A brief overview of the 2009 German General Election.

No real surprises in the outcome of the German General elections, although many on the left will take some pleasure from the results. On the down side, the conservatives won and the turnout was at a record low of 70.8 percent, against 77.7 percent four years ago. In 1972 it was as high as 91.1 percent, so it is fair to say voters in Germany, like their counterparts throughout the EU have become disillusioned with the political process. 

The big losers were the SPD, many voters from its core support base stayed at home or transferred to the Greens or Left Party. The SPD lost approximately ten million voters compared to 1998, when Gerhard Schroeder came to power and formed a coalition government with the Green party. This time around, approximately two million SPD voters stayed at home and compared with the last federal election the SPD is down 76 seats.

Both the Left Party and the Greens increased there vote, with Die Linke increasing the number of seats it has in the Bundestag to 76, up 22, and the Greens ending the night on 68, up 17. The Left party is now the fourth largest party in the Bundestag and its members and supporters must be pleased with the outcome. This is expressed in the following comments from three of its leading members.

Oskar Lafontaine: "The result is significantly better than 2005 and represents a great achievement for The Left. I thank all who helped achieve this result. Social issues will be at the center of our work in the new parliament. We will continue to fight against Hartz IV and the raising of the retirement age to 67. The workers and the most vulnerable must not be made to pay for the economic crises, those who caused it, the bankers and speculators must be be asked to pay. Last but not least, the army has to be withdrawn from Afghanistan."

Gregor Gysi: "We are experiencing a unique historical event. The first time in the history of Germany, a party to the left of the Social Democrats reached a double-digit figure. This result is a reward for a consistent policy towards the welfare, social justice and against war in Afghanistan. "

Ulrich Maurer: "A huge success for The Left, which is only marred by the black and yellow result. It increases our responsibility for the distribution of fights that happen now."

A couple of interesting points from the election; politically, Germany is split down the middle between conservative voters and those I will loosely describe as progressives. With the Right gaining 53% of the vote and the ‘Left’ 46%. The lesson for the latter surly must be, if they are tempted to enter into a coalition with the conservatives, don’t, as their electoral core will punish them heavily. Leaving a side the experience of the Greens after entering a coalition with SPD when Gerhard Schröder was Chancellor, there is little doubt at this election, the SPD have been punished heavily for entering the Grand Coalition led my Mrs Merkel.

The new Left Party faction in the Bundestag will consists of 40 women and 36 men, there names are as follows: Jan van Aken, Agnes Alpers, Dr. Dietmar Bartsch, Herbert Behrens, Karin Binder, Matthias W. Birkwald, Heidrun Bluhm, Bock Steffen Hahn , Christine Buchholz, Eva Bulling-Schröter, Dr. Martina Bunge, Roland Claus, Sevim Dagdelen, Dr. Jörg-Diether Dehm-Desoi, Heidrun Dittrich, Werner Dreibus, Dr. Dagmar Enkelmann, Klaus Ernst, Wolfgang Gehrcke-Reymann, Nicole Gohlke Diana Golze, Annette Groth, Dr. Gregor Gysi, Heike Hänsel, Dr Rose Marie Anna Gertrud Hein, Inge Hoeger, Dr. Barbara Höll, Andrei Constantine Hunko, Ursula Jelpke, Dr. Lucretia Louise Jochimsen, Katja Kipping, Harald Koch, Jan Korte, Jutta Krellmann, Katrin Kunert, Oskar Lafontaine, Caren Nicole Lay, Sabine Leidig, Ralph Lenkert, Michael Gerhard Leutert, Stefan Liebich, Ursula Cornelia Lötzer, Dr. Gesine Lötzsch, Thomas Lutze, Ulrich Maurer, Dorothée Louise Menzner, Cornelia Möhring, Kornelia Moller, Niema Movassat, Kersten Naumann, Wolfgang Neskovic, Thomas North, Petra Pau, Jens Petermann, Richard Pitterle, Ingrid Liselotte Remmers, Paul Georg Schäfer, Michael Bad, Herbert Charles shui, Dr. Ilja Seifert, Catherine Senger-Schafer, Raju Sharma, Dr. Petra Sitte, Sabine Ursula Stueber, Alexander Süßmair, Dr. Kirsten Tackmann, Frank Temple, Dr. Axel Troost, Alexander Ulrich, Kathrin Vogler, Sarah Wagenknecht-Niemeyer, Halina Wawzyniak, Harald Weinberg, Katrin Werner, Jörn Heinz Adolf Wunderlich, Sabine Zimmermann 

With the introduction of PFI and the part privatization of local government; Mass corruption was bound to follow in its wake.

A few months ago a friend of mine received a letter from his local Council informing him as he parks his car in his front garden, he must have a dropped-kerb, plus a ‘suitable’ parking area constructed in his front garden. The Council sent him an information pack and after he had filled in the necessary paper work and returned it, the Council eventually sent him two quotes from private contractors who had tendered for the work.

 One of the quotes came in at just over £3,000 and the other just under £4,000. My friend thought bugger that, ignored the Councils recommendation, and rang round and eventually had the work down for £1,700. It did not take an accountant to understand what was going on with the Council provided quotes, but life being short, after my friend and I had finished discussing the lack of parentage of those who work in the councils highways department, we went our separate ways.

This conversation came to mind, when I read in the Morning Star that some of the UKs major construction firms, including conglomerates like Balfour Beatty, have been fined over £130 million by the Office of Fair Trading, for ripping off taxpayers in a massive price-fixing scam. 

According to the Star, “The price-fixing scam meant that firms inflated the cost of the contracts, which included construction work on schools, hospitals and social housing, through a practice known as 'cover pricing.’ Apparently, contractors would collude with each other to make high and unattractive bids for the work to ensure that contracts were given to their co-conspirators - some of whom then passed backhanders worth as much as £60,000 to the losing bidder as "compensation."

An Office of Fair Trading investigator Stephen Blake admitted the 100 firms caught so far, were just the tip of the iceberg. Mr Blake confessed: "To find that this illegal activity was endemic within the industry came as a surprise to us and the evidence suggests the practice was much more widespread."

One is attempted to say to Mr Blake, “Sure and pigs might fly.” It is clear, a scam like this, which involves contracts worth billions of pounds, works on a bases of a round robin. The contractors, big and small, take turns at placing the lowest bid, which comes in a few percentage points below the inflated quotes and thus they gain the contract. Far from the £60,000 being given to those who lose out, they simply waited for their turn to gain a contract that was over priced and thus guaranteed to turn a massive profit. If my friends experience was anything to go by, this mark up was in the area of 50 to 100%, enough to make any senior executive’s eyes water. No, the bung must have gone to Council officials who were nodding through over priced quotes, which were then rubber stamped by the Councillors and government ministers who had responsibility for the projects in question.

In truth this story has it all, corrupt and greedy big business, local councils wasting council tax payers coin; at best incompetent local councillors and government Ministers, plus a parliamentary opposition that failed to shine a light into the sludge. Yet on the day the story broke, not one of the UK national newspapers carried it prominently. [bar the Morning Star]

At a time when benefit claimants are hung out to dry by the media, and sent to prison by the judiciary for defrauding comparatively small sums of money, not a single individual involved in this fraud has been brought before the Courts for participating in what must be one of the largest ever robberies of the public purse. 

To his credit the Left Labour MP, John McDonnell did call for a full public inquiry into the construction industry. 

"Today's OFT revelations about the abuse of public funds by the construction industry comes hot on the heels of the blacklisting scandal and abuses by construction gangmasters. This has exposed the industry as a law unto itself in the way in which it abuses the system to maximise its profits. There now needs to be a full public inquiry into the construction industry's practices, including cover pricing, blacklisting and health and safety."

Although I will not be holding my breath, as I am certain there will be no public enquiry, as it would open a massive can of worms that would encompass, business, big and small, local, regional and national government. There is nothing new in this type of corruption, although the sheer scale of it will surprise many. It is yet another example of the disastrous consequences when government privatizes public services by the back door. 

We should not forget local authorities first started their direct works departments because the relationship between business and local councils had become far to cosy and corrupt. It seems, with the demise of these departments, and the part privatization of the NHS, corrupt practices are once again spreading, like topsy, throughout the UK. 

Welcome to the 19th Century, circa 2009.

The Beatles: Heralds of the Revolution, or purveyors of Tin Pan Alley ditties?

In an article last week, which was partially brought about by the entertainment conglomerate EMI, releasing a remastered Box Set back catalogue of the Beatles recordings, I wrote 

“The overwhelming majority of 60s British pop music was total pap, either Tin Pan Alley ditties; early Beatles, or imitation US black Rock&Roll of the type Chuck Berry first brought to the stage; the Stones.”

Thus I was interested to read a Morning Star piece by Keith Flett, who sifts through the Beatles Box Set to find out where the band was situated politically. Back in the early 1960s, the only interest I had in early Beatles music, was spending my school dinner hour down the shops, liberating Beatles singles and EPs from our local record store, to sell to my class mates so I could finance my weekends at Soho’s Flamingo Jazz Club, where the music was Afro American. 

Although after the Beatles split, it would be untrue to say John Lennon did not play a part in my political awaking, for like many ‘non political’ working class youth back then, his [often muddled] political thinking and post Beatles music, especially in my case the LP Imagine, were to play an important role in my political development. 

It would be true to say Lennon, rather than Lenin, had far more influence on my own early political awakening. Lennon’s lack of deference to those we had been schooled to look up to, could not but turn our young heads and it was only later, we went on to educate ourselves and gain an understanding about our class and the enemies we faced. 

Many of us then moved beyond mere protest politics, but it is worth remembering a  charismatic figure, which John Lennon undoubtedly was, can, despite their flaws, by their art alone inspire tens of thousands of young people to join the struggle to liberate human kind from oppression and drudgery, no mean feat in itself.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Heralds of the Revolution

By Keith Flett.

September has seen the rerelease of much of the Beatles catalogue in a remastered format, the mono box-set selling out its first pressing at £170 a time, and a game based on the ex-group. For musicians who released their last new record almost 40 years ago this is an achievement, of sorts.

Arguably more interesting is the 40th anniversary of the release of the last album the Beatles recorded - Abbey Road on September 26. It was not actually the last new Beatles record to be released - the earlier Let It Be appeared in 1970.

Abbey Road contains George Harrison's classic ballad Something and its B side Come Together, which foremost Beatles critic the late Ian MacDonald argued was the song that marked the beginning of the downfall of Western civilisation.

MacDonald was not entirely joking either, since in his book Revolution In The Head he spends several pages justifying how the structure of the track fits with the cultural relativism of the late 1960s.

He argued that Come Together was the "key song" of the late 1960s, a "pivotal moment" which has "since undermined the intellectual foundations of Western culture."

I've always liked Come Together, also a favourite of Beatles producer George Martin, and the song is used in the advertising for the remastered Beatles records, but these claims seem somewhat overblown and still leave the question of whether we can associate the Beatles with the left.

John Lennon post-Beatles is another matter. Whatever we think of Imagine songs like Working Class Hero and the album Sometime in New York City - not currently available incidentally - were unashamedly of the political left.

But what of the Beatles from the early 1960s to 1970?

In an interview with New Left Review editors Tariq Ali and Robin Blackburn in 1971, Lennon argued that the Beatles were working class lads who didn't like authority and the police but found themselves ill-prepared for fame and wealth.

Even so he notes that Harrison and himself over-ruled the group's then manager Brian Epstein on their last US tour and spoke out against the Vietnam war.

Recently Paul McCartney has argued that, through contacts with Bertrand Russell, he was the first Beatle to raise the issue.

Certainly McCartney was interested in progressive and avant garde ideas in art but, as Lennon noted, the group turned in 1966 and '67 towards mysticism in an effort to discover if there was more to life than money.

Lennon in particular turned back to politics and the alternative culture of the late 1960s and this was reflected in his music.

That did not make either him or the Beatles automatically left wing, but it certainly meant that they were open to the ideas of the left and in a way that has not always been the case for well-known groups since.

The debate about the versions of the Beatles song Revolution, where Lennon variously sings that he wants to be counted in or counted out of revolutionary politics - he had in mind in particular late 1960s versions of Western Maoism - is well known. He was unsure whether violent confrontation or a late-1960s hippy-style love involving hirsuteness and drugs was the best way to change the world. Those in power continue to pursue the first alternative 40 years on and the second is now out of fashion.

At least in the 1971 interview Lennon had particular praise for the Morning Star, noting that he kept on reading it to see if there was any hope, although he went on to suggest that he was not sure there was.

Cartoon of the week: No platform for Fascists.

First published here.

Tories, Lib-Dems and Blue Labour, are in competition to decide which of them will inflict the most pain on the British people.

If we weren’t witnessing it with our own eyes, it would be difficult to believe the three largest political parties in the UK, if they carry on as they are, will enter the next general election campaign with a bidding war as to which of them will make the biggest cuts to  public services and welfare benefits. In other word the Tories, Lib-Dems and Blue Labour, will be in competition to decide which of them will inflict the most pain on the people of the UK. That the UK electorate seem quiet comfortable with this, points to the fact they have become so demoralized and disillusioned with politics and become so in awe of the mass media, they are prepared to put up with almost any thing from those who represent them politically, even if it goes against their best interest.

As a recent correspondent to the Guardians letters page wrote,

“The world seems to have taken leave of its senses and be living in a world of make-believe foisted on it by a conspiracy of Banks, politicians and media.” “Tax payers are being asked to forget that their taxes are meant to fund public services and not fund loans to banks The fiscal hole is a result of these loans, not of any ‘irresponsible overfunding’ of public services.” *

All three of the party leaders, Cameron, Clegg and Brown, without a hint of embarrassment have been touring the TV studios, telling the electorate that the whole country must make sacrifices. Never mind only a few months ago they were telling us the purpose of pouring billions of pounds of tax payers coin into the coffers of privately owned banks, was to prevent societal pain. Not share it out with 95% of the population, including those least able to afford it. Whilst excluding from any responsibility those who were actually responsible for the banking system almost going belly up.

A couple of weeks ago I walked across Westminster Bridge, half way across, having set up their pitch on the pavement, a group of con artists were dragging in punters to wager there hard earn cash on ‘find the lady.’  Their plant in the crowd strode up and placed a fifty pound note on the tricksters box, who then made a palaver about accepting a bet of that size, but accept it he did and though and behold the man won. Now there cannot be many people in the world who do not understand ‘find the lady’ is a confidence trick, but people still pushed their way to the front, seemingly oblivious that they were about to be fleeced. After taking £200 in less than a minute, the plant shouted “cops” and the shysters retreated across the bridge in the direction of the Westminster parliament; which I thought was very apt.

Because within that august building, there are men and women who make these 'find the lady' tricksters look like amateurs at their game. Cameron, Brown, Clegg and their minions, are all prattling on about a black hole in the nations finances, which is absolute balderdash, as only a few months ago, far from pouring billions of pounds down a black hole that came out at a cashpoint in Monte Carlo or some former Soviet Republic. We were told the government, supported by the opposition, had made substantial investments in the Banking system, which due to sub prime, etc, had cash flow problems. These Banks we are now told, are back on an even keel to such an extent the sharks who ‘man’ them, are up to their old tricks and once again paying themselves exorbitant bonuses.

All three of the party leaders have started talking up the green shoot of economic recovery, so where is the problem, why the rush to make massive cuts in the welfare state. ‘The government’ in the not to distant future should be able to privatize the investments they have made in the Banking system; and in all probability they may even turn a profit for the tax payers. As long as they do not repeat the corrupt practices of the Thatcher years when her government began the process of privatizing the UKs crown jewels.

It is here I return to the confidence tricksters, it is becoming increasingly clear for the Tories, the old political adage, ‘never waste a crisis’ is being brought into play and David Cameron is hoping to achieve what Thatcher and Blair were unable to do, destroy the British welfare state, which was painstakingly erected brick by brick by the organized working class in tandem with the Labour governments which periodically held power in the three decades that followed WW2. 

Blue Labour, never a party to stand against the tabloid herd once it has got up a head of steam, has inexplicable followed the Tories lead and Brown now has his minions burning the midnight oil to find ways to cut the welfare state to the bone. Something which if successful, would wipe away the only worth while legacy of Gordon Brown, Sure Start, pension credit increases for OAP and the Disabled and the refunding of the NHS.

With the government and now opposition, so obviously pulling a three card trick on the people of the UK, one would have thought there would be anger and outrage stalking the land, but there is not, people are acting just like those who are fleeced by the ‘find a lady’ tricksters. They are refusing to believe what is before their eyes and by the time the penny drops, the shit will have already hit the fan and splattered all over them.

Cameron is banking the electorate will fail to wake up and smell the coffee before the next general election? One can only hope he is mistaken in this, but if he is not; and the Tories are elected; and these proposed cuts to the welfare state become a reality, the outlook for millions of people in the UK looks grim. For not only will the cuts reduce demand, as people find they have even less money to spend, thus provoking an even deeper recession, but this time, with the Welfare State safety net withdrawn, the victims of the recession will crash to the ground with a heavy thud; and the country will erupt with a rage and anger not seen for generations.

* Penelope Newsome, The Guardian letters page, 19.09.09.


** Cartoon above first published here,

Obituary: Juan Almeida Bosque: Revolutionary soldier, writer, politician

Juan Almeida was one of the 80 or so revolutionaries who had arrived on Cuba's shoreline in December 1956 after a year in Mexico planning the campaign. They had spent a nausea-inducing week at sea on the heavily overladen boatGranma, which had been built for a dozen people.

After three days on dry land they were confronted by troops loyal to Batista, and the ensuing fight cut down the majority of Castro's men. With only a handful left alive, revolutionary legend has it, Almeida rallied his side with the battle cry: "Nobody here is going to surrender!"

It was a crucial moment. Castro and Almeida survived to flee to the Sierra Maestra mountains and launch the revolution proper. With just a dozen or so men at their side, dreams of overthrowing the CIA-backed Batista still hung by a thread. But over the next two years they established a base, winning the sympathies of many locals and raiding army compounds to bolster their paltry supplies of weapons and ammunition.

The ranks of the uprising were swollen not just by peasants attracted by Castro's mantra of land redistribution, but also by students from Cuba's cities, and even deserters from the ranks of Batista's forces. Despite this progress, the revolutionary forces remained vastly outnumbered.

Thousands of soldiers combed the Sierra Maestra in an attempt to eliminate the guerrillas, who numbered only a few hundred. But heavy-handed tactics, including torture and executions, turned disaffected Cubans against Batista's forces. By 1958 the ragtag bunch which had barely escaped with a single member alive a year earlier was beginning to establish itself as a more cohesive force. Meanwhile, American support for Batista was waning.

Suddenly the revolution had turned from the dream of a few straggle-bearded student types into a more mainstream movement. Dozens of organisations, many representing the middle-class professions, came out to support what was known as the July 26 Movement (one early, if catastrophically ill-conceived, attack had taken place on July 26 1953).

Almeida was appointed Commander and head of the Santiago Column of the Revolutionary Army and, having survived a huge army operation in July 1958 which came close to capturing or killing the revolutionary leadership, Castro and his men finally felt confident enough to leave their mountain stronghold and take the battle to Batista-controlled metropolitan centres. Almeida was in charge of one front as, sweeping down from the mountains, they inflicted a series of defeats on government troops, until, on New Year's Day 1959, Batista fled the country. Almeida, with Che Guevara and Castro, entered Havana unopposed.

Juan Almeida Bosque was born in a poor quarter of Havana on February 17 1927, a black boy in a society where skin tone mattered greatly. He was forced to take odd construction jobs while a child to help make ends meet. None the less, he went to the University of Havana to read Law. It was there, in 1952, that he fell in with a fellow law student, Fidel Castro, and pledged himself to the movement to topple Batista, who had taken power in a coup that year.

A year later he was part of the first direct attack on the dictatorship. With the Castro brothers (Fidel and Raúl), he and about 160 others attacked the Moncada barracks in order to seize the weapons stored there. Launched on July 26 1953, the attack was a farce, as Castro's men became separated from one another. More than 60 were killed; many others were captured and jailed.

Almeida, along with both Castro brothers, was imprisoned on the Isla de la Juventud until the Moncada rebels were amnestied in May 1955. The revolutionary leaders then based themselves in Mexico to plot a more competent campaign.

After Castro rode into Havana in early January 1959, Almeida was named a General of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba. As the postrevolutionary administration took shape, he wielded significant influence and was appointed, in 1966, to the Cuban Communist Party Central Committee and Political Bureau.

By then, according to a recent book, he had survived implication in a plot to overthrow Fidel Castro, having received significant sums of money from the CIA, which had also, it is alleged, spirited his family to safety.

It seems to have been decided that such rumours were part of a campaign to create discord within the Cuban government, and Almeida survived. In 1976 he was elected to the National Assembly of People's Power, one of a series of important posts he occupied.

Almeida announced that he was winding down his political career in 2003, owing to heart problems. In his spare time he enjoyed writing, and also composing songs – by the end he had produced more than 300 compositions. "I listened with pleasure to some of his songs," noted Fidel Castro, "especially that one of impassioned emotion which, in response to the homeland's call for 'victory or death', bids farewell to human dreams."

At the time of his death on September 11, Juan Almeida Bosque was one of only three surviving Commanders of the Revolution. The other two are the revolutionary veterans Guillermo Garcia, 81, and Ramiro Valdes, aged 77.

"I was a privileged witness to his exemplary conduct for more than half a century of heroic and victorious resistance, in the struggle against the internationalist missions and the resistance to the imperialist blockade," Castro said after Almeida's death. "Let us not say that Almeida has died! He is more alive today than ever!"

First published here, http://bit.ly/13GkFB

Far from protecting us and our children, the war on drugs is making the world a much more dangerous place.

The latest edition of the New Scientist magazine has a feature that considers the ‘ten most radical ideas for transforming society and changing the way countries are run'. One of them is the legalization and regulation of illicit drugs which I republish below. The article is timely as a number of South American countries, despite US governmental fury, have followed the example of Portugal and recently decriminalized the possession of drugs for personal use. Plus the UK National Addiction Centre will report today on its  findings from a pilot study which provided pharmaceutical heroin to long term chronic addicts.

These comparatively minor, although welcomed events, have once again unleashed the media attack dogs, which are set to work when any rational attempt is made to open up a national debate around the legalization of illicit narcotics. The purpose being is to panic those whose responsibility it is to pick up the debris of prohibition, and to force them to retreat back under their prohibition comfort blanket, having concluded it is impossible in the UK to have a rational public debate about the ending of the prohibition of illicit drugs or even around a more civilized method of treating those who have become addicted to narcotics. 

This week alone the Daily Mail, the Independent and the Guardian published articles that displayed the utmost ignorance and bigotry about the impact of prohibition. The Guardian ran a header over its peace which read ‘Drug legalization is no solution-it is a disaster waiting to happen.’

It is tempting to ask what world do these people live in, but it would be a mistake to believe the media publishes such pieces out of ignorance. For the editorial staff at the Guardian are well aware due to prohibition, 5000 people in Mexico have had their lives stolen in this year alone. That Two thirds of UK prisoners are in jail for drug related offenses and our inner cities are nightly rocked by drug turf wars and countless drug addicts have lost their lives through adulterated product.

Far from protecting us and our children, the war on drugs is making the world a much more dangerous place.

MH

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SO FAR this year, about 4000 people have died in Mexico's drugs war - a horrifying toll. If only a good fairy could wave a magic wand and make all illegal drugs disappear, the world would be a better place.

Dream on. Recreational drug use is as old as humanity, and has not been stopped by the most draconian laws. Given that drugs are here to stay, how do we limit the harm they do?

The evidence suggests most of the problems stem not from drugs themselves, but from the fact that they are illegal. The obvious answer, then, is to make them legal.

The argument most often deployed in support of the status quo is that keeping drugs illegal curbs drug use among the law-abiding majority, thereby reducing harm overall. But a closer look reveals that this really doesn't stand up. In the UK, as in many countries, the real clampdown on drugs started in the late 1960s, yet government statistics show that the number of heroin or cocaine addicts seen by the health service has grown ever since - from around 1000 people per year then, to 100,000 today. It is a pattern that has been repeated the world over.

A second approach to the question is to look at whether fewer people use drugs in countries with stricter drug laws. In 2008, the World Health Organization looked at 17 countries and found no such correlation. The US, despite its punitive drug policies, has one of the highest levels of drug use in the world.

A third strand of evidence comes from what happens when a country softens its drug laws, as Portugal did in 2001. While dealing remains illegal in Portugal, personal use of all drugs has been decriminalized. The result? Drug use has stayed roughly constant, but ill health and deaths from drug taking have fallen. "Judged by virtually every metric, the Portuguese decriminalization framework has been a resounding success," states a recent report by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC.

By any measure, making drugs illegal fails to achieve one of its primary objectives. But it is the unintended consequences of prohibition that make the most compelling case against it. Prohibition fuels crime in many ways: without state aid, addicts may be forced to fund their habit through robbery, for instance, while youngsters can be drawn into the drugs trade as a way to earn money and status. In countries such as Colombia and Mexico, the profits from illegal drugs have spawned armed criminal organizations whose resources rival those of the state. Murder, kidnapping and corruption are rife.

Making drugs illegal also makes them more dangerous. The lack of access to clean needles for drug users who inject is a major factor in the spread of lethal viruses such as HIV and hepatitis C.

So what's the alternative? There are several models for the legal provision of recreational drugs. They include prescription by doctors, consumption at licensed premises or even sale on a similar basis to alcohol and tobacco, with health warnings and age limits. If this prospect appals you, consider the fact that in the US today, many teenagers say it is easier to buy cannabis than beer. 

Taking any drug - including alcohol and nicotine - does have health risks, but a legal market would at least ensure that the substances people ingest or inject are available unadulterated and at known dosages. Much of the estimated $300 billion earned from illegal drugs worldwide, which now funds crime, corruption and environmental destruction , could support legitimate jobs.  And instead of spending tens of billions enforcing prohibition, governments would gain income from taxes that could be spent on medical treatment for the small proportion of users who become addicted or whose health is otherwise harmed.

Unfortunately, the idea that banning drugs is the best way to protect vulnerable people - especially children - has acquired a strong emotional grip, one that politicians are happy to exploit. For many decades, laws and public policy have flown in the face of the evidence. Far from protecting us, this approach has made the world a much more dangerous place than it need be.

Cartoon of the week.

First published in Socialist Worker

Obituary of Darren Sutherland: A young sportsman who died whilst at the top of his game.

This is the first obituary of a sportsman I have published at Organized Rage, I have done so for a number of reasons. In todays backbiting world we often over look the joy such sports people bring into are lives. Whilst scum are overloaded with public honors and wealth many professional sports men and women are consigned in there prime to return to the world of mundane toil, believing the best years of their lives are behind them. This is especially true of professional boxers, whether the sport in a civilized society should be banned I will leave for another day, although to its credit Cuba has managed to do this successfully and the 'art' of boxing has continued to flourish. 

The reasons that lay behind the death of Darren Sutherland are yet to be told, whatever they were, for a young man to die whilst at the top of his game is tragic, and all one can do is pass on condolences to his friends and family and be thankful the young fellow crossed our path.

MH

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Irish professional boxer on track to secure a world title.

By John Rawlings.

Darren Sutherland, who has been found by his manager Frank Maloney hanged in his flat in south-east London, was one of Irish boxing's brightest prospects in the professional sport, having joined the paid ranks after winning an Olympic middleweight bronze medal in Beijing last year. He was only 27, and many had predicted that he had the ability to go all the way to a world title.

Born in Dublin to an Irish mother and West Indian father, Sutherland moved to London as a child before relocating to the island of St Vincent. His accent still reflected the years he spent growing up in the Caribbean, although he would ultimately return to Navan, in County Meath, while training and boxing in Dublin, the city he regarded as home. 

Nicknaming himself "The Dazzler", Sutherland was viewed as one of the outstanding performers in Beijing, where he lost in the semi-final to Britain's James DeGale, who went on to take the gold medal. While DeGale was snapped up by the English promoter Frank Warren, some shrewd judges suggested Warren's rival Maloney may have got the better deal when he persuaded the Irishman to commit his future to his management and promotional skills. 

Despite being 26 when he made his professional debut, relatively old to make the switch from the amateurs, Sutherland had been well schooled. As well as his years with the Irish national squad, he had trained in Sheffield with Brendan Ingle, the wise guiding force behind such diverse talents as Naseem Hamed, Johnny Nelson and Junior Witter, who had all become professional world champions. When he signed with Maloney, his training was overseen by the respected London trainer Brian Lawrence.

"He was an absolute diamond to work with, a joy, and he had so much talent," said Lawrence. He added that Sutherland had suffered a rapid physical and emotional decline in the past two weeks, and had been due to see a specialist about his depression.

Former three-weight world champion Duke McKenzie said he believed Sutherland could have gone on to become a star, emulating the likes of Barry McGuigan and Steve Collins, who became household names in their homeland and beyond as they won world titles. "Of all the fighters who came back to the British Isles with medals, I thought he was the best," said McKenzie. 

Sutherland had won three senior Irish amateur titles while fighting out of the St Saviour's Amateur Boxing Club in Dublin. He was viewed as accommodating and accessible by those around him, and had earlier rejected numerous offers to turn pro to pursue his dream of winning an Olympic gold medal.

Regarded as the major personality of the Irish team in Beijing, Sutherland enjoyed a success that earned him national renown. He made his professional debut amid considerable public interest in Dublin last year, where he spoke of his wish to fight for the Irish title. All four of his wins had been scored by stoppage, and he had been scheduled to make his next appearance in the ring next month in Sunderland. 

Maloney collapsed after finding the body of his fighter, and is receiving hospital treatment for a minor heart attack.

• Darren John Sutherland, boxer, born 18 April 1982; died 14 September 2009

First published here.  

Stieg Larsson: The revolutionary who kicked the hornet’s nest and became a best selling author.

I recently enjoyed watching the Swedish TV adaption of the crime novels written by Henning Mankell, which feature the detective, Inspector Wallander.* It seems the genre of the detective novel is highly popular in Sweden; and Mankell’s great rival there was Stieg Larsson, whose trilogy of novels have sold over 14 million copies worldwide, and like Mankell’s Wallander, are also to be adapted for Swedish TV. The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest, the last of the three book trilogy is due to be published in the UK on October 1st.

The key to Stieg Larsson books is class privilege and arrogance, justice and revenge. I new little about the authors and I was pleasantly surprised to read in a recent article by Nick Cohen of Stieg Larsson background as a socialist and anti fascist activist, although sadly he died aged 50 in 2004. 

I realize many on the left now regard Nick Cohen as little better than a heretic, due to his inexplicable support for the ‘War on Terror.’ I can understand this attitude somewhat, as there is little doubt, when people like Cohen and Hitchings became cheer leaders for the criminal invasion of Iraq, they willingly allowed themselves to be conscripted by Bush/Blair to gain support for the war effort, and by doing so they placed themselves firmly in the camp of the enemy. However it will be a poor day in hell when we socialists can only admire and enjoy the work of those who agree with us politically and at times I still get pleasure from reading Mr Cohen’s columns. 

Before become a best selling author Stieg Larsson had edited Fjärde Internationalen, the journal of the Swedish section of the Trotskyist Fourth International, he was also a co-founder of the Swedish anti Nazi/racist Expo Foundation, similar to the British Searchlight Foundation, and was a hate figure for the Swedish far right.

To say this gives him an unusual biography for a best selling writer would be an understatement, but it is great to see that a good guy can win through. You can read Nick Cohen’s article in full here.

* The BBC has also adapted some of the Wallander novels, but in my view even with subtitles, Swedish, TV is closer to the books.

Cuban revolutionary Juan Almeida dies.

Cuban revolutionary Almeida dies

Almeida (top right) was among the victorious revolutionaries in 1959 One of the original protagonists of the Cuban revolution, Juan Almeida Bosque, has died of heart failure at the age of 82, according to state media. Almeida was one of several vice-presidents in the Council of State under Raul Castro. He was the only black commander in the Cuban leadership. From a poor Havana neighbourhood, Almeida was in the group of guerrillas led by Fidel Castro which eventually seized power in Cuba in 1959. He went on to become a general in the armed forces, a member of the politburo of the Communist Party and the third-ranking member in the Council of State.  Here, nobody surrenders!  Slogan from the revolutionary struggle attributed to Almeida State-run media announced his death, declaring he would remain "in the hearts and minds of his compatriots". Sunday has been declared a national day of mourning, and flags will be flown at half-mast. There will be no lying-in-state, in accordance with Almeida's wishes. He will be given a military funeral at a later date. Granma A former construction worker, Almeida participated in the failed 1953 assault on the Moncada military barracks in Santiago de Cuba, and was among those sent to jail. Almeida could often be seen at the side of Fidel and Raul Castro Following an amnesty, the rebels were released and in 1956 they went to Mexico to regroup and prepare for a fresh assault. Almeida was on board the Granma boat when it sailed back to Cuba carrying the small group of fighters that would launch the insurrectionary campaign from the Sierra Maestra mountains. He was promoted to the rank of commander during the mountain campaign. Outnumbered in one of the early battles, Juan Almeida is said to have stormed to the front shouting, "Here, nobody surrenders!" It became a slogan of the revolution. First published here.