我译中国的大封冻-政权面临它自己的"卡特里娜飓风"

中国的大封冻-政权面临它自己的"卡特里娜飓风"

"对中国政府来说，2008年的大雪灾已经是一个公共灾难形象" -纽约时报


Vincent Kolo， 中国劳工论坛

今年2月7日农历新年即将到来之际，也是全球最大规模的人口流动之时候，中国则经历了为期近四周的极端的寒冬天气。东部和南部的许多地方经历了自1951年以来最寒冷的冬天。据中国红十字会称，暴风雪造成80多人丧生，摧毁或损坏80万间房子，经济和农业的损失高达800亿元（约110亿美元）。航空、公路和铁路运输停顿。电力线路的倒塌和煤炭运输的扰乱导致了中国有史以来最严重的停电，有些地区，如在湖南省郴州--一个有450万人口的城市，近两周没有电力供应。

因为积雪阻塞路轨和击落高架电力线路，大约8000班货运列车被延误。上海地区见证了135多年来最大的降雪，2月2日周六，其长江口的巨大的港口被迫关闭，超过1000只船只被困。铁路运输的瘫痪加剧了电力部门的危机，虽然暴雨之前存在着严重短缺，由于电厂老板为抗议政府的价格管制而蓄意减少煤炭储备，这种短缺变得更为严重。全国电网的产能的不足意味着在情况最好的时候供给偏紧。暴风雨也导致了客运业的混乱，总共10个机场关闭，以及数以万计的坐车人在封锁的道路上滞留几天。作为中国的南北干线公路的京珠高速公路关闭了17天。

江苏省社会主义者陈立志评论道，"它就像影片'后天'中景象"。他告诉中国劳工论坛说："我们在长江三角洲从来没有见过这么多的雪，在这一地区气温降至零度以下是不正常的，"

极端天气会加剧民众关注一国的气候变化，在去年由HSBC进行的一项调查中受访者中有47 ％认为气候变化是人类面临的一个最大的问题，在世界上这也是比率最高的之一。科学家们在中国的大冻结是否和全球变暖有联系上意见不一。但有些东西显然已经出差错-两个受灾最严重的省份湖南和贵州有一个副热带气候。风雪是和复发的寒冷天气的拉尼娜现象有关，拉尼娜也在最近几个星期造成了澳大利亚和印度尼西亚以及南部非洲国家的灾难性的洪水。拉尼娜现象的增强和频发及在最近几十年中其温暖天气的对应物厄尔尼诺现象强烈暗示着由于全球变暖而与更为温暖的海洋温度有联系。


中国受灾最严重的部分-安徽，江西，湖北，湖南和贵州省-包括重要的农业地区，那里冬季作物现已被毁。北京关于农业经济的高级专家陈锡文警告说："在有些地方，新鲜蔬菜和水果受到的影响是灾难性的"。农业部的报告说损失了1440万只家禽， 87万头猪， 45万头绵羊和85000头牛，它们要么冻死要么死于由于交通堵塞导致的缺乏食物和水。灾难在仅数周前实施的政府价格管制上冲破了一个大洞。据国家发改会的说法，1月25日至30日之间，36个城市里，蔬菜的价格上升30 ％。

"由于交通运输及通讯的中断，甚至电话系统失灵，某处介于8千万到1亿2千万人遭受了严重的影响" ，陈立志报道说。 "人们不得不烧木材和为照明买蜡烛。蜡烛的价格也和燃料和食品一样飙升-一根蜡烛，售价为5 -8元人民币（ 7 0美分和1 .10美元）。"


同于布什的飓风惨败

由于风雪减退和中国开始恢复，一场政治风暴正在酝酿之中。对于执政党的'共产党' ，仅在它主办奥运会的六个月之前，2008年可怕的冬天，引起了人们把它和2005年布什政府在飓风卡特里娜上拙劣的反应进行不安的比较。在美国，这一卡特里娜事件和混乱的伊拉克一起标志着一个政治转折点，布什注定是一个'跛脚鸭'总统。最近几个星期的这些事件和卡特里娜事件有许多相似之处，无论北京的宣传机器试图掩盖多少事实，已经暴露了如铁路和电力部门，地方政府，新闻媒体及紧急服务的国家机构的系统性的失败。


为什么这么多的中国的交通运输和能源基础设施在冰冻天气下瘫痪，为什么政府的反应如此缓慢和混乱？近年来中国成为所有投资蓬勃发展体之母，社会固定资产投资占去年国内生产总值份额很大达50 ％ ，但全国电网的扩张始终落后于作为一个整体的经济的增长并导致史无前例的供应紧张问题。在2001年和2007年之间，用电总需求每年增加20.2 ％ ，但安装的发电量只比今年同期增长了18.5 ％。[华尔街日报， 2008年2月6日]


在暴风雪中，有超过2000输电塔[高压电线架]和惊人的39000公里的电力线路在冰雪重压之下坍塌。中国使用的是一种高压电网而不是较为昂贵的地下电缆以及其极度依赖煤炭-供其百分之八十的电力-使得它在暴风雨中特别容易受到攻击。


在许多地区，输电铁塔的倒塌是因为它们间距甚远，这导致它们在架空电缆上的厚厚的冰雪的额外重量的重压下弯曲。这又是削减成本的结果，这是中国很多建设项目的通病。过度依赖煤炭：煤炭占了铁路总运能的百分之四十，除了其可怕的环境影响外，也带来了巨大的后勤问题。


政府对危机的处理赢得了一些人的赞誉。联合国国际减灾战略(ISDR) 的发言人萨尔瓦诺布里塞尼奥声称 "世界各地的各国政府可以借鉴中国政府的作为"。一些评论家竟然歌颂起独裁政府的美德，正如在（2月7日）国际先驱论坛报的一个报道中那样。这个报道谈及一个"独特的中国式的共产主义的群众动员，宣传和国家控制" 并称这"显示了一个独裁一党专政的共产主义政府的优势。"


不过，这并不是一个'优势'，中国各级政府的独裁和官僚政治的性质极大地阻碍了救援工作。情况正如2003年的'非典'爆发，严格对媒体的封杀的目的是防止'不稳定'，这阻碍了至关重要的关于灾害的信息流动，并减少了存在着的官方媒体通过揭露弊端和无能对政府机构施加一些压力的本来就有限的空间。这也加强了政府的强硬的，自上而下的危机管理方法。正如一名博客评论说的： "许多朋友想和我一起当义工，但没有正式接受他们的渠道。"


"政府几乎消失了… …"

外界观察家们常常被政府宣传所骗。更精明的观察员是资深的纽约时报驻上海的特派记者Howard W. French。他报道说， "中国天气紧急事件的真正的丑闻是它已经持续了好几个星期而被视而不见并且在这期间的绝大部分时间里没有以紧急事件来对待之。" [纽约时报， 2月1日]


在另一份报告中，French解释说， "虽然雪大，在全国大部分地方的降雪量-被形容为5 0年未遇-一点不象世界其他地区在冬季经常经历的深深的覆盖.. .但在很多受严重影响的地区，政府似乎已经几乎消失，需要提供的紧急服务也如此般消失。"[纽约时报， 2月3日]


即使国家控制的新华社，也引述沃尔玛中国中部地区的高级经理蒋利群的话，说灾害的严重性被大大地低估了，尽管有湖南省气象局发出的早期警报。作为中国经济和政治事务的一个关键的因素的省之间的对抗和竞争无疑使得组织全国力量来应对危机困难重重。举例来说，有的省煤炭盈余但并不愿意将它们让与急需的省份。


中央政府疲于向地方大员发号施令。来自执政的共产党的中央委员会声明警告危机期间的"官员”表现和晋升或处罚挂钩" 。许多人都会同意北京的人民大学的一位教授高芳的这样的观点，他告诉洛杉矶时报（ 2月4日） ， "危机暴露了我们的许多地方官员都是不合格的。大多数是任命的而非选举产生的。或者假如他们是被选举的，选民也往往被要求选谁" 。


但省级和地方官僚的笨拙和无能没有使得北京错过得胜的机会。第一次暴风雪袭击发生在1月10日，然而国务院，中国的内阁用了近3个星期-直至1月2 9日-建立一个全国性的指挥中心以协调救灾工作和煤炭，石油和电力部门直接运转。


官方宣传描绘了一副政府积极地投入处理危机的图景。政府高层人物，尤其是总理温家宝飞至动荡地区，如铁路车站，向群众发言并告诉地方行政部门"不要放松和倦殆" ，正如副总理吴仪说的[新华社， 2月3日]。国有媒体接到命令不报道抱怨之声，只报道正面的消息，时刻牢记'社会稳定'的威胁。在讲话和文章中多次提到'全面战争'的目的是团结人民支持政府和压制批评。国家主席胡锦涛宣布"没有灾难征服得了伟大的中国人民"。当一个统治集团如此利用宣传，工人和普通公民有充分的理由去怀疑。


危机暴露了中国社会的阶级分化。数以千万计的农民工已经被迫放弃自己的一年一次也是唯一的机会从他们的工厂无法形容的苦工和辛劳逃离回他们的家，数以百万计仍面临着粮食和电力短缺问题，最近几天煤炭公司和铁路公司的股票价格由于产生于危机的较高的利润前景而在股票市场上冲进。


有大量的关于胡锦涛在山西省访问并下矿井告诉矿工新年假期期间要继续努力工作以减轻煤炭短缺的媒体报道。他告诉他们："大家春节期间也不能休息了,在这儿我给大家提前拜个早年,祝你们身体健康!工作顺利!家庭幸福!"。这些工人如何心甘情愿地响应之就不清楚了-他们没有给予选择-但是，长达一周的假期通常是用来进行设备的维修和保养的。现在，大多数中国的国营矿山将继续在整个假期开工，而定期的维修工作将被推迟。应该记住，中国的煤炭行业在世界上有最坏的安全纪录，平均每一天有13名矿工死亡。


电力公司发起'叛乱'

尽管该政权有着可怕有力的宣传机器，'后卡特里娜'的政治反应是不可避免的。鉴于根深蒂固的独裁，这个过程将比美国卡特里娜的情况花更长的时间，但质疑和反对太多以至于不能完全消失。许多人已经质问为什么中国能把宇航员送入太空，但不能保持其列车正常运行以顺利度过一个寒冷的冬天。同样，许多人质问花费350亿美元办北京奥运会的价值，经济学家（ 2007年3月1日）指出了这一点，总费用中超过43％用于最后9项奥运会比赛项目。


另一个正当的质疑是，为什么它花了这么长的时间才调动251000解放军部队和77.2万民兵和预备役军人去清理道路和进行其他救灾工作。"在湖南，1月13日就开始下雪"一个博客写道， "为什么只有交警和普通街道清洁工在做这项工作，直至昨日才调动军队 " [国际先驱论坛报， 2008年1月30日]


战士们一旦召集，但他们的工具往往是不够的。有报道说工作队步行着用铲子清理京珠高速公路干线。在某些地区坦克被用于积雪清除工作，然而扫雪机会更有效。新华社报道士兵用机关枪射击来打落架空电缆上的冰，电视新闻显示，维修人员像蜘蛛人似的在高电压线上摇摇欲坠地用锤砍冰。因此有11名电力维修工人已经死亡的悲惨的消息传出并不令人感到意外。而这些死亡却被该政权的媒体机器用来作为鞭策激励人们进一步牺牲的一部分，但事实仍然是，由民主计划带来的机械化和一个健全的投资政策，以及工会的权利，这些人的死亡本来是可以避免的。显然，中国的电力公司没有足够的机动的起重机和斗卡车，使抢修工作变得极其危险和劳动强度很大的任务。正进行着的私有化和行业违规是无助于这些问题和其他问题的解决的。


即使是严冬天气正渐渐逼近，许多电力公司在2008年第一周故意减少它们的煤炭储备。“标准”（1月24日）指出这是一个电厂经理发起的"叛乱"，其目的是迫使政府解除价格管制和增加利润。从12月至次年1月不受国家控制的优质煤的价格上升了13％ ，由575块钱一吨涨到650元一吨，而电力价格仍是固定价格。


电力公司老板效仿了以中石化为首的国有石油炼油公司的策略，炼油公司在10月迫使政府做出了一个令人尴尬的掉头以认可汽油和柴油的价格涨价10 ％。据中国煤炭运输和分销协会的Fang Xiu’an的说法，电厂通常库存18-20天量的煤炭而在某些情况下他们的储备减少到只有3天的量。某些电厂经理据说一直在销售其库存的煤炭而不是燃煤发电，以便从较高的煤炭价格中获利。如果最近几个星期的灾害真的如政府说的是'全面战争'，那么现在许多电力公司的老板应该执行死刑。


这一危机引起了对中国经济模式的可行性的根本性质疑。正如华尔街日报（ 2月6日）指出， "问题的深度表明，该国的快速发展的经济是如何地接近于碰及其物力之极限" 。但是视这样的问题为快速的工业化的一个必然结果将是错误的。在中国问题的症结在于其投资兴盛处于极其无计划和无政府状态。正如政府经常指出的那样，许多投资被干劲十足地投到'浪费的和重复的'如大型商场或五星级酒店的项目中。没有电以及没有消费得起的消费者，这些东西有什么意义呢？


世界上最大的流动

当约2亿流动人口每年为过农历新年艰难地回家时，运输系统长期超载也表明中国的经济蓬勃发展有着极大社会代价。中国和海外资本家赚得的丰厚的利润是建立在来自中国的贫穷内地的'亚无产阶级'的这种大规模的举家移居及在沿海地区的制造业中心为期11个月安排他们住在拥挤的宿舍或其他凑合的住所里的基础上的。这些工人离开自己的亲人，旅行数千公里，然后在资本主义有史以来最恶劣的工业条件下奴隶般的工作的『动机』是不能选择留在他们的家乡，因为那里没有工作，而大部分农田规模太小而且生产力太低以至于不能养家糊口。


时间上非常巧合的，在农历新年开始前一周世界上最大的一年一度朝圣般的流动正开始时，暴风雪袭来了。估计有600万民工滞留在火车站和汽车站。 "由于大雪，成千上万的民工涌至湖南，贵州，或四川省的主要交通枢纽却发现没有更多的公交来把他们送回家" ，陈立志告诉中国劳工论坛，"大多数人住不起当地的每夜10-20元人民币（约1.40-2.80美元 ）的便宜的旅馆。因此，他们滞留，被迫睡在他们可以睡的任何地方。对于某些人，这样的情况持续了一个多星期。其他人选择以步行继续他们的行程，一天走7-10小时，在雪里跋涉50 - 100公里。"


在最糟糕时，惊人的80万名旅客滞留在广东省的省会广州的火车站，该省的流动人口比其他任何省份多-约3 千万。政府的解决方案是在铁路车站周围挂起大量横幅写着要求民工返回自己的工厂并在那里度假的标语。但对于许多人，这不是一种可以选择的办法。正如广东省的一位民工周卫解释说的 "我的工厂宿舍关闭了。我没有地方可去。" 另一位已经在商场外睡了好几夜的民工说："我觉得自己像一个难民" 。 [标准，香港， 1月31日]


大约有150万广东的民工被迫在该省度过农历新年。地方政府和官方[傀儡]工会给点甜头-电影票，卡拉O K入场券，和给家里打电话的免费电话卡。但对于缺乏书面劳动合同以及医疗保险和社会保障覆盖的一个劳动者来说，丧失自己的探亲假是一个沉重的打击。正如陈立志解释说的， "一旦得到工资，许多民工将回家一个月或更长的时间，他们可能会去一个新的地区找工作。"


这些事件再次使人确信中国的民工遭受了痛苦。一个网上的批评者问道，"什么造成了60万人滞留在火车站" ？ "这不是因为一连几天的大雪，它也不是巴士服务的推迟或取消。问题是我们的旧的城乡二元结构" 。 [纽约时代周刊， 2月3日]


因为担心动乱，车站被庞大的准军事部队围着。尽管如此，在广州站为了争购车票，一位女民工被践踏致死和500人受伤。当温家宝作为他到最糟糕的交通瓶颈处的闪电之旅而抵达广州，这部分是为了宣传目的，但部分原因也是去责备当地官员缓慢和无效地应对危机。


被大量报道的温家宝在广州手里拿着扩音器面对群众的场景突现了今天的中国的令人难以置信的社会矛盾。许多民工拥挤在车站前面，不知道是谁在讲话，在毛泽东还是邓小平的时代-那时大多数中国人没有电视，更遑论上网了，这种情况是不可思议的。


正如Howard W. French报道说的： "这默默而有力地承认了这一事实，即保持该国的经济粗制滥造的以百万计的民工是太忙或太穷或太累或太边缘化了以至于不能通过收看电视新闻而要完全通过用扩音器面对群众以足够近来认出他们国家的第二把手了" ， [纽约时报， 2月1日]


'世界级'的基础设施？

即使在正常时期，中国铁路网络在世界上也是最拥挤的，6 ％的世界的轨道运输了24 ％的世界轨道运输量。中国的铁路系统的总长度是76600公里，是世界第三。然而，相对于中国的人口与在过去20多年的爆发性的工业增长，这是一个相当不够大的系统。相比之下，德国拥有45000公里铁路，或相当于中国的58 ％，尽管事实上，德国的领土是中国的1/28。


据一份工业杂志，中国铁路，旅客列车日常只提供241万个坐位，但售出305万张票（高峰时是420万张票），迫使许多乘客站立。对12个小时的旅程来说，这不是开玩笑，由中国标准，这还不是一个特别长的旅程。

货运更是捉襟见肘。任何一天可利用运力是11万个运货车厢，日均需求量却是28万个运货车厢。像许多国有工业，铁路运输是单独省级实体，而不是形成一个完全统一的国家系统。笔者从上海到内陆省份的河北的旅行发现预先购买从北京到我的最终目的地的车票是不可能的。唯一可能的到北京本身的火车站-一个不同的省份，因此不同的公司！-去购买这样的车票

官方统计显示，在过去的5年里兴建了6500公里的新铁路。但与此相比，仅2006年一年里，建成了4400公里的新的高速公路，去年又新建了8300公里高速公路。片面强调公路建设的这种不平衡的原因是因为几乎所有的中国的高速公路都是收费道路，其经费主要根据其和省级政府的合同由私营公司出。铁路也正在向私人和外国资本开放，但这种发展比较迟，所以迄今为止，规模要小得多。


在去年9月，浙江省衢常铁路通车，这是中国的第一条部分资金由私人资本出的铁路。上海铁路局副局长称赞这是"长期以来一直由国家垄断经营的铁路首次向私人资本开放投资和融资，这是一个转折点。" [北京观察， 2007年12月20日]


政府和媒体专家正在利用这次冬季运输危机催促更快速的私有化计划和采用市场解决方案 。随着去年12月最大的铁路公司中国铁通集团有限公司在上海和香港交易所上市，中国现在有四个上市的铁路公司。根据铁道部(MOR)的统计数字，去年铁路网固定投资远远达不到目标，差近三分之一。政府办的北京观察宣布说：" 铁路建设严重缺乏资金，铁道部不得不利用资本市场为目前上市的公司融资并建立新的股份制公司上市。"

这样的一个政府的'专家' 是中国社科院的产业经济学学院的于慧，他辩称， " [铁道部]的行政性垄断必须予以消除，以建立一个合理的竞争机制来促使企业提高效率。"

然而，这些方法-放松管制和更快的私有化-在许多欧洲国家已经进行了，其结果是票价更高，员工及乘客状况恶化，安全标准下降。不应是更多的新自由主义试验和谋取暴利，中国的交通混乱是一个有力的论据证明需要民主的社会主义规划，集中国家资源和掌握技能以及主动的工人和乘客，从根本上铲除官僚主义，把所有的决策权放在选出的可以立即召回的并拿不超过熟练工人的工资的委员会手中。


鼠年

中国的统治者必将惶恐地看着这一新的鼠年。上周温家宝告诉他的内阁："我们担心的是， 2008年经济将是最艰难的一年"。一方面是快速冷却的全球经济和加深的世界各地的银行危机。另一方面存在着与夏季奥运会并行的通胀驱动的逐步增多抗议和罢工。冬季混乱突出了中国的经济增长模式的根本的弱点。北京的独裁者为降低通货膨胀率和尽量减少如能源部门的投机性破坏以及防止经济步美国硬着陆的后尘而斗争的前景如何呢？


基督教科学箴言报（ 2月1日）强调了该政权的问题： "行政价格管制难以落实，现在几乎所有的食品生产，分配和销售都掌握在私人手中...如果农民或店主不能对应他们的成本增长而提高他们的价格，他们将被引向减少供应。"


这当然是在过去2-3周以一个很尖锐的形式被我们所看到的。中央政府一直强调它的价格管制政策只是'暂时'的，而这在春节后可能会被取消，至少是部分地。正如同一期杂志上指出的： "官员坚持说，新设立的食物价格管制仅仅是一个克服市场失灵的努力，而不是退回到社会主义指令性计划经济去。中国不是亚洲唯一的一个国家在面对不断上涨的粮食价格后采取这样的行动：上个月马来西亚配给食用油，而印尼则是补贴食用油精炼厂以降低零售价格。北京的举动，包括遏制小麦，玉米，水稻的出口来努力刺激国内供给和抑制物价的上涨。"[基督教科学箴言报2月1日]


受累于今年的冬天，大量的农作物歉收增加了温家宝政府的压力，这将确保食品价格上涨，11月份以18.2 ％的月增长率向前冲着，继续名列公众的关注问题之首。再多的媒体'开足马力'和宣传也不能阻止未来几个月内对政府处理这次危机和一个引人注目的基础设施的崩溃的真正原因的批评之声。


作为社会主义者的陈立志解释说： "从该冬天的危机得到的教训是显而易见的。如今所需要的是对公共服务特别是在农村地区，围绕农业发展进行大量新的投资，而且以此为契机发展内陆省份的工业。必须扭转今天的片面的对出口的依赖。这将使得数以千万计的变成'工业游牧民'的人们在家里生活和在家附近工作，享受更好的生活水准。不过，这只有在工人和农民的民主计划生产并结束私有化和暴利的基础上才是可能的。"


尽管鼠年不祥地开始，中国劳工论坛祝愿她的读者和所有的社会主义者和劳工活跃分子有一个愉快的假期。这些事件只会说服更多的人加入结束资本主义的混乱和建立未来的民主的社会主义的斗争上来。



China’s big freeze – Regime faces its own ”Hurricane Katrina”


”The Great Snowstorm of 2008 has been a public image disaster for the Chinese government” – New York Times


Vincent Kolo, chinaworker.info


In the run up to the Lunar New Year on 7 February, which occasions the biggest human migration in the world, China experienced almost four weeks of extreme winter weather. In many parts of eastern and southern China this was the coldest winter since 1951. Snowstorms killed more than 80 people, destroyed or damaged 800,000 houses and caused economic and agricultural damage valued at 80 billion yuan (about $11 billion), according to the Red Cross in China. Transportation by air, road and rail seized up. Collapsing power lines and disruption of coal deliveries created the country’s worst ever power failures, with some areas without electricity for nearly two weeks, as in the case of Chenzhou, a city of 4.5 million people in Hunan province.


Some 8,000 freight trains were delayed as snow blocked tracks and brought down overhead power lines. Shanghai saw its worst snowfalls in 135 years, and its gigantic port at the mouth of the Yangtze River was forced to close on Saturday 2 February, stranding more than 1,000 ships. The crippling of rail services aggravated the crisis in the electrical power sector, although serious shortages existed before the storms, and became acute as power plant bosses deliberately ran down coal stocks in protest over government price controls. Insufficient capacity in the national power grid means supply is tight at the best of times. The storms also played havoc with passenger transport, with ten airports closed altogether and tens of thousands of motorists stranded for days on blocked roads. China’s main north-south trunk road, the Beijing-Zhuhai expressway, was closed for 17 days.


”It’s like something from the film, ’The Day After Tomorrow,’” commented Chen Lizhi, a socialist from Jiangsu province. ”We have never seen so much snow in the Yangtze Delta, it is not normal for temperatures to drop below freezing in this region,” he told chinaworker.info.


The extreme weather will intensify popular concerns over climate change in a country where 47 percent of those questioned in a survey by HSBC last year consider this to be one of the biggest issues facing humankind, one of the highest ratios in the world. Scientists are divided over whether there is a link between China’s big freeze and global warming. But something clearly has gone awry – Hunan and Guizhou, two of the worst-hit provinces, have a sub-tropical climate. The snowstorms are linked to La Niña, the recurring cold weather phenomenon that has also caused disastrous flooding in Australia, Indonesia and southern Africa in recent weeks. The increased intensity and frequency of La Niña and its warm weather counterpart El Niño in recent decades strongly suggests a link to warmer ocean temperatures as a result of global warming.


The worst hit parts of China – the provinces of Anhui, Jiangxi, Hubei, Hunan and Guizhou – include important farming regions where winter crops are now destroyed. ”The impact on fresh vegetables and on fruit in some places has been catastrophic,” warned Chen Xiwen, Beijing’s top expert on the agricultural economy. The Ministry of Agriculture reported the loss of 14.4 million poultry, 870,000 pigs, 450,000 sheep and 85,000 cattle, that either froze to death or died from lack of food and water due to transportation hold-ups. The disaster has smashed a hole in government price controls imposed just weeks ago. According to he National Reform and Development Commission the price of vegetables in 36 cities rose by 30 percent between 25-30 January.


”Somewhere between 80 to 120 million people have suffered serious effects as a result of the breakdown of transportation and communication, with even phone systems out of action,” Chen Lizhi reported. ”People have to burn wood and buy candles for light. The cost of candles as well as fuel and food has shot up – one block candle sells for 5-8 yuan (between 70 cents and $1.10).”


Parallels with Bush’s Katrina fiasco


As the snowstorms recede and China begins to recover, a political storm is brewing. For the ruling ’communist’ party, just six months before it hosts the Olympic Games, the terrible winter of 2008 raises uncomfortable comparisons with the botched response of the Bush Administration to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. That event marked a political turning point in the United States and, alongside the fiasco of Iraq, doomed Bush as a ’lame duck’ president. There are many parallels in the events of recent weeks, which, no matter how much Beijing’s propaganda machine tries to hide the facts, have exposed systemic failings of state agencies such as railway and power authorities, local governments, news media and emergency services.


Why was so much of China’s transport and energy infrastructure immobilised by the freezing weather, and why was the government response so slow and chaotic? China has experienced the mother of all investment booms in recent years, with fixed asset investment accounting for a colossal 50 percent of GDP last year, yet the expansion of the national power grid has consistently lagged behind the growth of the economy as a whole leading to ever tighter supply problems. Total demand for electricity increased 20.2 percent annually between 2001 and 2007, but installed generating capacity only grew by 18.5 percent a year over the same period. [Wall Street Journal, 6 February 2008]


During the storms, over 2,000 transmission towers [pylons] and a staggering 39,000 kilometers of power lines collapsed under the weight of ice and snow. China’s use of a high-tension power grid as opposed to more expensive underground cables, and its crushing dependence on coal – for 80 percent of its electrical power – left it especially vulnerable to the storms.


In many areas where transmission towers collapsed this was because they were spread too far apart, causing them to buckle under the additional weight of thick ice and snow on overhead cables. This is again a result of cost-cutting that is endemic to many construction projects in China. The heavy reliance on coal, apart from its dire environmental effects, also poses huge logistical problems: coal takes up 40 percent of total railway capacity.


The government’s handling of the crisis has won praise from some quarters. A spokesman for the UN’s International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), Salvano Briceño, claimed ”governments across the world can learn from the Chinese government’s commitment”. Some commentators went so far as the extol the virtues of authoritarian government, as in the case of one report in the International Herald Tribune (7 February). This spoke of a ”uniquely Chinese display of communist mass mobilisation, propaganda and state control,” adding that this, ”illustrated the strengths of an authoritarian one-party communist government.”


But rather than a ’strength’, the dictatorial and bureaucratic nature of Chinese governments at all levels enormously hampered relief work. As in the case of the ’SARS’ outbreak of 2003, strict media censorship aimed at preventing ’instability’ impeded the vital flow of information about the disaster and reduced the limited scope that has existed for the official media to exert some pressure on government agencies by exposing malpractice and incompetence. This also reinforced the government’s rigid, top-down approach to crisis management. As one blogger commented, ”Numerous friends want to join me as volunteers, but there is no formal channel that will accept them.”


”Government almost disappeared...”


It often happens that external observers are taken in by regime propaganda. A more astute observer is Howard W. French, the veteran Shanghai-based correspondent of the New York Times. He reported, ”The real scandal of China’s weather emergency is that it had been going on for weeks, largely uncovered and not treated as an emergency for most of that time.” [New York Times, 1 February]


In another report, French explains that, ”Although large, in most places the snowfall – described as having been the worst in 50 years – has been nothing like the deep cover that other parts of the world often experience in winter... But in many badly affected areas, the government appears to have almost disappeared, so overwhelmed has it been by the demand for emergency services.” [New York Times, 3 February]


Even state-controlled Xinhua News quoted Jiang Liqun, senior manager of central China region of Walmart, saying the severity of the disaster has been largely underestimated despite the early warnings issued by the Hunan meteorological authority. Rivalry and competition between provinces, a crucial factor in Chinese economic and political affairs, undoubtedly complicated efforts to organise a unified national response to the crisis. Some provinces with coal surpluses, for example, were reluctant to release them to provinces in need.


The central government has been busy issuing exhortations and reprimands to its local satraps. A statement from the central committee of the ruling Communist Party warned ”officials’ performances during the crisis could either mean promotion or punishment”. Many would agree with the view of Gao Fang, a professor with People’s University in Beijing, who told the Los Angeles Times (4 February), ”The crisis has revealed that many of our local officials are not qualified. Most are appointed, not elected. Or if they are elected, the voters are often told whom to select”.


But bungling and inaction by provincial and local bureaucrats does not let Beijing off the hook. The first snowstorms struck on 10 January, yet it took almost three weeks – until 29 January – for the State Council, China’s cabinet, to set up a national command centre to coordinate relief work and direct operations in the coal, oil and power sectors.


Official propaganda portrays a government taking a ’hands on’ approach to the crisis. Top government figures, especially Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, have been flying to trouble spots such as railway stations to address crowds and tell local administrations ”not to be slack and weary”, as Vice Premier Wu Yi put it [Xinhua, 3 February]. The state-run media has received orders not to report complaints, only positive news, bearing in mind the threat to ’social stability’. Repeated references in speeches and articles to ’all-out war’ are designed to unite the population behind the government and suppress criticism. ”No disaster could vanquish the great Chinese people” declared President Hu Jintao. When a ruling group uses propaganda like this, workers and ordinary citizens have every reason to be suspicious.


The crisis has laid bare the class divisions in Chinese society. While tens of millions of migrant workers have been forced to abandon their one and only chance to escape to their families from the unspeakable drudgery and hard toil of their factories, and millions still face food and power shortages, the share prices of coal and rail companies have surged on the stock market in recent days on the prospect of higher profits stemming from the crisis.


There was huge media coverage of Hu Jintao’s visit down a mineshaft to tell miners in Shanxi province to keep working through the New Year holiday in order to relieve coal shortages: ”As you all will not be able to have any days off, I wish you early New Year’s wishes for good health, smooth work and prosperous families,” he told them. How willingly these workers responded to this idea is unclear – they were not given a choice – but the week-long holiday is normally used to carry out equipment repairs and maintenance. Now, most of China’s state-run mines will continue working through the holiday, and the scheduled maintenance work will be postponed. It should be remembered that China’s coal industry has the worst safety record in the world with an average of 13 miners killed every day.


Power companies stage ’rebellion’


Despite the regime’s awesome propaganda machine a ’post-Katrina’ political reaction is inevitable. This process will take longer than was the case in the United States given the heavy boot of dictatorship, but the questions and objections are too many to simply disappear. Many are already asking how China can put astronauts into space but can’t keep its trains running through a cold winter. Likewise, many question the merits of spending $35 billion on the Beijing Olympics, which as The Economist (1 March 2007) pointed out, is more than 43 percent of the total cost for the last nine Olympic Games put together.


Another valid question is why it took so long to mobilise 251,000 PLA troops and 772,000 militia and army reservists for road clearance and other relief work. ”In Hunan, it started snowing on the 13 January,” wrote one blogger, ”Why is it that this was left to traffic policeman and ordinary street cleaners until yesterday, when the army was mobilized?” [International Herald Tribune, 30 January 2008]


Once the soldiers were called in, their tools were often inadequate. There are reports of work teams clearing the main Beijing-Zhuhai expressway on foot, using shovels. Tanks were used for snow clearance work in some areas, but snowploughs would have been more effective. Xinhua News reported soldiers firing sub-machine guns to shatter the ice on overhead cables, and television news showed maintenance workers dangling from high voltage lines like human spiders, hacking away the ice with hammers. The tragic news that eleven electrical maintenance workers have been killed is therefore no surprise. While these deaths have been exploited by the regime’s media machine as part of its drive to spur the population to greater sacrifices, the fact remains that with mechanisation, a sound investment policy as a result of democratic planning, and trade union rights, these deaths could probably have been avoided. Evidently China’s power companies have a shortage of mobile cranes and bucket-trucks, making repair work an extremely dangerous and labour intensive task. These and other problems have not been helped by the ongoing privatisation and deregulation of the industry.


Many power companies deliberately ran down their coal stocks in the first weeks of 2008, even as the severe winter weather was approaching. This was a ”rebellion by power plant managers”, to quote The Standard (24 January), aimed at pressuring the government to lift price controls and increase profits. From December to January, the price of premium coal which is not controlled by the state rose by 13 percent, from 575 yuan a tonne to 650 yuan, while electricity prices are still subject to price fixing.


Power company bosses were copying the tactics of the state-owned oil refiners, led by Sinopec, who in October forced the government into an embarrassing u-turn when it sanctioned a 10 percent rise in petrol and diesel prices. Power plants that normally stock 18-20 days’ worth of coal had in some cases run their reserves down to as little as three days’ worth, according to Fang Xiu’an, of the China Coal Transport and Distribution Association. Some power station managers have reportedly been selling their coal stocks, rather than burning them, in order to profit from higher coal prices. If the disaster of recent weeks really was ’all-out war’ as the government says, then many power company bosses should now be facing the firing squad.


This crisis raises fundamental questions about the viability of China’s economic model. As The Wall Street Journal (6 February) points out, ”the scale of the problems showed how close the country’s racing economy is to hitting its physical limits”. But it would be false to see such problems as an inevitable result of rapid industrialisation. The crux of the problem in China is that the investment boom is largely unplanned and anarchic. As the government regularly points out, much investment is ploughed into ’wasteful and duplicative’ projects such as monster shopping malls or five-star hotels. What is the point of these without electricity, and without consumers who can afford to shop or stay in them?


World’s biggest migration


The chronic overloading of transport systems as around 200 million migrants make the annual trek home for the Lunar New Year, also shows the inhuman social cost of China’s booming economy. The bumper profits made by Chinese and overseas capitalists are based upon uprooting this massive ’sub-proletariat’ from China’s poor inland and billeting it for eleven months of the year in crowded dormitories or other makeshift accommodation in the coastal manufacturing centres. The ’motivation’ for these workers to leave their loved ones, travel thousands of kilometres and then slave under some of the worst industrial conditions in the history of capitalism, is that staying in their home village is simply not an option. There are no jobs, and most farms are too small and unproductive to support a whole family.


With devilish timing, the snowstorms struck just as the world’s largest annual pilgrimage was beginning. One week before the start of the New Year, an estimated six million migrant workers were stranded at railway and bus stations. ”Due to the snow, thousands of migrant workers arrived at major transport hubs in Hunan, Guizhou or Sichuan province, to find there was no more public transportation to finish their journey home,” Chen Lizhi told chinaworker.info. ”Most can’t afford even a cheap bed in a local hostel, at 10-20 yuan ($1.40-2.80) per night. So they are stranded, forced to sleep wherever they can. For some this lasted for over a week. Others chose to continue their journeys on foot, walking for 7-10 hours a day, and covering 50-100km through the snow.”


At its worst, a staggering 800,000 travellers were stranded at the main railway station in Guangzhou, the capital of Guangdong province, which has more migrants than any other province – roughly 30 million. The government’s solution, spelt out on massive banners draped around railway stations, was for migrants to return to their factories and spend the holiday there. But for many this was not an option. As Zhou Wei, one of Guangdong’s migrant workers, explained, ”My factory dormitory is closed. There’s nowhere for me to go.” Another migrant who had slept rough for several nights outside a shopping mall said, ”I feel like a refugee”. [The Standard, Hong Kong, 31 January]


Around 15 million of Guangdong’s migrant workers were forced to spend the Lunar New Year in the province. Local governments and the official [puppet] trade unions dealt out sweeteners – tickets to film-shows, karaoke, and free phone cards to call home. But for a workforce that lacks written job contracts, medical insurance and social security cover, the loss of their home leave is a heavy blow. As Chen Lizhi explains, ”Once they are paid, many migrants will go back home for a month or longer, then they will probably go to a new area to find work.”


These events have again brought home the suffering of China’s migrant population. ”What caused 600,000 people to be stranded at the train station?” asked one online critic. ”It is not because of heavy snow for days, nor is it the delayed or cancelled bus service. The problem is our old, two-track urban-rural divide.” [The New York Times, 3 February]


Railway stations were ringed by huge paramilitary forces for fear of unrest. Still, one woman migrant worker was trampled to death and 500 people were injured in a stampede for tickets at Guangzhou station. When Wen Jiabao arrived in Guangzhou as part of his lightning tour of the worst traffic bottlenecks, this was partly for propaganda purposes, but partly also to upbraid local officials for their slow and ineffective response to the crisis.


The incredible social contradictions in China today were highlighted by Wen’s much-reported appearance, megaphone in hand, before the crowd at Guangzhou. Many of the migrant workers huddled in the station forecourt did not know who the speaker was, a situation unthinkable in the era of Mao Zedong or Deng Xiaoping – a time when most Chinese did not have access to television let alone the internet.


As Howard W. French reports: ”It was a quiet but powerful recognition of the fact that the millions of migrant workers who keep the country’s economy churning are too busy, or too poor, too tired or too alienated, to have followed the news on television closely enough to recognize their country’s second-highest official simply by seeing him before a crowd with a megaphone.” [The New York Times, 1 February]


’World-class’ infrastructure?


Even in normal times China has the most congested railway network in the world, carrying 24 percent of the world’s rail traffic on just 6 percent of the world’s tracks. The total length of China’s railway system is 76,600 km, making it the third longest in the world. But this is a vastly undersized system compared to China’s population and the explosive growth of industry in the last 20 years. By comparison, Germany boasts 45,000 km of railways, or 58 percent of China’s total, despite the fact its territory is 28 times smaller than China’s.


According to an industry magazine, Chinese Railways, on a daily basis passenger trains provide only 2.41 million seats, but issue 3.05 million tickets (4.2 million tickets on peak days), forcing many passengers to stand. This is no joke on 12 hour journey, which is not an especially long trip by Chinese standards.


Freight transport is even more overstretched. While total available capacity on any day is 110,000 freight cars, average daily demand is for 280,000 freight cars. Like most state-owned industries, the railways are separate provincial entities rather than forming a fully integrated national system. The author, on a trip from Shanghai to the inland province of Hebei, found it was impossible in advance to buy a ticket to take me from Beijing to my final destination. It was only possible to buy such a ticket from the railway station in Beijing itself – a different province and therefore a different company!


Official statistics show that 6,500 km of new railways were built in the last five years. But this compares to 4,400 km of new expressways built in 2006 alone, and a further 8,300 km of expressways last year. The reason for this lopsided emphasis on road-building is that almost all China’s expressways are toll roads, largely financed by private companies under contract from provincial governments. The railways too are being opened to private and foreign capital, but this development has come much later and is, so far, on a much smaller scale.


In September last year, the Quchang railway in Zhejiang province opened to traffic, China’s first railway financed in part by private capital. The Deputy Director of Shanghai Railway Bureau hailed this as ”a turning point in the opening of railway investment and the financing market, which has long been monopolized by the state, to private capital for the first time”. [Beijing Review, 20 December 2007]


Government and media ’experts’ are using the winter transport crisis to urge even faster privatisation and adoption of ’market solutions’. With the listing of China Railway Group Ltd., the biggest rail company, on the Shanghai and Hong Kong bourses in December, China now has four stock market-listed railway companies. Last year, based on statistics from the Ministry of Railways (MOR), fixed investments in the rail network fell far short of the target, by almost one-third. ”With a severe shortage of funds for railway construction, the MOR will have to make use of the capital market, financing present listed companies and establishing new joint stock companies for listing,” declared the government-run Beijing Review.


One such government ’expert’ is Yu Hui, from the Institute of Industrial Economics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, who argues, ”The [MOR] administrative monopoly must be eliminated in order to set up a reasonable mechanism for competition and impel enterprises to improve efficiency.”


Yet wherever these methods – deregulation and faster privatisation – have been carried out as in many European countries, the results have been higher ticket prices, worsening conditions for employees and passengers, and falling safety standards. Rather than more neo-liberal experiments and profiteering, China’s traffic chaos is a powerful argument for democratic socialist planning, to pool national resources, harness the skills and initiative of workers and passengers, and root out bureaucracy by placing all decision-making in the hands of elected committees, subject to immediate recall, and receiving no more than a skilled workers’ wage.


Year of the Rat


China’s rulers must be viewing the new Year of the Rat with trepidation. ”We fear that 2008 will be a most difficult year for the economy,” Wen told his cabinet last week. On one hand there’s the rapidly cooling global economy and deepening worldwide banking crisis. On the other there’s the Summer Olympics running parallel with the risk for escalating inflation-driven protests and strikes. The winter chaos has underlined fundamental weaknesses in China’s economic growth model. What are the prospects for Beijing’s dictators in their struggle to hold down inflation, minimise speculative sabotage as in the energy sector, and at the same time prevent the economy following the United States into a hard landing?


The Christian Science Monitor (1 February) underlined the problems for the regime: ”Administrative price controls, however, are hard to implement now that almost all food production, distribution, and sales are in private hands... If farmers or shopkeepers are not allowed to raise their prices in line with their costs, they will be tempted to hold supplies back.”


This of course, is what we have seen, in a very sharp form, over the last 2-3 weeks. The central government has stressed its price control policy is only ’temporary’ and this will probably be lifted, at least partially, after the New Year festivities. As the same journal points out: ”Officials insist that the new food price controls are simply an effort to overcome malfunctions in the market, not a retreat to socialist economic planning diktats. Nor is China the only Asian country taking action in the face of rising food prices: Malaysia rationed cooking oil last month, while Indonesia is subsidizing edible oil refineries to keep retail prices down. Beijing’s moves include curbing exports of wheat, corn, and rice powder in an effort to boost domestic supply and dampen price increases.” [The Christian Science Monitor, 1 February]


But the massive crop failures suffered this winter will increase the pressures on Wen’s government, insuring that food price inflation, which ran at a monthly rate of 18.2 percent in November, continues to top the list of public concerns. And no amount of media ’spin’ and propaganda will stop a groundswell of criticism in coming months over the government’s handling of this crisis and the real causes of a spectacular infrastructural breakdown.


As socialist Chen Lizhi explains, ”The lessons from the winter crisis are clear. What’s needed is massive new investment in public services and particularly in rural areas focusing on agricultural development, but using this as a spur to industrial development in the inland provinces. There must be a shift away from today’s one-sided dependence on exports. This would allow tens of millions who are now ’industrial nomads’ to live at home, and work nearby home, enjoying a better standard of living. But this is only possible on the basis of workers and farmers democratically planning production and putting an end to privatisation and profiteering.”


Despite the ominous start to the Year of the Rat, chinaworker.info wishes its readers and all socialists and labour activists a happy holiday. These events can only convince more and more people to join the struggle for an end to capitalist chaos and for a democratic socialist future.

我的关于建立新的工人政党问题的译文:

理论


世界各地的工人面临的一个主要问题是政治代表问题。传统的工人组织逐渐地向右转并放弃了社会主义的理念。这里是Peter Taaffe从历史以及意大利和德国最近的经验中总结的一些教训，同时着重关注巴西最新的发展。

建设新的工人政党的问题


历史的和意大利和德国最近的经验教训，以及巴西最新的发展情况。

Peter Taaffe，英格兰和威尔士社会主义党总书记

世界各地开展工人运动的一个核心问题-在现阶段这也许是最关键的-在大多数国家缺乏以一个或多个群众性工人政党的形式发出的独立的政治声音。柏林墙的倒塌和可憎的斯大林政权的垮台亦见证了对计划经济的清除。这是一个重要的历史转折点，对于工人阶级，这具有重大的后果，尤其是它的意识。正好与20世纪90年代长期繁荣和新自由资本主义冷酷的压力相应，社会民主党和'共产’党的根基也腐烂变质。前者，过去列宁和托洛茨基把它归结为'资产阶级工人政党' ，可看到他们完全失去他们的'工人'基础，因为他们已经蜕变成纯粹的资产阶级形式。这意味着在几代人中的第一次—为1 00多年来，在英国的情况下—工人阶级没有一个群众性的政治平台。

不过，马克思主义者面临这样一个局面在历史上不是第一次。马克思和恩格斯都不认为工人运动仅仅通过鼓动、宣传甚或他们强大的理论思想就可以获得独立的阶级意识或社会主义觉悟的。马克思认为经历和与此相结合的科学社会主义思想将成为工人阶级的最好的老师。正是基于这个原因，马克思从来没有淡化他自己的思想理论宝库，而是比如通过建立第一国际在行动中努力和完全不同的工人阶级力量结合起来。

在国际工作中，马克思主义者与英国工团主义者甚至无政府主义者结合。马克思始终从工人阶级的组织和意识的现有状态起继续推进，通过自己的无与伦比的介入以谋求使其达到更高水平。第一国际完成了这一艰巨的任务，但随着巴黎公社的失败和由巴枯宁领导的无政府主义者的蓄意破坏分裂，第一国际竭尽了它的历史使命而告终。但是，通过群众性政党的发展和接纳社会主义等等为第二国际准备条件，这方面的经验是十分重要的。

恩格斯与工党


在十九世纪末，恩格斯在英国采用了与马克思同样的基本做法，比如，在工人阶级的'漫长的冬眠期'，他耐心地宣传一个'独立工人政党’ 的思想，以反对当时的社会主义者，甚至'马克思主义'宗派势力。举例来说，他没有把自己树立在曾经超过10000名成员但对待其他势力特别是结合起来以建立一个独立工人阶级政党的想法采取极端主义和宗派的态度的形式上拥护'科学社会主义'的社会民主党联盟的基础上。那时在开展工人运动中没有比恩格斯更杰出的理论家了，历史上也仅次于马克思本人，但恩格斯坚持认为，以英国工人阶级意识和政治组织的目前的状态，如果它‘真正的向前迈进一步'，这将相当于一打纲要。后来这被群众性工党本身的发展所完全地认可和证明：如果工人阶级群众没有首先经历过它自己的独立的政党的经验，那么英国具有群众基础的'纯真'无瑕的马克思主义的组织不会发展。

当工党形成时，甚至当它还没有一个社会主义的条款时，列宁对工党采取了同样广泛的做法。他认为虽然工党" 不认可阶级斗争，阶级斗争将一定认可工党" 。这再次被继俄国革命后的英国的带有突出的革命色彩的急剧的向左转所证明。这通过工党的著名的条款四在采纳社会主义壮志的工党中传达。这仅仅在1995年才被英国首相布莱尔清除。

自那时起，尽管有居住在新自由主义新工党的大海里的一个孤立的左翼改革者的前哨基地中的如Tony Benn那样的孤注一掷的行动，'新工党'的这一政治堕落的进程已势不可挡和不可改变了。这种蜕变的后果不只是思想上的而且对工人阶级产生了重大的影响。资产阶级高度成功地利用斯大林主义的崩溃进行了遍及全世界的思想反革命运动。其最大的效果发生在社会民主党高层和工会右翼身上。他们热情地对市场的拥抱加强了资产阶级的能力以带着撒切尔的口头禅， '没有替代'来兜售其新自由主义方案。与20世纪80年代不同，那时这个想法被拒绝，而现在被前社会民主党领袖和工会右翼所加强。

“没有更好的选择了，这是唯一的选择。”


当有改良派，'资产阶级工人政党'，统治阶级就至少被迫留意有没有人在监视自己。这些政党在一定程度上也是一种对资产阶级走的'太远'的'检查'，至少部分如此。综观今天的德国，加强了这种看法。由Oskar Lafontaine领导的'左翼'政党的出现，甚至他和这个政党有不足之处，但仍然对社会民主党（ SPD ）产生了影响。由于陷入与默克尔的基督教民主党结成的资产阶级联盟，在选举上和在会员上，社民党遭受了支持上的巨大的损失。反过来说，左翼党从社民党那里拉走了很多支持者，据民意调查，左翼党的支持率目前维持在12 ％左右。这反过来又迫使社民党反对部分'改革' ，如对失业者的野蛮打击，原先在该联盟与前施罗德政府里，他们自己接受了这个“改革”。

在英国，撒切尔的口头禅现在成为布朗的了。他向工会领导层吟诵着'你有什么新工党的替代呢？’。他们的答案就像一个行凶抢劫的受害者那样死抱布朗的腿，因为他猛踢工人阶级和工会本身。现在英国的选举-三个主要政党在'糊涂的中间立场’中不能有效地区分彼此' –事实上是一场闹剧。正如卫报的Polly Toynbee指出的，'先者当选'的选举制度，加上缺乏'选择'，意味着英国下次选举的结果将最终取决于'边缘'。仅仅2万个'摇摆选民’决定这些席位胜负。

这正好与工会上层如工会的Prentis和现在的其他人那样的占主导地位的僵化的右翼官僚集团相配合，这体现在最近地方政府的选票和邮政争议中，这大大地阻滞了任何有效的劳工行动。但来自下层的巨大的不满意味着无论在工业上还是在政治上，这种情况不能允许在没有挑战中继续下去了。如果没有来自左翼包括工会左翼的严肃的挑战，布朗在了解到'没有更好的选择了这是唯一的选择'后会觉得很安全将继续藐视地威胁工会，特别是他们的领导。

目前法国工人阶级在与执意要砸碎自己的权利和社会地位的萨科齐政府的英勇的斗争中面临着相同的困境。在过去15年里，法国资产阶级每一次力图以这样的方式对抗工人阶级，都要么以局部失败结束或'撤回'而结束。但考虑到他们感觉到他们在欧洲和国际上已落后于他们的资本主义的竞争对手，'这个时候'，他们就拼命地迫使工人阶级让步。缺乏一个以群众性政党的形式形成的强大的凝聚力中心，这无疑是削弱法国斗争的一个因素。

萨科齐能够在上次反对他自己的政府的大选中获胜，据他的说法，当时的政府是主持'闭塞社会'的。他唯一能够做到这一点的原因是没有来自罗耶尔女士和她现在的资产阶级“社会主义”党的挑战。罗耶尔女士许诺的每周35小时工作制只是嘴上说得好听，选举之后，她立即出尔反尔。即使在1995年，当法国工人打败了资产阶级及其朱贝计划'，但是缺乏一个群众性的政治替代是显而易见的。那时资本家可能被迫退缩，但因为没有替代性政府及没有群众性政党推动这一进程导致没有得到所有必要的定论。

巴西的教训


由于成立于2004年的社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的形成源于反对卢拉政府于2002年当选之后的向右转，这种情况在巴西并不存在。该党的形成及其以后的演变对巴西本身来说是很重要的，而且还给国际上的工人和左翼运动提供了很多经验教训。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的建立尤其是公共部门的工人对卢拉和他的工人党（PT）政府在诉求巴西的资本主义中打击工人的迅速的背叛的极端厌恶之产物。

在这部分巴西左翼之前，甚至那些托洛茨基前辈对卢拉建立一个'左翼'政府抱有一些希望。尽管事实上卢拉本人在选举之前曾表现出他屈服于新自由主义的'华盛顿共识' -私有化，不稳定的工作，向外资曲膝-的倾向，那些托洛茨基前辈对卢拉建立一个'左翼'政府依然抱有一些希望。他的右倾转化通过他赢得国际上新自由主义'社会民主党'高层领导们的赞许表现出来。尽管布莱尔与曼德尔森曾攻击过工人党（PT）和卢拉，现在，他得到的只是赞赏。诚如其所言，卢拉被证明使巴西的资本主义和帝国主义放在了‘中用的人手里’。但是，这次对公务员的打击激起了工人党（PT）内部的反对，这通过很多工人党（PT）的议会代表，如Heloísa Helena, Baba 和 Luciano Genro helo有力地表达出来了。他们连同另一个下院议员因反对卢拉的'养老改革方案’而被立即开除。

鉴于事实上卢拉-不同于布莱尔-出生于巴西工人阶级深处，这个被出卖的感觉是十分强烈的。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)集结了巴西战斗的激进的左翼部分。在2004年的成立大会上，该党明显的是社会主义倾向和向左的，其中大部分参加者有托洛茨基背景。托洛茨基主义在拉丁美洲尤其在巴西和阿根廷根基很深。这主要表现在两个主要的趋势，欧内斯特•蔓德尔的第四国际（USFI）联合秘书处和由Nahuel Moreno领导的’morenoite’组织， ' morenoism '和它的国际组织the Liga Internacional de lTrabajadores（LIT -国际工人联合会）代表了蔓德尔的一种反动，他在某一阶段结合了极左的政策-包括灾难性的支持城市游击队运动-带有随即导致第四国际（USFI）在巴西分裂的机会主义。他的一些过去的追随者作为部长参加了卢拉政府。

在‘morenoite’的传统中，可以看到的一个传统就是令人钦佩的工人的自我牺牲，许多人都作出了很大的牺牲，他们中的一些人为工人的事业付出了他们的生命。这种情况尤其在阿根廷和巴西。在同一时间内，莫雷诺对蔓德尔机会主义的反对被粗略地表达出来。此外，莫雷诺自己由于高估了20世纪80年代阿根廷MAS而犯了严重极左错误。虽然阿根廷MAS成长成为一个相当大的力量，莫雷诺高估了其'夺取政权'的能力。他去世后，他的后继者犯了不少错误，而其中最重要的是在斯大林主义崩溃上。他们一边倒地认为这是个’进步’。即使是国际上持有由华尔街日报概括的在一篇社论中宣布的对于资本主义’我们赢了’的观点的资产阶级也不这样。

这导致的结果是‘morenoism’分裂成竞相争夺基础薄弱的前‘morenoite’激进分子的支持的不同的组织和'国际’。当面对反对者时，不是辩论和讨论观点-这是工人国际委员会（CWI）的传统-而是如英国SWP的做法专断地开除，或者仅仅'要求自动离开'，这是其领导层的通常的反应。

早期的成功


尽管如此，成立社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的大多数人来自工人党（PT）并具有托洛茨基的背景。在2006年的总统选举中，为了取代卢拉的所谓的传统左翼'政府，作为该党的总统候选人的来自蔓德尔传统的Heloísa Helena获得了近7百万张选票。对于一个非常年轻的政党，这是极大的成功-举例来说，相比于PT在1982年的第一次全国选举运动更为成功-这有力地证明了那些如像“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）和CWI的始终赞成建立一个新的群众性政党的主张是正确的。因此，“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的先锋之一-在第一阶段出借其资源和办事处给该党-在该党自己的国家行政机关中也举足轻重。最重要的是，这个新政党明文昭示确保如下权利：它是非常民主的平台和具有民主倾向的。

不过，这样的政党，就像德国左翼政党，不是激烈的阶级斗争尤其是工业冲突时期诞生的，这就是如20世纪80年代的工人党（PT）或在存在的第一阶段声称为社会主义者和'革命'的南非工会联合会COSATU的情况。这在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)身上打上了特定的印记：它过去是现在仍然是一个群众性工人阶级政党。俄国革命后形成的新的群众性政党是带领着旧党中的绝大部份的工人积极份子从旧的工人阶级组织和社会民主党中分裂出来的。即使在那时，社会民主党，成员匮乏，仍然留有残余的非工人积极分子的支持。有时，大多数工人醉心于这些组织是由于纯粹的历史惯性和缺乏需要一个新的革命政党的意识。正如列宁和托洛茨基认为的，这就要求这些新的共产党采取'统一战线'的战术以在行动上接触和影响仍然处在社会民主党旗下的工人。

同时，由于卢拉政府转向右边，它越加削弱它的基础。工人党（PT）支持的巴西参议院议长Renan Calheiros已因为一个贪污丑闻被迫离开。据指控，除其他活动外，尤其是他付款给一个他与之有外遇并和她有一个3岁的女儿的前女记者。腐败在巴西很常见，这是资产阶级政党的地方病。但Renan的劣行是一个'极大的丑闻'。民意压力迫使卢拉采取行动解职了Renan。

但自2005年5月以来卢拉政府一直遭到腐败的指控。最初，它们造成了严重损害，但腐败是如此习以为常，如此地和巴西政治生活结成一体以至于巴西人民期待不到更好的政治家了。估计有30 ％的国会代表有对他们提起的刑事诉讼。事实上，很多人谋求职位以避免受到法院的起诉！一项研究指出腐败的代价相当于国内生产总值的0.5 ％。然而，曾经有一段时间，工人党（PT）因它的一个新的社会主义社会的远景被视为'不同'。现在，像其对应的在欧洲和其他地方的前社会民主党和前共产党首领一样接受了资本主义，它已接受了与之相应的'“猪肉桶分肥”'哲学。

巴西资产阶级接受了卢拉的政府，因为它在捍卫资本主义的利润上很'能做事'。信贷和国内需求异常火爆，因为数以百万计的巴西穷人成为'初次消费者’（金融时报）。当美国经济出现垮台及其对作为巴西商品的一个巨大的市场的中国发生影响时会发生什么事则是另一回事了。即使整个巴西经济增长速度放慢，对期待着卢拉政府把百万计的巴西人从日常生活的梦魇中拉出来的成百万人特别是对穷人来说都是一个大灾难。农业，服务业，甚至工业都在世界经济上升的支持下经历了增长。同时，消费者消费也上升了，主要得益于最低工资和最穷的人的福利的少许提高和经济活动中自2003年来规模增加了一倍的约占35 ％的国内生产总值的信贷的投入。世界经济放缓或衰退的可能对拥有由近期经济增长和创造出的尽管工资非常低的就业机会产生的希望的成百万人有破坏性影响。

政府声称至2007年7月的12个月里创造了120多万个就业岗位。这意味着一些最贫穷阶层的人，甚至工人阶级阶层从卢拉政府那里获益。因此，选举上潜在的对政府的支持至今仍未消失。作为'最好选择'，资产阶级容忍了卢拉，绝大多数穷人和工人阶级还没有撤回他们对政府的支持。但另一方面，中产阶层在基础设施，特别是航空业感觉到了剧烈的危机。他们中多数反对政府。经济，社会和政治局势因此极不稳定。

要进一步发展其重要的但有限的6 ％的选民基础，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)应该将自己定位于吸引那些仍暂留在卢拉和工人党（PT）中的工人阶级的‘巨大储备’使之加入他们的行列。一旦巴西遭受经济的暴风雨和由其引起的社会波动,他们将与卢拉和工人党（PT）决裂。但并不保证他们将转向社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，如果该党本身并没有吸引他们的政策，战略和策略的话。

联盟陷阱


意大利重建共产党(PRC)的发展对社会主义自由党(P-SoL)和巴西有很多经验教训和警告。意大利重建共产党(PRC)的创建对意大利工人阶级来说是向前迈了一大步，但在初始阶段，它只有最激进的先进阶层。该党，特别在贝尔蒂诺蒂领导下，没有严重破坏左翼民主派的基础（DS-前共产党的大部分），甚至当后者移向右边时亦然。其中一个原因是意大利重建共产党(PRC)不一致的立场，特别是它不惜牺牲一个动态的阶级斗争政策而把重点放在选票至上主义上。此外，意大利重建共产党(PRC)领导层滑向联盟主义的泥潭而非追求工人阶级对资本主义的不调和的政策。即使在'国家联盟'形成之前，在当地和全市范围，意大利重建共产党(PRC)与资产阶级政党分享权力。这往往导致对工人和当地的工会的攻击，在工人看来，意大利重建共产党(PRC)应对此负责。

在全国意义上，从这到同普罗迪的资产阶级政党正式的联盟不是一大步。起初，意大利重建共产党(PRC)只是从外部支持1996年的'和平'政府。甚至没有得到部长职位的'好处'和与之相随的名头，随着这个政府对工人阶级和工会的打击，意大利重建共产党(PRC)因此遭到了协会的憎恶。这为贝卢斯科尼的返回铺平了道路。现在在意大利他们进了一步，正式加入了和巴西的卢拉那样打击养老金，教育和所有意大利工人阶级过去得到的成果的普罗迪的联盟。在作为意大利下议院议长的贝尔蒂诺蒂的指挥棒下，意大利重建共产党(PRC)正在被看作一个特定的单独的工人政党以便蜕皮变成一具为了创造另一个自由资本主义政党而戴上的作为'革命的东西'的一个部分之面具。

在意大利重建共产党(PRC)内部，这个过程尚未完全完成，但如果社会主义自由党(P-SoL)和所有新的工人阶级组织接受联盟主义的话，它对他们是一个很大的警告。如果没有明确的政策，这意味着这些新形成的组织不但不能形成凝聚群众的中心之源而且可能夭折。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)尚未至此地步，但使其不惜牺牲插手阶级斗争特别是劳工斗争和总的社会运动而顺从于选举一面的资产阶级社会的巨大的压力已对社会主义自由党(P-SoL)领导层产生了影响。

向右转


这在不重视激进政策的选举中被反映出来,尤其在其总统侯选人Heloísa Helena身上反映出来,之所以这样做是为了赢得最大的选票数,她也反对堕胎,但是在该问题上,她和大多数社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的成员发生了冲突.Heloísa Helena的立场遇到了来自最近的社会主义自由党(P-SoL)大会的多数代表的不缓和的反对,但是在她周围的一群人,特别是如来自Rio Grande Del Sul的MP LucianaGenro的一些人已寻求把社会主义自由党(P-SoL)推向更为实用的更为右倾的政策上去,由来自工人党（PT）的现已加入社会主义自由党(P-SoL)行列的“流亡者”加强了这些政策.

他们一起成功地使社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的领导层转向右,这反过来激起了左派的反对,其中社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）起着作用.反对只得到了社会主义自由党(P-SoL)大会中低于四分之一的支持票, 社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）寻求超越之即通过社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内部的四团体来形成一个左翼的一致性最强的组织之联合阵线, 社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）和在巴西扩展的其他有托洛茨基背景的组织卷入了其中。这样的发展在历史上同样地出现过.1933年希特勒在没有共产党的有力的抵制下获胜后,在现存的”国际’中存在着信心上的深深的危机.托洛茨基提出要建立一个新的第四国际的主张,由此产生的是“四团体”政党的形式,托洛茨基认为这额外地重要,这四党是托洛茨基国际左翼反对派、德国社会主义工人党（SAP）以及两个荷兰的左翼政党，即革命社会主义党（RAP）和独立社会主义党（OSP），他们在于马克思列宁的原则基础上的“新国际”宣言上签了字。

早期的“四团体”设定了比目前社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内的四团体更加宏伟的目标，但是问题基本上是一样的，即如何在工人阶级运动中使左翼的潜力最大化，这个团体因为非托洛茨基政党的领导政治上的不一致而没有巩固成为一个新的永久性的形式。在巴西的情况下的组织在政治上假如可以获得透明的话，是一直有机会在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内形成一个一致的政治力量而更为紧密相连的。

社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，包括意大利的意大利重建共产党(PRC)的早期经历表明假如一个新的政党转向右的话，持续的成功，影响的扩大和成员的扩大不是自动地得到保证的。可是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的左翼比意大利重建共产党(PRC)的左翼更为清晰并且更具潜力，这是因为来自意大利重建共产党(PRC)的基础的托洛茨基组织寻求了基本不正确的政策。由Livio Maitan领导的第四国际（USFI）和Bertinotti是不能区别开来的。长期以来，他们是相同“派系”的一部分，因此没有形成实质性的力量，其他人要么采用极左立场或者纯粹是宣传性的超级聪明的解说员的角色。

巴西的四团体


目前在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内组织起来的左翼反对派在政治上比这更强。该组织的联合阵线，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内的四团体，特别是包括来自位于巴西北部Belem的Alternativa Revolucionária Socialista（革命社会主义-ARS）的同志，圣宝罗的另一个组织是由在圣保罗和一个非常重要的洲Minas Gerais的富有斗争历史的工人组成的CLS，在该洲，CLS在社会运动特别是失地运动以及印刷工人中有很深的基础，另外两个组织参加了这个团体。人们希望四团体在一系列能够吸引社会主义自由党(P-SoL)中的其他持不同政见组织的会议和公众活动中能团结起来。

与此同时，马克思主义者-托洛茨基者左翼的重组进程正在推进，在最近的由在四团体中工作的组织代表参加的会议上，“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）和这些同志设定了建立人数上更强和更为有影响的马克思主义力量的任务，鉴于在该阶段，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)相对地缺乏新的工人阶级的阶层，仅仅通过集中在党内的活动是不能完成这个任务的，在工业舞台上的斗争即使不能说尤为关键也是事关重大的，但是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)还没有用尽它的潜力。卢拉主义和工人党（PT）的破产将导致重要的阶层把他们的希望寄予社会主义自由党(P-SoL)身上。建立一个新的群众性工人政党的正当理由之一就是提供一个能把至今分崩离析的工人阶级和左翼力量聚集在一起的机会。

这样的新的政党是一个用来讨论、辩论和制定能保证工人阶级在未来获得成功的政策的工具，在该政党内的一个可行的马克思主义者-托洛茨基主义者骨干对于它的成功是至关重要的，没有的话，这些政党，包括社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，即使他们一开始成功，终会停滞、甚至从政治舞台上衰退和消失，在巴西，考虑到该党中的马克思主义的影响，这看起来是不可能的。

将被整个世界的马克思主义者热情地追随的巴西的马克思主义者的任务是通过社会主义自由党(P-SoL)左翼的最好的力量聚集起来以便干预社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内展开的进程和清晰地与改良主义和口头上革命行动上改良的中间路线温和主义决裂。迈向成功的第一步是创建强有力的带有清晰远景、策略、战略和组织性的托洛茨基组织。资本主义正在陷入危机，但是这不自动地意味着左翼将赢得什么。为此，需要建立新的群众性工人政党。全世界的马克思主义者将热情地关注和研究学习社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的发展经验教训以便为其它地方的相似发展提供经验教训的借鉴。

来自当今社会主义12月7日/1月8日版

socialistworld.netcommittee for a workers’ internationalsocialistworld.netcommittee for a workers’ internationalcwi@worldsoc.co.ukTheoryProblems of buildingnew workers' partiesPeter TaaffeGeneral SecretarySocialist Party, England and Wales23 December 2007Lessons from history, the recent experience of Italy andGermany, and the latest developments in Brazil.socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 2TheoryProblems of building new workers' partiesLessons from history, the recent experience of Italy and Germany, and the latest de-velopments in Brazil.Peter Taaffe, General Secretary, Socialist Pary, England and WalesOne of the major issues facing workers around the world is political representation. Traditionalworkers' organisations have been moving steadily rightwards, abandoning the ideas of socialism.Here Peter Taaffe draws some lessons from history and from the recent experience of Italy andGermany, while focussing on the latest developments in Brazil.A central question for the worldwide workers'movement - perhaps the most crucialat this stage - is the absence in mostcountries of an independent political voicein the form of a mass workers' party orparties.The collapse of the Berlin wall and the odiousStalinist regimes also witnessed the liquida-tion of the planned economies. This was animportant historical turning point, with majorconsequences for the working class and, par-ticularly, its consciousness. Coinciding withthe long 1990s boom and the remorselesspressure of neo-liberal capitalism, this actedto rot the foundations of social democracyand the 'Communist' parties. The former,characterised by Lenin and Trotsky in thepast as 'bourgeois workers' parties', wit-nessed the complete disappearance of their'worker' base as they became purely bour-geois formations. This means that, for the firsttime in generations - for more than 100 yearsin the case of Britain - the working class iswithout a mass political platform.But this is not the first time in history thatMarxists have been confronted with such asituation. Neither Marx nor Engels believedthat the working-class movement would ac-quire an independent class or socialist con-sciousness by agitation, propaganda or eventheir powerful theoretical ideas alone. Experi-ence would be the greatest teacher of theworking class, argued Marx, combined withthe ideas of scientific socialism. It was for thisreason that Marx, while never diluting his owntheoretical treasure trove of ideas, strove tolink together in action the disparate forces ofthe working class, for instance, through theestablishment of theFirst International.The Marxists combined with English trade un-ionists and even anarchists in the work of theInternational. Marx always proceeded fromthe existing level of organisation and con-sciousness of the working class, seekingthrough his own priceless intervention, to takeit to a higher plane. The First International ful-filled this colossal task but, following the de-feat of the Paris Commune and the attemptedsabotage and disruption of the anarchists ledby Bakunin, the First International had ex-hausted its historical mission and was woundup. This experience, however, was vital inpreparing the ground for the Second Interna-tional, with the development of mass parties,the acceptance of socialism, etc.Engels & the Labour PartyThe same basic approach of Marx wasadopted by Engels in the latter part of thenineteenth century, in Britain, for instance,during the working class's 'long winter sleep'.He patiently propagated the idea of an'independent working man's party', in opposi-Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 3tion to the socialist and even 'Marxist' sectar-ian forces of the time. He did not base himselfupon the Social Democratic Federation thatformally adhered to 'scientific socialism', forinstance, which had at one time upwards of10,000 members but which adopted an ulti-matist and sectarian attitude towards otherforces and particularly to the idea of combin-ing to create an independent party of theworking class. There was no greater theoreti-cian in the workers' movement then thanEngels, historically second only to Marx him-self, but he insisted that, given the existinglevel of consciousness and political organisa-tion of the British working class, that if it tookone 'real step forward', this would be worth adozen programmes. This was clear recogni-tion, vindicated later by the development of amass Labour Party itself, that a 'pure', unsul-lied Marxist organisation in Britain with massroots would not develop without the mass ofthe working class first passing through theexperience of its 'own' independent party.Lenin adopted the same broad approach to-wards the Labour Party when it came into ex-istence, even when it did not have a socialistclause. He argued that while the Labour Party"does not recognise the class struggle, theclass struggle will certainly recognise the La-bour Party". He was again vindicated with thesharp shift towards the left in Britain, with pro-nounced revolutionary overtones, followingthe Russian revolution. This was expressedwithin the Labour Party with the adoption ofthe socialist aspiration, through its famousClause Four. This was only liquidated by the'bourgeois entrist' Blair in 1995.Since then, the process of political degenera-tion of 'New Labour' has been inexorable andunalterable. This is despite the forlorn hopesof those like Tony Benn who inhabit an iso-lated left reformist outpost in a New Laboursea of neo-liberalism. This degeneration isnot just ideological in its consequences buthas materially affected the struggles of theworking class. The bourgeoisie was highlysuccessful in using the collapse of Stalinismto conduct an ideological counter-revolutionworldwide. Its greatest effects were on thetops of the social democracy and the tradeunion right-wing. Their enthusiastic embraceof the market has strengthened the ability ofthe bourgeoisie to sell its neo-liberal pro-gramme accompanied by Thatcher's mantra,'There is no alternative'. Unlike in the 1980s,when this idea was rejected, it is now rein-forced by the ex-social democratic leadersand the trade union right-wing.The only game in townWhen there were reformist, 'bourgeois work-ers' parties', the ruling class was at leastforced to look over its shoulder. These partieswere to some extent a 'check', at least par-tially, on the bourgeoisie going 'too far'. Aglance at Germany today reinforces thispoint. The emergence of the 'Left' Party ledby Oskar Lafontaine, even with all his and theparty's inadequacies, has nevertheless exer-cised an effect on the Social Democrats(SPD). Enmeshed in a bourgeois coalitionwith Merkel's Christian Democrats, the SPDhas seen a dramatic loss in support, bothelectorally and in membership. Conversely,the Left Party has drawn support away fromthe SPD and presently stands at around 12%in opinion polls. This, in turn, has compelledthe social democrats to oppose some of the'reforms', such as the brutal attack on the un-employed, which they themselves acceptedpreviously within the coalition and the previ-ous Schröder government.In Britain, Thatcher's mantra is now Brown's.'What is your alternative to New Labour?' heintones to the trade union leadership. Theiranswer is to cling to Brown's leg like a mug-ging victim, as he puts the boot in to theworking class and the trade unions them-selves. Elections - with the three major par-ties effectively indistinguishable from one an-other in the 'muddled middle' - are virtually afarce now in Britain. The 'first-past-the-post'electoral system, combined with the absenceTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 4 cwi@worldsoc.co.ukof 'choice', means that the outcome of thenext election in Britain, as Polly Toynbee ofThe Guardian pointed out, will be determinedby the 'marginals'. Ultimately, a mere 20,000'swing voters' in these seats decide the out-come.This goes together with the domination of anossified right-wing bureaucratic caste at thetop of the trade unions, like Prentis of Unisonand now others, as shown in the recent localgovernment ballot and the postal dispute,which acts as a giant brake on any effectiveindustrial action. But the colossal discontentfrom below means that this situation will notbe allowed to continue without a challenge,either industrially or politically. Without a seri-ous challenge from the left, including thetrade union left, Brown will continue to treatthe trade unions and particularly their leader-ship with contempt, safe in the knowledgethat 'New Labour is the only game in town'.A similar dilemma confronts the French work-ing class, locked in an epic struggle at pre-sent with the Sarkozy government, which isbent on smashing its rights and conditions. Inthe last 15 years, each time the French bour-geoisie has sought to confront the workingclass in this way it has ended either in theirpartial defeat or a 'draw'. But given their per-ception that they are falling behind their capi-talist competitors, both in Europe and interna-tionally, they are hell-bent 'this time' on forc-ing concessions from the working class. Theabsence of a mass pole of attraction, in theform of a mass party, is undoubtedly a factorweakening the struggle in France.Sarkozy was able to win the last election witha campaign against his own government,which, according to him, was presiding over a'blocked society'. He was only able to do thisbecause there was no challenge whatsoeverfrom Ségolène Royal and her now bourgeois'Socialist' Party. Paying lip service to the 35-hour week, she immediately repudiated thisafter the election. Even in 1995, when theFrench workers defeated the bourgeois andits 'Juppé plan', the lack of a mass politicalalternative was palpable. The capitalistscould be forced back then but because therewas no alternative government and no masspolitical party to advance this, all the neces-sary conclusions were not drawn.Lessons in BrazilThis situation does not exist in Brazil, be-cause of the formation of the Party of Social-ism and Liberty (P-SoL), which was formed in2004, resulting from the revolt against theLula government's swing towards the rightfollowing his election in 2002. The formationof this party and its subsequent evolution isimportant for Brazil itself but also holds manylessons for the workers and left movementinternationally. The establishment of P-SoLwas a product of the utter disgust felt by pub-lic-sector workers in particular at the speedybetrayal of Lula and his Workers' Party (PT)government in its attacks on them at the be-hest of Brazilian capitalism.Prior to this sections of the Brazilian left, eventhose with Trotskyist antecedents, held outsome hopes that Lula would install a 'left'government in power. This was despite thefact that Lula himself had indicated his capitu-lation to the 'Washington consensus' of neo-liberalism - privatisation, precarious work,bending the knee to foreign capital - prior tothe election. His rightward evolution wasshown by the praise that he earned from thehigh priests of 'social-democratic' neo-liberalism internationally. Whereas Blair andMandelson had attacked the PT and Lula pre-viously, now he earned nothing but praise.True to his word, Lula has proved to be a'safe pair of hands' for Brazilian capitalismand imperialism. The attack on the civil ser-vants, however, provoked opposition withinthe PT, expressed forcefully by a number ofPT parliamentary representatives, such asHeloísa Helena, Baba and Luciano Genro.They were summarily expelled, along withanother MP, by Lula for opposing his 'pensionreform' programme.Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 5The sense of betrayal was acute, given thefact that Lula - unlike Blair - had originallycome from the depths of the Brazilian workingclass. P-SoL rallied significant sections of thefighting, militant Brazilian left. At its foundingconference in 2004, the party was markedlysocialist and to the left, with most of thoseparticipating coming from a Trotskyist back-ground. Trotskyism has strong roots in LatinAmerica, particularly in Brazil and Argentina.This was reflected in two main trends, theUnited Secretariat of the Fourth International(USFI) of Ernest Mandel, and the 'Morenoite'organisations, led by Nahuel Moreno.'Morenoism' and its international organisation,the Liga Internacional de los Trabajadores(LIT - International Workers' League) repre-sented a reaction to Mandel, who combinedultra-left policies at one stage - including dis-astrous support for urban guerrilla move-ments - with opportunism, which subse-quently led the USFI to fracture in Brazil.Some of his past adherents have participatedas ministers in the Lula government.Within the Morenoite tradition, one can findadmirable, self-sacrificing workers, with manywho have made big sacrifices, some of thempaying with their lives for the workers' cause.This was particularly the case in Argentinaand Brazil. At the same time, Moreno's oppo-sition to Mandel's opportunism was ex-pressed crudely. Also, Moreno himself, asshown by his overestimation of the MAS inArgentina in the 1980s, made serious mis-takes of an ultra-left character. Although theMAS in Argentina grew into a considerableforce, Moreno overestimated its capacity to'take power'. After his death his heirs mademany mistakes, the most important of whichwas over the collapse of Stalinism. They pre-sent this in a one-sided way as 'progressive'.Not so the bourgeoisie internationally, whoseattitude was summed up by the Wall StreetJournal which declared in an editorial that, forcapitalism, 'We won'.The result of this was a fracturing of More-noism into different organisations and'Internationals', ferociously competing againstone another for the support of a narrowingbase of former Morenoite militants. Whenconfronted by opposition, rather than debat-ing and discussing the ideas out - as is thetradition of the Committee for a Workers' In-ternational (CWI) - arbitrary expulsions, as inthe manner of the British SWP, or merely an'invitation to leave', are the usual reactions ofthe leadership.Early successDespite this, most of those who set up P-SoLcame out of the PT and were from a Trotsky-ist background. In the 2006 presidential elec-tions, Heloísa Helena, who comes from theMandelite tradition, as the party's presidentialcandidate got almost seven million votes as aleft alternative to Lula's alleged 'traditionalleft' government. This spectacular success ofa very young party - more successful, for in-stance, than the PT in its first national elec-toral outing in 1982 - was a complete vindica-tion of those, like Socialismo Revolucionário(SR) and the CWI, who have consistently ar-gued for a new mass party. Consequently,SR was one of the pioneers of P-SoL - lend-ing its resources and offices to the party inthe first period - and also had a presence onthe National Executive of the party itself.Above all, this new party enshrined the rightsof platforms and tendencies, which ensured itwas extremely democratic.However, this party, like the Left Party in Ger-many, has not been born in a period of inten-sified class struggle, particularly industrialconflict, as was the case, for instance, withthe PT in the 1980s or COSATU, the SouthAfrican trade union federation, which waspronouncedly socialist and 'revolutionary' inits first phase of existence. This put a certainstamp on P-SoL: it was and remains a smallmass working-class party. The new massparties that were formed in the aftermath ofthe Russian revolution came from splits in theold organisations of the working class, theTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 6 cwi@worldsoc.co.uksocial democracy, taking with them the greatmajority of the active workers in the old par-ties. Even then, the social democracy, largelyempty of members, still retained residual sup-port from inactive workers. Sometimes it wasthe majority of workers who clung to theseorganisations through sheer historical inertiaand lack of consciousness of the need for anew revolutionary party. This required, asLenin and Trotsky argued, that these newCommunist parties adopt the 'united front'tactic to reach and influence in action theworkers still under the banner of social de-mocracy.However, the new formations, the Communistparties, developed in a period of revolution,were generally large, with an active base, andwith roots within the working class. This is notthe case with the Left Party in Germany,which is mostly an electoral phenomenon atthis stage. Only a few workers and youthhave been prepared to enter its ranks - par-ticularly in Berlin and east Germany. In theseareas it is viewed with suspicion because ofthe party's connections with Stalinism andnow the coalition governments in Berlin, inparticular, and elsewhere that attack the livingstandards of the working class. P-SoL in itsfirst phase of existence was different. A num-ber of Trotskyist organisations were presentbut so also was an important layer of work-ers, of 'independents', etc.At the same time, the Lula government re-pelled more and more of its base as it shiftedtowards the right. The PT-backed president ofthe Brazilian Senate, Renan Calheiros, hasbeen forced to take leave because of a cor-ruption scandal. It is alleged, among otherthings, that he arranged for payments to bemade to a female former journalist with whomhe was having an affair and by whom he hasa three-year-old daughter. Brazil is used tocorruption, which is endemic in bourgeoisparties. But the saga of Renan's misdemean-ours was a 'scandal too far'. Popular pressureforced Lula's hand and Renan has beenejected from office.But Lula's government has been dogged bycharges of corruption since May 2005. Ini-tially, they caused serious damage, but soinured and so 'integrated' into Brazilian politi-cal life is corruption that the Brazilian people'expect nothing better of their politicians'. Anestimated 30% of Congress representativeshave criminal proceedings open againstthem. In fact, many seek office to avoidprosecution from the courts! The cost of cor-ruption is put by one study as equivalent to0.5% of gross domestic product. Yet, therewas a time when the PT was perceived as'different', with its socialist vision of a new so-ciety. Now, like its counterparts the ex-socialdemocrats and ex-Communist party chiefs inEurope and elsewhere, having accepted capi-talism it has embraced the 'pork barrel' phi-losophy that goes with it.The Brazilian bourgeoisie is reconciled toLula's government because it is 'doing thejob', defending capitalism's profits. Credit anddomestic demand are booming as millions ofpoor Brazilians become 'consumers for thefirst time' (Financial Times). What happenswhen the bottom falls out of the US economyand has repercussions on China, a huge mar-ket for Brazil's commodities, is another mat-ter. Even a slowdown in the rate of growth ofthe Brazilian economy will be a catastrophefor millions, especially of the poor, who havelooked towards the Lula government for somedeliverance from the nightmare of daily livingfor millions of Brazilians. Agriculture, the ser-vice economy and even industry have experi-enced growth on the back of the world eco-nomic upswing. Also, consumer spending hasrisen, helped by some increase in the mini-mum wage and benefits for the poorest, andan injection of credit into the economy, whichhas doubled in size since 2003. This is about35% of GDP. A world economic slowdown orrecession could have a devastating effect onthe millions whose hopes have been raisedby the recent growth of the economy and thecreation of jobs, albeit very low paid.The government claims that there have beenTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 7more than 1.2 million jobs created in thetwelve months to July 2007. This has meantsome of the very poorest sections of thepopulation and even sections of the workingclass have gained from the Lula government.Consequently, the underlying support elec-torally for the government has not yet evapo-rated. The bourgeoisie tolerates Lula as the'best option', and the poor and working classhave not yet, in the great majority, withdrawntheir support from the government. The mid-dle class, on the other hand, feels mostacutely the crisis in the infrastructure, particu-larly in the airline industry. It is, in its majority,opposed to the government. The economic,social and political situation is consequentlyhighly volatile.To advance further from its important but lim-ited base of 6% of the electorate, P-SoLshould be positioning itself to attract to itsranks the 'heavy reserves' of the workingclass which still tentatively remain behindLula and the PT. They will break from thismooring once Brazil is affected by the stormyeconomic and social waves which impend.But it is not at all guaranteed that they willpass over to P-SoL, if the party itself does notembrace the policies, the strategy and tacticsto attract them.The coalition trapThe development of Rifondazione Comunista(PRC) in Italy holds many lessons and warn-ings for P-SoL and Brazil. The creation of thePRC represented a giant step forward for theItalian working class but, initially, it took with itjust the most militant advanced layers. Theparty, particularly under the leadership of Ber-tinotti, did not seriously undermine the baseof the Democrats of the Left (DS - the bulk ofthe ex-Communist Party) even when the lat-ter moved towards the right. One of the rea-sons for this was the inconsistent position ofthe PRC, particularly its emphasis on elector-alism at the expense of a dynamic class-struggle policy. Moreover, instead of pursuinga policy of working-class intransigence tocapitalism, the PRC leadership slid into theswamp of coalitionism. Even before a'national bloc' was formed, at local and city-wide levels the PRC was sharing power withbourgeois parties. This invariably led to at-tacks on the workers and the unions at a locallevel, which the PRC took responsibility for inthe eyes of the workers.It was not a big step from this to a formal coa-lition with the bourgeois parties around Prodiat a national level. Initially, it was supportfrom the 'outside' by the PRC for the 'OliveTree' government of 1996. Without even the'benefits' of ministerial portfolios and the trap-pings that go with them, the PRC conse-quently earned the odium of association withthis government's attacks on the workingclass and the trade unions. This paved theway for the return of Berlusconi. They havegone a step further in Italy now, formally join-ing Prodi's coalition, which like Lula in Brazilis attacking pensions, education and all thepast gains of the Italian working class. Underthe baton of Bertinotti as 'president' of theItalian Chamber of Deputies, the PRC isshedding its skin as a specifically separateworkers' party to become part of a 'red thing',which is a mask for creating another liberalcapitalist party.The process has not yet been fully completedwithin the PRC but it is a big warning to P-SoL and all new organisations of the workingclass if they embrace coalitionism. Withoutclear policies, this means that these new for-mations, rather than being a chrysalis fromwhich a mass pole of attraction can form,could be smothered at birth. P-SoL has notreached this stage as yet. But the enormouspressures of bourgeois society to 'conform',to elevate the electoral profile at the expenseof intervention in the class struggle, particu-larly the industrial struggle and the socialmovements in general, has had some effecton the leadership of P-SoL.Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 8 cwi@worldsoc.co.ukRightward driftIt was reflected in the elections in the playingdown of radical policies, and particularly itspresidential candidate, Heloísa Helena. Thiswas done in order to court the maximumnumber of votes. She has also opposed abor-tion but has come into conflict on this issuewith the bulk of P-SoL's membership.Heloísa's position met with implacable oppo-sition from the majority of delegates at therecent P-SoL congress. But a group aroundher, particularly some like the MP LucianaGenro from Rio Grande Del Sul, have soughtto push P-SoL towards more 'practical' poli-cies, that is a more right-wing position. Theyhave been reinforced by refugees from thePT, who have now entered the ranks of P-SoL.Together, they have successfully shifted P-SoL's leadership in a rightward direction,which in turn has provoked a left opposition,within which Socialismo Revolucionárioworks. This opposition received just under aquarter of the votes at the P-SoL congress.SR seeks to go beyond this in forging aunited front of the most consistent organisa-tions on the left, through a 'bloc of four' withinP-SoL. This has involved SR together withother groups spread throughout Brazil, all ofwhom come from a Trotskyist background.There are some historical parallels with thisdevelopment. After the victory of Hitler in1933, without the Communist Party undertak-ing serious resistance, a deep crisis of confi-dence in the existing 'Internationals' existed.Trotsky raised the need for a new, 'Fourth'International. Arising from this was the forma-tion of a 'Bloc of Four' parties, described byTrotsky as "exceptionally important". The fourparties were the Trotskyist International LeftOpposition, the Socialist Workers' Party ofGermany (SAP), and two Dutch left parties,the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) andthe Independent Socialist Party (OSP), whosigned a declaration for a 'new International'on the principled foundations of Marx andLenin.This earlier 'bloc of four' set itself more gran-diose targets than the present bloc of fourwithin P-SoL but the issues were fundamen-tally the same: how to maximise the potentialfor the left in the working class movement.This bloc was never consolidated into a newpermanent formation because of political in-consistencies of the leaders of the non-Trotskyist parties. The organisations in thecase of Brazil are much closer politically, withevery chance, if political clarity is attained, inforging a coherent political force within P-SoL.P-SoL shows, as also with the earlier'experiment' of the PRC in Italy, that contin-ued success, the growth of influence andnumbers, is not automatically guaranteed if anew party shifts towards the right. However,the left is clearer and has more potential in P-SoL than in the PRC. This is because theTrotskyist organisations, from the foundationof the PRC, pursued a fundamentally incor-rect policy. The USFI, led by the late LivioMaitan, was indistinguishable from Bertinotti -they were for a long time part of the same'fraction' and, consequently, did not gain sub-stantial forces. Others either adopted an ul-tra-left position or a purely propagandistic,super-wise role of commentators.Brazil's bloc of fourThe current organised left opposition in P-SoL is much stronger politically than this. Theunited front of organisations, the bloc of fourwithin P-SoL, includes comrades from Alter-nativa Revolucionária Socialista(Revolutionary Socialist Alternative - ARS),located in particular in Belem in the north ofBrazil. Another organisation in São Paulo isthe CLS (Socialist Liberty Collective), madeup of workers with a history of struggle bothin São Paulo and Minas Gerais, a very impor-tant state, where the CLS has an importantbase in the social movements, particularly thelandless movement and among print workers.Two other organisations are participating inTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 9this bloc. It is hoped that the 'bloc of four' willbe consolidated in a series of meetings andpublic activities which then could attract otherdissident groups in P-SoL.At the same time, a process of regroupmentof the Marxist-Trotskyist left is under way. Atits recent congress, attended by representa-tives of groups working in the bloc of four, SRset itself the task, together with these com-rades, of building a numerically stronger andfar more influential Marxist force. Given thatat this stage P-SoL is relatively empty of newlayers of the working class, this task will notbe achieved by merely concentrating activitywithin the party. The battle on the industrialstage is as crucial, if not more so, at present.But P-SoL has not exhausted its potential.The collapse of 'Lulaism' and the PT will re-sult in important layers transferring theirhopes to P-SoL. One of the justifications for anew mass workers' party is that it offers thechance for the working class and the left togather together the hitherto disparate scat-tered forces.Such new parties are an arena for discussionand debate and the working out of policiesthat can guarantee success for the workingclass in the future. The existence of a viable,Marxist-Trotskyist spine within such a party isvital to its success. Without this, these par-ties, including P-SoL, can stagnate, even de-cline and disappear from the political stage,even if they have initial successes. Thatseems unlikely in Brazil, given the influenceof Marxism within the party.The tasks of Marxists in Brazil, which will beeagerly followed by Marxists throughout theworld, is to intervene in the processes unfold-ing in P-SoL, to delineate clearly from reform-ism and the shades of centrism - revolution-ary words but reformist deeds - by bringingtogether the best forces of the P-SoL left. Thefirst step towards this goal is the creation of apowerful Trotskyist organisation, with clearperspectives, tactics, strategy and organisa-tion. Capitalism is moving into crisis but thisdoes not automatically mean that the left willgain. To do that, it needs to create new massworkers' parties. The developments in P-SoLwill be eagerly watched and studied by Marx-ists throughout the world, in order to learn thelessons for similar developments elsewhere.From the December 07/January 08 edition ofSocialism Todaywww.socialismtoday.org