The working class was wealthy were profiting

Scan page 6

Workers Party) in Argentina. I ed in favor of President Dilma Rousseff’s impeach­ n mid-April, Brazil’s House of Representatives vot­ ment. What took place was a barbaric scene, with countless speeches by reactionary politicians who dedicated their vote to God, family, and the police. Right-wing political leaders also spoke out against the president, accusing her not only of corruption, but also of creating a “communist dictatorship” in the country.

It is clear that the push for impeachment has noth­ ing to do with the formal charges of budget misman­ agement brought against Dilma; in fact, this was hardly mentioned. Instead, it is an attempt to break with Brazil’s constitution and disregard the outcome of an election. It is a coup orchestrated by a corrupt right wing to seize political power from the Workers’ Party (PT).

More than likely, the Senate will ratify the impeach­ ment and oust Dilma, who will likely be succeeded (Brazilian Democratic Movement Party). [Temer be­ came president on May 12.—editors] This will secure the success of a right-wing coup.

The coup was planned and executed by reactionary political parties, the Chamber of Commerce and oli­ garchical mass media. Globo, the largest TV and news channel in Brazil, has actively supported right-wing measures throughout the process. From 1964 to 1985, it served as a propaganda tool for the military dicta­ torship. Despite its subsequent apology for support­ ing the dictatorship, today it continues its reactionary role. Globo anchors promoted the pro-impeachment demonstrations and called for the population to par­ ticipate. These protests got round-the-clock coverage, while the struggles of workers and left forces got little airtime.

The coup was led by the Brazilian Democratic Move­ ment Party (PMDB), a right-wing party that previous­ ly backed the PT and had the Vice Presidency under Dilma. It was also supported by the PT’s right-wing neoliberal opposition, the Brazilian Social Democ­ racy Party (PSDB). The impeachment was facilitated by Brazil’s judicial system through orchestrated, se­ lective attacks against the PT while ignoring charges against other parties involved in the Petrobras scan­ 6 SOCIALIST ACTION JUNE 2016 dal, the largest corruption scandal in Brazil’s history.

How did the coup come about and how did the oncepopular PT lose the reigns of power? It is necessary to answer these questions before examining the deep political and economic crisis the country is facing. The coup will not resolve this underlying crisis. On the contrary, growing tensions and conflicts are likely to emerge. At this historic moment, the situation in Brazil poses a tremendous challenge for revolution­ ary socialists.

The failure of class conciliation The PT emerged out of working-class struggle. In the early 1980s, metalworker strikes in Sao Paulo marked the end of the dictatorship´s complete control over workers and labor. Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva, then president of the steelworkers’ union, became a major figure in the labor movement during these strikes. He went on to create the Workers’ Party as well as the CUT (national labor confederation), creating a divi­ sion between the PT’s political party and their labor organization, in other words, between the political superstructure and labor’s economic struggles.

Although the PT was built on workers’ support, it has employed a politics of class-conciliation. The PT’s 13 years in the presidency have been marked by mi­ nor social welfare measures that assisted people in extreme poverty. In the process, millions of precari­ ous jobs were generated. PT measures broadened the consumer market and provided larger sections of the population with access to credit, giving the illusion of more prosperity than there actually was.

It is not uncommon for Brazilians to say that Presi­ dent Lula eliminated starvation, or for poor people to say that thanks to the Workers’ Party, they can buy meat to eat with their rice. The PT years greatly ex­ panded access to a university education.

At the same time, however, the education system was highly privatized; large government loans were handed over to corporate executives. Free public uni­ content with political and economic conditions, the masses, the left, youth, and workers took to the streets and challenged the whole political class in the momentous protests of June 2013—late in President Dilma’s first term.

As the economic crisis deepened, the PT could no longer maintain the social pact that it represented. There had emerged a crisis characterized by growing budget deficits, a gigantic corruption scandal involving one of the most promi­ nent corporations, and a decrease in the price of com­ modities.

From December 2015 to April, over one million workers joined the ranks of the unemployed; the un­ employment rate jumped from 6 percent to over 10 percent in less than two years. The crisis has made it impossible for all sides to “win” or even maintain the illusion that they are winning. The PT has made clear that they will implement cuts and austerity measures, forcing workers to pay for the economic crisis.

Aggravating this harsh economic U-turn from pros­ perity to crisis, a political reversal has also taken place: from the PT’s dominant political position to Dilma’s ongoing impeachment. Dilma Rousseff was re-elected in October 2014 while campaigning on an anti-austerity platform. However, once in office she implemented harsh austerity. She even cut down many of the education reforms that the PT imple­ mented—in one case, cutting the available seats in the technical college program by half.

Social discontent from these policies has caused Dil­ ma’s approval rating to plummet to the lowest levels in decades (roughly 10 percent). The well-off middle class, not as affected by the economic situation as the poor, began to mobilize a year ago. Protests were or­ ganized by the PSDB, right-wing opposition of the PT, which refused to accept the election results. Propelled by the mass media and widespread indignation over corruption practices, enormous crowds demanded Dilma’s removal. They praised the judiciary heroes cooked up by the media and railed against the left. Some even praised the military dictatorship.

In the process, the PT’s allies defected. Above all, they were pressured by powerful business lobbies (continued on page 7)

Scan page 7

(continued from page 6) and perceived a situation in which the media, the judiciary powers, and sectors of the middle class supported Dilma’s impeachment. All the right-wing and center parties that once sup­ ported the government joined the opposition and pushed for impeachment trials. Most im­ portantly, Michel Temer’s PMDB began to call for impeachment.

It is notable that the impeachment was or­ chestrated by the PT’s political allies. In the past, these right-wing figures were not op­ posed or criticized by the PT government, which used this alliance of convenience to gain the presidency. The PT dug its own grave by al­ lying with these forces to maintain power. Its strategy of class conciliation has proven an ut­ ter and complete failure, with its former rightwing allies spearheading impeachment efforts and the working class nowhere to be seen. PT refuses to mobilize workers against coup The division between the PT’s political party and its labor organization, CUT, was main­ tained during the impeachment proceedings. In the past, the Brazilian working class has en­ gaged in strikes and work stoppages against cutoffs and other measures taken by the bosses or the government. The CUT engaged in these struggles only when given great pressure by its base to organize an action. Likewise, the CUT did not put up a real fight against the current right wing coup, largely because the PT did not want them to.

The CUT called for inoffensive rallies that were more spectacle than struggle. This is particularly egregious when one considers that the CUT has approximately 25 million workers in its ranks, within strategic sec­ tors of the economy, including metal, oil, and banking sector workers. Yet CUT did not call for a single strike, assembly or picket—working-class methods of strug­ gle to challenge the impeachment.

Why would the PT, a party that emerged from the great metal-worker strikes of the ’80s refrain from employing all of the weapons in its arsenal to fight the coup? Why wouldn’t the party use the same methods that brought it into existence? The answer is because the PT is implementing budget cuts and privatization, attacking workers and making them pay for the eco­ nomic crisis. If the PT were to unleash the power of the working class to fight against the impeachment, who is to say that they won’t fight against the PT and their austerity measures next?

CUT opened the way for the coup by its lack of resis­ tance, showing more fear of working-class radicaliza­ tion than of the right-wing coup. Instead of employ­ ing the CUT to fight against the impeachment, Lula attempted to form more coalitions by unsuccessfully trying to buy off right-wing representatives.

Despite the PT’s dismal mobilizations, many Brazil­ ians opposed the impeachment. A substantial portion of the coup’s opposition did not support Dilma’s gov­ ernment, but rather, demanded democracy and were against the right wing. Many correctly understood that the coup would bring to power a more aggressive, unelected austerity government.

The challenges facing Temer The most likely scenario is that Vice President Te­ mer will become president and enact a series of new cuts. Last November, Temer and the PMDB published a document called the “Bridge to the Future,” which outlined strict austerity measures, such as reforming labor laws, dismantling workers’ rights, raising the retirement age, and privatizing public health and edu­ cation.

The big media corporations in the country demand that the upcoming government implement such a pro­ gram right away and “shock” the nation in 10 days, much like Argentina’s neoliberal Mauricio Macri. Forecasting difficulties, they advise him to implement the measures by presidential decree—authoritarian measures for an unelected President Temer.

Yet Temer potentially faces various obstacles that will weaken his presidency. First, the working class could finally become a protagonist by fighting against austerity measures. Although the CUT did not mobi­ lize to keep Dilma in power, the union may be forced to mobilize against the cuts due to growing workers’ discontent. Also, the international media has not ex­ pressed support for the impeachment, further weak­ ening the strength of a possible Temer government.

Furthermore, Temer has been implicated in the Petrobras corruption probe and investigations into election finance practices. Both issues could bring about a new impeachment process and the cancel­ lation of his presidency by Brazil’s Electoral Court, which would give way to new presidential elections. However, at this moment, that situation doesn’t seem to be plausible. Brazil’s elite wants a strong govern­ ment as quickly as possible in order to implement austerity measures.

With midterm elections coming up next year, Temer is in a difficult position. His support from the bour­ geoisie is based on his ability to implement austerity measures, but these measures could prove detrimen­ tal to PMDB’s popularity in the midterm elections.

Another challenge for the Temer government is a floundering economy that austerity measures cannot fix. What is more likely is that there will be further economic recession, possibly deepening into an eco­ nomic depression. Based on economic forecasts, by the end of 2016 the country’s GDP will have fallen 9 percent since 2014.

One thing is certain: there is growing resistance against austerity measures. Students have occupied nearly 100 schools in Rio de Janeiro in support of teachers who have been on a month-long strike de­ manding increased wages and denouncing constant delays in pension distributions. Throughout the coun­ try, university students are fighting against cuts to the education budget, and voting to strike and mobilize against the presidential impeachment. These actions point a way towards fighting the impeachment with­ out supporting the PT government and its cuts.

The defeat of the PT is not synonymous with the defeat of Brazil’s working class. The worsening eco­ nomic situation and Temer´s anticipated austerity measures will be a major test for Latin America´s larg­ est working class.

Drawing revolutionary lessons It is clear to socialists that Lula and his successor Dilma are responsible for the privatization of Bra­ zil’s oil, increased unemployment, billions in cuts to education and health care, and for the growth of the reactionary figures who led the coup. The left must fight these cuts. Yet opposing the PT and its austerity program does not mean supporting a right-wing coup. While this seems to be an obvious difference, many Brazilian socialists have fallen into this logic.

The most important group to the left of the PT, the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL), closed ranks with the PT and used their parliamentary leaders to de­ nounce the coup. Yet like the PT, they demanded abso­ lutely no action from the labor unions.

However, within the PSOL, other sectors acted dif­ ferently. The PSOL’s ex-presidential candidate Luciana Genro, who received nearly 1.5 million votes in 2014, demanded general elections in the crucial days lead­ ing up to the impeachment. Only on the eve of the vote in the House of Representatives did Genro finally release a statement against the impeachment. Her si­ lence contributed to the absence of mobilizations and promoted the illusion that general elections could be an advance for the working class at this juncture.

The call for general elections, now echoed by The Economist, was supported by another ex-presidential contender, Marina Silva. Silva’s presidential bid was strongly financed by Brazil’s largest bank and Brazil’s most-read newspaper, Folha de São Paulo. Sectors of the right are on the same boat, calling for new elec­ tions ever since Dilma was elected.

The Unified Socialist Workers’ Party (PSTU), anoth­ er left party in Brazil, which has a stronger working-class presence than PSOL, took an even more disas­ trous position. The PSTU’s main slogan was “out with all of them,” and it called for “general elections” via a hypothetical general strike. The PSTU’s hypothesis of general strike has no basis in reality: there is no movement towards a strike and workers are not the subjects bringing about President Dilma’s ouster, or anyone else for that matter.

Those who are yelling, “Out with all,” are in fact yell­ ing, “Out with Dilma.” The PSTU’s call helps conceal AP (Above) Protesters lampoon Dilma Rousseff and Luiz Ignacio da Silva (Lula), former president and founder of the Workers Party (PT).

the right-wing nature of the coup. Certainly “out with all of them” would be progressive if it came from a workers’ uprising against all of those in the govern­ ment. But the reactionary nature of the coup was demonstrated through the vote in Congress—with speeches dedicated to God and military dictator­ ship—if it wasn’t already clear. However, the PSTU did not speak out against the right and instead echoed them by calling for the immediate ousting of Dilma.

The toppling of government by the working class is one thing; the toppling of government by corrupt re­ actionaries is another thing entirely.

The essential lesson in Brazil is that one cannot characterize a movement solely by what happens, but rather, by who is the primary subject. Certainly, if the working class were to mobilize and oust the govern­ ing party due to its cuts and betrayals, it would signal a major advance in a revolutionary process. However, a victory by the right while the working class passive­ ly watches is far from revolutionary, or even progres­ sive.

On overcrowded buses, in workplaces, at neighbor­ hood bars, everyone is discussing the impeachment. Esquerda Diario, the most-read left digital news in Brazil, releases articles every day that reach thou­ sands with the call to create a movement against the impeachment that is independent of the PT. The Revo­ lutionary Workers’ Movement (MRT), the political party behind Esquerda Diario, has been pushing for a real plan to fight against the cuts and the impeach­ ment. While the PT seeks to contain struggles, it is time for workers and students to knock down all the barriers created by the PT and the CUT to defend our democratic rights.

The only solution to the putrid regime we live in is a socialist revolution. However, we are not in a revo­ lutionary period. There are many who wish to defend democracy against the coup, want to end corruption and get rid of a regime that opens the door to protofascist representatives in parliament. Therefore, mass worker mobilizations against the coup and against the PT cuts should culminate in a Constitutional Assem­ bly to implement radical democratic measures. Such measures should include instituting the direct elec­ tion and revocability of all government officials, from the currently state-appointed court justices to the representatives in Congress. Each politician and judge should receive no more than the salary of a school­ teacher.

A Constitutional Assembly should address unem­ ployment by prohibiting companies from firing work­ ers. The assembly should also suspend the payment of the public debt that consumes 43 percent of the na­ tional budget, while public necessities like education and health care suffer aggressive cuts.

The submission of labor and student unions to the PT and its conciliatory strategy undermines the strug­ gle of youth and workers against unemployment, bud­ get cuts and the coup. This political surrender inhibits workers and students from building radical solutions to the grave situation Brazilians face.

But this chapter is not over. In the upcoming months in Brazil, these lessons are fundamental. They will be used address the growing grievances and offer a clear strategic position: fight the right-wing, oppose auster­ ity and overcome the PT, which serves as an obstacle to a militant and revolutionary working class—a class that must be organized not in a corrupt pro-business party but in a revolutionary party to put an end to capitalism. n SOCIALIST ACTION MAY 2016 7

Scan page 8

Bernie Sanders National Campaign Committee ... Sanders’ demise (continued from page 1: “Bernie Sanders’ demise: What are the lessons?”) tial convention representation on the Democratic Party’s “Platform Committee,” where party leaders supposedly hammer out a program with a real-world shelf life of a matter of days. Sanders’ appointment of liberal professor and civil rights activist Cornell West and leading climate-crisis activist and founder of 350.org Bill McKibben to this committee are but the first of many “concessions” in the offing for Sand­ ers’ sheepherding services.

Sanders, his protestations to the contrary, has been a welcome addition to the periodically orchestrated “lesser evil” sham employed by ruling-class leaders and their ever calculating and sophisticated think tanks. They know full well that capitalist elections are essential to promoting the myth of democracy and to orienting social movements into safe electoral chan­ nels.

Well before Sanders proclaimed his “democratic so­ cialism,” several national polls indicated that social­ ism was on the minds of millions. A 2016 poll indi­ cated that 49 percent of youth 30 years old and un­ der preferred socialism over capitalism, up from 46 percent three years earlier. The Black population as a whole, according to this same Pew Poll, registered a 55 percent preference for socialism.

It is in this growing anti-capitalist context that Sanders, “political revolution” rhetoric in hand, has consciously stepped forward to lend legitimacy to the Democratic Party, the nation’s infamous “graveyard of social movements.”

Hillary Clinton and her advisers equally understand the political shell game and makeover schemes. One of capitalism’s most heinous pro-corporate warmon­ gers and racist apologists has been momentarily transformed, presto change-o, into a feminist, hu­ manist, anti-racist, and environmentally concerned politician! No doubt Donald Trump’s team will at­ tempt a similar reconfiguration, as evidenced by the racist bigot’s scripted and teleprompter-presented performance on June 7, when he noted, “We’re going to take care of our Afro-American people that have been mistreated for so long.”

Political discontent rising in U.S. population In the coming weeks and months, we will all “feel the fizzle” when Sanders, as repeatedly promised, stumps the nation, undoubtedly at times with Hillary at his side, hustling votes on her behalf to rescue the nation from the “greater evil”—Donald Trump. Sand­ ers already received his first call on June 7 from Presi­ dent Obama, presumably suggesting that he accede to the “presumptive victor,” Clinton.

The June 9 face-to-face encounter with Sanders’ oftproclaimed friend Obama (the “great deporter” and overseer of the present seven U.S. imperialist wars) was undoubtedly arranged to privately negotiate the terms of his surrender.

Until June 9, Obama had declined to side with either candidate, knowing full well that a premature tilt against Sanders would further distance potential vot­ ers from Clinton, whose “unfavorable” ratings have risen to near historic highs as congressional approval ratings have sunk to historic lows—11 percent.

Meanwhile, liberal media pundits like the MSNBC crew are openly suggesting that intelligent Demo­ crats quickly find a way to coax Sanders into the Clinton fold, even suggesting that the crooked “su­ perdelegate” scenario be dropped entirely (in future elections of course), and that Sanders be given near control over the party’s window-dressing platform committee.

“What do Sanders’ supporters do?” asked MSNBC. “While Sanders will likely endorse Clinton eventually, his supporters are another matter. Many are inde­ pendent voters without strong ties to the Democratic Party, so they may continue fighting Clinton no mat­ ter what Sanders does.”

MSNBC continued, “Sanders’ task now, if he wants to help Clinton, will be to do so while avoiding being labeled a tool of the establishment by his own sup­ 8 SOCIALIST ACTION JUNE 2016 porters.”

Step one in the current two-stage largely orches­ trated “lesser-evil” electoral game has been Sand­ ers’ shepherding the growing number of people with anti-capitalist sentiments back into the Democratic Party. Step two will now focus on Sanders’ efforts to do the same with those who have been drawn into his orbit but who may well decide to quit the electoral shell game in disgust—currently the Clinton-Obama team’s worst nightmare. “Be nice to Bernie” is their present scripted message.

The fact that capitalism’s higher ups felt compelled to lend an air of legitimacy to Sanders’ fake social­ ism is an indication of the questioning nature of our times and the deep discontent that is percolating in the consciousness of working people.

A New York Times/CBS poll last November indicated that some 56 percent of registered Democrats who were questioned said they felt positive about social­ ism as a governing philosophy. Twenty-nine percent had a negative view. This, in itself, goes a long way in explaining why Clinton, and in fact, most Republican Party candidates, largely refrained from the red-bait­ ing tirades that have been the usual stock-in-trade of capitalist politics. Attacking Sanders as a socialist might well have the effect of advancing his credibility, not to mention that of socialism!

In time, when the inevitable and broad-ranging working-class fightback takes shape in forms truly independent of and against the twin parties of capital and its liberal “third-party” middle-class-based vari­ ants like the Green Party, working people will find genuine political avenues and mass organizations of struggle to express their disgust at capitalist aus­ terity and social regression. This combination of re­ newed and massive mobilizations in the streets, in re­ invigorated and democratically led union fightbacks, and in anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic, and pro-environment struggles will undoubtedly find an expression in the political arena.

The desire for political “independence” of the two major parties, however vague this term might be in the minds of millions at the present time, is gaining ground in the United States. A full 43 percent of the electorate, according to a recent Gallop Poll, is reg­ istered as Independent, with Democratic Party reg­ istration at 32 percent, and Republican Party regis­ tered voters at 23 percent.

U.S. left collapses before Sanders There is no doubt that Sanders’ “political revolu­ tion” and “anti-establishment” rhetoric, not to men­ tion his self-proclaimed “democratic socialism,” has spiked interest in the current primary contests as well as in socialist ideas more generally. Again, this is the consciously orchestrated aim of the Sanders proj­ ect; the U.S. ruling class and its pundits are more than capable of appealing to the best instincts and highest aspirations of working people for a better life for all in order to once again lure them into their life-extin­ guishing anaconda-like institutional clutches.

Tragically, many of those who claim to know bet­ ter—those who seriously consider themselves social­ ists—have been active partisans, if not enthusiastic advocates, of today’s ruling-class-promoted Bernie Sanders brand of lesser-evilism.

Among these socialists, and perhaps the most prom­ inent Sanders supporter in the primary contests, is Kshama Sawant, and her Socialist Alternative party. Sawant is a two-time winner in recent Seattle citycouncil election contests, where she ran as an open Travis Dove / NY Times Two prominent Sanders supporters:

(Above) Black activist and scholar Cornell West.

(Left) Climate activist and 350.org founder Bill McKibben, shown with Bernie Sanders.

socialist and against the Democratic Party machine.

Socialist Action hailed Socialist Alternative’s Se­ attle campaigns, and the associated Socialist Alter­ native city council run by Ty Moore in Minneapolis. Socialist Action enthusiastically participated in these campaigns, contributed financially, organized public fund-raising forums, went door to door, and other­ wise widely publicized this inspiring socialist effort.

This is not to say that we were not aware that So­ cialist Alternative originally sought, unsuccessfully, to organize these campaigns as joint efforts with the pro-capitalist Green Party. But Green Party leaders rejected those overtures, leaving Socialist Alterna­ tive with a critical decision as to how to proceed. To their credit, they took the high road in working-class politics and ran as socialists, but their penchant for the middle-class Green Party was never far from their perspectives.

Today, that road, leading to independent socialist working-class politics against the Democratic Party, has been abandoned, with Socialist Alternative and Sawant actually campaigning for Sanders in all the Democratic Party primary contests.

In an article published in the May 4 issue of Counter­ Punch, Sawant gives an explanation for phase two of their electoral strategy. She writes: “To endorse Hill­ ary, even with a more progressive platform, would be the opposite of political revolution and would aban­ don all the vital energy and momentum we have built over this historic past year. We simply can’t afford to make this mistake. That’s why I have launched a petition calling on Bernie Sanders to run all the way to November as an independent, and to use his cam­ paign as a launch pad for a new political party of the 99%.”

Sawant immediately continues: “If Bernie’s only concern is that running independently could open the door to a President Trump, then why could he not at least campaign in the 40+ states where it’s general­ ly clear the Democratic or Republican candidate will win? Even in this way, while not putting his name on the ballot in the 5-10 closely contested ‘swing states,’ he could still run an historic campaign if linked to building a new party” (emphasis in original).

But Sawant’s “new party” in this case is, again, the middle-class, pro-capitalist Green Party, which has regularly urged its supporters to vote Democrat in “swing states” or simply declined to seek ballot status in these “contested states.” Sawant’s petition calls on Sanders to run on the same ticket as the Green Party’s presumptive presidential candidate, Jill Stein—per­ haps to replace Stein on the ballot with Sanders.

Here it is important to remind readers that the terms “independent” and “third party” are not always clear. There are several “third parties” today, ranging from extreme right-wing expressions of capitalist politics like the Libertarians and the Constitutional Party to liberal, reformist Democratic Party-oriented outfits like the Working Families Party, to the pro-capitalist Green Party.

In the case of the Green Party, let me remind read­ ers that Green presidential candidate Ralph Nader achieved ballot status in six states via heinous agree­ ments with Patrick Buchanan’s incipient fascist Re­ (continued on page 9, in “N.Y. assault on & free speech”)

Scan page 9

Mark Ugolini / Socialist Action