Solidarity Radio

In the last five years we have seen a significant increase in socialists elected to office, and this has inspired many more candidates to run. But these opportunities also raise a number of questions about electoral strategy. 

How do we develop candidates? How do we support them and keep them accountable once in office? How do we combine the power of elected office with organizing beyond the ballot box to achieve meaningful change?

On May 16th we spoke with members from the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) in Richmond, CA, and in our discussion we explored how their model addresses these questions. RPA, for the past 15+ years, has won the mayorship and a majority of the city council of Richmond and have been able to achieve significant victories such as rent control and forcing Chevron to reduce pollution and pay higher taxes.

Former state representative candidate and Incorruptible Mass co-founder Anna Callahan talked to Sue Wilson and Steve Early – two RPA leaders – about the organizing model RPA has developed and the lessons of their success for our electoral efforts in Massachusetts.

Background article: https://socialistcall.com/news/how-the-richmond-progressive-alliance-organized-for-victory/

Richmond Progressive Alliance https://www.richmondprogressivealliance.net/

This week we are joined by Vini Almeida who is a member of the Brazilian socialist organization Comuna. We talk about the challenges socialists face when working to build a democratic and multi-tendency socialist organization, electoral politics, supporters of the new right, and the political effects of the pandemic. Throughout we draw connections between the political situations in the US and Brazil.

To find out more about Communa check out their website www.comunapsol.org

~ Min 1 What is Comuna and PSOL? 

~ Min 16 The Bolsonaro government, wannabe fascists, and his extreme neoliberal policy

~ Min 25 Who supports Bolsonaro?

~ Min 35 Pressures on, fissures within, the effects of the pandemic on the Bolsonaro government.

~ Min 54 Prospects for the left in Brazil

Bill Resnick and Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate for President in the last election, discuss the Biden administration’s proposed American Jobs Plan. Announced with great fanfare at a cost of $2 trillion plus, the annual outlay would actually represent less than one-third of the U.S. military budget and is designed to fund the wish list of the U.S. corporate apparatus, such as “advanced “ nuclear power, “clean” coal, and the “smart” continent-spanning grid that will enable investor-owned utilities to preserve their domination. Still Biden’s plan is just a negotiating position, and there is a chance that significant resources could be devoted to genuine zero-greenhouse-gas model cities.

In this episode, we spoke with Labor For Palestine organizers Suzanne Adely who is the Co-Director for the Food Chain Workers Alliance and President-Elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and Michael Letwin who is a public defender in New York City and former President of the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys/UAW 2325.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• The recent general strike in Palestine and about work conditions for Palestinians;
• What is Labor for Palestine and why is it misleading to frame the violence as between two conflicting parties;
• What led to the recent violence; and
• Why organized labor should get involved in this struggle.

Labor for Palestine was launched in April 2004 by New York City Labor Against the War and Al-Awda NY: The Palestine Right to Return Coalition to reclaim the legacy of working class solidarity with Palestine in the United States, as reflected in groundbreaking statements by the League of Revolutionary Black Workers in 1969, and wildcat strikes against the United Auto Workers (UAW) leadership’s support for Israel in 1973.

ABOUT EMLab

Empathy Media Lab is produced by Evan Matthew Papp and they are a proud member of the Labor Radio Podcast Network. Support media, authors, activists, artists, historians, and journalists, who are fighting to improve the prosperity of the working class everywhere. Solidarity forever.

This was originally published on Empathy Media Lab and on Labor for Palestine

Our interview with Mike is an extended discussion of the geography of neoliberal capitalism: the devastation being wreaked by the twin crises of the pandemic and economy; the utter inadequacy of the state’s response to address these crises for working people; the origins of the pandemic and emerging new strains of the virus; big pharma and vaccines; white supremacy; the class background of Trump supporters; the reactionary role of mega churches; and, most importantly, what we can do to organize against these onslaughts and the hopeful signs of resistance that emerged in the movement for Black lives and other eruptions.  

This is our featured podcast episode with Dianne Feeley interviewing Mike Davis, a prolific author, urban theorist and researcher. His books include the prophetic The Monster at Our Door (2005) on the global pandemic threat and the followup,The Monster Enters (2020) on the coronavirus disaster. His works also include Planet of Slums (2005) on the causes and consequences of runaway urbanization, books on the history of Los Angeles, City of Quartz (1990) and Set the Night on Fire (2020, co-authored with Jon Wiener) and many others.

Professor Rabab Abdulhadi gave this presentation on the situation in Palestine and the growth of the global solidarity movement to a webinar on Tuesday, August 25, 2020 sponsored by the Detroit branch of Solidarity, Jewish Voice for Peace – Detroit, U.S. Palestinian Community Network (USPCN) – Detroit and Palestinian Youth Movement – Detroit. Dr. Abdulhadi emphasized the importance at this critical time of movements coming together to oppose racism and colonialism everywhere, from the USA to Palestine. She particularly noted the solidarity and mutual support shown by #Black Lives Matter and Palestinian struggling under Israeli occupation, and the growing support for Palestine in the progressive sectors of the Jewish community, among organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace as well as Queer Jewish activists.

The brutal treatment of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, made even worse by the Covid-19 pandemic, is a point of special concern as are conditions in U.S. prisons and the horrific situations in immigrant detention centers.

The presentation was preceded by brief welcoming remarks from the sponsoring groups, and followed by a question and discussion period. Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi directs the center at San Francisco State University that she organized, AMED (Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diaspora Studies).

For the past few decades now, there’s been an uptick in these emerging diseases, which are products of capitalism’s disruption of the relationship between humans and earth’s ecosystems. There have always been transfers of diseases from animals to humans and probably back the other way too, for example, rabies or the bubonic plague. But, in the past three or four decades, this has increased sharply. Deforestation and the decline of biodiversity have facilitated the threat of these diseases. And we’re talking about diseases from HIV to Lyme disease, to Ebola, to Zika to Hantavirus, and the Coronavirus. 

Where did Covid-19 come from?

What are the challenges to ending the global pandemic?

How should the left respond?

A well-known area of ecology called Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functions and Services began developing about 20 years ago. It studies how biodiversity contributes to various functions that shape an ecosystem. We’re talking about things like carbon storage or net productivity. We’re talking about things like resilience, the ability to bounce back. And we’re talking about things like resistance to invasion by pests and pathogens.

Diseases will spread through an ecological community much more easily when biodiversity has been reduced. Biodiversity is being reduced on our planet. We’re faced with habitat destruction, deforestation, contamination of habitats and so on. Many, many species or populations of these species are disappearing.

A robust ecosystem includes predators and competitors of animals that are normal hosts for a lot of viruses and bacteria, so there are fewer primary hosts for the pathogen. Diminishing biodiversity then expands the number of potential hosts. Second of all, in diminishing biodiversity you are eliminating alternative, poorer quality, hosts for a lot of pathogens. This is what they call the dilution effect. For example, in the natural environment, Lyme disease affects more than just deer and mice. It affects squirrels; it affects other organisms. But these other organisms are not necessarily the best hosts to the bug. The bug hasn’t adapted as efficiently to these hosts, and so it may not be able to reproduce in them or it may not be able to make the connection with vectors like ticks and so on.

These are some of the ways that biodiversity decline actually enhances the possibility of transmission of these bugs. This is what has happened in the case of Lyme, in the case of Hanta or, perhaps, in the case, which I’ll explain, of Covid-19.

We need a program that’s going to address these environmental issues, while providing economic security, food security, housing security, you know, basic needs for people, and we need to amplify the Green New Deal to incorporate Medicare for all

Organisms that survive biodiversity decline are often opportunistic species. They’re often what we would call generalists, like bats or rats or mice. These organisms proliferate in areas where biodiversity has been reduced, where there’s been deforestation, where human settlements are creating edge environments. So, for example, the deer mice that carry Lyme proliferated in grassy fields in the suburbs that were created when real estate development took place. Hantavirus is a rodent-borne virus in the Southwestern United States and it began proliferating with increased agribusiness and irrigation along with suburbanization and urbanization.

In the case of Ebola, bats proliferated in West Africa where oil palm plantations were put in and replaced forest. So, now you have greater contact between humans and the primary host as well. 

When I lived in Nicaragua, a big problem was that the landowners would push the poor campesinos, the poor farmers, off their land and then they would migrate further into the forest and slash and burn the forest and what we know now is that these type of activities expose people to the risk of contracting various pathogens from organisms that are being pushed into smaller and smaller spaces and with reduced diversity.

We also have to take into account the effects of climate change. For example, the vectors and hosts of the Lyme Disease bacteria are spreading out across the Northern US, now showing up in Michigan and further west 

So, in the case of Covid-19, Hubei Province, where Wuhan is located, has been the most rapidly industrializing area in China for the past century with a very high rate of deforestation. And you have an affected pool of animals, of horseshoe bats, which have been carrying the virus for a long time. The virus has adapted to enter into bat cells and the bats’ immune system has evolved to deal with it. Over time a pathogen often will co-adapt with a host under natural selection, so it doesn’t kill the host, because it’s kind of disadvantageous under most circumstances for the pathogen to be automatically fatal. 

But, when it transfers to other mammals, there is the potential for it to become deadly, to become virulent. 

There are two theories about how bats transferred the virus to people. One is that it transferred from an isolated population of bats (and I should point out that bats have not been properly sampled, so we don’t have samples from all populations of horseshoe bats.) The other theory is that the virus made the transfer to humans earlier, but it hadn’t mutated to its virulent form, so it wasn’t detected. And this could have happened months ago. 

And there’s also a possibility that another mammal, possibly the pangolin, picked up the virus en route, and became an intermediary for transfer to humans. Now, one way this could have worked out is through wet markets like in Wuhan, where there are cages of animals, like pangolins, stacked one on top of the other, live animals. So, basically, you have animals on the top layer defecating and urinating and sneezing and coughing or whatever and infecting the animals below them. And you’re talking about animals that are never in contact with each other in the natural environment.

And then you have people who are managing the animals. We’re not talking about eating bats. We’re talking about being in proximity with animals in the presence of a virus which is transmitted readily by aerosol, by droplets sneezed out or coughed out or in the process of talking, in humans.

First of all, we don’t know very much about it. Other coronaviruses have been studied, but not extensively. The common cold is a coronavirus, but it is not very threatening and research on it not profitable. SARS and MERSA, two other coronaviruses, were deadly and there had been some research on them. But, these viruses were controlled fairly quickly, so there was less urgency about studying them.

With the present coronavirus, you have a relatively unknown pathogen with what appears to be a significant mortality rate and a high rate of transmission. At this point, we don’t have the information we would need to judge how it compares to the common flu. And everything we do know has to be treated as tentative.

The global average death rate, based on confirmed cases and confirmed deaths, according to the WHO, was 3.4%, as of March 3. But this figure is rather meaningless, first off, given the lack of adequate testing on a global level and the efforts of various authorities to cover up the scale of the disease in their countries. I mean, the number of deaths has been seen to be vastly under-counted. Same with the number of confirmed cases. Some 20-30% of cases are thought to be asymptomatic. Many more are mild or not severe enough to require hospitalization, and so may go uncounted.

Mortality rates, transmission rates and prevalence are also functions of social inequality and poverty, so death rates vary greatly from that global average for marginalized and oppressed populations, as we’ve seen in New York, Chicago and elsewhere. Oppressed communities also have less access to testing and authorities in many places are not even reporting demographic data for the disease. 

As we know, the mortality rate varies across age groups. An early estimate by the WHO in China was that the death rate for those over 60 was 3.4% and the percent steadily rose with age so that the death rate for those over 80 was 15%. That was before the Chinese authorities recently increased the number of Wuhan confirmed deaths by 50%. In New York City, 95% of deaths were among those over 44 years old. Almost half were among those over 75. So, the real mortality rate is going to vary from that global average according to the age structure of the population of a given country, as we saw in Italy’s case, where an aging population succumbed to coronavirus at a much higher rate.

Moreover, we may have seriously underestimated the pathological manifestions of Covid-19, leading to an undercount of deaths: it turns out that the coronavirus doesn’t just kill by attacking the lungs, but also presents significant cardiac, renal, neurological and other pathologies, either directly attacking these organs or by triggering a hyperimmune response. A recent Science article noted that deaths due to heart failure, renal failure and disruptions of other organs and systems were initially misdiagnosed, but later turned out to be related to Covid-19.

Covid-19 also appears to be highly transmissible. On average, according to some estimates, each person will transmit to 3.5 other individuals (its reproductive number, R0=3.5). So, you’re talking about an exponential increase in infected people. But, again, transmission rates are determined by factors beyond the innate, biological propensity of the virus, such as crowding, use of PPE, social distancing, etc.

The curve is apparently flattening in New York, although keep in mind that case numbers and mortality numbers are extremely unreliable, even in New York City and State.

But, New York City and State are NOT the U.S., which is a very large and heterogeneous place: geographically, demographically, economically. So, while case and mortality numbers may be flattening out in New York, they are increasing in urban and rural areas in many other states. There are many areas in the U.S., with large, dense, impoverished, indigent populations and poor or nonexistent public health and medical infrastructure, in which control of the virus is going to be difficult, if, in fact, there is a will to do so. 

This is an extremely complex issue. Researchers are waiting with bated breath to see what happens in China. That country seemed to have reduced their reproduction number to below 1, which means that each case will infect fewer than one other person. However, some countries that brought the virus under control, such as Singapore, are spiking again.

One issue is whether individuals and the population can develop immunity, through exposure to the virus. The verdict is still out on the question of natural immunity. A large study in Wuhan showed that while some people developed antibodies following infection, others did not. One positive aspect is that older people seem to develop antibodies more readily than younger people. On the other hand, development of antibodies does not necessarily mean that we have immunity. 

An earlier study pointed out that the antibodies we generate must bind to the spike protein that permits viral entry into cells in order to neutralize the virus. In that study, a significant portion of those antibodies bound to other viral proteins and failed to neutralize the virus. And this virus is tricky (although not as bad as HIV): it covers itself with a “camouflage” of sugar molecules to trick the immune system. What is more, for some viruses, we retain an immunological memory for a lifetime, while for others, our immune systems retain a memory for a short time, and this isn’t only due to the viral mutation rate, but to the virulence of the pathogen, and other factors. 

This depends in part on the virus’ mutation rate. HIV and the flu mutate quickly (meaning the surface proteins are altered), leaving our immune systems eating dust. In the former case, the mutation rate is so high (together with extra-viral “camouflage,” noted above) that it has forestalled development of vaccines. In the latter, we devise vaccines on a yearly basis to try to keep up. 

Although Covid-19 appeared at first to be fairly stable, researchers recently discovered that the virus has mutated into two strains, one much more virulent than the other. The virulent strain is the one that has impacted Europe, and then spread to New York, while the less virulent strain affected Asia and then made it to Washington state.

The U.S. has opted for a mitigation strategy, principally involving social isolation measures, personal hygiene, and, subsequently some travel and crowd restrictions and closures of worksites and schools, measures which started late and have varied in extent and timing across states. Yet, virtually every country that has managed to bring Covid-19 under control has employed a viral suppression approach. Suppression means rapidly reducing the Reproductive Number to less than one, and keeping it there. Suppression measures include the previous, or more vigorous, social distancing measures, but also curfews, restrictions of movement outside the home, rigorous quarantines of cases and contacts, up to a total lockdown. Extensive and timely testing was the key to the success of these suppression measures.

Accurate measures of numbers of cases and of mortality is necessary both to track and quarantine cases and their contacts, and to conduct random community sampling, in order to identify hot-spots. It is necessary to evaluate whether social distancing is working and to know when to ease it. It is also necessary to calculate the death rate. Testing has been woefully inadequate in the U.S. By the end of the first week in April, the average seems to oscillate around 150,000 tests per day. The most current figure for tests per thousand people for the U.S. is about 12, which places it at number six in the world. Iceland still has the most rigorous testing in the world. 

There are other problems with the tests that need to be overcome. One, of course, is the overly strict criteria for testing, which is largely limited to hospital patients already showing symptoms of severe infection, along with medical personnel (and those with the money or clout to circumvent the restrictions). To be effective, testing would hopefully be applied to identify all suspected cases (anyone who walks into a doctors’ office, as one expert put it) AND sample enough asymptomatic cases to allow for an estimate of their prevalence. For another, at this point, many clinics and labs are running out of supplies, in large part due to lean production of these materials and outsourced, international supply chains. A third is the two-three day turnaround time between swabbing the patient, running the PCR, and getting the results back: a delay that costs lives. For a fourth, this test has a high rate of false negatives: it misses up to 20% of cases for a number of reasons not necessarily related to the test itself.

For another, at this point, many clinics and labs are running out of supplies, in large part due to lean production of these materials and outsourced, international supply chains.

One option is to use antibody tests, which can be done with a pin-prick in a few minutes. These will allow doctors to determine if a person has been infected at some point. In turn, this will allow a better estimate of prevalence in both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals, and a possible assessment of immunity. There are caveats: that such a test won’t pick up antibodies early in the infection, that not everybody seems to develop antibodies, and that not all antibodies confer immunity.

Whatever technical measures are used will inevitably run up against the wall of existing social inequality. Social isolation and lock-downs are not applied on an even playing field any more than the disease itself is “equal opportunity.” To varying degrees, much of the world’s population has been subjected to four decades of declining living conditions or absolute impoverishment as a result of neoliberal austerity and “one-sided class warfare,” on top of the historic dispossession of masses of people in the global south and the inequities of racism in the global north. 

Leaving aside the co-morbidities produced by these oppressive relationships, measures such as social isolation, home quarantines, curfews, contact tracing and even personal hygiene, will have radically different meanings for and impacts on homeless people, families living crammed into in crowded apartments or ramshackle dwellings and densely populated slums, working class families living paycheck to paycheck, people lacking access to clean running water or basic sanitation or adequate food sources. Domicile quarantine is meaningless if you are homeless and can be a death sentence if you can’t get food. It is no surprise that food riots broke out in impoverished parts of southern Italy after that country imposed its draconian lock-down. But, these social conditions also mean that such measures may be ineffective, leading, again, to a resurgence.

I think this provides another argument for an expanded Green New Deal. We need a program that’s going to address these environmental issues, while providing economic security, food security, housing security, you know, basic needs for people, and we need to amplify the Green New Deal to incorporate Medicare for all, universal healthcare, I would say, because both of these are necessary in the short and in the long run to, to prevent and stop these pandemics from taking the toll they do. 

Additionally, we need to protect ecosystems and prevent biodiversity decline and that involves things like agroecological production. It also involves ensuring that people have enough food to eat and aren’t constantly being forced off the land to move further into forests bringing them into contact with immunocompromised animals that are being affected by biodiversity decline.

Absolutely. The global south has been subject to what we call ecological unequal exchange for – – for decades, if not centuries, whereby the wealth of these countries flows up north and then the ecological and environmental catastrophes are exported to the south. So, there’s definitely a need for environmental reparations, but this should not let local oligarchs off the hook either, because there is also a huge need for social transformation, including agrarian reform.

Mike Friedman is an evolutionary biologist teaching at the University of Antigua Barbuda in the Caribbean. For the last several years, he’s been studying and writing on the development of dangerous viruses around the planet, including Covid-19. In addition to his scientific writing, he has published several articles in Monthly Review.

Bill Resnick co-founded the Old Mole Variety Hour on KBOO, 90.7fm, Portland, OR. He has written for Socialist Review and Against the Current among others. He also wrote for, edited, and chaired the editorial collective of the Portland Alliance, for 30 years the voice of radical Portland. This article originated in interviews on KBOO radio, 90.7fm, Portland Or.

The transcript was edited by Johanna Brenner.

Each year the International Institute of Research and Education in Amsterdam, the education arm of the Fourth International, conducts an annual event entitled the Ecosocialist School. Although eco-socialism is a prominent theme, the school can be described more accurately as an intense boot camp for Marxist education.

This year Solidarity sent two students, one from their own ranks, Stephen Mahood (also a DSA member), and the other from the ranks of DSA, Matt Stone. The school lasted three weeks in total and Stephen attended all three, while Matt was only able to attend the first two weeks. The two recorded this conversation about their experience including how they both came into the left and how they were approaching the Ecosocialism school. They share the experience of attending a multilingual school and how much they appreciated the English, Spanish, and French interpreters.

They discuss the structure of the school, from their living situation to the daily classes and share the excitement of meeting comrades from different countries and learning about their on-the-ground experiences. They describe the substance of the school curriculum and how the intense relationship-building of the school provided constant moments of learning, whether intended or not. They touch on the need for a strong anti-war movement well before Trump’s assassination of the Iranian military commander, Suleimani.