Re-energized, Revitalized Revolution!
by Coast Watcher
When
British Prime Minister Theresa May called the snap UK general
election for June 8, she thought the result
would be a cut-and-dried victory for her Conservative Party. Most
political pundits agreed with her. Given the mess building up in the
wake of the Brexit referendum, May was relying on a bounce in
popularity to give her the mandate for another five years as Prime
Minister. In that time she planned to negotiate Britain’s exit from
the European Union and sell the National Health Service off to
private, that is, American
corporations.
It
seemed she wouldn’t encounter much resistance. Labour, the other
main party in UK politics, appeared sunk in a quagmire of Neoliberal
Third Way policies, the decaying legacy of previous Prime Ministers
Tony Blair and his successor Gordon Brown. Under their watch, Labour
abandoned its historical origins in the working class of Great
Britain and took up an amorphous position somewhere in the
center-right of UK politics. Discredited and devalued since the
strike-riddled 60s, 70s and early 80s, it was thought the party’s
heyday as the champion of ordinary Britons had passed.
May
and the pundits alike reckoned without Labour Party leader Jeremy
Corbyn, MP.
For
years Corbyn struggled mightily against the inertia in his party to
drag it back to its original place on the Left. To most peoples’
amazement he succeeded. His efforts were rewarded beyond anyone’s
wildest dreams when the results of the election began coming in.
Unlike
more recent general elections, 68.7% of the voting public turned out
on June 8.
Over the course of the day, the Conservative Party lost thirteen seats
and failed to reach the 326 seats needed to win the election. They
won 318 seats at 42.4% of the vote. Labour on the other hand gained
thirty seats, mostly at Conservative expense, coming in at 262 seats
and 40% of the vote. Neither party gained the majority needed to win,
resulting in a hung parliament – but Jeremy Corbyn was a mere 2,227
votes away from becoming prime minister. What is most significant
about the election is that 72% of voters under the age of thirty voted
Labour.
Hung parliaments, where no one party has sufficient seats to form a
government, are not uncommon in British politics. Conservative prime minister
Edward Heath formed such a government after failing to make the
majority needed in the 1970s. However, this hung parliament has left Theresa May in a
vulnerable position. It’s not uncommon for party leaders who’ve
suffered such a result to resign. So far her party appears to be
backing her, but she needed to do a deal with one of the other
parties in order to form a minority government and survive as PM.
The
Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) wasn’t interested. It took a
beating in the polls, losing 21 seats to come in at 35. The Liberal
Democratic Party gained a modest four seats, making it the fourth
largest party in Parliament. It had formed a coalition government
with the Conservatives in David Cameron’s time as prime minister, but expressed
little interest in renewing the deal. The Liberal Democratic Party
hasn’t formed a government in its own right since 1923.
That
left May with the option of approaching the fifth largest party, the
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) of Northern Ireland, which gained two
seats to come in at 10 overall. It would still not give her the
numbers needed to form a majority government, but it would at least give
her a useful voting bloc to push her policies through. In a situation
straight out of a Whitehall farce, May first said a deal had been
reached, then five hours later had to retract the claim when the DUP
renounced it, angry she was attempting to bounce them into
an agreement before they were ready. Outgoing Irish Republic prime minster, Taoiseach
Enda Kenny, entered the fray when he said any such arrangement must
not jeopardize the Good Friday agreement, the treaty which brought an
end to the Troubles after decades of strife between the British
Government and the Provisional IRA. Given the known extremism of the
DUP, it’s unlikely they’ll heed his warning. There’s also the
matter of the DUP’s extremist right-wing views on issues such as abortion,
climate change and gay rights among others.
Jeremy
Corbyn is in an excellent position to take advantage of the
situation. Parliament sat on Tuesday, June 13
for the first time since the election, and Corbyn received a standing ovation from his fellow party members. Theresa May will present
her plans through the Queen’s Speech, scheduled for June 19.
Corbyn intends to do the same, presenting an alternative Queen’s
Speech laying out his party’s plans. It could turn the whole into a
manifesto popularity contest.
Edward
Heath’s minority government lasted a mere two weeks before collapsing,
provoking another election. The same could well happen to Theresa May,
forcing her resignation and a new general election, probably in the autumn.
What is most telling about this is that just days after the
election, membership of the Labour Party has surged to over 800,000
from a poor 150,000 members at the end of the so-called New
Labour movement brought in by Tony Blair. A million members is
certainly within reach. This is unprecedented if you follow the wise head-wagging by pundits
on both sides of the Atlantic who predicted Corbyn would destroy the
Labour Party.
Secondly,
a new poll held by Business Insider has found that in the event of
another election Labour would win by a landslide. What does this all mean?
“The
Labour Party won seats not by moving to the Right, but by standing up
to the ruling class,” said US Senator Bernie Sanders.
Under
Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, Labour shed its neoliberal guise and
returned to its working class roots. Such a move has been welcomed
with overwhelming relief by the majority of the British population
tired of wishy-washy New Labour policies which benefit none except
the 1%.
A striking example of how far to the left Corbyn has moved
his party can be seen in his upholding the demand for Blair’s
prosecution for war crimes following the Chilcot Inquiry into the
Iraq War. For one Labour leader to turn against another is unheard of
– but then, Blair was never truly a socialist. The mood of the
British people is such that President Trump has postponed his
intended visit to the UK through fear of mass protests.
The
Brexit negotiations with the EU are due to begin on June 19,
although these may be postponed. Theresa May is all for a hard
Brexit, cutting ties at the earliest possible date. Corbyn is in
favour of a soft Brexit, with give-and-take on both sides.
Such
luminaries as Barak Obama and Bill Clinton have poured scorn on
Corbyn, saying he’s the “maddest person in the room,” or that
Labour “got a guy off the streets” in lieu of a real leader. This
return by the party to represent ordinary people is terribly worrying to neoliberals, hence this outpouring of bile on their part.
The last thing the Democratic Party of America wants is for the
country’s own grass roots movement to be revitalized by the UK
election result. The DNC doesn't want the hope it holds out for ordinary people
everywhere to become widespread. The spark Bernie Sanders ignited is far from
being extinguished. A new blaze with the wind of change blowing
strongly behind it will burn the Establishment down to the ground –
and the world will be the better for it.
For more insights into the Labour Party's results in the parliamentary elections, check out these articles:BIO: Coast Watcher is the pen name of a Brit living abroad in the wilds of America. He keeps a close eye on the changes in the political winds and hopes to witness a more progressive American government forming in the near future.
Corbyn embraces change: https://www.nationofchange.org/2017/06/12/corbyn-teaches-embrace-change-need/
UK Elections, or how the Democrats should stop worrying and learn to love socialism:
https://www.nationofchange.org/2017/06/12/uk-elections-democrats-learn-stop-worrying-love-socialism/
Rolling Stone's Matt Taibi on Corbyn's win, "Goodbye and Good Riddance to Centrism": http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/44100-focus-goodbye-and-good-riddance-to-centrism
When Democrats talk about the importance of "compromise," what they really mean is "compromise with the right wing." When's the last time you remember Democrats making substantive concessions to the left?
Note that since Jeremy Corbyn took over as leader of the Labour Party in the UK, pushing it to be the most left it has been in almost a century, Democratic icons Barack Obama and Howard Dean have been putting him through the ringer. Why are they so hostile to successful leftists?
And before I hear apologists talk about how compromise with the right is necessary because the left is so weak, consider the possibility that the left is weak because the designated "leftist" party in the US, the Democrats, actively suppresses leftists and refuses to support left-wing organizing. What's the meaningful difference between openly demonizing leftists and quietly marginalizing them, especially when you're going to pass right-wing policies in the name of "compromise" anyway?
When you wonder how we wound up with Republicans holding a historic dominance the federal and state governments in spite of the constant failure of their own policies, remember that the left has been effectively disenfranchised from US politics. A growing number of people are hungry for left-wing alternatives to the moribund status quo, but without any real representation in the major parties and systemic suppression of minor parties, they've got no place to go but the streets.
***
There are so many arrogant types to choose from--it was tough this week to pick an overall winner for the "Chastise Rich Arrogant Pricks" or C.R.A.P. Award. Prime Minister Theresa May is definitely a politician in need of chastisement upon revelation that her Tory government's "austerity measures" might have caused or added to the intensity of the deadly Grenfell high rise fire which has killed at least 30 and injured so many others in London. We award this week British C.R.A.P. Award to Mrs. May in hopes she resigns and goes someplace else where she can't hurt anymore innocent ordinary people.
John Johnston, who is challenging Democratic state Rep. Chuck Moseley for Indiana's 10th District seat, said during a social media discussion on poverty that “no one has the guts to just let them wither and die.”
This inhumane and sociopathic statement about the poor clearly demonstrates Johnston is in need of chastisement. Please feel free to shame him in social media and email/call/mail him your thoughts on his callousness and let him know we don't appreciate his genocidal tendencies.
If you know a person or persons in public office (or running for one) who is in need of chastisement for their policies and words, and you would like to nominate them for the C.R.A. P. award, please send their names and details to us at The Revolution Continues blog at our contact email on the sidebar under the editor's details. Thank you.
***
Now, here are some ways to become involved in progressive change this week...
On the American side, John Johnston is our winner (or is that loser?) of the C.R.A.P. Award this week for his callous remarks:
John Johnston, who is challenging Democratic state Rep. Chuck Moseley for Indiana's 10th District seat, said during a social media discussion on poverty that “no one has the guts to just let them wither and die.”
This inhumane and sociopathic statement about the poor clearly demonstrates Johnston is in need of chastisement. Please feel free to shame him in social media and email/call/mail him your thoughts on his callousness and let him know we don't appreciate his genocidal tendencies.
If you know a person or persons in public office (or running for one) who is in need of chastisement for their policies and words, and you would like to nominate them for the C.R.A. P. award, please send their names and details to us at The Revolution Continues blog at our contact email on the sidebar under the editor's details. Thank you.
From Climate Hawks:
Breaking news - a
federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration’s Army Corps of
Engineers broke the law when it approved the Dakota Access pipeline.
The Corps failed to perform an adequate study of the pipeline’s
environmental impact, particularly its impact on fishing rights,
hunting rights, and environmental justice.
The judge hasn’t
decided whether to stop the oil flowing (and leaking) through the
pipeline - instead, he’s asking for more briefing next week. But this
uncertainty gives us new leverage against the banks that fund this and
other climate-destructive pipelines like Keystone XL.
Around the world,
people and communities are rising up to demand that banks, pension
funds and other big investors stop financing risky fossil fuel
companies and projects. Individuals, foundations, colleges, churches,
and other institutions have already promised to move $5 trillion out
of fossil fuels. After pressure from more than 700,000 people and
cities like Seattle representing over $5 billion in accounts, several
banks have dropped their DAPL investments or committed to revisit
their financing of fossil fuel projects that threaten Indigenous
sovereignty. People power is working!
And this push isn’t
just against DAPL, but a handful of other bad projects: the infamous
Keystone XL, Enbridge’s Line 3, Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain, and
TransCanada’s Energy East.
Meanwhile, fossil fuel companies continue
to drill for oil on Indigenous lands and ecologically sensitive areas
around the world. Now is the time to turn up the pressure, and where
possible, move our money.
We need everyone to
align their money with their values: withhold your consent from a
global finance system that puts Trump cronies’ profits ahead of
Indigenous rights, long-term economic analysis, and a safe planet for
all.
RL Miller, for Climate
Hawks Vote
Contribute
References
Standing Rock Sioux
Claim Victory and Vindication in Court
https://www.theatlantic.com/
Total divested from the
Dakota Access Pipeline, DefundDAPL.org
http://www.defunddapl.org/
Divestment Commitments:
Approximate value of institutions divesting
https://gofossilfree.org/
***
From 314:I’m a science teacher in Colorado, and I want to show you how science is under attack in our schools.
A few weeks ago, I received a package in my mailbox from the Heartland Institute. It included a textbook called “Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming” that was chock full of citations. Here’s the problem: They were often citing the Heartland Institute’s own papers -- or taking real research deliberately out of context in an attempt to mislead people.
A lot of science teachers across the country are getting these packages. They think we’re dumb enough to fall for their junk science. And they’re using this tactic -- with plenty of funding from the fossil fuel industry -- to try to influence school boards and science programs.
314 Action is fighting back by investing in programs to recruit school board candidates who believe our kids should be taught real science -- make a donation to support that work today.
Look, I’ve been teaching for 25 years. It’ll take more than slick packaging to fool educators like me. The Heartland Institute knows that, too.
The reality is climate science has been politicized beyond belief -- more and more, parents are challenging what’s being taught in the classroom. They raise the issue with the principal, the superintendent, and the school board, and they point to textbooks like this as evidence that science teachers are trying to “indoctrinate” their kids. I know firsthand what it’s like to be threatened with disciplinary action over teaching climate change. And I understand why some educators throw up their hands and say it’s not worth it.
That’s exactly what groups like the Heartland Institute want. They want their junk science to be taught alongside peer-reviewed research, but they’ll settle for science teachers just removing all mentions of climate change from their lessons.
This fight will play out in school boards all across the country. The good news is 314 Action is working hard to recruit and train responsible, pro-science advocates to run for these positions.
Will you chip in today to help fund this program to recruit and train STEM professionals running for school board?
Thanks for taking the time to read my story,
Cheryl Brown Manning
P.S. Here’s a photo of me with my copy of the Heartland Institute’s textbook. Let’s fight back.
 |
***
From March for Science:
On April 22, I had the honor of sharing the Cool Effect story with you at the March For Science in Washington, DC. Given the news that the United States Federal government is leaving the Paris Climate Accord, my husband and co-founder, Richard Lawrence, and I have been thinking back to December of 2015 when the world gathered to establish that historic agreement.
During that monumental event, our daughter, Skye Lawrence, took the stage and announced the mission of Cool Effect: to provide a way for individuals to take immediate and measurable action to fight climate change by supporting the world’s best carbon-reduction projects.
The projects supported through Cool Effect have verifiably reduced more than 13 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions. On our platform alone, more than 130,000 Americans like you have raised their hands and declared their willingness to the fight climate change and save the planet. They are taking responsibility for human-caused global warming by reducing one ton of greenhouse gas emissions at a time.
Simply put, this is The Cool Effect. Like the butterfly effect, we believe that small contributions by each of us can have a major impact on the world’s biggest problem.
We urge you to take action on climate change by checking out Cool Effect and exploring the many ways you can have an impact. It’s easy, each project is scientifically verified, and supports human ingenuity; health; and jobs growth.
Click HERE to help make a difference in our fight against climate change.
The world took historic action to combat climate change in Paris. Let’s recommit to continuing our progress.
Thank you,
Dee Lawrence,
Co-Founder, Cool Effect
***
From Change.orgLimit Nestle’s Michigan Water Withdrawals
 |
| |
Our
names are Yousef Emara and Nathan Koh. We are eighth graders in Ann
Arbor, Michigan. Our class completes a Sustainability Action Project
(SAP) by choosing a cause in which we can make a positive impact. We
have chosen to raise awareness of Nestle’s water pumping practices in
Michigan and petition the state legislature and the Michigan Department
of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to reject an increase in Nestle’s
pumping rates in White Pine Springs, Osceola County, Michigan.
Why This Issue Matters
In
many countries, including the United States, there is little limitation
on the rate at which water can be pumped out of aquifers (underground
water reserves). Water bottling companies have been pumping billions of
gallons of water out of aquifers and impacting the watershed and
surrounding environment and selling water bottles for 3000 to 5000 times more than they pay for it.
One such pumping site is Nestle’s well field in White Pine Springs,
Osceola County, Michigan, which is part of the Muskegon River watershed.
What This Means for Michigan
Nestle
runs a plant for its two water bottle brands, Ice Mountain and Pure
Life, in Stanwood, Michigan. The company operates three well fields
with a total of seven wells, all within the Muskegon River watershed.
According to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ),
Nestle pumped more than 3.4 billion gallons of water from its three
Michigan well fields between 2005 and 2015. In 2015, Nestle was given
approval by the MDEQ to pump 250 gallons per minute at White Pine
Springs Well in Osceola County. The company now wants to increase the
amount of water it pumps from this well to 400 gallons per minute. Nestle would pay the state of Michigan $200 per year for this increase.
According to a test conducted in August 2000 by Malcolm Pirnie Inc.,
Nestle’s White Pine Springs Well pumps water from an underground
aquifer that is connected to the aboveground water system through a
permeable layer of Earth, called a leaky aquitard. Pumping water from
the aquifer can drain significant amounts of water from above. This
indicates that the wetlands and wildlife above the ground are at high
risk of being harmed by Nestle’s pumping. Residents, like Rhonda Huff,
as reported by the MLive
newspaper on April 9, 2017, noticed that water levels in Osceola
County’s Chippewa Creek, which flows into the Muskegon River watershed,
have significantly dropped in recent years, affecting trout populations.
Nestle
needs a permit from the MDEQ in order to increase the rate at which it
pumps water. The MDEQ requires the use of a Water Withdrawal Assessment
Tool to determine the impact of proposed water withdrawals on fish and
wildlife in the area. Nestle’s proposed water withdrawal increase to
400 gallons per minute failed to pass MDEQ’s Water Withdrawal Assessment Tool. However, the MDEQ can and did overrule the failing grade determined by the Water Withdrawal Assessment Tool.
Nestle’s
plan to increase the amount of water withdrawn to 400 gallons per
minute would undo an agreement with environmentalists reached more than
seven years ago for a well field in Sanctuary Springs, which is also
part of the Muskegon River watershed. In 2001, Michigan Citizens for
Water Conservation sued Nestle over potential damage to the system of
lakes, rivers, and streams that its water withdrawal would cause. An
agreement was reached in 2009, limiting the amount of water the company
could pump.
What You Can Do To Help
Please
sign our petition! Help us in reaching our goal of 10,000 signatures
to present to the state legislature and the MDEQ. Thank you for taking
the time to protect our most precious resource – water.
|
