Monthly Archives: September 2019

OTTAWA Images of Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau in blackface produced widespread reaction to the images themselves, and on the issue of race and racism in Canada. Here is some of what was said by politicians, federal party leaders and candidates:

I never talked about this. Quite frankly, I was embarrassed. It was not something that represents the person Ive become, the leader I try to be and it was really embarrassing. Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau

The fact is, I didnt understand how hurtful this is to people who live with discrimination every single day. I have always acknowledged that I come from a place of privilege, but I now need to acknowledge that comes with a massive blind spot. Trudeau

When we reflect on mistakes weve made in the past, thats a question that were always going to be asking why did we do that? Why did we think it was OK? Why did we think it was a good idea at the time? It wasnt a good idea. It was a terrible idea. It was something that minimizes and takes advantage of a reality that I have not had to live with of being discriminated against, of being marginalized, of being judged, for the colour of my skin, for my language, my background. Trudeau

I have to recognize I let a lot of people down with that choice, and I stand here today to reflect on that and ask for forgiveness. Trudeau

I believe that Canadians might have been able to accept his apology if he had been truthful and open, if he hadnt based that apology on a lie, but he was specifically asked if there wereother incidences where he engaged in this type of racist behaviour and he indicated that there was only one other incident and now we know that there was at least three. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer

I first saw the video this morning when it was published this morning, and I can say there was an individual who was concerned by this and brought it to our campaign and our campaign did turn it over to a news outlet for verification. We left it in their hands. Scheer

When youve got a prime minister that is mocking the lived realities of Canadians, it can inflame those tensions and give more oxygen to those who believe in discriminating (against) people based on the way they look. Thats why its deeply concerning. The impacts that this has on Canada and on the lives of Canadians cant be underestimated. This is massive. And thats why its so important for us to think about what people are going through right now and how they might be hurting. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh

I thought he (Singh)showed genuine concern, and as someone who obviously has been victim of these types of things in a way thatI never have, I think he responded with a lot of class and dignity and, obviously, he was speaking on behalf of so many Canadians who have been victims of racist acts or mockery like that. Scheer

I can understand that some people were hurt with these pictures. But Mr. Trudeau said that he was sorry, so we have to talk about something else. Quebec PremierFrancois Legault

I told him, Prime Minister, people are going to hurt, but I think the black community will be forgiving.The reason why they are going to be forgiving is because they have seen what he has done and they have appreciated what he has done. Greg Fergus, Liberal candidate, chair of Parliaments black caucus

There is no place in our country to take pictures or act in that way. As Indigenous people, as an Indigenous person myself who has faced racism and discrimination, its entirely unacceptable. Jody Wilson-Raybould, Independent candidate and former Liberal cabinet minister

When I saw that picture last night certainly it was a sucker-punch. I think for me and for a lot of people from minority communities it really makes you start to think, When is this ever going to end? You work so hard, you go to school, you know you have to be just a little bit better than the next person because you have to prove just a little bit more, you succeed, you go on in your career maybe you even become the mayor and then youre reminded in the worst possible way that people you respect, people you admire, people who are allies in the battle with you, still need a little bit of education. Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi

I dont know what to say. Im sick about it. And I think about the impact for every child in this country, Indigenous or people of colour, and how it impacts them personally. It does harm. Its racist. Green Leader Elizabeth May

Ill just make three brief comments of principles that I think we need to keep in mind in response to this. One is that when we see acts of racism, we should call them out as well as understanding their systemic roots and that theres something deeper going on. The second is that I think we should expect the highest levels of integrity from our leaders and that means that nothing should be hidden from us, certainly not for a long period of time. And the third is that I think we need to hold our representatives to account. And in the case of party leaders, I think other representatives of that party should hold their leader to account. Jane Philpott, Independent candidate and former Liberal cabinet minister

This is not about whether or not the prime minister is racist, its about the system in which we live in that is inherently racist and makes people think it is OK to mock racialized peoples lived experiences and appearances. People should be looking at this and talking about this; not just in respect to the prime minister, but critically looking at the racism, oppression and hate that us brown, black, and Indigenous people experience in our day-to-day lives. Samya Hasan, executive director, Council of Agencies Serving South Asians

I was very disheartened and disappointed to see these images. These indefensible images bring back many painful memories of racism that I and other racialized Canadians have experienced throughout our lives. The prime minister has sincerely apologized and expressed his regret. The Justin Trudeau that I have come to know over the last four years is a champion of diversity and inclusion, and a strong ally of racialized communities. Amarjeet Sohi, Edmonton Liberal candidate and cabinet minister

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 19, 2019.

The Canadian Press

Read this article:

Assisted-death lawsuit adjourned, government evidence widens eligibility: lawyer - Todayville.com

From Chinatown Art Brigades #ChinatownNot4Sale tour on May 17, 2019 (photo by Hrag Vartanian/Hyperallergic)

On August 1, 2019, the Bill de Blasio administration launched its Create NYC Action Plan to celebrate the progress they have made since launching New York Citys first Cultural Plan in 2017. How much progress has really been made? The answer: It is impossible to tell precisely because the Department of Cultural Affairs (DCLA) is hiding the data necessary to evaluate their progress on cultural equity, the distribution of their overall funding by borough and neighborhood, and the distribution by large and small institutions.

Coverage from leading art journals has taken the administrations claims at face value by failing to point out that the $1 billion allocated for fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019 is actually less than the allocations made in almost any three years under Bloombergs tenure. From fiscal years 2004-2014 (Bloombergs last adopted budget) DCLA Expense + Capital funding averaged $480 million annually, with a 3-year average of $1.4 billion (40% higher than the 3 year period celebrated by de Blasio). The three years from FY2009-FY2011 actually saw $1.7 billion in total DCLA allocations. So while DCLAs expense budget has increased under de Blasio, its capital budget has declined much more significantly, making the overall totals lower.

There are several worthy accomplishments DCLA did highlight in August: The addition of the Weeksville Heritage Center into the Cultural Institutions Group (CIG), the increased funding for the 900+ Cultural Development Fund (CDF) grantees, and the creation of Diversity Plans by the CIG institutions. These are all important and positive. Yet, they easily distract from the bigger picture, that arts funding was, and remains, one of the most inequitable city services according to the CUNY Equality Indicators study. While New York City is certainly the most generous public arts funder in the United States, how it distributes those funds is extraordinarily inequitable, a problem the Cultural Plan was created in part to rectify.

As the following chart shows, prior to the creation of the cultural plan, DCLAs funding heavily favored the institutions in the CIG (the 33 mostly large institutions like the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the American Museum of Natural History) over the nearly 1,000, mostly smaller institutions funded through the Cultural Development Fund (CDF). Manhattan got more than 50% of total funding for all five boroughs and received a per capital allocation five times that of Brooklyn and 10 times that of Queens.

Since DCLAs primary mission is as a funding (rather than programmatic) agency, how it distributes its grants is the single most significant action it can take to create cultural equity in NYC. At the two-year mark, we should be able to track that progress. However, the Action Plan gives us no such information. Furthermore, on NYCs Open Data website, there is no indication of the location or size of DCLA grantees, preventing us from truly evaluating progress toward funding equity.

However, we are able to evaluate DCLAs claim to having increased equity within the Cultural Institutions Group (CIG) by providing a 17.5% increase for smaller institutions and an 8% increase for larger institutions in 2019. Giving a greater increase to smaller institutions seems like the very definition of equity, until one looks more closely to see that these increases, rather than giving greater funding to lesser-funded organizations, are proportional to the existing allocations (captured in the chart above) that are hugely inequitable. So even though the percentage increase for the smaller institutions is higher, a 17.5% increase to $300,000 or $400,000 is still significantly less than an 8% increase to $12 million or $4 million and the net result is increasing inequity rather than increasing equity the exact opposite of the administrations claim.

DCLAs records show that in fiscal years 2017 and 2018, it increased one-time funding to the smaller CIGs by 12% and the larger CIGs by 6%, a similar sleight-of-hand. As you can see in the following chart, the inequity between the three highest-funded and three lowest-funded CIGs actually increased by $1.6 million dollars under the de Blasio 2017 and 2018 budgets; between the Metropolitan Museum (the top-funded CIG) and the Bronx County Historical Society (the lowest funded CIG) the inequity increased by $623,376.

While we do not have the granular data for Fiscal Year 2019 for the lowest-funded institutions, we do have DCLAs percentage figure (17.5% vs. 8%) along with figures for the increases of the top three recipients which show that the 8% increases for the Met, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), and American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) were $908,062, $879,505, and $848,473 respectively.

Based on DCLA statements in the Action Plan (Objective 1, Strategy A, Action 3), Cultural Development Fund (CDF) grantee increases were also based on a proportion of their existing funding, with higher proportional increases not higher dollar increases going to the less-funded organizations. As shown in the chart above, higher proportional increases can actually result in smaller dollar increases for smaller organizations when the existing inequity is great. Thus, instead of increasing equity in the cultural budget, de Blasio has actually made the inequities worse in his budgets since 2017 the exact opposite of the stated goal of CreateNYC.

The Peoples Cultural Plan would welcome comprehensive data from the de Blasio administration disputing any information analyzed here. For example, a chart similar to the FY2015 chart, showing the change in total funding allocations by borough and neighborhood, and the change in total funding allocations broken down by institution size including capital funding (which was not included in the FY15 chart). A true cultural plan would require DCLA to report annually on its progress. Two years after the CreateNYC, there is no ambition to share such information with the public.

Low ambition is the hallmark of CreateNYC. The Peoples Cultural Plan called for ending the burdensome annual grant-cycle for the smaller CDF institutions, instead funding them through baselined operating support like the CIG. The action plans strategy to offer more flexible and multi-year support to small organizations instead listed the following as one of its successes: extending the FY20 CDF application deadline from 6PM to midnight. In other words, they have done nothing to change the fundamentals of the granting cycle, nor to reduce the complexity or length of the application itself, which is a significant burden for small organizations.

Before we discuss the progress on our other concerns (the housing crisis and labor equity for artists and cultural workers) it is worth stopping for a minute to analyze why de Blasio hasnt made any progress on funding equity despite the rhetoric. Ultimately, the large CIGs have a stranglehold on power in the cultural sector, stemming from their boards of directors that include major capitalist power brokers, drawing heavily from the real estate industry. A nave analysis would highlight the fact that these trustees are also major donors to de Blasio, and that de Blasio has taken huge amounts of real estate money an industry invested in increasing property and land values, which drives inequity.

On deeper analysis, the decline of industrial production in New York City, combined with the rise of real estate to become 60% of the worlds assets, has meant that the city government has little choice but to direct nearly all policy toward increasing property values, which feeds city revenue through property taxes. Sam Steins book, Capital City, highlights the structural binds placed on city planners, and the resulting capitalist-democracy contradiction:

In a nominally democratic capitalist republic, the state and its planners have to perform a delicate balancing act: planners must proceed with enough openness and transparency to maintain public legitimacy, while ensuring that capital retains ultimate control over the processes parameters. The people must have their say, but their options must be limited. If the system is entirely opened up, people might demand the full socialization of land, the abolition of private property and all the rest. If the system is completely closed, however, they might revolt against an unjust and unaccountable government. Planners are therefore tasked with creating public processes that are open but rigged. From this capitalist-democracy contradiction arises the familiar landscape of participatory planning public comment periods, community boards, planning commissions, design charettes and a host of other interventions. (p.33)

Thats an apt description of CreateNYC. The Peoples Cultural Plan advocated for more radical changes, such as popular control over-generous and equitably distributed public funds as well as for eliminating de Blasios developer-friendly housing policies, items not likely to be considered by an administration dominated by real estate. That the consultants hired to work on the cultural plan in 2016 came largely from the real estate sector was the consequence of these structural realities.

Cultural policy has been subsumed under real estate development imperatives. DCLA reports to The New York City Economic Development Corporation (EDC). The DCLA was moved from under Deputy Mayor Tony Shorris portfolio to the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, initially Alicia Glen, now Vicky Been. Ali Davis, the recently hired Senior Advisor for Arts and Culture to the Deputy Mayor for Housing and Economic Development (the position which directly oversees DCLA), was most recently the Chief of Staff of REBNY (the Real Estate Board of New York), before which she was an Assistant Vice President at the EDC under Bloomberg.

DCLA continues to direct significant capital funding to projects that have a net effect of increasing property values, and cultural institutions continue to artwash development projects While the SHEDs initial public funding allocation of $75 million dollars came from Bloomberg, the de Blasio administration has been excitedly promoting its opening over the last several months. More than $1.2 billion in public funds intended for poor neighborhoods were diverted to the ongoing development of Hudson Yards under de Blasios tenure, using gerrymandering practices that treated it as a part of Harlem.

The Action Plans strategies to support living wages for artists and cultural workers and alternative models for artists and cultural organizations to acquire and operate affordable property and share resources have been superficial. The accomplishment highlighted is the allocation of $13.9 million in capital funds for the development of only 209 units of affordable artist workspace. More disturbing is the partnership with the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) with three Brooklyn-based cultural organizations (unnamed) to operate a facility in a city-led affordable housing project in Brownsville, Brooklyn (Action Plan p. 16).

Another accomplishment highlighted by DCLA has been its work on diversity in the cultural workforce. The requirement that CIGs adopt Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) plans, stemming from CreateNYC, has at least elevated the discourse in the city. However, beyond discourse, nothing is being done to address the structural causes of that lack of diversity.

Reports from CIG employees who wish to remain anonymous due to fear of retaliation, state that DEI plans created have been thoroughly watered down by boards of directors even in cases of vigorous staff advocacy, and that DCLA has had a very light touch, not actually requiring much to be enforced. Due to the federal EEOC employment policy preventing organizations from specifically hiring people of color, the actions of CIG institutions will be limited to more vigorous recruitment, and vaguely-defined improvements to organizational culture. Furthermore, DCLAs threats to cut funding for lack of progress are empty. Despite prior comments about reducing funding to the MET in order to distribute some of that funding more equitably, the METs 2019 budget allocation was $27,454,185 (More than all the expense funding going to Queens and Staten Island combined in 2015). DCLA Commissioner Tom Finkelpearl recently admitted as much at a hearing this week.

While overt racism and implicit biases certainly play a role in limiting diversity at major institutions, the low proportion of people of color able to enter the field, resulting from historical exclusion and oppression, is a much greater factor. In the Labor Plank of the Peoples Cultural Plan, we called for an investment of $142 million annually to address this problem across the city. A jobs program on that scale could at least make a dent in the problem.

However, funding investments toward DEI initiatives highlighted in the Action Plan amount to a total of only $1,500,560 over two years (Action Plan, pp 10-11). The bulk of this will go to fund low-paid internships for CUNY students, which is certainly beneficial for a few. Yet many CIGs have privately acknowledged that it will not have much of an effect since there are no new jobs available at the end of it.

While the city continues to do next to nothing to advance cultural equity, artists have continued to be active in anti-gentrification protests, and in developing alternative models of housing and property, such as Community Land Trusts (CLTs). Groups such as the Chinatown Arts Brigade, Artist Studio Affordability Project (ASAP), Take Back the Bronx, the Brooklyn Antigentrification Network, Mi Casa No Es Su Casa, the Movement to Protect the People, and many others have placed housing and gentrification at the center of the conversation in the world of arts and culture, including through numerous protests and actions this year alone. The many groups involved in anti-gentrification protests who joined the protests against Warren Kanders shows that our analysis is deepening and we are making connections across the different forms of our oppression. The victory against Amazons attempt to move to Queens was due in part to artist groups like ASAP, which put forward an artists pledge not to take money from Amazon, and to Queens Neighborhoods United (QNU), a group involving many Queens artists, which took a bold stance from the beginning.

People are organizing, and culture and the arts are an essential part. A peoples cultural plan is taking place all around us as different groups build more power among themselves. This is what it will take to change the systems of oppression. True equity among all people is the foundation for cultural equity.

Go here to see the original:

The Deficiency of Bill de Blasio's Plan for Cultural Equity - Hyperallergic

The marriage of what were at the time Minnesotas second and third leading political parties was one made more for convenience than for love. Losing will do that.

This year, as the DFL commemorates the 75th anniversary of the union between the Democratic Party and the Farmer-Labor Party, does the combination still have meaning? Or does it simply mean the Democratic Party in Minnesota is called something different from what it is in every other state for reasons lost on most people? Does having the only hyphenated party name simply feed the states need to feel exceptional?

Recent arrivals and old timers both can be confused. As part of a documentary being produced on the history of the Farmer-Labor movement, filmmaker Randy Croce filmed person-on-the-street interviews near the DFL booth at the Minnesota State Fair. What does DFL stand for, they were asked?

Democratic Farmer League? tried one man.

Isnt it Democratic something something? offered a woman.

Something to do with back in the day, replied another woman.

Back in the day turned out to be 1944. At the time, Minnesotas Democrats were barely a factor in state politics or government, having not elected a governor since 1915 and not claimed a U.S. senator since the Civil War.

Though the states dominant political force at the time was the Republican Party, the populist Farmer-Labor Party had managed to do better than the Democrats. Four different Farmer-Labor candidates had won U.S. Senate seats in the 1920s and 30s, and three different FLP governors including Floyd B. Olson were elected during the Great Depression.

Though never in control of both the House and the Senate, whatever New Deal-type legislation passed during those years, it was because of the Farmer-Labor Party, not because of President Franklin Roosevelts fellow Democrats. But the FLPers had lost the governorship to a progressive Republican, Harold Stassen, in 1938, leading to a string of GOP governors that lasted until 1955.

In an interview earlier this month, former Vice President and U.S. Sen. Walter Mondale summarized the futility of the Democrats and the Farmer-Labor Party remaining as two separate entities: There was a built-in fight there, and we always lost.

Then there was Roosevelt himself. The thrice-elected president was seeking a fourth term and worried that the coalition of Democrats and Farmer-Laborites who had helped him carry the state in 1932, 1936 and 1940 was fading.

So who exactly was in the Farmer-Labor Party?

As Croces interviews show, present-day Minnesotans are often confused about the odd name of the present-day party. Where are the farmers? Is labor is as committed to the party as it once was?

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

William Mahoney, circa 1910

And while the rural strength of the Nonpartisan League was enough in states like North Dakota, in Minnesota, where there was a robust industrial base, labor was a necessary ally. It was William Mahoney, a St. Paul labor leader and later mayor, who helped bring the L into the FLP, which also benefited from ethnic Germans, who were targets of oppression by the notorious Minnesota Commission on Public Safety, formed to guard against foreign threats during World War I.

Though the party had nearly 40,000 dues-paying members and was fortified by associations around the state that served as the social and education hubs in many communities, their strategy for the Nonpartisan League and the early Farmer-Labor alliance was to work within the existing parties especially the Republicans, which were stronger and contained a liberal wing, says Tom OConnell, a retired Metropolitan State University professor who has written about the FLP.

In a bitter primary fight in 1918, Farmer-Labor-endorsed candidate Charles August Lindbergh (father of the aviator) lost to the governor who had led the Commission of Public Safety. J.A.A. Burnquist. (Lansing notes that the New York Times dubbed Lindbergh a Gopher Bolshevik.)

The Farmer-Labor Party went on to run its own candidates in the general election, and the party was able to elect a U.S. senator in both 1922 and 1923. Its leading figure, both at the time and historically, was Floyd B. Olson, who was elected governor in 1930 and was reelected in 1932 and 1934.

It took a great politician to take them over the top, said OConnell.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Charles A. Lindbergh, 1918 candidate for governor

Had Olson not died of cancer in 1936 at the age of 45, he could well have gone on to the U.S. Senate or even national office. Instead, he was replaced first by Lt. Gov. Hjalmar Petersen and later by Elmer Benson, who was atop the party in perhaps its greatest election, 1936, where he won as governor and the FLP carried six of nine congressional seats.

But while Olson and Benson had similar politics, Benson lacked Olsons skills as a public speaker and as a pragmatist. Many historians of the party cite a businessman who complained that while Olson mouthed some of the partys most radical positions, this son of a bitch (Benson) actually believes them.

It didnt help that Benson was openly affiliated with more radical elements of the party, including Communists and laborites from the Congress for Industrial Organization. An occupation of the state Capitol and the Senate not only wasnt resisted by the governor it was praised by him. There was also the tendency to exploit government appointments to both put FLPers in power and collect a 3 percent voluntary party dues payment, all of which gave Stassen the opening to run as a reformer and anti-Communist in 1938, wrote Steven Keillor in his history, Shaping Minnesotas Identity.

Like many protest movements before it, the Farmer-Labor Party rose quickly, peaked during a time of troubles, and then plunged rapidly into public disfavor, wrote historian William E. Lass in Minnesota: A History.

The merger between the Democrats and the Farmer Labor Party was finalized on April 15, 1944. With just a few days left in the candidate filing period, lawyers from both parties delivered registration papers to the secretary of state announcing the union that would be known as the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. So close was the deadline that the secretary of state opened the office on a Saturday to receive the filing, said DFL board member and unofficial historian Jules Goldstein.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Floyd B. Olson in 1932

Yet from the start, the marriage was tense. FDR and World War II were unifying factors early on, but the new party was not only a fledgling union of political factions, there were factions within the factions that emerged once World War II was won and Roosevelt was dead.

One of those factions was Communists who had been welcomed in the Farmer Labor Party and stuck around after the merger to see what would happen. The Communists some out in the open and some secretive had opposed war with Hitler when Josef Stalin was allied with Nazi Germany but embraced it once the Soviet Union was invaded. A Popular Front strategy of working with any group or politician who opposed fascism marked American Communists during the war.

After the war, however, they opposed any U.S. policy that was opposed by Stalin.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

1936 Farmer-Labor Party ticket

Evidence of this tension comes in a 1947 letter that Goldstein discovered in party archives. It was written by Third Ward Farmer-Labor Caucus in Minneapolis chair Ruben Latz to Truman. It reported on a unanimous vote of the caucus asking the president to repudiate a speech given one week before by former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. By introducing Churchill, Truman had lent the prestige of your office for an address that can only result in isolation of one (of) our heroic allies, Latz wrote.

The speech in question was the one given by Churchill at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, in which he warned against an expansionist Soviet Union that had taken control of Eastern Europe and threatened the West and the United states. From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent, Churchill famously said.

In his history of the intraparty battle, Macalester College political science chair G. Theodore Mitau described the combatants as the left wing, led by Benson, and the right wing, led by Hubert Humphrey, who had become mayor of Minneapolis in 1944 and would go on to gain national attention when his anti-segregation speech helped pass a strong civil rights platform at the 1948 Democratic National Convention.

After he mediated the merger, Humphrey expected the FLers to fade away. So he was surprised when he and his allies lost control of the party in 1946 to a still potent Farmer-Labor faction that outworked and out organized them at DFL caucuses and conventions.

In the wake of that takeover, Humphrey had become a candidate for U.S. Senate, and he was determined not to lose at the grassroots again. Marine veteran and then-state DFL secretary Orville Freeman was the person given the organizing task, with help from Macalester student Walter Mondale, doctoral student Arthur Naftalin, future ambassador Eugenie Anderson, law student and veteran Don Fraser and St. Pauls Eugene McCarthy, writes Keillor in Shaping Minnesotas Identity.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Macalester College President Charles D. Turck, Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale in 1948.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Eugenie Anderson in 1951

Thats about how we stated it, Mondale recalled this month. Who wanted to be connected to a party that was openly conspiring with the Soviet Union? Mondale asked. I was not one of them.

In his autobiography The Good Fight, Mondale recalls helping get Macalester, Hamline and St. Thomas students to a Young DFL meeting in late 1947 to help Humphrey win the endorsement for U.S. Senate.

At one point, someone in the audience asked (Humphrey) if he thought the United Front supporters were actually members of the Communist Party, Mondale wrote. Well, if theyre not members, they are cheating it out of dues money, he said.

Said Mondale this month: That was very un-Humphrey-like. He did not like to be confrontational. But I think he saw that his career was involved in this dispute.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Don Fraser and Orville Freeman, circa 1956.

Mr. Freeman moved that a letter of congratulations be sent to Mayor H.H. Humphrey on his re-election as Mayor and complimenting him on his outstanding leadership of the progressive forces of the State, the minutes stated. But Herman Griffith, a member of the Farmer Labor faction who was a longtime critic of Humphrey, had a problem with that.

As the minutes noted: Mr. Griffith move that references to outstanding leadership be struck. The his motion succeeded.

Joked Mondale: It shows you what love and affection was going on there.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

Hubert H. Humphrey at the 1948 State DFL Convention in Brainerd.

The Wallace and Benson supporters left the DFL or were kicked out and many did not return for another twenty years, Keillor wrote. Unique Farmer-Labor politics never returned.

OConnell attributes the new DFL that emerged as one more suited for post-war America. While the FLP was a response to the Great Depression, its leaders had grown long in the tooth while the liberal Democrats around Humphrey were younger and more energetic with World War II forming their world view, not the Depression.

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

A Democratic Farmer Labor party delegation prepares to leave the St. Paul Union Depot for Washington, D.C., in 1949. The Twin Cities Zephyr is at right.

According to Lass, Humphrey advocated for the combined name not just to ease the transition but because he knew there were thousands of votes to be gained by a candidate who had Farmer-Labor in his or her party name. There are fewer people alive now who know the story or vote for someone because of the L and the F in DFL. As recently as 1999, after a disastrous 1998 election for DFLers, a party chair proposed dropping the extra letters.

Goldstein said he sees the legacy of the merger in modern DFL politics with the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren wing of the party on one side and the more moderate wing, represented by the likes of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, on the other.

Courtesy of the DFL Party

OConnell has recently helped revive a nonprofit called the Farmer Labor Education Committee that had been incorporated by the late U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone. It has put on programs and is using state Legacy grants to produce a film about the former party and the populist movement it represented. He said just as his generation of anti-war activists in the 1960s and 1970s didnt recognize their connection to the Farmer Labor Party, the current backers of Sanders and Warren dont know of the connection either.

It is re-emerging without necessarily a historical antecedent, OConnell said. People dont necessarily think of themselves as Farmer-Laborites but as Bernie Sanderites.

The party still does well with some in organized labor, especially teachers, government workers and unions like the Minnesota Nurses and the Service Employees. But it can struggle with skilled trades, which are less politically active and other industrial trades, such as mining and milling, have lost jobs and members as the economy changed. The DFLs loss of the 8th Congressional district seat, which represents the Iron Range, is evidence of perhaps waning support in the north.

DFL candidates have also struggled in what might be considered farm country, due in part to the rise of environmentalism as a core tenet of the Democratic platform, though the Farmers Union stays closer to DFL candidates.

Mondale said he does see challenges outside of the Twin Cities for the DFL, but said he always did well in Greater Minnesota, and he notes that both Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith have strength around the state. In general, though, he said DFL candidates have to get off their asses and work and talk to people in rural areas.

Correction: The original version of this story misstated the date of Hubert H. Humphreys speech advocating for Democrats to adopt a strong civil rights platform. It was at the 1948 Democratic National Convention, not the 1944 convention. The story has been updated and corrected.

See more here:

As the DFL marks its 75th anniversary, do the party's Farmer-Labor roots still mean anything? - MinnPost

Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwes dictator and lifelong communist, died on Sept. 6, 2019, at the age of 95. In a country where theaverage life expectancy was only 44 years(according to a 2006 census), he outlived most of his countrymen.

However, his protracted and long life was constructed upon inflicting enormous and unimaginable suffering upon his people and country. For the rest of us, his incumbency should serve as a constant warning about why we should not fall for the next charismatic socialist who heedlessly promises everything.

Mugabe was born into poverty. Abandoned by his father at age 10, he attended a Jesuit missionary school and eventually graduated from theUniversity of Fort Hare in South Africa, the same university Nelson Mandela attended.

While Mugabe was receiving educator training in Ghana in the 1950s, he joined one of Africas nationalist movements, calling for the establishment of an independent country led by the black majority in his homeland, which at the time was still a British colony.The emergence of these nationalist movements coincided with the Cold War. The SovietUnion and Communist China expanded their influence in Africa, hoping to turn former colonies into client states.

Mugabe was imprisoned for a decade due to his anti-government political activities, and while in prison, he was elected as the president of the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU). During his long imprisonment, Mugabe thoroughly studied Marxist-Leninist ideology. He became afirm believerthat only socialism could save his homeland, and that only his ZANU could lead the peoples revolution and bring true socialism to Zimbabwe. Therefore, ZANU must always remain in power and remain the only power.

Mugabe also came to see private property owners, such as the white farmers, as a threat to the socialist paradise he wanted to build. Upon his release, Mugabe led the ZANU guerrillas to fight against the white minority rule from Mozambique. Somehow, between prison and guerrilla warfare, he managed to obtain seven college degrees and was commended as an intellectual freedom fighter.

In 1979, the British government broke a Lancaster peace deal that officially ended the white minority rule and the civil war in Zimbabwe, and Zimbabwe held its first democratic election in 1980. Mugabe became the first black prime minister of Zimbabwe with an overwhelming victory. The West accepted Mugabes legitimacy, while perversely ignoring the widely reported voter fraud and voter intimation that occurred.

Initially upon his election, Mugabe put on a good show. He promised the white minority in the country reconciliation anddeclared, If yesterday you hated me, today you cannot avoid the love that binds you to me and me to you. His first cabinet included a former political foe and two white men. He promised his countrymen would never see violence and poverty again.

In his early years, he built schools and clinics that improved blacks literacy rate and health. For a while, his oratory about peace and justice had many in the West fooled. Everyone thought he was another Mandela.

Mugabe was hailed as a liberator, knighted by Queen Elizabeth II, and even nominated with the U.K.s Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington for a Nobel Peace Prize in 1981. Compared to other African nations, Mugabes star power helped attract numerousforeign resources andaidto his country.

Underneath Mugabes caring, freedom-loving facade, however, was a cruel, power-hungry, and murderous despot. Just two years into his rule, he dismissed his political opponent from the government and sent an army of former ZANU guerrillas trained by North Korea to the heartland where rival tribes resided, killing as many as20,000civilians, and arresting, torturing, and raping many more.

His brutal act forced his political foe to surrender, turning Zimbabwe into a one-party state. He proceeded to change the constitution to make himself president in 1987. He famouslysaid, Zimbabwe is mine, and only God who appointed me will remove me.

Through violent oppression, voter fraud, and voter intimidation, Mugabe made sure he was the only head of state in Zimbabwe after every election. He ended up ruling Zimbabwe for the next 37 years, until a military coup forced his resignation in 2017.

During his long reign, some compared Mugabe to Adolf Hitler, a comparison he accepted with pride,saying, I am still theHitlerof the time. This Hitler has only one objective, justice for his own people, sovereignty for his people, recognition of the independence of his people. If that is Hitler, then let me be a Hitler tenfold.

As a self-proclaimed communist and socialist, Mugabe installed a socialist experiment in Zimbabwe. His most notorious economic policy was land reform. Mugabes government, in the name of racial justice and to right historical wrongs, insisted that black Zimbabweans could only obtain equal share of land through a land reform.

So his government passed laws allowing landless black Zimbabweans to expropriate land from white farmers without compensation, and to occupy commercial farmland. The law stipulated that Great Britain should pay reparations for the land taken from the African people during its colonial rule. Women and rival tribes who backed Mugabes political opponents werent allowed to benefit from the land reform.

Government-backed ZANU militias were at the forefront to enforce the land reform with violence because Mugabetoldthem, Our party must continue to strike fear in the heart of the white man, our real enemy.The Human Rights Watchdocumented the widespread human rights violations these militias carried out.

Besides the human cost, the economic impact of the land reform was disastrous. Before land reform, Zimbabwe was nicknamed the breadbasket of Africa. Agriculture products were 40 percent of the countrys exports, and the agriculture industry was the countrys largest employer.

Then land reform forced experienced white farmers torun away, leaving much land unattended. Inexperienced new land owners didnt know how to grow crops. Agriculture production rapidly declined. Instead of exporting produces, Zimbabweans couldnt feed themselves. Now, more than 60 percent of them rely on foreign food aid for basic survival.

The rest of the economy fell along with the agriculture industry: Banks closed, factories shut down, and the unemployment rate skyrocketed. Zimbabwesgross domestic product per capitadropped from $1,105 in 1980 (the beginning of Mugabes reign) to $397 in 2007. Average life expectancy dropped from 60 years in 1980 to 46 in 2007, the lowest in the world.

The Mugabe government responded to its economic woes by printing money. Its inflation rate reached 500 billion percent. Shortage of food, water, and electricity were common. Zimbabwe also experienced unprecedented health crises. About 3 million Zimbabweans (roughly a quarter of the population) fled the country. Of course, Mugabe blamed the West, the same West that has been sending millions of dollars in aid.

While his countrymen lived impoverished and destitute, Mugabe enriched himself, his family, and his cronies. His personal wealth isestimatedto have exceeded U.S.$1 billion, including a $5 million mansion in Hong Kong. His second wife, Grace Mugabe, is even known as Gucci Grace because of her impossible-to-satisfy appetite for expensive European luxuries.

The misery Zimbaweans experienced isnt new or unique. Anyone who has lived under Maos China, Castros Cuba, Kims North Korea, and Maduros Venezuela can tell you they shared similar life experiences. Mugabe wasnt the only charismatic socialist who ruined a country and the lives of millions. Socialism has failed everywhere and every time.

Despite socialisms terrible record, it seems it always finds a charismatic spokesperson, whether they are old and wise or young and cute, trying to convince the rest of us to give socialism another try and promising the outcome will be different this time because the wisest leaders in history have finally arrived and are in charge to take care of us.

Mugabes life should remind us not to be fooled by someone who promises to give us everything and to better our lives in every way. C.S. Lewis warned that a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth.

Mugabe certainly turned a once-prosperous country into a hell on Earth. Lets not give any socialist in our country any chance to ruin our lives.

Read more:

Mugabe Is What Happens When A Country Falls For A Charming Socialist - The Federalist

Washington, Sep 19 (IANS) Amid widespread concerns over China actively planning for the successor to the Dalai Lama, a top US official has said that Beijing should allow Tibetans to practice their faith freely, including choosing religious leaders, without interference.

David Stilwell, Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday that the US believe that Tibetans, like all faith communities, must be able to practice their faith freely and select their leaders without interference.

We will continue to assert this belief, and we remain committed to supporting meaningful autonomy for Tibetans.

His statement comes as US lawmakers have introduced a bill demanding that Beijing stay away from the octogenarian Tibetan spiritual leaders succession.

The bill, introduced in the House of Representatives by James McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat, also lays out a road map for punitive action against Chinese officials who interfere in the Dalai Lamas succession.

The legislation would strengthen US support for the Tibetan people in their struggle for human rights, religious freedom and genuine autonomy, McGovern said in a statement on Wednesday.

Stilwell told the Senate hearing on US Policy in the Indo-Pacific Region: Nor will we be silent about the Chinese governments repression at home. As Secretary Pompeo has said, the ongoing human rights crisis in China is truly the stain of the century.

In Xinjiang, authorities are deliberately attempting to strangle Uighur culture and stamp out the Muslim faith, including by detaining more than one million ethnic and religious minorities in camps.

And in Tibet, where the Communist Partys oppression goes back decades, thousands of Buddhist monks and nuns have been evicted from their residences in just the past year alone.

Disturbingly and ironically the party (Communist Party) continues to assert its role in the Dalai Lamas reincarnation process, even as President Xi has urged party members to remain unyielding Marxist atheists.

We believe that Tibetans, like all faith communities, must be able to practice their faith freely and select their leaders without interference. We will continue to assert this belief, and we remain committed to supporting meaningful autonomy for Tibetans, he said.

Separately, the bill introduced by McGovern, puts a condition that Beijing should not be allowed to expand its diplomatic stations in the US until Washington us able to establish a consulate in Lhasa echoing the tit-for-tat nature of last years Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act.

The bill, the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2019, is an amendment to the Tibet Policy Act of 2002, which codified in broad terms US government support for the Tibetan people.

It requires that the US administration consider any Chinese official who is complicit in identifying or installing a government approved candidate as Tibets spiritual leader, contrary to the current Dalai Lamas instructions, to be subject to economic sanctions and prohibited from entering the US.

In July this year, China had conveyed that the successor of the Dalai Lama has to be decided within China and any interference by India on the issue will impact bilateral ties.

Senior Chinese officials and experts told a visiting team of Indian journalists that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama must be approved by the Chinese government and the selection should take place within the country based on an over 200-year old historical process.

In August, the Dalai Lama, 84, assured his followers, especially Tibetans, that he is in the best of health and will live to be 110 years old.

Concerns about his health were voiced following news of his being admitted to a private hospital in Delhi due to a chest infection in April.

IANS

rn/in

View original post here:

US backs Tibetans' right to practice faith, choose religious leaders - CanIndia News

There are sensational new calls for a new inquiry into Princess Dianas tragic death after explosive new details and evidence have emerged about what really happened 22 years ago in Paris.

A new book, published Tuesday, identifies the mystery man driving a white Fiat Uno that investigators believed clipped Dianas car leading her to careen into the Pont de lAlma tunnel in 1997.

In Diana: Case Solved by journalist Dylan Howard and former homicide cop Colin McLaren, out now via Skyhorse Publishing and Start Publishing, the co-authors discuss the wild conspiracy theories that have mired the case for decades.

See it: Find out what really happened in DIANA: CASE SOLVED, available now in both hardcover and Kindle editions at Amazon!

Below is an exclusive excerpt from chapter thirteen of Diana: Case Solved, available only on Amazon.

To get the definitive account that proves what really happened to Diana, order the book here.

***

They were everywhere.

From scorned ex-lovers to angered international arms dealers, Diana had an enemies list like few have ever seena list much longer than Colin and I, as investigators, put together. Between her own countless premonitions of death to the outright threats against her, it is a wonder she lived so long. Nations, international conglomerates, and the British royal family all stood to benefit from her shutting up and going away foreverand such a thing can be accomplished a number of ways. Yet foremost among them, and certainly foremost in effectiveness, would be snuffing out Dianas life entirely.

Diana was a threat to the establishment for a host of reasons. For the royals, it was a reputation cost. Diana threatened to cheapen the monarchy; to blur the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior for a member of the family. And most unnerving of all, she threatened to dispel the magic that made outsiders feel as though the royals were exceptional and special. If that were to occur, many in the public might start asking questions about why the royals are followed, tolerated, and subsidized in the first place. Everything the family had built could all come crashing down.

And the powerful international entities Diana threatened saw her as a risk to their very chummy way of doing business. To their racket. Land mines alone were probably enough to get Diana on their watch list.

Consider the following: In Country A (as in the United States), there is a large military defense contractor that makes land mines. In every election cycle, lobbyists in the employ of this defense contractor make heavy campaign donations to politicians who support foreign aid to war-torn Country B. Once elected, these politicians green-light several billions of dollars in aid from Country A to Country B. But there is a tacit understanding. Country B knows that it must use the preponderance of the funds received to arm itself against future oppression. . . by purchasing arms from the defense contractor in Country A. It is a racket in which everybody wins.

The defense contractor turns a few million in lobbying funds into a few billion in land mine sales. The politicians get their election coffers filled and stay in power. And the war-torn country gets a whole bunch of money for arms (with a bit left over to grease the political wheels on their end, too). It was a nice, legal scheme for making money and solidifying power . . . and one idealistic royal threatened to send it all crashing to the ground.

Again, the wonder is not that Diana was killedand she was killedbut that her life was not taken sooner.

One imagines that initially, the players involved must have looked to one another. Cant the royal family handle it? Cant the British government make her shut up and stop speaking out like this? But they could not, and they did not. Diana persisted.

But she wasnt killed as a result of an orchestrated execution.

It was an all-too-familiar road accident.

Here is how.

***

Our new research has shown that the paparazzi were not to blame in Dianas death, and that it was instead a case of someone being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Painstaking decades of work, in-person interviews with witnesses and those involved, as well as multiple visits to the crime scene have brought forth revelations that French and/or British police either did not see, or were not in a position, politically, to acknowledge.

We have found that on the night of her death, the $123,000 Mercedes that carried Diana and others was capable of easily out-accelerating every single vehicle that the members of the paparazzi were driving. In short, there was no neck-and-neck chase, as such a thing was an impossibility. The mass of photographers could not have kept up with her car. Period.

Yet as her car neared the tunnel on that fateful night, there were numerous witnessesmany, only auditorywho heard a loud screeching of tires. This could only have been the Mercedes braking suddenly. Why? Had driver Henri Paul simply failed to notice the tunnel that was right in front of him? Even in a somewhat intoxicated state, this seems unlikely.

But something made him brake.

Other witnesses claim to have seen a flash in the tunnelor in the moments before the car entered the tunneljust before Dianas death. It would seem easy perhaps too easyto conclude that this flash was from a photographers camera.

But when we stop and think, we have to ask how this could possibly be. Dianas Mercedes was too fast. The paparazzi could not catch up with it. They arrived after the fact, of course, to take photos of the death car.

But none were present when the vehicle literally met its doom.

We can now, in this book, reveal that additional research into the circumstances of Dianas death brought forth two new witnessesGeorge and Sabine Dauzonnewho were present at the accident and confirmed details to Colin of a particular scenario that has long been floated but never proven . . . until now.

While the motorcycle make and models driven by the photographers were not able to keep up with Dianas car that night, two other vehicles were. These vehicles were in close proximity to Dianas car as it approached the tunnel. The vehicles were a motorcycle and a white Fiat Uno that had joined the road late in the game.

The motorcyclist remains a mystery, but the Dauzonnes got a clear look at the driver of the Uno, as Colin discovered.

In the aftermath of the accident, a fragment of plastic was found by French police. It came from a Fiat Uno. In addition, Dianas Mercedes was found to have a smear of white paint upon it. This paint was analyzed, and found to be paint that was only used by one manufacturer: Fiat. An exhaustive database search of over 112,00 Fiats never found the elusive car. Despite calls to the public, no person ever came forward as the driver.

In the days after Dianas death, during the inquest into what precisely had happened, no less an authority than Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, poured fuel on the fire that the flash of light tunnel murder scenario was not only an established assassination format, but one that the British government itself had considered using in the past.

Specifically, Dearlove outlined a scenario that the British government had contemplated deploying in the early 1990s to assassinate a senior Balkan politician by forcing a crash. When the politicians car passed into a tunnel, a blinding flash device would have been deployed, bright enough to blind and disorient the driver. (In a world in which the CIA has openly confirmed possessing heart attack guns for decades, it requires no leap of faith to trust that a blinding device such as this existed in 1997.) The flash would be mistaken by any bystanders as a photograph, but the effects would be deadly. The driver of the car would lose control of the vehicle and crash into the tunnel in such a way that the death of the target would be essentially assured.

A year after Dearloves testimony, Richard Tomlinson, a former British spy, also publicly confirmed and corroborated Dearloves account.

What seems possible is that the mysterious lone motorcyclist deployed this blinding device while Dianas car was in the tunnel. In her memoir Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers, former MI5 agent Annie Machon confirms her belief that this is precisely what happened.

What was the Fiat Unos role? Did it somehow assist in the deployment of the device? Did the driver steer his car in such a way so to help the motorcyclist in deploying it? Or was he or she merely an Oswald-like patsy? Was the car only there to soak up blame and attention in the aftermath, to distract investigators from the real clues? Or was it, as we believe, a simple and routine car accident? We would know the answers to many of these queries if we had, for example, footage of the accident.

There were two CCTV cameras in the Pont de lAlma underpass, but neither recorded footage of the fatal collision. They were either malfunctioning on the night in question, or not positioned to shoot the correct part of the tunnel. This too unbelievable to be dismissed as a coincidence.

Indeed, a French judicial inquiry into the crash was told that neither camera was working on the night in question. Both, unbelievably, were broken. However, one motorist who came forward to the press shared that he received a speeding ticket after being caught on a tunnel camera just fifteen minutes prior to the accident.

But a lack of cameras was not enough. The flash-attack itself was not enough. The conspirators had to do more.

French security services who were part of the cover-up leaked information to the press that Henri Paul was a drunk, and was three-and-a-half times over the legal limit on the night of the crash. They also switched his blood sample at the lab, replacing his with that of an alcoholic. This was all but proved when Pauls physician confirmed which medications Paul was taking, and that those drugs did not show up in his system.

If you believe some armchair detectives, however, Henri Paul was sober as a judge when he was attacked and disoriented with a top-secret government light device that likely rendered him more severely disoriented than any amount of drinks could do.

It all comes back to Dianas own words in the death note:

This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous. My husband is planning an accident in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for him to marry.

In October 1995, the princess told Lord Mishcon, her solicitor, that reliable sources had informed her of the princes plans that she and Camilla would be put aside. We find this document today in the National Archive in London.

If the disbelievers are to be believed, Diana was murdered, and she was murdered by forces with leading-edge spy technology, and with the power to create international complicity between governments and government agencies. She was just that dangerous, and just that powerful. Because of her behavior, she had to be stopped. This story could have ended no other way.

Yet our story continues, with a unique and unprecedented encounter with one of the chief players. And what it reveals shines an entirely new light on what happened.

Armed with this information, we knew what we had to do.

For more, order Diana: Case Solved here.

See the original post:

'Diana: Case Solved': Princess Diana 'Was a Threat' (Excerpt) - Radar Online

British Gas workers are facing huge paycuts(Pic: Annasmith1986/WikCommons)

Im writing on behalf of my colleagues from British Gas. British Gas sells energy and mechanical services.

The energy side is failing and the heating installation side is the most profitable, so theyre taking money from here to bail out energy.

To do this theyve created a new schedule of rates (SOR) for every heating installation contractor.

Previously an hourly rate meant every install was a tailored price, which was quite fair.

The new rate means cuts of between 25 and 35 percent. For example, a job that would have been 300 is now around 200. This will have a huge impact on workers livelihoods. The customer is still being charged the same. So British Gas is making even more profit.

For some people, British Gas has been a career. A lot of contractors are ex-British Gas and many have been there 10-20 years, feeling like employees and part of the family.

Its us that give customers confidence that they have an experienced person in their home. We are the face of British Gas.

These cuts have been so drastic that a lot of contractors are considering moving on or cutting their hours. New labour may come from agencies or recently qualified engineers, leaving concerns over safety and quality. Contractors across Britain have discussed a strike and the GMB union is looking into the unfairness of the pay cut.

British Gas threatened to close contractors diaries unless they agreed to the new contract.

Some reluctantly agreed, feeling they are held over a barrel.

But many are refusing to agree and will simply walk out.

A joint contractor email was sent to management but they have not responded.

British Gas has a cheerful advertising campaign with the motto, Were with you!

But it is considerably less so with its own workforce.

A British Gas worker

Some years ago Theresa May famously wore a T-shirt reading, This is what a feminist looks like.

Yet she has awarded former cricketer Geoffrey Boycott a knighthood.

Boycott was convicted in May 2000 by a French court of assault on his then partner Margaret Moore in 1998.

Her bloodied and bruised face is there for all to see in photographs of the assault.

Boycott was given a three-month suspended sentence and a measly fine.

Labours Dawn Butler, shadow minister for women and equalities, has correctly demanded that Boris Johnson immediately withdraw the knighthood.

Everyone should flood politicians and the media with complaints.

Boycotts knighthood sends a horrific message to thousands of women who suffer violent abuse at the hands of men they know.

Added to this is the drastic reduction in funding for refuge support services under years of Tory austerity.

It is not possible for any Tory to claim any sort of feminist values. Feminism cares about women and children.The Tories do not.

We have a government of perpetrators of all forms of oppression.

We must have a general election and vote for a Labour government lead by Jeremy Corbyn, who has more feminist values than any Tory woman!We must take to the streets to end Tory rule.

Liz Kitching

Leeds

Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnells proposals for a Right To Buy for Private Housing Tenants has caused a debate.

Most people do not understand the principles and the purpose of this proposal.

Recently I became aware of situation where a disabled persons housing benefit had covered enough to buy the property outright.

The propertys disrepair was shocking. But the persons benefit entitlement had also covered enough money for repairs.

This person would benefit from McDonnells proposal. Housing associations have the right to buy property.

However, why would they do so and then pay for all the repairs?

At the moment all power lies with the landlord.

McDonnell should go furtherand ensure immediate ownership to the social housing sector.

Mark Porciani

Glasgow

It is good to see Socialist Worker reporting on the desperate state of the social care system (Social care is on the brink, 4 September).

The system has suffered many years of systematic privatisation and underinvestment.

Age UKs Caroline Abrahams is right to note that one of the consequences is that older people are more and more left to fend for themselves. This is also a huge problem for many disabled people.

Abrahams welcomed a report by Guy Standing on piloting a Universal Basic Income at its launch earlier this year.

But sadly she celebrated the worrying idea that a basic income would allow people to care for family members.

Throwing even more pressure back on the family to provide care would further undermine the right of people to access professional social support. It would leave people at the mercy of their families personal circumstances.

A serious approach is needed, not fantasies about what small cash transfers and a reheated version of David Camerons big society can achieve.

Mark Dunk

South London

One of your guys gave me a paper at our CWU union gate meeting in Hove last week.

I just wanted to say thanks for that and for coming to support us.

I will buy the next edition now to support you.

Post worker

Brighton

An election right now would be an act of

self-harm for Labour.

Youre in an echo chamber if you think it wouldnt be.

Gemma Cade

On Facebook

Tony Horne

On Facebook

Paul Harris

On Facebook

While passing through Stansted airport on the first day of Ryanair's second pilots strike, I was struck by the large number of Ryanair planes flying as normal.

Workers unity is their greatest weapon. They need to be at least as broadly organised as their employers.

National unions will be increasingly powerless against multinational capital unless they develop international links.

John Shemeld

Nottingham

The media, a right wing propaganda machine, sensationalises knife and gun crime to promote fear and racism.

They heighten the idea that crime is out of control. Then the government says it will increase police numbers.

The real criminals are those who justify a system of inequality and war.

Lambski

Bournemouth

See the article here:

LettersBritish Gas is driving down our wages to boost profits - Socialist Worker