Anarchists oppose China trade deal

I thought anarchists were supposed to be opposed to capitalism, but instead this advocates "the accountability of businesses to the community".

The submission also complains that the deal undermines NZ manufacturers. So, the Wildcat group doesn't want to undermine NZ capitalists (well, not the manufacturing ones anyway)?

The commentary also says the group opposes Chinese workers coming in under the FTA as they won't have protections and wage rates the same as NZ workers. This is the same argument used by many of the advocates of the White NZ policy in the 1890s and early 1900s. It's rather disturbing to see this argument being put forward today by anarchists.

In fact, all these three objections could be made by the National Front!

Philip Ferguson

Jared wrote: "Of course anarchists oppose capitalism — which is why their concern must be the immediate effect of free trade and capitalist agreements on communities, workers and their workplaces — local and international — hence their statements!"

But opposing free trade is in no way the same as opposing capitalism - indeed many of those who are most vehemently opposed to free trade are small NZ capitalists!

"Your critique re-enforces the absolute misconception of anarchist ideas. You then proceed to lump all anarchist viewpoints as being in agreement with this particular collective — some would argue that as a form of racism..."

!!LOL
I think maybe you've been reading a bit too much po-mo theory, or maybe you just need to get out more...

Tim Bowron

thr workers party supports free trade, and says small capitalists oppose it - guess whats the big capitalists think.... the same as the workers party - they are pro free trade.

so the workers party has some explaining to do.

free trade benefits capitalism and bosses, and investors and the most dominant trade partner (in this case china, it is not an equal trade).

it undermines their workers, our industries and workers and national soverignty.

Why are the workers party siding with helen clark and phil goff? and people like fran o sullivan?

"the workers party supports free trade"?

I think not. Have a read of our statements on our website and I think you will find that we do nothing of the sort.

Instead we point out the simple truth that neither free trade nor the bankrupt strategy of economic nationalism/protectionism offer any solution for workers - the only solution is to overthrow capitalism itself (for which in the current NZ situation the first concrete step must be to fight all job losses through the occupation of any businesses threatened with closure).

We do this because we understand (unlike our friends in RAM or *some* anarchists who clearly should know better) that the role of revolutionaries is not to put forward arguments and slogans that are necessarily going to gain them the most popularity or fit with the existing (low) level of consciousnes, but rather the ones that articulate what it is that the working class objectively needs to secure its liberation.

cheers,

Tim

The answer to free trade and the racist divisions that divide the working class needs to start with workers solutions to job losses and factory closures now. Every workplace needs to fight for workers control and every workplace closed down by the capitalist market should be socialised by the workers.
Put the hospitals under workers control!
Occupy and nationalise Fisher and Paykel without compensation as the answer to job losses and factory closures!

http://rankandfilers.blogspot.com/2008/05/socialise-fisher-and-paykel.html

Dave Brown

Indeed Dave is on the right track there (although I'm not sure he really needs to use so many exclamation marks).

Also if we are serious about getting rid of capitalism we can stop calling every election for people to vote for capitalist parties like Labour and the Greens.

cheers,

Tim

I want to add a disclaimer here — I'm not part of the wildcat collective. In fact, if I were to vote, I'd probably vote for The Workers Party. I agree with almost all of its statements, Marx etc etc.

My examples I've drawn from my own workplace. I wish my workmates were talking about kicking out the boss, but its GST, free trade and petrol around the lunch room at the moment. I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here, but Wildcat has addressed a concrete issue which has more prominence than Marx or Bakunin in most worker's realities. Sad, I know.

Jared

I wish I could dance, but i have to left feet....

Jared

"No, you're far too busy doing interprative dances for government bureaucrats! :P"

Rather be dancing in front of one than becoming one...

"I wish my workmates were talking about kicking out the boss, but its GST, free trade and petrol around the lunch room at the moment. I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here, but Wildcat has addressed a concrete issue which has more prominence than Marx or Bakunin in most worker's realities."

I totally agree - unfortunately the current consciousness is not revolutionary (hell, it's not even reformist at my workplace insofar as most of my co-workers seem to have zero expectations of achieving anything).

However I don't think we can solve this simply by hiding our politics and pretending to be simply left-Keynesians or whatever.

Revolutionaries have a long hard slog ahead of them to patiently explain their ideas to the small number of workers who will listen to them given the non-revolutionary nature of the present period.

This is why the Workers Party run in elections - not because we expect our ideas to be massively popular or that we will get many votes, but rather to gain a slightly wider audience for revolutionary ideas.

But this is just one tactic of many - strikes, protests, writing articles and holding educational forums are all equally important and vital tasks.

cheers,

Tim

Tim,
Ive seen Workers' Party call for occupations but not socialisations of closed factories such as Feltex. Presumbably you would organise the occupations and then call for socialisations. Bit like winning democracy in Nepal to create the conditions for socialism later.

If I'm on the right track I'm a bloody sight further up it than you are since there is no point calling for workers democracy or workers occupations unless you are calling for workers power. Otherwise you are preparing workers for the bosses counter-revolution. Occupy for what? Democracy for what?

As for critical support for Labour. There is no question that most low paid workers even highly pissed off with Labour are not so stupid as to vote for Key. While that is the case it is totally sectarian to call for a vote for WP on a program that, as far as I know - maybe you will develop your program to include some socialist demands - does not even step outside a bourgeois republic in a country you think is imperialist! (you see the point of the exclamation mark)

A communist position would be to use the election to put up your full program for socialism. But since you know that most workers still have illusions in parliament and the 'lesser evil', Labour in this case, you would say to them, "if you don't agree with our program yet, we'll support you to re-elect Labour so that at some point in the future this experience will teach you that we are correct."
Its called a united front with reformist workers to win them to revolution.

Dave

I wrote:
>"The commentary also says the group opposes Chinese workers coming in under the FTA as they won't have protections and wage rates the same as NZ workers. This is the same argument used by many of the advocates of the White NZ policy in the 1890s and early 1900s."

Sam Buchanan replied:
>The usual Marxist silly point-scoring.

Sam, why don't you try responding to the actual political argument here. Heaps of advocates of the White NZ policy made exactly the same argument that you are defending. It's nothing to do with 'point-scoring'; it's an historical fact.

>Apparently Philip Ferguson thinks it's quite OK for a group of workers in New Zealand to be paid less and have less protections since they are employed by a Chinese company.

The answer, Sam, is not to join the NF in trying to keep out Chinese workers; it's to work to *unionise* them when they're here and challenge any and all restirctions on their rights. It's weird that I should have to explain this basic point of workers' solidarity to an anarchist, especially one who has been aorund as long as you have.

It's not up to revolutionaries to give advice to the NZ ruling class on which trade policies - protectionist or free trade - they should deploy. Both work in the interests of capital.

This is what class-struggle anarchists and Marxists should both be explaining.

Phil

Phil — I agree with what your saying about unionising workers and addressing class issues. But the Wildact never mentions anything above about keeping chinese workers out!

Please, stick to the facts. You've made good points, but them they fall flat when you again, lump the Widcat with NF via statements they never actually made. And yes, the same can be said of Sam's comments re Marxism.

Lets agree here that workers interests are paramount in any kind of struggle, and currently, that includes free trade with china.

Jared

"The answer, Sam, is not to join the NF in trying to keep out Chinese workers; it's to work to *unionise* them when they're here and challenge any and all restirctions on their rights."

We never suggested keeping Chinese workers out - we opposed a legal framework by which they can do temporary work in NZ under Chinese employment conditions. Isn't that what you are saying about opposing restrictions on their rights? Or do we have to wait until the agreement is in effect before doing so? Don't you see bringing in what are in effect temporary contract workers as an attack on both worker's rights and union organising?

I'm not particularly up on the history, but I wasn't aware of previous proposals to allow Chinese workers to work in NZ under Chinese labour laws, so I'm not sure that your alleged historical parallel holds water.

Cheers
Sam

"Is this The Jared, Dave & Tim Show? Not what I wanted with my breakfast."

Maybe try Denny's?

This discussion started with comments on the Wildcats actions. I think they were misguided and in the end called on the NZ state to stop the China FTA.

The WP alternative was to advocate internationalism and unity between workers of all nationalities. OK but how? Occupations of closed factories was the most promising suggestion.

However, occupations, like standing for bourgeois parliaments on a reformist program, are a minimal program which does not raise the need for socialism. There is no linking of these immediate demands with transitional demands such as nationalisation and workers control, and then to the obvious ends of a program which is workers power and socialism.

Does the Workers Party support occupation of Fisher and Paykel with the accompanying demands of nationalisation under workers control with no compensation?

Or will than stand for parliament with a minimal program for a 'workers republic'?

Dave Brown
http://redrave.blogspot.com/2008/02/nz-crisis-free-trade-and-socialism.html

"is when we smash national borders and I can sell my labour where ever I please."

You must be rich to think this in the first place. Most workers cant even afford a bus ticket to work, let alone a plane ticket to Oz.

What is the difference between Capialism and Communism?
With Capitalism people are exploited by other people. With Communism it is the other way around

Many right wing libertarians oppose central government. That doesn't make them anarchists, nor does that mean anarchists are promoting a right wing agenda.

"a country that censors its own media"

Good heavens. Nasty Chinese censors.

Not like the nice New Zeland media. You can get whatever you like up in the New Zealand media. Left, right, any day, anytime, any opinions can get equal space. Really. Try it at home sometime.

Good on the Wildcat Collective for doing this. It shows that they have a real ear to the ground on what's happening in New Zealand, and know the real issues amongst the working class.

People need to stop being so ruthlessly critical of each other amongst the left: just because these cats are against free trade doesn't make them racists. And even if they are supporting local capitalists by default, why is in better for Marxists to be trying to support international capitalists? :P

Cheers,
Oliver Woods
RAM Co-Organiser

Yeah can we have more information about the dance? What did you wear?