Jacobin Magazine: Where Next for Finland’s Welfare State?

That’s something with which we’re struggling. The welfare state is a good concept and still retains widespread support among Finns. We represent a certain continuity in terms of these structures but understand that change is needed because they are under attack. One thing that separates Finland from Sweden is that we had a lot of influential autonomist-leftist debates in the mid-2000s which impacted policy and thinking in the Left Alliance. I come from that scene — as do many others — in the squatters’ movement and the politics of urban space.  [...]

We propose to put it at a level where people feel empowered to refuse bad jobs. The social democrats believe they can end all precarious work by introducing new laws. We’re saying no, entrepreneurship and self-employment are here to say. People want to do it and it’s also something that brings with it a freedom to be your own boss. What worker does not want to be their own boss? Instead of saying that we need to reverse all these changes we’ve seen in the labor market through new laws, we need a welfare structure that isn’t based on two categories: employed and unemployed. Basic income concerns the whole employment system. [...]

Another example is the so-called sharing economy, which is really more like a renting economy. It’s possible to imagine how these platforms could be run collectively in a way that resembles the traditional socialist concept of co-ownership of the means of productions. We should also look at data. If instead of it being hoarded by large corporations all the data we produce in society were open assets, it would provide a base for innovation which would be radically different compared to an economy with a few private actors owning patents. If data was owned collectively, it would be a great equalizer. Then there is the rapidly occurring automatization of industrial labor. We could respond to that by taxing the robots, creating a universal basic income and moving to a six-hour work day. This is an optimist view of the future — but we need to start thinking that way if we want to avoid the worst outcome. [...]

It should be remembered that the party differs from other populist-right forces in its origins. Unlike, say, the Swedish Democrats and the Front National, it began as an agrarian party with migration playing a relatively minor role. Its rhetoric was much more traditional populism — the ordinary man against the elites, particularly against the EU. In the mid-2000s anti-immigrant, right-wing groups in Finland were looking to come together and saw the potential of the True Finns as a vehicle. The party that rose to prominence was founded on this mix of xenophobic, migration-focused politicians and an agrarian populist base. 2011 was their big breakthrough and research suggests a broad range of sentiments about change propelled them. They said they were outside of politics, with the regular people, rhetoric you can even find in more centrist figures like Macron in France. So it wasn’t some kind of pure anti-immigrant vote.  

read the article

The Atlantic: Memphis's Novel Strategy for Tearing Down Confederate Statues

In a surprise move Wednesday evening, Memphis’s city council voted to sell the two parks to a new private nonprofit corporation that will run them, on condition that they keep the parks public. Mayor Jim Strickland signed a contract with the nonprofit, Memphis Greenspace, on Friday, and the council ratified it. Soon afterward, Greenspace, which was incorporated in October, began removing the statues, with celebratory crowds gathering to watch, singing, “Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye.” The statues have been removed to a place nobody can find, according to the city’s chief legal officer. [...]

Leaders in Memphis have long wanted to get rid of the statues. Tennessee seceded during the Civil War, though it was a hotbed of loyalism and sent more soldiers to fight for the Union than any other Confederate state. But while the Volunteer State is conservative at the state level, Memphis is not. The city is nearly two-thirds African American, and the presence of monuments to Davis, who led a traitorous revolt from the United States dedicated to maintaining black slavery, and Forrest, a Confederate general infamous for slaughtering surrendering black soldiers and for later co-founding the Ku Klux Klan, was offensive and nonsensical. [...]

Over the last few months, local officials in some jurisdictions have simply acted to remove monuments. In Birmingham, Alabama, another majority-black city saddled with a Confederate monument the local government detested, the city council and mayor decided in August to simply cover up a monument, drawing a lawsuit from the state government and more than $3 million in fines to date. In Durham, North Carolina, where state law prevents removal of monuments, a crowd of protesters gathered and tore down a statue commemorating Confederate soldiers that sat on the lawn of the former county courthouse.  

read the article

Al Jazeera: Cracking down on independence movements is a bad idea

How should central governments treat independence movements? My own research shows that central governments can limit the uncertainty and violence over secession campaigns when they provide a legal path to independence. The most recent scenes in Catalonia and Iraqi Kurdistan only serve to further confirm this finding. When central governments crack down on independence movements, political and economic instability and even violence are the usual outcomes.

There are two major reasons why suppressing secession attempts by force is no solution to the issue. First, it is impossible to efface the dream of independence from people's minds. Repression raises latent support for independence, even if it removes all public expression of that support. If the state eventually faces a moment of weakness or crisis, that latent support could quickly break out into a mass movement, as happened in various parts of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union in the 1990s.

Second, when governments try to eliminate the possibility of independence, they give themselves a freer hand to mistreat their ethnic minorities. My research shows that democracies that define themselves as "indivisible" in their constitutions are less likely to decentralise power to their regions and give more rights to local communities to govern themselves. [...]

Moreover, contrary to conventional wisdom, secessionism generally does not spread across borders. Some evidence suggests that self-determination claims are more likely to arise when there are more such claims in nearby countries, but no one has yet found that the success of independence movements in one country causes independence movements to become more successful in nearby countries.

read the article

Al Jazeera: What India's BJP lost in the Gujarat elections

The narrow victory India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) secured in the assembly elections in the western state of Gujarat and northern state of Himachal Pradesh has brought some relief to its leadership. [...]

Yet not all was quiet and smooth in Gujarat. Before the elections, the state saw massive protests by traders against a new taxation regime introduced by the central government. There were reports of widespread resentment in rural areas and farmers were on a war path against the ruling party. Repeated atrocities against Dalits had shaken the conscience of the country, and the Dalits were out on the street, blaming the BJP for the violence. [...]

The emergence of these three leaders was significant, as they were opposition voices coming from within Gujarat. Earlier efforts against the Gujarat government did not have strong local or indigenous voices to back them. Modi as State Minister succeeded in convincing the Hindus of Gujarat that opposition to him was actually an insult to them and Gujarat. But it seems that since he's moved from Gujarat to Delhi, other local party leaders were not as successful in controlling public opinion. [...]

Gandhi also framed his campaign in economic language, constantly talking about the distress of the farmers and the unemployed youth. He presented himself as a devout Hindu, thus deflecting BJP attempts to brand him an imposter and pseudo-Hindu. Gandhi also strategically refrained from talking about the atrocities and isolation faced by the minorities in Gujarat. [...]

Modi's image, despite the electoral win, has taken a severe blow in the eyes of the public and the media. This has opened up many possibilities for politics of India and the 2019 parliamentary election which till yesterday was seen as yet another easy win for the BJP. Suddenly, it now seems that the 2019 vote is open game.

read the article

Politico: Hungarian left’s far-right dilemma

“Of course it’s sad that the second-largest opposition party is also a far-right party,” he said. But he argued that Jobbik was now “a moderate far-right party” — an assessment that chimes with Jobbik’s own efforts to recast itself as a milder alternative to Orbán. [...]

A survey last month by pollster Median found 39 percent of all adults — and 56 percent of those who know who they will vote for in the election — support Fidesz. Jobbik lies second, with the support of 11 percent of all adults and 15 percent of those who know how they’ll vote in the election, to be held in April or May. [...]

“Although we reject the redistribution of migrants in Europe on the basis of quotas determined by Brussels, we also warned the government of making statements that basically spark Islamophobia,” said Gyöngyösi. “We cannot go against a world religion … Moderate Islam is our ally in fighting extremism.”

Jobbik’s leaders also point to their recent support for embattled NGOs and the Central European University and their opposition to a government campaign against financier and philanthropist George Soros. They have also teamed up with trade unions to fight wage inequality between Western and Eastern Europe.

The party has even begun to distance itself from Western European right-wing Euroskeptic parties. Gyöngyösi says France’s National Front and the Alternative for Germany now have more in common with Fidesz than Jobbik.

read the article

Haaretz: Israel's Warming Relations With Africa Survived a UN Vote. But Will Further Political Tension Break Them?

South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) just "unanimously resolved to direct the South African government to immediately and unconditionally downgrade the South African Embassy in Israel to a Liaison Office" as an "expression of solidarity to the oppressed people of Palestine,"  in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Furthermore the ANC called on the Palestinians "to review the viability of the two-state solution." [...]

In September, the Israel-Africa summit scheduled for October in Lomé, Togo was cancelled. According to Israel, this was due to widening unrest in the West African nation. Official Palestinian sources claimed that a boycott campaign was instrumental in its cancellation. According to the Johannesburg-based Afro-Middle East Centre, under half of all African nations were likely to attend. [...]

Israel has, since 1960, more than quadrupled its average income per capita (in real terms) to nearly $34,000. Sub-Saharan Africans have increased their average wealth just 1.5 times over the same period to just over $1600. [...]

First, Israel is keen to diversify its pattern of trade. Currently there is a lot of upside in relations with Africa, given Israel’s total trade with the continent is less than that it enjoys with Vietnam alone. And, second, for Israel, better relations with Africa offer diplomatic protection and votes, especially at the United Nations. That contention is now going to be tested.

read the article

Quartz: New research finds the areas of the UK that could be hurt most by Brexit are those that voted for it

While researchers from the University of Birmingham admit it’s difficult to predict the likely long-term impacts of Brexit, they were able to quantify the shares of regional and national GDP and labor income (both in the UK and the EU) that are at risk due to Brexit. As such, researchers found that the Midlands and Northern England (the UK’s economically weaker regions) are particularly vulnerable. In contrast, London and Scotland were far less at risk.

Brexit highlighted deep divides within the UK. While Scotland and London voted to remain in the EU, Northern England and the Midlands, as well as Wales, voted to leave. The study’s finding echo previous research that found that Wales and northeast are among the areas most vulnerable to loss of funding, bad trade agreements, and a shortage of European workers. In short, these areas, which voted to leave the EU, are worst exposed to the economic impact of Brexit. [...]

The UK’s exposure to Brexit is some 4.6 times greater than that of the rest of the EU as a whole. The study estimates that 12% of UK GDP is at risk of Brexit trade-related consequences, compared with 2.64% of EU GDP. The study also notes that if the UK were to leave the EU without a beneficial trade deal in place, or with a deal in which the UK’s access to the block is severely restricted, it would be left in a far more damaging position than the rest of the EU. 

read the article

The Guardian: Trump may celebrate his tax giveaway – but it could speed his downfall

For this bill hands the Democrats just the ammunition they need for their campaign to win back control of Congress in next November’s midterm elections. It’s unpopular – opposed by 55% of US voters, and supported by just 33% of them – and with good reason. [...]

The mega corporations stand to gain the most, as their taxes fall from 35% to 21%. Republicans are trying to cast this as help for “America’s families and small businesses”, as if the chief beneficiaries will be the Mom and Pop who run the neighbourhood general store. But the reality is that Republicans are paying back the mighty plutocrats who have been bankrolling them for years. Admire the candour of congressman Chris Collins, who last month said of tax cuts, “My donors are basically saying, ‘Get it done or don’t ever call me again.’” [...]

Trump will brag and crow, but there is a danger here for him too. Passing this tax cut has been the driving mission of the likes of House speaker Paul Ryan for decades. It’s why they’ve tolerated the daily outrages committed by Trump: they were ready to swallow anything for the sake of having someone at that Oval Office desk who would sign their tax bill. Once he’s done it, his usefulness diminishes. Should the Russia probe gather pace, should Trump’s poll numbers go even deeper underwater, then the passing of these tax cuts will lead some Republicans to conclude that he is no longer indispensable.

read the article

The Guardian: The Guardian view on Poland: Brexit will worsen the EU’s dilemmas

Amid this tricky transcontinental row, Theresa May flew to Warsaw with senior cabinet ministers, seeking to develop a strategic alliance with Poland ahead of the second phase of Brexit talks. Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki obligingly signalled that Poland would back the UK on a bespoke deal, including services. Mrs May offered a security partnership with a country anxious about an ever more assertive Russia. This bilateral bargain is complicated by the European commission’s deep suspicion of UK efforts to negotiate behind its back. It fears that London’s divide-and-rule strategy will work better in the second phase of Brexit talks than in the first, when it hit a wall of pan-EU solidarity. The Tories have made common cause with Law and Justice before. Many European leaders wanted Mrs May to signal her goodwill to them by transmitting in Warsaw their view that Poland has crossed a line. Instead, she described constitutional issues as “primarily a matter for the country concerned, not the EU”. [...]

The possibility of a premier league of EU states, based around single-currency membership, is much enhanced by Brexit. It leaves Poland as the biggest non-eurozone member. The UK was also a leading advocate of EU enlargement, partly because it wanted a wide and shallow union. Eastern expansion was partly intended as a brake on western-centred integration.

Hardly anyone in Brussels welcomes the UK’s departure, but as talks get tough it might increasingly be seen as a blessed relief – the amputation of an infected limb, permitting less inhibited forward movement. British Euroscepticism has been an irritant to EU officials over the years, but it has also been a valuable component in the mix. Brexit is, by definition, a uniquely British phenomenon. But nationalist politicians blaming the EU for domestic woes is not. The Polish government’s undemocratic lurch deserves criticism. The unsolved riddle for Brussels is how to uphold the values on which the EU was founded, using methods that do not cultivate resentment and so further undermine those values.

read the article