liberation

The liberal case for open borders and immigration

The liberal economist Philippe Legrain has been asking 'why are so many people are against the free movement of labour'. He's just published a new book arguing the case for open borders, in which he assembles strong evidence that immigration brings benefits to everyone. He says that immigration controls really just boil down to fear of change or to racism. The Guardian have just published a think piece of his on immigration to Britain entitled Don't believe this claptrap. Migrants are no threat to us.

Capitalism's glory days and inequality

The Economist magazine has commented on globalisation and the rise of inequality, suggesting that the imbalance is now such that a backlash is soon possible. It says that 'labour's share of GDP has fallen to historic lows' in the rich world at a time when 'profits are soaring'. The magazine emphasizes the health of the economy at the moment:

These are the glory days of global capitalism. The mix of technology and economic integration transforming the world has created unparalleled prosperity. In the past five years the world has seen faster growth than at any time since the early 1970s. In China each person now produces four times as much as in the early 1990s.

It also points out that in places like the US, wages are fairly stagnant, and that the typical top manager is now paid 110 times the average wage instead of the 40 times that it was 20 years ago. The magazine typically lacks any robust solutions apart from more of the same with an emphasis of increasing social mobility rather than economic equality.

Chavez to bishops: read Marx, Lenin and the Bible

So Hugo Chavez now calls himself a communist, quotes Leon Trotsky, and has announced his plans to nationalise the telecommunications and electricity industries. This is strong stuff, and the left should be impressed with the continued 'turn to the left' in Latin America. However, in reporting on recent events, both the the Economist and the World Socialist Web Site are seemingly in agreement that Chavez's rhetoric is still well ahead of his reality, and when you look at much of the detail there is less for the right to be alarmed at and less for the left to celebrate about. The Economist admit that Chavez can claim a mandate for implementing 'socialism', but it thinks that private business has little to fear from his regime. Still they seem to be bemused that Chavez tells Venezuelan bishops that they should read Marx, Lenin and the Bible because 'Christ was an authentic communist, anti-imperialist and enemy of the oligarchy'. The WSWS are still very tough on Chavez, suggesting that an examination of what his government is about shows that his policies 'far from signaling a resurgence of socialism, represent an echo of the kind of economic nationalism and military populism associated with figures such as Juan Peron in Argentina'. The Guardian gives a more sympathetic hearing.

8 Tribes - no class

It's hard not to join the critics and label Jill Caldwell and Christopher Brown's new book called '8 Tribes' as banal or simplistic pop sociology. Their attempt to define the 'hidden classes of New Zealand' is clearly more about PR talk than any real intellectual analysis. But, the book is still kind of interesting - you can read about it in the Sunday Star-Time profile on it - and you can take an interesting quiz on the 8 Tribes website to work out which tribes you below to. (Apparently I'm predominantly a Raglanite.)

The book doesn't really help understand NZ society or politics, despite what it's authors say. In the Sunday Star-Times profile, Caldwell and Brown are said to believe that 'Don Brash failed to win the election because he mixed up his tribes'. Likewise, CEO Teresa Gattung and Helen Clark can't get along because they are from different tribes, and 'If each could only try to see the world from the other's tribal viewpoint, they would understand each other better.'

This all sounds more like talkback radio than class analysis. And the fact is that the authors aren't really talking about class at all, and after reading any of the book you wonder what's wrong with understanding New Zealand through more traditional means of class analysis.

State housing under Labour: longer waits and more privatisation

State housing provision continues to be substandard under the Labour Government. The Herald reports that 'Poor families in desperate need of accommodation are waiting almost half a year for a state house.' Whereas in 2001 the average wait was 71 days, this has rocketed up to 176 days. Despite the major accommodation shortages, the Government has also only built about 7000 new states houses, which does not come close to replacing the 13000 state houses previously sold off by National. What's more, according to the article, Housing Minister Chris Carter is considering another state housing sell off, and has instructed Housing NZ Corp 'to explore whether it should retain expensive properties as they become vacant.'

The orthodoxy of Michael Cullen

Although most people are already very aware of Michael Cullen's orthodox economic conservatism, Colin James published an article on Cullen last week that gives further evidence that the Labour Government under Cullen's stewardship is far from radical. Cullen admits that Labour and National 'converge towards the middle' of the political spectrum, but of course suggests that Labour still has different 'values' than National. Yet despite being the 'party intellectual', Cullen has problems elaborating on what these different values are.

Hertz-vs-Avis politics

Labour and National are forever trying to convince us that they are miles apart ideologically, and that it therefore makes a big difference which one of them is elected to lead the country. Therefore it's refreshing when any of their advocates drop the guise and tell the plain truth. Sunday Star-Times columnist Matthew Hooton has been a political and media strategist for Don Brash and John Key has written a column where he admits (or in his thinking 'celebrates') the new policy consensus. His comments are worth quoting at length.

Although National's constantly paints Labour as being economically socialist and ruining the neoliberal economic reforms, Hooton says that actually, 'With the exception of industrial relations, Labour has done almost nothing to change the legacy of Sir Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson, and even the 1990 benefit cuts remain in place'. Likewise, he admits that National in government would have reformed less than it suggested: 'Institutions like the Human Rights Commission and TVNZ newsreaders saying "kia ora" were always safe, even under a Don Brash-led government. US aircraft carriers were never going to anchor off Rangitoto. Every MP rejoices when a treaty grievance is resolved'.

Although citing some minor differences on issues like law and order, Hooton makes the following summary:

Roughly speaking, our main political figures have reached a consensus: they're right on economics, left on social issues, green on the environment, "independent" on foreign policy and stand for justice-without-guilt on treaty issues. Even on tax, the defining policy issue of the 2005 election, Bill English and Michael Cullen are both committed to ongoing cuts. Key appears completely relaxed about the unions' dream of the minimum wage reaching $12 an hour.

Hooton calls this all 'Hertz-vs-Avis politics', and says we're only headed for more of it in 2007.

Farmers bludge off the state (again)?

Farmers in New Zealand have always been keen to 'socialise their losses and privatise their profits' - especially back in the days of minimum price subsidies. The latest farmer scheme to extract huge amounts of money from the state is in Tenure Review, whereby farmers essentially swap with the government low-value land for high-value land. The Government throws some money to the farmer as well, and gets to turn the low-value land into conservation land. Ann Brower, a political scientist, has recently exposed this 'obscure but huge transfer of wealth and resources' in the NZ Herald, after spending 'a year digging into the politics and economics' of it all. READ MORE BELOW

82% of Germans feel politically disenfranchised

Throughout the western world there is a growing gulf between official political life and the general population. The latest example of this is found in a poll published by Stern magazine indicating substantial political alienation in Germany. For example:

* 82% of the German population believe 'no consideration is given to the interests of the people' by leaders.
* 47% say elections are incapable of bringing about political change

According to a WSWS report on the poll, much of this alienation can be explained by the unprecedented re-division of wealth to favour the rich in recent years. They also point out the gulf between the people and the political class is reflected in recent party membership decline. The Christian Democrat Union membership has fallen by nearly a third since 1991 (to 561,000), and the Social Democratic Party membership has also fallen to 561,000 (from 755,000) but in much fewer years.

Creating another Afghanistan in Africa

For a very good backgrounder and explanation for current events in Somalia, read Mick Hume's piece in spiked-online about How to create Africa's Afghanistan. As well as showing how the US have been stuffing up the Horn of Africa, Hume aptly describes the Bush adventure in this an other parts of the world as an out-of-control, fear-driven foreign policy, characterised by a mixture of risk-aversion and recklessness'. The World Socialist Web Site also provides commentary on the US in Somalia - especially the fact that the Americans now admit their role in the illegal war.

Govt backtracks from Iraq criticism

Helen Clark and Foreign Minister Winston Peters have quickly sought to distance the government from the criticisms that Duty Minister Jim Anderton has made of the US role in Iraq. Anderton's comments were relatively mild and probably in line with majority opinion, and so it's informative to see Clark and Peters' reactions. Even though Anderton had been specifically asked to make a comment as Duty Minister during the holiday period, Helen Clark later said that he was speaking on behalf of his own party rather than the Government. Peters went further to say his comments were 'ill-informed and regrettable'. This is clearly a government that is divided on the issue, but led by those determined not to have the US criticised for Iraq.

UPDATE: The Dominion Post reports that there has been a Groundswell of support for Iraq comments with 80% of survey respondents agreeing that Iraq was becoming another Vietnam.

Money & power

The Business section of the Sunday Star-Times has published two articles on the personal wealth of political leaders internationally and domestically. The intended message of these business articles is that most of the world's representatives 'are not always rich'. For instance, apparently 'George W Bush has a surprisingly small fortune.  His net worth is estimated at somewhere between $US15m and $US26m'. Similarly, 'Bush's fortune may be small, but British prime minister Tony Blair's is tiny. His net worth is estimated at just $4.2m'. The NZ Dimension story lists the known assets of John Key (which have already been widely publicised) and Helen Clark. Surprisingly, Clark owns an Auckland villa worth $720,000, a Wellington townhouse worth about $350,000, an apartment in Christchurch, property at Rodney, and is 'a beneficiary of two family trusts'. Her joint annual income with her husband is estimated at $500,000.

Level of heath funding challenged by Pharmac

The Government's drug-buying agency, Pharmac, has suggested that the government is underfunding the health sector. When interviewed by the Otago Daily Times about whether the high-cost breast cancer drug Herceptin should be made available through the public health system, Pharmac medical director Peter Moodie responded by saying, 'I think you have to ask a bigger question and say is the amount of funding for health right?'. For a senior government employee to make this point shows a significant level of disquiet about Labour's health funding in this sector.