Socialist 2016: Crisis and Change
2016 2016-04Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 8 →
The words are the paper's own, from its digital file; the division into articles was made by machine, so a box or caption can end up inside the article next to it.
Scan page 8
Friday, May 20, 7 p.m.: Is Russia Imperialist? The Nature of the Conflict in Ukraine and Syria. Jeff Mackler, National Secretary, Socialist Action – USA; and Roger Annis, socialist journalist Saturday, May 21, 10 a.m.: Robots, Part-time and Precarious Employment – Is the Working Class Disappearing? Peter D’Gama, paralegal worker, Executive member of CUPE 4948; Xavier, postal worker and leading member of NPA, France; Bob Lyons (see bio 1 p.m.: Climate Justice, After COP21. Roger Annis; Jaime Gonzalez, Socialist Unity League-LUS, Mexico; Angela Bischoff, staff member 4 p.m.: Another Great Recession and the Stakes for Humanity. Louis-Philippe Rochon, professor, Laurentian University; Bob Lyons, SA/LAS member, former NDP MLA in Saskatchewan 7 p.m.: Corbyn, Sanders and the Revival of “Socialism.” Barry Weisleder, federal secretary, Socialist Action – Canada; Jeff Co-sponsored by: Socialist Action / Ligue pour l’Action socialiste – Canadian state, Socialist Action – USA, and the Socialist Unity League (Liga Unidad Socialista) – Mexico Contact: www.socialistaction.ca, website: http://socialistaction.ca below).
of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance; Xavier, France Mackler, SA-USA.
647-986-1917 Without doubting the good inten tions of advocates of a progressive Ba sic Income, it does need to be pointed out that the question of which version is to be adopted will not be decided by an impartial court of the common good but by present-day governments.
The people running the show on Par liament Hill and at Queen’s Park have some history behind them when it comes to the implementation of mea sures of austerity and privatization. But their recent experience in bold new social policies that raise the living standards of working-class people and increase their share of the social wealth is significantly less.
The austerity agenda, which we can trace back to the 1970s but which has intensified following the international crisis of 2008, has placed a central stra tegic importance on weakening the ad equacy of income-support programs. In addition to the massive undermining of federal unemployment insurance, pro vincial social assistance has been enor mously weakened.
People on Ontario Works (OW) and the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) have seen the spending power of their income reduced by up to 60 per cent since the infamous Tory cuts of the mid 90s. Not only have income levels been driven down but rules and poli cies have been adopted that have made opposite reason. They are looking with great interest at the possibility of us ing Basic Income as a stalking horse for their regressive social agenda and it will be the version that Bay Street has in mind that will win out over notions of progressive redistribution.
As the announcement in the Ontario Budget acknowledges: “The pilot would also test whether a basic income would provide a more efficient way of deliv ering income support, strengthen the attachment to the labour force, and achieve savings in other areas, such as health care and housing supports” (page 132).
Social programs that have emerged in capitalist societies, especially those de voted to income support, have always been reluctant concessions. Their de sign, effectiveness, and contradictions have reflected the prevailing economic and political situation and the balance of class forces in society. For decades, we have been fighting a largely defen sive struggle to prevent the decimation of systems of social provision. We are not in a period when bold new redis tributive programs are on the drawing board.
The Liberals will be only too happy if we give up our fight to defend the sys tems that have been won in previous struggles and join them, as “stakehold ers” at the consultative round table. A decade of experience in maintaining an empty discussion of “poverty reduc tion” has turned them into experts in such diversionary tactics. At the end of the process, however, if we allow them, they will put in place a version of Basic Income that will give Milton Friedman very little reason to turn over in his grave.
We are in a period when capitalism and the governments that represent its interests are increasing the rate of exploitation and reducing the level of social provision. That is not about to change and any redesign of income support systems we confront will be all about furthering, not limiting, levels of social inequality. This is a particularly bad time for the lamb to accept an in vitation from the lion to lie down. Basic Income will be no panacea, and the fight for income adequacy will continue, of necessity, to take the form of social mo bilization against an agenda of auster ity and regression. n John Clarke is an organizer with the On tario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP).
----- pull-quotes -----
Woodsworth Residence, U of T, 321 Bloor St. W. at St. George, Toronto
An International Educational Conference May 20 – 21