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
Free delivery and 25% off – click here!
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)
Text of my presentation at Limmud, University of Warwick, 29 December 2014
My name is Eric Lee and I’m speaking to you tonight on behalf of TULIP – Trade Unions Linking Israel and Palestine.
TULIP was founded about 5 years ago and in its founding statement, signed by three very prominent trade union leaders in the UK, the USA and Australia, we said:
“At the moment, the opponents of a two-state solution are on the offensive, working hard to promote their destructive agenda of boycotts and sanctions targetting Israel. It’s time for trade unionists in all countries to go on the offensive ourselves, to challenge the apologists for Hamas and Hizbollah in the labour movement.”
To learn more about TULIP I strongly recommend you visit our website – www.tuliponline.org – and join our mailing list there.
In tonight’s talk, I want to discuss three things –
- What is happening in the world’s trade unions with regard to Israel
- Why I think this is happening
- And finally, what we can do to reverse this trend
This is the speech I gave today in Trafalgar Square at the demonstration in support of Kobane — part of an international day of action.
Comrades and friends, brothers and sisters, good afternoon.
I have been asked to speak with you today about the support trade unions are showing for the heroic people of Kobane.
We are all inspired by the steadfast resistance shown by the people of Kobane, men and women, working people like ourselves.
We must be clear about our language here: Islamic State is a fascist organization and the fighters in Kobane are on the front lines of the fight against fascism in our time.
They are fighting with great heroism and determination and I am confident that they will win.
This is a fight that the international trade union movement needs to support.
It is our fight too.
The British and international trade union movements have the moral responsibility to come to the defense of the heroic fighters in Kobane.
In the past, the trade union movement has known what it needs to do.
Eight decades ago, when fascists were besieging Madrid, trade unionists were on the front lines — literally — in the fight. The entire international working class movement, Communists and Socialists alike, were inspired by the slogan “No pasaran!” — “They shall not pass!”
Today it is the responsibility of trade unionists to once again throw our full support behind a people standing up to a fascist onslaught.
It is not enough to issue a press release.
It is not enough to pass a resolution in a trade union branch.
Comrades and friends, brothers and sisters, we must do more.
The TUC must take the lead and mobilize British workers in acts of solidarity, including bringing thousands of them into the streets to rallies like this one.
The International Trade Union Confederation and the global union federations must do the same at global level.
In the 1930s, we were not strong enough and we were unable to stop the fascists from taking Madrid.
That victory for Franco, Hitler and Mussolini must not be repeated today.
Kobane must not be allowed to fall.
They shall not pass! No pasaran!
It’s now been two months since I published my blog “Why I’m throwing my mobile phone away“. I thought this might be a good time for an update.
Since I wrote the article, I have been using my iPod Touch as a phone, mostly using free wifi in my home, office and outdoors, sometimes using a Huawei Mobile Wifi device with a GiffGaff SIM card thrown in. (This creates a Wifi zone whereever I happen to be.)
I can receive the occasional rare phone call on my incoming Skype number, and text messages (also rare) are received by the Huawei device, and I can view them via a web interface on the iPod Touch. I can send SMS messages the same way.
The main things I use a smartphone for — checking emails, updating my todo list, checking things like news and weather, reading e-books using the Kindle reader, listening to music on Spotify or iTunes, checking for cinema times in Flixster, syncing my FitBit, etc. — I do without difficulty on the iPod Touch. I don’t need an iPhone for any of this.
The experiment, so far, has been a success.
So now a word about costs. Previously I was paying on average £58 a month for all my mobile telecoms costs.
The iPod Touch cost more than I planned on, as I needed to get the 32 GB version for £249 — £50 more than I would have paid for the 16GB version. Why pay extra? Not for the extra gigabytes, but for the additional camera, which I learned did not come on the 16 GB version.
I got the Huawei Mobile Wifi device on eBay for £35.50.
So I spent £284.50 on hardware — but sold my old Samsung Galaxy Note for £110. So the total investment in hardware was just £174.50.
The Skype online number for the occasional incoming phone call costs £3.35 per month. I may get rid of this as I hardly ever use it, and anyway it’s not a contract. I can cancel at any time.
To use the Huawei Mobile Wifi (mostly on busses, to check news and emails) I took a GiffGaff SIM card for data only. This is costing me £5 a month for 500 MB of data. In addition, I had to do a one-off top-up of £10 to allow me to send and receive SMS messages.
So in addition to the £174.50 for hardware, in the first two months I’ve spent £20 on Giffgaff and £6.70 on Skype. Assuming I continue with this, over the first two years, my total expenses should be £388.25 all told. This is just £16.17 per month. By year three, this will drop to probably just £5 a month, if I chuck the Skype number.
This is considerably less than I would have paid for any iPhone plan offered by any UK carrier.
For example, Carphone Warehouse is currently promoting the iPhone 5C for £49 plus £23.99 per month.
That offer is for an 8GB model (my iPod Touch is 32 GB) with 500 UK minutes and 500 MB of data (the same amount of data that I’m getting from GiffGaff for £5 per month). The carrier is EE. Over 2 years, that would cost £634.76 — more than 63% more than what I am paying now.
It’s a savings of nearly £250 in the first two years.
The savings will grow even more after the first two years.
I’m not missing a “proper” smartphone at all, and while my experience may not be similar to others (I do, for example, have access to wifi at home and at work), surely others are also overpaying for devices that may not be necessary.
As I reported a couple of days ago, Facebook is hosting a page that promotes the “blood libel” against Jews in breach of its own Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) and, probably, British and European law.
My attempts to complain using their online system failed.
So today I’m trying something new: I’ve sent them a letter.
With a stamp on it.
I promise to report back if they respond …
I learned this morning that Facebook has a page devoted to “Jewish ritual murder” which I found hard to believe — so I checked and found it’s true.
So, as one does, I used Facebook’s complaint procedure to formally report harassment. After all, I do feel harassed — as a Jew and a human being — by people promoting vile anti-Jewish propaganda.
It took Facebook 32 minutes to respond, which is great.
Good to see that they care about racism and antisemitism and are as keen as I am to … wait a minute … here’s a screenshot of their response:
Just in case you can’t read that, here’s the essence of it:
You reported Jewish ritual murder for harassment.
Status This page wasn’t removed
Thank you for taking the time to report something that you feel may violate our Community Standards. Reports like yours are an important part of making Facebook a safe and welcoming environment. We reviewed the page you reported for harassment and found it doesn’t violate our Community Standards.
When I went to look at the Facebook “Community Standards” here’s what I found under “Hate Speech”:
“Facebook does not permit hate speech, but distinguishes between serious and humorous speech. While we encourage you to challenge ideas, institutions, events, and practices, we do not permit individuals or groups to attack others based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or medical condition.”