup some of the money funneled into the war over the past years.

In fact, the businessman-turned-president has already discussed the possibility with his Afghan counterpart Ashraf Ghani and reportedly views the potential there as a justification for prolonged US military presence.

According to administration sources, the White House is already considering sending an envoy to Afghanistan to meet with mining officials, an opening salvo for harnessing the country’s natural resources.

Afghanistan is also open to the idea, with Afghan government spokesperson Javid Faisal calling it a “win-win” situation.

Interestingly, Trump has been receiving informal advice on Afghanistan from his billionaire friend Andy Feinberg, who owns major US military contractor DynCorp.

The company has been operating in Afghanistan since 2003 and is believed to play a role in securing the country’s mines, according to the New York Times.

US already behind in the race

The US is not alone in seeking a piece of the cake in Afghanistan and has fallen behind countries like China, Germany and Russia who have already taken their first steps.

Last month, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier told Ghani that his country was interested in Afghanistan’s large deposits of lithium, a key ingredient in rechargeable batteries used in smart phones and electric cars.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says his government is “open” to sending more troops to Afghanistan, as requested by the United States.

China is eyeing Afghanistan’s copper resources and is sending in its Metallurgical Group Corporation (MCC) to extract $100 billion worth of the chemical.

During the Soviet-era, Russia tired to control Afghanistan's natural gas but abandoned the effort after the Taliban’s rise to power.

The US invaded the country in 2001 to allegedly eradicate the Taliban and other terror groups. After years of deadly clashes, however, the Taliban are seemingly stronger while the Daesh (ISIL) terror group has also gained a foothold in the country.