Kent Communist Group Public Meeting on the ‘Anti-Parliamentary’ Tradition in Britain

This report has been written by our close sympathiser Mark Hayes whose book was the basis for the presentation given to the meeting. As the report makes clear, the Kent Communist Group is a very welcome sign of a growing interest in revolutionary politics in the UK as elsewhere.

On 25 November the Kent Communist Group held a meeting in Canterbury on the ‘Anti-Parliamentary’ Tradition in Britain presented by Mark Hayes, author of The British Communist Left.

The KCG is a new group formed in 2011 active in and around Canterbury University – for more see their blog https://kentcommunistgroup.blogspot.com/ [1].  We’re also reprinting their statement here for information. We think that, whatever its specificities, and whether or not it survives and develops further in 2012, this group, like others that have appeared (like the class struggle forums in Manchester and other British cities), is a very encouraging sign of a commitment to proletarian political activity and of a growing interest in discussing revolutionary politics faced with a revival of struggles worldwide and the deepening capitalist crisis.  

Despite being held at 6.30pm on a Friday night in an out-of-the-way
university lecture hall some distance from the town centre, November’s meeting attracted around 20 people. In addition to members of the KCG these included representatives from the ICC, the Communist Workers’ Organisation, the Anarchist Federation, Socialist Party of Great Britain and The Commune, as well as former members of the ICC and half a dozen other students from the university.

The title of the meeting was chosen by the KCG themselves, but as the presentation explained, the left communist tradition is much more than ‘anti-parliamentarism. Focussing on the period at the end of the first world war it showed that opposition to parliamentary activity was a major trend within the early Third International, basing itself on the concrete experience of the seizure of power by the soviets in Russia and the counter-revolutionary role played by social democracy, the Labour Party and trade unions. Far from being an ‘infantile disorder’ as Lenin argued in his notorious pamphlet, anti-parliamentarism was a practical response to the need to develop new forms of mass organisation based on general assemblies, in order to wage an autonomous struggle to overthrow decadent capitalism. Despite eventual defeat, the left communists around Sylvia Pankhurst and the Workers’ Dreadnought fought for these positions against the growing trend towards opportunism and centrism in the International itself, while still attempting to form a principled communist party in Britain and fighting for their positions within it.   

There was no vocal disagreement with these arguments in the meeting.  Instead, the discussion that followed was around two main areas.

The first was dominated by the SPGB whose interventions focused on the need for us today to work in bourgeois parliaments in order to achieve a majority vote to peacefully overthrow capitalism. ‘Why not use parliaments?’ was the question asked by one SPGB speaker. This argument, which has been consistently advocated by this group since 1904, allowed other speakers to repeat the answer given by the left communists of the 1920s:  because firstly the power of the bourgeoisie no longer resides in parliaments but rather in the executive apparatus of the state, and secondly because the exploiting class will never willingly give up its power peacefully through some simple vote.  The peddling of such arguments today can only help to spread illusions in bourgeois democracy at a time when the power of this mystification is being unmasked by the realities of the economic crisis and increasing examples of mass revolt against it, in Greece, Spain, the Middle East...  

The second area of discussion was of more interest in terms of understanding the issues and concerns of a new generation coming towards revolutionary politics and militant activity today, with a whole range of questions and assertions by ‘non-aligned’ students (and also by the Anarchist Federation). Isn’t the whole concept of class outmoded? ‘I’ve never even been in a factory, nor am I likely to’. Isn’t it better to talk instead of ‘the 99%’? Hasn’t the working class in Western Europe been decimated by or integrated into capitalism? Doesn’t the very term ‘communism’ put people off or make them think of Stalinist Russia? ‘We should forget old arguments, go out into the community, and listen to ordinary people’s concerns’....

On the face of it these sound like the same questions raised in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the revolutionary movement was just re-emerging from the counter-revolution. What are we to make of such questions today?  In fact they are typical of discussions we’ve had with many others in the students’ struggles and the Occupy movement internationally, and despite their many weaknesses, and the continuing weight of the past, these movements, like the ‘Indignados’ movement in Spain, and the struggles in Greece and Israel, represent an important development of class consciousness – for much more on this crucial issue see the article on social movements in International Review no. 147. [2]

In short, without underestimating the difficulties for the recovery of the class struggle, the situation today increasingly provides concrete answers to such questioning and helps dispel the mystifications behind them – as they were to an extent at the meeting. And whatever confusions were expressed, we can certainly say the discussions among the comrades present were marked by an openness and very fraternal spirit which gives us confidence that they can be overcome.
 
MH 12/11

---

We are the Kent communist group.

The aggressive attacks on public service provision and the austerity agenda of the ruling class are symptoms of an ongoing crisis of capitalism. These austerity measures are a way in which the capitalist class attempts to cut costs in order to restore its rate of profit. Today the crisis is not simply a cyclical downturn but shows a system which has become obsolete, which cannot even reproduce that class whose work sustains it – the working class. With this in mind the overthrow of capitalism, and the misery it causes - Poverty, War, and Environmental degradation – is a necessity.

The alternative to capitalism is communism, and by this we do not mean the horrors of Stalinism, or the state dictatorships of the USSR and its ilk. What happened in Russia and other “socialist” countries, was not a challenge to capitalism, but its consolidation in the hands of the state. Whilst private property was abolished the state remained as the only capitalist, it is for this reason we refer to such regimes as “State-Capitalist”.

Instead we put forward a vision of communism as a stateless, classless society based on the principle of “from each according to ability to each according to need”. In such a society a multiplicity of councils and mass assemblies, directly controlled by workers themselves, direct the productive forces towards the fulfilment of society's needs. Communism therefore represents a real human community, where the free development of each is guaranteed by the free development of all.

The only way that this can come about is through the mass movement of the working class organized in its own interest and through its own organizations. However, the ways in which capitalism divides us through racism, nationalism, sexism and homophobia provide a barrier to working class solidarity and must be overcome. Workers must unite across national boundaries. Capitalism is a global system, and its overthrow must also be on a global scale.

The Kent Communist Group is an organization of revolutionary communists, from both Marxist and Anarchist traditions. We seek to provide a platform for cooperation and debate between revolutionary communists. We are not a specific political organization but provide points of common agreement as the basis of revolutionary cooperation.

These Points of agreement are:

- Global Revolution for the overthrow of capitalism.
- Proletarian Internationalism and Opposition to Nationalism of all kinds.
- Opposition to Stalinism and State Capitalism.

As an organization seeking to facilitate cooperation between communists of different traditions & tendencies, we seek to provide activities that are practical and activities that are more theoretical and further our understanding of communism – its history and ideas.

If you are interested in taking part in activities and discussions within the organization, please contact us via email: [email protected] [3]

 

One of the ideas raised at a recent meeting of the Occupy movement in London has been that the ruling class somehow engineered the current economic crisis in order to preserve its own power. This conception is nothing new; conspiracy theories have been around for as long class society and government and vary widely in scope and plausibility. Even the Ancient World had its share with Nero being accused by contemporary historians of starting the Great Fire of Rome.

In more modern times, ever since the rise to dominance of the Rothschild dynasty in international banking and their role in funding the English in the Napoleonic Wars, the idea of banking elites manipulating economic crisis and war for its own ends has been able to find an audience.

Today, as the masses try to make sense of the economic catastrophe that is shaking the foundation of society to its core, and with mainstream bourgeois politics utterly discredited, many are turning to conspiracy theories in order to try and understand the world situation.

Such conceptions are no longer the province of “crazy” extremists. For example, some opinion polls have demonstrated belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories as being widely held by the general public in the US. A poll in 2004 found that 49% of NYC residents believed parts of the US government had advance warning of the attacks and allowed them to happen.

We in the ICC have also been accused of being “conspiracy theorists” because of our thesis on the “Machiavellianism” of the ruling class. In fact, we think there are fundamental differences between a Marxist analysis of the political life of the ruling class and the ideological underpinnings behind many conspiracy theories. This is what we hope to explore in this article.

Conspiracies real ...

Another early conspiracy theory surrounds the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 with Lord Salisbury alleged to have either masterminded the plot or have allowed it to continue after discovery in order to justify a crackdown on Catholics in England. This theme of false-flag operations is common in conspiracy theory - that is, a covert operation designed to appear as if it was being carried out by an enemy group or power in order to justify action against it.

Most “false-flag” theories fall at you what might call the plausible or possible end of the conspiracy theory spectrum. Their plausibility is derived from the fact that many real false-flag operations have been planned and carried out throughout history. For example:

·         Commonly known as the Gleiwitz Incident, Germany justified its invasion of Poland in 1939 due to an attack by a group of Polish soldiers on a German radio-station. In fact, the operation was carried out by SS commandos dressed in Polish uniforms;

·         Operation Susannah was an attempt by the Israeli security forces to plant bombs in various hotels in Egypt which would then be blamed on Islamic extremists, communists, etc. Also known as the Lavon Affair, as the Israeli Minister of Defence, Pinhas Lavon, was forced to resign over the issue;

·         Operation Northwoods was a proposed operation submitted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Kennedy administration, suggesting government operatives carry out acts of terrorism in the US and frame Cuba in order to justify military aggression. Although Northwoods was never carried out, it shows beyond question that these kinds of operations are seriously discussed in the upper echelons of the state.

Other examples of proven historical conspiracies include:

·         The Ebert-Groener Pact, was a secret agreement Freidrich Ebert (leader of the SDP) and Wilhelm Groener (commander of the Reichwehr) in 1918 during the German Revolution. This was an alliance for counter-revolution between left and right, with the left providing the political cover (the ruling SDP saying it carried out its action in the name of the workers) while the right provided the muscle, the brutal Freikorps who later evolved into the Nazi SA and SS.

·         The Propaganda Due (P2) Lodge – “a state within a state”[1] – had tentacles spread throughout the Italian ruling class. It has been linked to both the Mafia and the Vatican and included Italian politicians, business men and state functionaries (including the police and security services). P2 came to light in 1981 during investigations into the collapse of Banco Ambrosiano. It also alleged to have been closely linked with the mysterious “Operation Gladio”;

·         Operation Gladio itself was initially established by NATO as a “stay-behind” operation in the event that the Soviet Union invaded Europe or a “communist”[2] government seized control of a European state. Strongly linked to the right-wing of the bourgeoisie and organised crime, these structures would attempt to disrupt political and social life under the new regime, through subversion and terror. Various trials and investigations have seen allegations of Gladio and P2 involvement in terrorist events in post-war Italy. Although Gladio was primarily focused on Italy, similar operations were in place throughout continental Europe and Gladio has become a short-hand term covering them.

It is, therefore, a matter of historical record that such conspiracies do exist. Naturally, this doesn’t mean that every event is the product of conspiracies, but nor does it mean that we can naively dismiss any discussion of bourgeois machinations as “just” conspiracy theories.

... and imagined

It goes without saying that while some conspiracies have been proven to exist and others, while not categorically proven are at least plausible, there are many conspiracy theories which are utterly without foundation.

These conspiracy theories usually have very similar characteristics:

·         The world is secretly controlled by a covert group that ranges from Jews, Freemasons, bankers (who coincidentally often happen to be Jewish) and even aliens;

·         All significant world events are actually the product of the machinations of this clique.

Ironically, the propagation of such conspiracy theories often has its origin (or is at least facilitated) by state organs. The infamous “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, supposedly the minutes of a meeting attended by world Jewish leaders as part of a plot to take over the world, was actually a forgery created by the Tsarist secret police, the Okhrana.

The Jewish people have, of course, long been the target for accusations of conspiracy. Even the word ‘cabal’, often used to describe a group of plotters, derives from ‘Caballa’, a form of Jewish mysticism. Many modern conspiracy theories, even when they are not the overtly anti-Semitic rantings of the far-right, are still ideological descendents of the kind of hatred embodied in the Protocols. More modern theorists may talk sincerely about “international bankers” and a “global elite” rather than “international Jewry”, but the essential ideological structure is the same. After all, much of the resentment towards Jews was derived from the perception of their dominance of the banking system and the fact that they represented a visible minority with supposed loyalties to something other than the crown or the national state. These sorts of conspiracy theories are thus tightly interweaved with nationalist sentiments. As a side note, the influence of this is even seen on leftist ideology which officially repudiates nationalism and racism - the ideology of anti-globalisation is explicitly bound up with the idea of global capitalists who undermine the national state and exploit its peoples. The underlying similarities with the paranoid ideology of the Nazi regime are obvious.

Communists have also been a popular target for conspiracy theories. In the US, the Protocols were republished in 1919 by the Public Ledger in Philadelphia with all references to Jews replaced with “Bolsheviks” and calling it the “Red Bible”. Drawing on Marx’s Jewish background, anti-Semites have always equated communists and Jews and it was inevitable that the Russian Revolution would be identified with the Jewish conspiracy. The vast literature written on this subject is worthy of an academic treatise in itself but it is safe to say that the well-known total identification between “Jews” and “Bolsheviks” by the Nazi regime is the logical consequence of this line of thought.

While most can see the paranoid fantasies of the far-right for what they are, it is worth pointing out that mainstream bourgeois history has largely interpreted the Russian Revolution along conspiratorial lines. Instead of being the conscious act of the masses themselves, historiography often reduces the Revolution to a coup d’état by the Bolsheviks. Once again, we see that conspiracy theory, for all its avowed rejection of mainstream thought, is not a million miles away from the fundamental axes of bourgeois ideology even if it exaggerates certain aspects to the point of absurdity.

The Role of Conspiracy Theory

Officially, the bourgeoisie disavows conspiracy theory. In fact, the very term is a pejorative intended to imply that the very idea of conspiracies in the democratic state is so ridiculous that no right-thinking person could possibly believe them. Despite this, as we have briefly examined, the bourgeoisie indulges in conspiratorial activity all the time. Moreover, its own view of history is conspiratorial, a chronicle of ceaseless rivalry between cliques seeking control of the state, of manipulation of the masses, etc.

Conspiracy theories orientated around libels towards particular groups are an expression of the racism and prejudice that’s endemic to capitalist society; in that sense they have a spontaneous character. But they are also employed consciously by the state in order to justify action against certain groups. The venomous lies propagated around the Jews have been used to justify brutal pogroms throughout history.

Similarly, conspiracy theories around communists were used in efforts to mobilise counter-revolution in the period after Red October, both in Russia and beyond. The “Red Scares” in the US, for example, were propagated in order to support the policy aims of the US state. In the first period, the aim was to decapitate the political organs of the working class. The ideological offensive wasn’t limited to communists: anarchists, union members (especially the IWW), strikers of any sort were all routinely denounced as dangers to respectable society. This was part of the international counter-revolution unleashed to crush the revolutionary wave.

In the second Red Scare, the infamous period of “McCarthyism”, the policy aims certainly had a social dimension but were primarily orientated around the imperialist rivalry between the US and its Russian rival. The US ruling class was concerned about the appeal that Stalinist ideology had for the working class and had already uncovered several active Russian spy-rings.

What of conspiracy theories that denounce the state (the 9/11 Truth Movement is an example)? In some respects, they represent the extreme distrust that the petit-bourgeoisie has for the state and big capital. It is no accident that the home of modern conspiracy theory is among the right-wing libertarians in the United States. On the face of things, these conspiracy theories appear to challenge the mythology of the democratic state. But, in fact, they play a role in preserving that very mythology because - in an expression of the historic impotence of the petit-bourgeoisie - they are unable to provide a real alternative to bourgeois democracy. Instead, they are reduced to the entirely utopian demand of calling on the state to be what it pretends to be, the democratic expression of “the people”. For example, John Buchanan stood for the US Presidency in the 2004 election on a “Truther” platform. The more radical elements that see this approach as the futile exercise it is are condemned to holing up in mountain retreats with stockpiles of automatic weapons, waiting for the final apocalypse to descend.

The more paranoid varieties also serve another role. In the first instance, they allow any serious discussion of the inner workings of the bourgeois class to be dismissed from mainstream consciousness through guilt by association: partly because of the ludicrous nature of some of their claims, but also their unsavoury associations with the extreme right and religious fundamentalism.

Although, as we have seen, their underlying themes are not new in themselves, their modern forms are certainly influenced by one of the classical expressions of decomposing capitalism: the tendency for bourgeois ideology to become more and more openly irrational. In part, they are also a response to the growing chaos of capitalist in its everyday, material reality, and it’s no accident that there are close links to the rise of New Age and religious fundamentalism. David Icke, the classic representation of the New Age version, talks of alien lizards that secretly rule the world while Millennialist Christians believe they are living in the time supposedly foretold in the book of Revelations and that the coming of the Antichrist will be accompanied by a totalitarian “New World Order”. Nearly 20% of US Christians (roughly 16% of the country’s population) believe that Jesus will return within their lifetimes[3]. Sales of Hal Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth, one of the earliest popular paperbacks on the “End Times” had sold over 28 million copies by 1990, in spite of being more or less falsified by failed predictions. The Left Behind series, a fictionalised account of the Apocalypse, has sold millions of copies (in 1998 the first four books held the four top slots of the New York Times best-sellers list).

Many more examples could be given, underlining the fact that such theories have a growing influence on mainstream culture and politics. The impact of “End Time” ideology on the right-wing of the US ruling class is undeniable and we might also point out the successful television series “The X Files” which took up and widely popularised the UFO variety of conspiracism.

Marxism against Conspiracism

But aren’t Marxists (or the ICC at least) also conspiracy theorists? As mentioned above, we stand by the thesis that the ruling class is fully capable of organising elaborate conspiracies in order to further its aims. We identified some historical examples earlier in this article. We also identify an “elite” (the capitalist class) which has concentrated all political and economic power into its hands. Superficially, it would seem, we follow the basic pattern of conspiracy theories.

It is to be expected that, as Marxists, we subscribe to a materialist theory of reality and accordingly reject the notions of that we are living on the brink of Armageddon or that alien lizards are secretly in control of the planet. But why, for example, do we reject the idea of a secret global elite (who are capitalists after all) controlling the entire world, manipulating wars and crises in order to further their own ends?

The reason is based on our understanding of how capitalism functions. While conspiracy theorists may rail against the lizards, the bankers, the Bilderberg Group, etc. they cling to one of the deepest illusions that the bourgeoisie offers: the idea that someone, somewhere, is in control. It seems easier to lay the horror and waste of decadent, decomposing capitalism at the door of a grand conspiracy than understand it for the tragedy it truly is: that is, a society where humanity (even the ruling class) confronts its own economic and social activity as something alien and beyond its control.

The laws of capitalism function independently of the will of capitalists, regardless of how desperately they try to control them (usually through the medium of the state). For example, the current crisis is not the result of the machination of some global elite - on the contrary, the tendency towards crisis more and more escapes their control in spite of their machinations. While it is certainly true that this or that faction of the bourgeoisie will attempt to engineer war or crisis[4] to further their ends, it is important to remember that these aims were usually focused against another faction of the bourgeoisie.

The capitalist class is founded upon the principles of competition, a mechanism that capitalism cannot escape from. Competition is deeply entrenched within the economic processes of capitalism and cannot be overcome by an act of will. This element is expressed with the ruling class’s political and social life in the form of cliques, competition between individuals, corporations, nation states and alliances of nation states. Tendencies acting against competition certainly exist - statification, monopoly, etc - and are exacerbated in the era of decadence, but they can never fully overcome it, merely displace it to a higher level. Competition between companies becomes competition between states; free trade is sacrificed to mercantilism; wars are fought over markets and natural resources and tend towards more and more global conflagrations (world wars). Machiavellianism is a product of the alienated consciousness of the ruling class, the competition of each against all and does not offer the bourgeoisie any means of escaping from the fundamental contradictions in either its economic, ideological or political life.

The highest unity achieved by the bourgeoisie takes place in a revolutionary period, when they are forced to confront the threat of a conscious, organised working class. The Ebert-Groener Pact mentioned above is an example of the intrigues the bourgeoisie is capable of during this situation, but the difficulty of the ruling class maintaining its unity in such a dangerous situation was expressed in the ill-fated Kapp Putsch.

For Marxists then, the bourgeoisie can never achieve the kind of permanent unity required to fully control the evolution of society. Conspiracy theories of the type discussed here thus offer neither a method for understanding the historic crisis of capitalist society, nor do they provide any programme for overthrowing it. Nonetheless, we must expect the influence of conspiracism to grow in the present period as the systemic crisis deepens and class consciousness remains very weak. Communists cannot simply dismiss adherents to such conceptions but confront and expose the reactionary roots of these ideas, while insisting on the genuinely Machiavellian nature of the ruling class.

As the class struggle gathers pace and the proletariat once again feels its own power it will abandon conspiracy theories in favour of its own historic method: Marxism.

Ishamael 8/1/12

In March 11th 2011 a gigantic tsunami flooded the Japanese east coast. Waves as high as 12-15 meters caused incredible damage. More than 20.000 were killed by the tsunami; thousands are still reported to be missing today; an uncountable number of people lost their home. On the whole planet a big part of the population has settled at the coasts or near coasts; most people live on a narrow space jammed together, more and more threatened by the irreversible rise of sea water levels. The flood waves of the tsunami showed all the dangers that flow from such dense settlement along the coasts.

But contrary to all expectations of the government, a disastrous accident occurred in the Fukushima nuclear power plant. The earthquake and the tsunami brought to the fore the potential dangers arising from both settlement along the coasts in times of climate change and the way the ruling classes deal with nuclear power. For reasons of space, we want to focus in this article on the consequences of the nuclear melt-down.

Chernobyl, Fukushima: helplessness and unscrupulousness of the ruling class everywhere

After the disastrous accident in Fukushima the evacuation of the population began too late and it did not cover the necessary no-go zone. Even though it may be objected that the rescue measures and the evacuation were delayed and made more difficult due to the consequences of the tsunami, the government wanted to avoid a large scale evacuation, because it did not want the population to become aware of the scope of the danger and wanted to downplay the whole situation. All of a sudden it became obvious that the responsible people in Japan (both the company which runs the nuclear plant, Tepco, and the government) had never expected such a scenario and that the safety measures in case of an earthquake and a tsunami of such a magnitude were totally insufficient. The planned emergency measures and the means of emergency intervention were quite inadequate and made hi-tech Japan look like a poorly equipped, helpless giant.

A few days after the disaster, when the possible need for an evacuation of the metropolitan area of Tokyo with its 35 million inhabitants was discussed in the government, this idea was immediately turned down because they simply did not have the means to implement it, and moreover it would have shown the state to be in danger of collapse.

In and around the nuclear plant the recorded radiation reached fatal heights. Shorty after the disaster Prime Minister Kan “demanded the formation of a suicide team of workers who would have to attempt the task of easing the pressure in the plant”. The workers who intervened on the site were totally ill equipped. “For some time there was a lack of dosimeters, and a lack of appropriate and admitted safety boots. One worker reported that the workers had to bind plastic bags with cellotape around their shoes instead. Very often it was impossible for the workers to communicate with each other or with the control centres. Many of the workers had to sleep on the premises of the site, they could only cover themselves with lead blankets. The critical values for male power plant workers in emergency situations was increased on March 15th from 100 to 250 mSv per year”. In several cases workers could only undergo a health check weeks or months later.  

25 years ago, at the time of Chernobyl, the collapsing Russian Stalinist regime, due to a lack of other resources, found nothing else to do but send a gigantic army of forced recruits to fight the disaster on the spot. According to the WHO some 600,000 to 800,000 liquidators were sent, of whom hundreds of thousands died or became ill because of the impact of radiation or cancer. The government never published any official reliable figures.

Now, 25 years later, hi-tech Japan tried desperately to extinguish the fire and cool the site amongst others with fire hoses and by spraying water from helicopters. In contradiction to all previous planning Tepco was forced to use large masses of sea water for cooling the plant and to dump the polluted water into the Pacific Ocean. And while the Russian Stalinist regime 25 years ago forcibly recruited hundreds of thousands of liquidators, economic misery forced thousands of workers in Japan to risk their lives. Tepco recruited in particular among homeless and unemployed workers in the poorest area of Osaka, Kamagasaki. In many cases they were not told where they had to work, and they were often not informed about the risks.

But not only were the lives of the liquidators put at risk; the civilian population was also put at risk. In particular children in the radiated area were exposed to high doses. Since the emissions superseded any previously recorded value, the government decided to consider the exposure of children in the Fukushima area to a radiation level of 20 millisievert as “not dangerous”.

During the first days the rulers in Stalinist Russia tried to stay altogether silent about the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl; the government of democratic Japan was equally determined to hide the full scope of the catastrophe. The people in charge in Japan showed no less cynicism and contempt for life than the Stalinist regime in power at the time of Chernobyl.

It is impossible today to assess the long-term consequences of the disaster in a realistic manner. The melt-down means that the melted fuel rods have formed a gigantic radioactive clot, which has penetrated through the pressure container. The cooling water has become extremely contaminated. It needs permanent cooling, and new gigantic masses of contaminated water accumulate all the time. Not only the water but also the “unprotected” reactors emit caesium, strontium, and plutonium isotopes. These are called ‘hot particles’, which can be found all over Japan, including Tokyo. So far there are no technical means available to dispose of the nuclear waste piled up in Fukushima. The cooling process itself takes years. In Chernobyl it was necessary to construct a sarcophagus which will have to be torn down at the latest in one hundred years time to be replaced by another one. There is not yet any solution in sight for Fukushima. However, in the meantime contaminated water accumulates and the authorities in charge do not know where to dispose of it. A large part of the cooling water is directly poured into the ocean, where the currents spread it across the Pacific, and its consequences for the food chain and for human beings cannot yet be measured. The Japanese northeast coast which counts as one of the richest fisheries will be affected, even the Bering Strait with its salmon resources may be hit[1].

Because the population density in this region of Japan is 15 times higher than in Ukraine the consequences for the population cannot yet be assessed.

The meltdown thus reveals that the consequences of such a nuclear disaster are totally out of control. The authorities in charge had the choice between plague and cholera. Either let the melt-down happen without any means of intervention or attempt to cool the site with sea water, thus accepting a further spread of radioactivity through the dissemination of the extinguishing devices. The helpless government opted for the contamination of sea water through highly radioactive fire fighting water.

Decontamination: instead of solving the problems, everything becomes worse  

The attempts to dispose of the contaminated soil in the surrounding area displayed a terrible lack of responsibility and lack of scruple. Up until August 2011 in the town of Fukushima some 334 school yards and nurseries were cleaned. But the authorities do not really know where to dispose of the contaminated soil. For example in Koriyama in the Fukushima prefecture, it was just buried in the soil on the school yards themselves. 17 out of 48 prefectures of Japan, amongst them Tokyo, reported that there were contaminated slicks, but the prefectures do not where and how to get rid of them. Even as close as 20 km to Tokyo radiated soil was recorded. Thousands of buildings still need to be scrubbed of radioactive particles.  Even forested mountains will probably need to be decontaminated, which might necessitate clear-cutting and literally scraping them clean. Japanese media have reported that the government is planning an intermediary deposit for millions of tons of radioactively contaminated waste. Since there is no solution some of the radioactively contaminated garbage has been burnt[2]. This is a way of spreading radioactivity even further via the smoke. This helplessness vis a vis the piles of nuclear waste casts a light on the impossibility of decontaminating the radioactive waste. 

Nuclear decontamination – the disastrous legacy, or shitting on the future…

The specificity of the production of electricity through nuclear energy is that the radiation does not stop once the nuclear power plants at the end of their operation time are switched off. The process of nuclear fission is not terminated once the nuclear power plant has been switched off. 

What is to be done with the nuclear waste, because any material which has come into contact with radioactive material is contaminated?

According to the World Nuclear Association, every year some 12,000 tons of highly radioactive waste accumulates. Until the end of 2010 some 300,000 tons of highly radioactive waste had been piled up in the world as a whole, out of which some 70.000 tons can be found in the USA. In 2008 in Russia some 700,000 tons of radioactive waste were stored, out of which 140,000 tons came from European nuclear sites. At the Hanford Site in the USA some 200,000 cubic meters of radioactive material need to be disposed of. In France more than one million cubic meters of contaminated soil is stored (‘Nucléaire, c’est où la sortie’, Le Canard Enchainé, p74), The geological storage which has been practiced or planned in several countries, for example in old mines, is nothing but a temporary makeshift, the dangers of which the defenders of nuclear energy stay more or less silent about. For example in Germany 125,000 barrels of nuclear waste are deposited in an old mine in Asse; these barrels are eroding due to the influence of salt; contaminated lye is already escaping from the barrels. In the German case intermediate storage experts Gorleben found out about the danger of landslides. Similar risks have been diagnosed in most of the dumpsites. This means that while the “normal running” of a nuclear plant is full of dangers, the disposal of nuclear waste is a totally unsolved question. The people in charge have been placing all the nuclear waste into dumpsites, leaving behind a pile of nuclear waste which an endless number of generations will have to cope with.

And the “normal” running of a nuclear plant is not as “clean” as always claimed by the defenders of nuclear industry. In reality enormous masses of water are necessary for the cooling of the fuel rods. Nuclear plants have to be constructed at rivers or shores[3]. Every 14 months in each reactor one quarter of the fuel rods need to be renewed. However, since they are extremely hot, after their replacement they have to be placed into the spent fuel pit, where they need to be cooled for a period of 2-3 years. The cooling water, which is pumped into rivers, leads to a thermal pollution. Algae develop, fish perish. Moreover, chemicals are emitted into rivers (e.g. hydrochloric acid, sodium, boric acid, detergents) In addition water is also polluted with radioactivity, even though only in small doses. 

Almost one year after the disaster – what conclusions have the people in charge drawn?

Are the holders of power, the people in charge, interested in clarifying the root of the problem? Obviously not! As a matter of fact the entire construction plan of the power plant in Fukushima was not adapted to the danger of earthquakes and tsunamis. By now, it has become known that the operating company Tepco covered up many nuclear incidents; important safety deficiencies were camouflaged; widely criticised faults in the safety system were not eliminated, partly because the plant was to be closed after 40 years of operating time. The Japanese state, which usually intervenes heavily in the industry and is known for its intervention through the MITI in the economy, in order to strengthen the competitiveness of Japanese capital, almost issued a blank cheque to the nuclear industry. Even when the manipulation of inquiry reports or the trivialisation of nuclear incidents came to the fore, the state did not intervene more strictly. At any rate, under the weight of competition and the worsening crisis, there is a worldwide trend for less and less money to be invested in maintenance and fewer and fewer qualified staff to be employed in maintenance and repairs. The capitalist crisis makes the nuclear plants even less safe, as safety standards are lowered by employing less qualified staff.

But above all it has become clear that of the 442 operating power plants worldwide many of them were built in earthquake-prone areas. In Japan alone more than 50 power plants were constructed in such areas. In the USA more than a dozen nuclear plants with a similar risk were constructed. In Russia there are many nuclear power plants without an automatic mechanism for shutting down in case of nuclear incidents. In many Russian nuclear power plants cracks and surface subsidence were reported. Chernobyl was probably no exception: such a disaster can occur at any time again. (Le Monde p49).  In Turkey the reactor Akkuyu Bay was built near the Ecemi fault. India and China are planning to build the most new nuclear power plants. Yet China with its 27 new nuclear power plants under construction is one of the most seismologically active countries[4].

Saudi Arabia is planning to construct 16 power plants, not least to be better armed against Iran.

In Pakistan a new reactor is to be opened near Lahore, where there is a moderate to high risk of earthquakes. Taiwan has 6 reactors although the country is in one of the most endangered seismological zones. Instead of considering the dangers of nature capitalism has constructed global time bombs. And while safety standards in the most highly developed countries have turned out to be insufficient, the safety philosophy is even weaker in those countries which are starting to draw on nuclear energy. They have even less experience in dealing with incidents and accidents. Hard to imagine what might happen in case of a nuclear disaster…

Moreover the operating time of old nuclear power plants which were to be shut down are now to be prolonged. In the USA their operating time has been prolonged to 60 years, in Russia to 45 years.

While the control mechanisms over nuclear industry by states on a national scale have proven to be incomplete and insufficient, on an international scale the states are opposed to restrictive safety standards or too much intervention by international monitoring organisations. National sovereignty takes precedence over safety.

In Germany the government decided in the summer 2011 to abandon nuclear energy by 2022. As an immediate measure, some nuclear power plants were switched off shortly after the Fukushima explosion.  Does German capital act in a more responsible manner? Not at all! Because only a few months before the same government had prolonged the operating time of several nuclear power plants, i.e. before Fukushima it had planned to maintain nuclear energy. If, however, it has decided to abandon nuclear energy now, this corresponds on the one hand to a tactical political move, because the government hopes to improve its chances of being re-elected; and on the other hand there was an economic calculation, because German industry is very competitive with its alternative energy production know-how. German industry now hopes for very profitable markets. Moreover the whole problem of getting rid of the nuclear waste remains unsolved…

To sum up: with or without Fukushima humanity is still faced with these nuclear time bombs ticking away. In many places they can ignite a new disaster because of earthquakes or other weak points.

Nuclear power generated electricity – cheap, clean and without any alternative? Profits at the expense of society and nature

Time and again we hear the arguments put forward by nuclear energy’s defenders that nuclear power generated electricity is cheaper, cleaner, and without any alternative. It is a fact that the construction of a power plant costs gigantic sums, which – thanks to the help of state subsidies – are shouldered by the electricity supply companies. But the bulk of the costs of the disposal of nuclear waste is pushed onto society by the operating companies. Furthermore the whole economic calculation put forward by the nuclear lobby does not take into consideration the cost of disposing of the waste. And once the nuclear plants which are more than 50 years old have to be dismantled, there are tremendous costs in tearing them down. In the UK it was estimated that the cost of demolishing the existing nuclear power plants would amount to 100 billion euros, some 3 billion euros per nuclear plant. In the USA they want to make it even cheaper – only 104 million dollars are to be spent for the 104 operating nuclear power plants. In France the demolition of Superphénix will cost 2.1 billion euros (Le Monde, p. 68). And again, the remaining nuclear waste cannot be disposed of in any way.

And if there is a nuclear incident or accident, normally the state has to intervene and come to the rescue. In Fukushima the follow-up cost, the size of which is yet unknown, are estimated to amount to 200-300 billion euros. Tepco could not raise this money. The Japanese state has promised its “help”, provided that the Tepco employees make sacrifices – their pensions are to be cut, wages lowered, thousands of jobs to be axed. Special tax charges are scheduled in the Japanese budget. Having drawn the lessons from previous accidents the operating companies in France have limited their liability to 700 million euros in case of accidents: this is peanuts in comparison to the possible economic costs of a nuclear disaster.

From an economic and ecological view the real costs of the running of the plants and the unsolved question of nuclear waste are a bottomless pit. In every respect nuclear power is an irrational project. The nuclear power companies receive massive amounts of money for energy production, but they shove the follow-up costs onto society. The nuclear power plants embody the insurmountable contradiction between the search for profit and the long-term protection of man and nature.

Crisis and depletion of nature

Nuclear power is not the only danger for the environment. Capitalism practises a permanent depletion of nature. It constantly plunders all resources without any concern for sustainability, for harmony with nature. It treats nature like a garbage landfill.

By now entire stretches of the Earth have become uninhabitable, whole areas of the sea have become poisoned. The system has embarked upon an irrational course, where more and more new technological means are developed to deplete natural resources, while at the same time the investment into this exploitation becomes more and more costly and immense and the risks and potential of destruction increase. When in 2010 at the shores of the leading industrial power USA the oil platform Deepwater Horizon exploded, the investigation into the accident unmasked striking deficiencies in the safety regulations. 

The pressure flowing from competition forces all the rivals, who have to invest large sums of money in the construction and the maintenance of production sites and their operation, to try to save money and to undermine safety standards. The most recent example is the oil pollution off the Atlantic shores of Brazil. All this negligence does not just crop up in technologically backward countries. In fact it takes on the most unbelievable proportions precisely in the most highly developed countries, because there competition is often even fiercer.

The whole humanity is threatened

In comparison to Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, Fukushima meant that for the first time a metropolitan area such as Tokyo with its 35 million inhabitants was directly threatened.

Nuclear energy was developed during World War Two as an instrument of warfare. The nuclear bombing of two Japanese cities inaugurated a new level of destruction in this decadent system. The arms race during the ‘cold war’ after WW2, with its systematic deployment of nuclear weapons, pushed the military capacity for destruction to the point where humanity could be wiped out in one stroke. Today more than two decades after the end of the ‘cold war’ there are still some 20,000 nuclear war heads which can still annihilate us many times over.

With the nuclear disasters in Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima it has become obvious that humanity is not only threatened with annihilation through the military use of nuclear power. Its “civilian” use for the production of energy can also cause the destruction of humanity.

The Japanese government estimated that due to the nuclear disaster at Fukushima the radioactive level of Caesium-137 was 168 times higher than the one provoked by the nuclear bomb of Hiroshima in 1945 (Shimbun, 25/8/2011). The amount of Caesium-137 was estimated to have reached 15.000 Terabecquerel, while the effect of the American atomic bomb Little Boy on Hiroshima was ‘only’ 89 Terabecquerel.

The whole development since the beginning of the disaster shows that the authorities and Tepco lost control, that the scope of the disaster was trivialised, that the costs of the rescue operation were skyrocketing and that the people in charge had not drawn the necessary conclusions. On the contrary. Not only concerning the question of nuclear power, but concerning the protection of the environment as a whole, the ruling class is becoming more and more ruthless – as the results of the recent Durban summit show. The destruction of the environment has been reaching higher levels, and the ruling class is totally unable to change the course of events and to take appropriate measures. The planet is sacrificed for the sake of profit.

Moreover the worsening economic crisis, which sharpened even more in 2011, leaves the ruling class with less room for manoeuvre for protecting nature. Thus capitalism pushes humanity towards the abyss through the effects of the crisis such as hunger, pauperisation and trade wars, shooting wars etc., while its power of destruction threatens the whole of civilisation. The nuclear power plants are only the tip of the iceberg.

A race against time has begun. Either capitalism destroys the entire planet or the exploited and oppressed – with the working class at their head – succeed in overthrowing the system. Because capitalism poses a threat to humanity on different levels (crisis, war, environment) it is insufficient to struggle only against one aspect of capitalist reality, e.g. against nuclear energy. We have to highlight the link between these different threats and their roots in the capitalist system. During the 1980s and 1990s there were many “single issue” movements (such as the struggle against nuclear energy, against militarism, against the housing shortage etc.), which reduced their focus only to one aspect. Today more than ever it is necessary to show the bankruptcy of the entire system, to demonstrate that the system cannot take humanity out of this impasse. It is true that the connections between the different elements are not easy to understand, but if we do not take the link between crisis, war and ecological destruction into account our struggle will end up in the dead-end of thinking that things could be reformed within the system.

Di 1/12

 

The ICC attended this bookfair hoping to be able, like last year, to have a stall from which to sell our publications and to participate in the various meetings and forums. Unfortunately, we were informed that we had been refused a stall on the grounds that we were not an anarchist group. This is in a way understandable: we are indeed a marxist and not an anarchist organisation (although the ICC recognises the internationalist currents within anarchism as part of the proletarian political movement). But the fact that there were at least three stalls left untaken on the day, and that many of the participants holding stalls were not exactly of pure anarchist antecedents, points to the fact that we were refused because we are the ICC or because we are part of the tradition of the communist left. We also want to recall last year’s Manchester book fair, where under the influence of the late and lamented comrade Knightrose of the Anarchist Federation, the ICC was able to have a stall. The protests of elements in the Manchester anarchist milieu notwithstanding, Knightrose pointed out that comrades of the ICC were participating in the Manchester Class Struggle Forum alongside various anarchist organisations and that it was ridiculous to bar us from having a stall. This not only expressed a proletarian solidarity but also the need to have real political criteria beyond a blanket condemnation of ourselves being ‘marxists’. Knightrose also put forward the need to have wider criteria for a book fair that could include revolutionary marxists and anarchists. This was also raised in informal discussion at this event.

We should be clear that this is not sour-grapes on our part. We wanted to participate at this event to the full, to sell our literature, to put forward our positions in the many meetings that take place at these events.

That apart, comrades of the ICC sold in the foyer of the book fair and we were extremely impressed when a member of the IWW offered to take some of our literature and place it on their own stall. This expressed, like last year, a degree of proletarian solidarity which was much appreciated by all the ICC comrades.

Further, when a significant meeting on the agenda at this event – a discussion on the summer riots - was cancelled, the comrade from the IWW and another comrade who was participating as an organiser and ourselves pushed for a meeting to take place on the recession and the austerity attacks. This was an important meeting in which twenty or so people took part. The comrade from the IWW gave the introduction and there was an encouragement for all to speak. This discussion was focused particularly on the current phase of attacks upon our class. In many areas of the introduction and also the following discussion we found we had much in common with the comrades attending this forum. For example, the real need to go beyond TUC processions; to link up with the fight back against the cuts; to relate to the international dimension of the struggle. Here the experiences in North Africa and in Spain and France were crucial reference points. The question of creating assemblies was also a vital component of this discussion. We listened with interest to the IWW militant talking about his involvement with organising precarious workers. Even though we don’t agree with the IWW policy of unionising these workers (through the IWW), and with the concept of dual unionism, we recognise that the resistance of this mercilessly exploited layer of the working class is going to play an increasingly important role in future struggles.  

Melmoth 27/1/12