Category: Uncategorized

Liveblog: New Scientist Live, London

14:41

Coming up next: Monica Grady on Rosetta’s Legacy.  Monica is a space scientist at the Open University.

Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko on 3 August 2014.
Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko on 3 August 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14:15

When Arabic science changed the world – with Jim Al-Khalili.

The House of Wisdom was a real place - in Baghdad - where science was done.
The House of Wisdom was a real place – in Baghdad – where science was done.

Between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, according to this Baghdad-born scientist, Islamic civilization did more than just preserve the memory of Greek achievements.

They also broke new ground, including the invention of algebra.

Only at the very, very end of the talk, he addressed the question of why the golden age of “Arabic science” cam to an end — by saying that, well, civilizations just decline, and the baton is passed.

11:30

No, not an "amazing" coincidence.
No, not an “amazing” coincidence.

Robert Matthews, What are the chances?

From a 19th century short story that seemed to anticipate the sinking of the Titanic to newspaper reports about double-yolked eggs (trillion to one chance!), Matthews gave a wide-ranging, sometimes difficult, talk about probability.

He did give away one very easy way to win money off our friends, but I won’t reveal it here.

 

 

11:25

No, this not what velociraptors looked like, probably.
No, this not what velociraptors looked like, probably.

Darren Naish: What dinosaurs really looked like.  This was the first lecture I attended and I loved it.  Naish started by showing how dinosaurs are conventionally portrayed by artists — starting with the skeleton and then “shrink wrapping” a skin around them.  We now know it’s a little more complicated than that, and in addition to have muscle, fat, etc, they likely had feathers and lots of other, weirder, stuff.  If the rest of New Scientist Live is this good, I’m going to enjoy these next few days …

11:15

I don’t normally do this, but this promises to be a very interesting four days, so I thought I’d share.  I’m attending the New Scientist Live event at Excel London, where there are four theatres and a main stage, and dozens of exhibitors.  I stopped by Rentokil’s “Pestaurant” this morning, which offered up — for free — snacks made from bugs.  If I hadn’t had that croissant earlier, I might have been tempted.

Day 1: A whiff of fascism in Cleveland

I arrived in Philadelphia last night, just in time to catch Donald Trump’s acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention.

Though I have to confess that after the first four hours of his speech (or at least it felt that long, maybe it was only an hour), I nodded off.

But not before I caught these sentences:

A number of these reforms that I will outline tonight will be opposed by some of our nation’s most powerful special interests. That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit.

Big business, elite media and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over everything she does. She is their puppet, and they pull the strings.

On the one hand, you might think there’s not much wrong with this.  Some Sanders supporters might even say similar things.

We’re all against the privileged elite, against big money in politics, etc.  But Trump is using a very specific language to describe those elites and how they operate.

It is the language of fascism.  And specifically of its national socialist variety.  And this is because it imagines  a world with secret rulers who manipulate others with their money.  That ruling cabal goes un-named by Donald Trump, but just as the dog can hear a particular kind of whistle, so the fascist understands who those “special interests” are.

Not convinced that this is a classic Nazi image?  Have a look at these examples from Nazi propaganda:

jewishpuppeteers

 

Is Donald Trump an anti-Semite?  Probably not.

But he is reviving a classic anti-Jewish trope, the notion of a powerful, secretive ruling cabal that owns and controls non-Jewish politicians just as a puppeteer controls his puppets.

If Trump had made those remarks in the context of a liberal, inclusive and anti-racist speech, one would hesitate to say anything.  After all, it may simply have been a poor choice of words.

But it wasn’t a liberal and anti-racist speech — it was the most racist and reactionary speech given at a national political convention in the United States in living memory.

There was more than a whiff of fascism in it.

I worry for America.

Trade unions in the Middle East: Opening remarks at the Svensson Prize panel

Last week the International Trade Union Confederation released its annual Global Rights Index. The Index reviews the state of workers rights in 141 countries. “The Middle East and North Africa,” it reported, “were again the worst region for working people.”

In the section on Libya, the ITUC reports that “an attempt was made on the life of Nermin Al-Sharif, head of the Libyan Dockers’ and Seafarers’ Union.” Nermin “was at the wheel of a car on the outskirts of Benghazi when the occupants of two vehicles began pursuing her and shooting at her. Hit by a bullet, the trade unionist was unable to avoid crashing. She had to be hospitalised. This is the second attempt to murder Nermin Al-Sharif. Like many other human rights activists, she was targeted by fanatics.”

Referring to Bahrain, the ITUC reports on “the guilty verdict issued against the” leaders of the teachers union Mahdi Abu Dheeb and Jalila al-Salman “for allegedly attempting to overthrow the ruling system by force and inciting hatred of the regime.” Jalila was released in 2012, while Mahdi remained in prison to serve out his sentence and has only recently been freed. According to the ITUC report, both Mahdi and Jalila were tortured in detention.

And in the section on Egypt, the ITUC discusses the Centre for Trade Unions and Workers’ Services, which denounced a renewed attempt to muzzle independent trade unions. The CTUWS and its leader Kamal Abbas have long been targetted by the regime – and its predecessors – for their unshakeable commitment to independent trade unionism.

LabourStart has been involved in all three countries, launching global online campaigns in support of these brave individuals and their unions.

In 2012, working together with the ITUC, we campaigned demanding that the Egyptian government drop the charges against Kamal Abbas, who was accused of “insulting a public officer”. Over 7,000 trade unionists around the world supported that campaign.

That same year, our campaign calling on the Bahrain government to free Mahdi and Jalila got the support of more than 11,000 union members, and we hope that this contributed to the decision by the government to free Jalila.

And in November 2015, working together with the International Transport Workers Federation, we launched a campaign demanding justice for Nermin and calling on the Libyan government to take steps to protect the lives of trade unionists and human rights defenders.

All three campaigns are bound up with the story of the “Arab Spring” which began in 2011.

The revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and elsewhere have had mixed results. We are all thrilled that our brothers and sisters in the Tunisian trade union movement UGTT shared the Nobel Peace Prize last year. The success of the democratic revolution in Tunisia is due in no small part to the trade union movement there.

I have no doubt that in the coming months and years we will see the ideals of the Arab Spring come to life again in Egypt, Bahrain and Libya — and that the independent trade unions in those countries will play central roles in the battle for democracy. People like Nermin, Mahdi and Kamal, who have been jailed, shot at, harassed and denounced by authoritarian regimes and fanatics, will be free to do their jobs as trade union leaders — and recognized for their heroic efforts in the fight for democracy and social justice.

I am glad that LabourStart, working together with our partners in the international trade union movement, has been able to play a small role in all this.

And I can promise to our brothers and sisters here today, to Nermin, Mahdi and Kamal, that we will stand by your side in the struggles to come.

Thank you.

Written by Comments Off on Trade unions in the Middle East: Opening remarks at the Svensson Prize panel Posted in Uncategorized

The Arthur Svensson International Prize for Trade Union Rights – my speech in Oslo

leif-arthur-eric 020

It is a great honour to be here today and to receive the Arthur Svensson International Prize for Trade Union Rights on behalf of LabourStart. I want to thank the union Industri Energi for awarding the Prize to us this year.

It is truly humbling to read the names of winners in previous years. The people and organisations you have selected represent the very best of the trade union movement, people who are often on the front lines of the fight for democracy and social justice.

In previous years the focus of the prize has been on individuals and unions which have taken great risks and sometimes suffered enormously for the “crime” of defending workers’ rights.

Mahdi Abu Dheeb, who together with Jalila al-Salman, was jailed and tortured by a government which was willing to go to enormous lengths to prevent the spread of the “Arab Spring” to Bahrain.

Napoléon Gómez, the leader of Los Mineros in Mexico, a victim of repression and death threats who is forced to live in exile from his country.

Russian trade union leader Valentin Urusov, jailed on fabricated charges when his real crime was to stand up for workers.

We who campaign in support of people like Mahdi, Napoleon and Valentin here in places like Oslo and London take few personal risks in doing so.

We are unlikely to be jailed and tortured, or shot at or forced into exile.

We live in countries with strong trade union movements, with a democratic tradition where human rights are largely respected.

We are not on the front lines in the way that our brothers and sisters in Bahrain, Mexico or Russia are.

And yet, the role we play in building global solidarity and in particular with our online campaigns, is critical.

LabourStart was founded 18 years ago, a time when few trade unions fully grasped the importance of the internet.

Today, I think that pretty much everyone understands that the Internet has changed completely how we organize, how we campaign, how we fight.

But LabourStart, from the very beginning, this was not just about the technology.

It was about internationalism. About global solidarity. About a world where the differences between social classes are more important than the differences between nations.

In a globalized economy, we made the case a globalized labour movement.

At first, we struggled to be heard.

But over the years, what we offer to the international trade union movement is increasingly understood and valued.

When it comes to campaigning in defense of workers rights we bring two things to the table: a platform and a network.

The platform is the web-based ActNOW system, which is a bespoke system we use to make it easy for trade unionists working in any language to support our campaigns.

The network is at its core a mailing list of just under 137,000 names and addresses of trade unionists who are prepared to support our campaigns. 88,000 of them are on our English list and the other 49,000 on dozens of other lists in all the major and several minor languages.

So how does it work?

Unions come to us with problems and we offer solutions.

For a number of reasons we work mostly with the global union federations and the International Trade Union Confederation. But we also work with national trade union centres, national unions, and in some cases, even local unions and pro-union NGOs.

Those organisations come to us with issues like an employer who has sacked union officials for doing their jobs, or a government which has jailed union leaders, or — in the worst case scenario — cases where trade unionists have lost their lives and the demand is simple justice.

Working together with our union partners, we figure out what the message of the campaign needs to be, who the target of our messages will be, and how we can achieve our goal.

Once this is all agreed upon, we put the campaign online and begin translating it. Typically, a campaign will appear in 15 – 20 languages, all the translations done by volunteers.

Anyone visiting LabourStart’s website will learn about the campaign, and it will appear on many other union websites automatically. We make sure it gets known on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and other social networks.

And if that’s all we do, the campaign will be a failure and very few people will know about it.

We have learned over the years that the only effective way to get the word out about these campaigns is email.

Email, that old, low-tech, boring communications tool turns out to be the killer app of online campaigning.

When we launch a campaign targetting a company or government, within minutes of our email message going out, the first few hundred messages of protest will have been delivered.

Within a day, we could be looking at 5,000 or more messages.

Never before in the long history of the international trade union movement have we had a tool like this.

That’s great, you may be thinking, but does it work? Do sacked trade unionists get their jobs back? Do jailed union leaders get released? Is anyone listening to our protests?

The answer is yes, sometimes. Not all the time. There is no guarantee that a campaign will work. But our campaigns succeed often enough that we actually published a short book a couple of years ago called Campaigning Online and Winning where we talked about dozens of successful LabourStart campaigns.

It’s probably time to do an updated version of that book — and to translate it into Norwegian.

And I should say a word about what we mean by winning.

We don’t mean “sending a lot of protest messages”. I don’t care if we send 1,000 messages or 20,000 messages — what matters is only this: did we get the result we were looking for?

There are campaigns we have won with very few messages sent. And campaigns we’ve lost despite having mobilized very large numbers of people.

That doesn’t mean numbers don’t matter. They do. It certainly helps to have more people involved in a campaign.

But other factors play a role as well.

The central one is the role played by people on the ground. We win campaigns when the workers on the ground, the ones we are fighting for and with, show determination and grit.

The courage of so many of the workers we campaign with is truly inspiring. Our role is clearly secondary — it is their heroic struggle that wins the day.

Which brings me here today, speaking to you in Oslo at this wonderful event.

I want to speak about your role, the role of Norwegian trade unionists in the work we do at LabourStart.

More than a decade ago, Espen Loken launched the Norwegian version of LabourStart. It was one of our very first versions in a language other than English and it flourished. We tapped into a couple of things that made it a success.

First of all, Norwegian trade unionists have been using computers and the Internet for a long time. So it was relatively easy, even some years ago, to reach large numbers of workers in this country using the Internet.

And second, we tapped into a long and proud history of international solidarity in the Norwegian labour movement. On one of my visits to Oslo — I think it was my last one — I was invited by one of your unions to speak at a full-day event on international solidarity. It was part of the union’s regular congress. I can’t imagine unions in most countries doing that sort of thing, and giving international work such prominence.

As a result of our work here in Norway, we now have 2,700 trade unionists from your country on our mailing list. Every campaign we do is quickly translated into Norwegian and every mass mailing goes out to those 2,700 people.

I’m tempted to say, thanks very much. If only we had such a large group of committed trade unionists in every country.

And yet — we could do better.

The unions affiliated to the LO claim 900,000 members. YS claims 220,000 members. These are extraordinarily high numbers considering that Norway only has about five million people.

But it also tells me that the potential for LabourStart here is much greater than the 2,700 people we currently talk to and who are involved in our campaigns.

It’s important to remember that only a fraction of the people on our mailing list actually sign up to support each campaign.

Our most successful campaign at the moment in Norway is one demanding justice for the murdered Italian researcher Giulio Regeni, who was killed in Egypt while doing research into independent trade unionism.

That campaign got the support of 185 people in Norway. Which means that over 2,500 Norwegian trade unionists who are on our mailing list have not yet supported the campaign. And another million or so organized workers in Norway, members of trade unions here, have probably never heard of the campaign.

Imagine if our mailing list consisted of, say, 10% of the members of Norwegian unions. The 10% who care the most about international solidarity.

Instead of having 2,700 people as part of our global network, we’d have 110,000. Instead of sending 185 messages of protest to the Egyptian government from here, we’d have sent over 7,500.

Is that overly ambitious?

I don’t think so.

When we started LabourStart back in March, 1998, there was no staff, no network, no resources. It was just an idea.

It grew slowly, year on year, and today we have the capacity to rapidly deliver thousands of messages of protest by email to targetted governments and employers.

But we can do so much more.

Our global solidarity conferences — the most recent ones were in Toronto, Berlin, Sydney and Istanbul — show that we can also work outside of cyberspace.

I think we’ve made great progress, and we’ve won some inspiring victories, but I’m not content and not resting on our laurels.

Looking back at the last 18 years, seeing what’s been achieved and how far we’ve come, my conclusion is a simple one.

This is only the beginning. Now, let’s start the real work.

Written by Comments Off on The Arthur Svensson International Prize for Trade Union Rights – my speech in Oslo Posted in Uncategorized

For this activist, the battle of Berlin is over

Larry Sanders and Eric Lee at a campaign event in London.
Larry Sanders and Eric Lee at a campaign event in London.

I have just left the Global Convention of Democrats Abroad here in Berlin where I represented Senator Bernie Sanders.

I was not a delegate, or elector, and hold no office in Democrats Abroad. But I was there to ensure that the best possible delegation was elected to represent our political revolution and I’m pleased with the results.

Not only did we manage to get Bernie’s brother Larry Sanders elected to the first position with nearly unanimous support, but we elected a whole team of excellent campaigners and activists. I’m particularly proud of the election of two women, one an old friend (Penny Schantz) and the other who was one of the key volunteers in London for Bernie (Kari Mosleh). I am sorry that of the 211 people who proposed themselves to be Sanders delegates from Democrats Abroad, only 9 will be going to Philadelphia in July to represent our campaign.

Among those 202 disappointed people I now have to count myself. This morning I was defeated in voting to be an alternate.

I won’t go into all the gory detail of what happened, except to say this.

Inside the Sanders Presidential Preference Group which I attended, I saw candidates rise to make their case, talking about themselves, or what they did for the campaign, or their political vision. I did not see people rising to attack other candidates, to question their integrity or make accusations against them.

Except in one case.

Over the course of the last several days, I was repeatedly accused, publicly and in private conversations, from the floor and in the corridors, of the worst possible crime.

That crime was denying the existing leadership of Democrats Abroad, meaning the people who gathered together in Berlin this week, the right to choose the 9 people who would go to represent the 24,000 people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the Global Presidential Primary.

In the Delegate Selection Plan drafted by Democrats Abroad, campaigns are given the right to review the lists of self-nominated candidates, and to submit a shortlist. The campaign is obligated to submit at least two names for every open position so that in the end, the leaders of Democrats Abroad still get a say in the matter.

Instead of submitting the minimum requirement of 18 names, we submitted 34. It goes without saying that many people were disappointed not to be included on that list.

Anticipating that, I wrote to everyone who had submitted their names, explaining what we had done and why.

I’m pleased to say that I received many emails thanking me for my transparency and fairness. I did not hear a single complaint from the self-nominated candidates who were excluded from the shortlist.

That shortlist met the requirement for gender balance, and 60% of the names on it met the affirmative action criteria as well. It included young and old people, Democrats Abroad veterans and people who have never been active in the organization.

Our idea was to ensure that some of the latter group, newcomers who the existing leaders of Democrats Abroad would not know, would go as delegates to Philadelphia. Their chances were increased because of the shortlist.

And as Larry Sanders just told the participants in the convention this morning, that is what is normally done in political organizations, and is particularly needed by insurgent campaigns like ours.

Unfortunately, not everyone in Democrats Abroad shared that view, and some began spreading rumors which had no basis in fact, and which served to cast the campaign in general and me in particular in the worst possible light.

Those attacks began well before we gathered in Berlin and picked up steam over the last few days despite our best efforts to clear the air.

They reached a peak this morning when the time came for the small number of electors who showed up for an early morning session to vote in the final round for an alternate.

I was given an opportunity for speak for one minute, and used it to say what I’d done for the campaign.

The winning candidate also had a minute and used all of it to denounce me for being involved in the creation of a shortlist of candidates.

And in the midst of all this nastiness, several people worked very hard openly and behind the scenes to clear up the rumors and encourage people to vote for me. In particular I want to thank Larry Sanders, Penny Schantz, Travis Mooney, Rob and Sanja Carolina. Your support and friendship have gotten me through a difficult few days.

In the end, the delegation we are sending of Sanders supporters to Philadelphia is a good one and I’m proud to have played a role in ensuring that happened. I’m even more proud of having played a role in mobilizing thousands of people in London and around the world since June 2015, winning a spectacular victory in the Global Presidential Primary in March this year.

I expect to be in Philadelphia for the convention in one capacity or another, and look forward to meeting many of you there.

The old politics may have won a small victory in Berlin this morning. As Bernie Sanders constantly reminds us, it is a rigged system.

But I am confident that we are strong and we are growing, and the political revolution Bernie speaks about is a reality.

The struggle continues.

Written by Comments Off on For this activist, the battle of Berlin is over Posted in Uncategorized

After Wisconsin, can Sanders still win?

This article appears in today’s edition of the Morning Star.


Bernie Sanders’ victory in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary this week is being spun by the mainstream media as “too little, too late”. The consensus among pundits is that Hillary Clinton’s delegate lead is so huge that there is simply no way for the democratic socialist senator from Vermont to catch up.

That has been the case for every single one of Sanders’ recent victories, starting with his wins in Idaho and Utah on 22 March. Those two victories, in two small states, went barely noticed even if they were shocking in their scale. In Idaho, Sanders took 78% of the vote and in Utah he won over 79%. His supporters reacted by donating a staggering amount of money online, making it the third month in a row that Sanders has out-raised Clinton. But the consensus among experts was that he didn’t have a chance. Continue reading

Haufenweise schwarze Schafe

This article appears in this week’s edition of Jungle World.


Die britische Labour Party und ihr neuer Vorsitzender Jeremy Corbyn haben ein Problem mit dem Antisemitismus in den eigenen Reihen. Das wird zwar öffentlich kritisiert, aber ihre politischen Prioritäten liegen anderswo. Continue reading

After just one primary, Bernie Sanders is the most successful socialist politician in the US in 80 years

genenormandarlingtonbernie128

As someone who enjoys political history and playing around with numbers, here are the vote totals for democratic socialist candidates for US president since 1900, when Eugene Debs first ran. In 1924, the Socialists did not run an independent campaign, and stopped running all together after 1956. Splinter parties, including the Communists, Socialist Labor, Socialist Workers, and the revived Socialist Party after 1980, are not counted and the numbers were always exceptionally low.

In just one primary (New Hampshire) Bernie Sanders has done better than any Socialist candidate since Norman Thomas in 1936.

Counting votes cast in Iowa and Nevada caucuses (not currently available), he’s almost certainly beaten that record.

1900 Debs 87,945
1904 Debs 402,810
1908 Debs 420,852
1912 Debs 901,551 (the best socialist vote ever as a percentage – 6%)
1916 Benson 590,524
1920 Debs 913,693 (the highest ever – running as a federal prisoner)
1928 Thomas 267,478
1932 Thomas 884,885 (a brief Depression-era revival)
1936 Thomas 187,910
1940 Thomas 116,599
1944 Thomas 79,017
1948 Thomas 139,569
1952 Hoopes 20,203
1956 Hoopes 2,044 (after this, the party by 1968 gives up on electoral politics)
2016 Sanders 151,584 (New Hampshire primary only)

Written by Comments Off on After just one primary, Bernie Sanders is the most successful socialist politician in the US in 80 years Posted in Uncategorized, Web exclusive