Labor's Gotta Play Hardball to Win!
Showdown on West Coast Docks: The Battle
of Longview
(November 2011).
click on photo for article
Chicago Plant Occupation Electrifies Labor
(December 2008).
click on photo for article
May Day Strike Against the War Shuts
Down
U.S. West Coast Ports
(May 2008)
click on photo for article
|
October 2013
Liberal Democrat
NYC Mayoral Candidate Won’t End “Stop and Frisk,”
Charters or Privatization of Public Education
Despite the
Hype, de Blasio
Will Be “Bloomberg Lite”
By Class Struggle Education
Workers/UFT
In the upcoming November 6 New York City mayoral
elections, Democrat Bill de Blasio is sure to clobber
Republican Joe Lhota. With polls currently giving de
Blasio a 45-point lead (78% to 23%), in a city where
registered Democrats outnumber Republicans six-to-one, the
outcome is a foregone conclusion. De Blasio has mounted a
liberal campaign, calling to raise taxes on the rich (by
less than 1%) and criticizing the New York Police
Department’s “stop and frisk” tactics as racial profiling,
while Lhota has run a race-baiting, red-baiting,
fear-mongering campaign appealing to conservative
billionaires and Tea Party reactionaries. With the
prospect of an end to 20 years of Republican mayors,
liberals, labor bureaucrats and quite a few would-be
leftists are gaga for Bill.
De Blasio has made his campaign theme the “Tale of Two
Cities,” one for the super-rich and another for those
struggling to make ends meet. For his part, on primary
night, Lhota said the campaign would highlight “two
completely different visions for the future of our city.” The media has
pitched the contest as the “unapologetic liberal” versus
the “hardnosed conservative.” One banker labeled the
prospect of de Blasio as mayor “terrifying.” At a
diamond-studded September 11 charity gala of wealthy
patrons at the Waldorf-Astoria honoring Michael Bloomberg,
a guest cried out, “Mayor Bloomberg should be mayor
forever!” (New York
Times, 11 September). But in reality, the contrast
is not nearly so sharp. A Mayor de Blasio promises to
be Bloomberg lite.
An alarmed editorial in the Wall Street Journal
(29 October), “Occupy City Hall,” shuddered that “New York
voters are about to elect the Occupy movement to run
America's largest city.” Perish the thought. But if the
voice of the titans of high finance endorsed Lhota, the
ultra-establishment New York Times (27 October),
which backed Bloomberg all three times he ran, came out
for “Bill Blasio for Mayor.” To those who have “already
anointed him leader of a national rebirth of left-wing
populism,” the Times retorted, “Hold on.” The de
Blasio it was supporting was “someone to sustain and build
on the 12-year legacy of Michael Bloomberg,” and “never
mind the revolution.”
After campaigning for various competing
Democrats in the primary (UFT, Teamsters 237, TWU 100 for
Thompson; AFSCME DC 37 and DC 1707 for Liu; RWDSU and 32BJ
SEIU FOR Quinn; 1199 SEIU, CWA 1, UNITE/HERE and PSC for
de Blasio), labor officialdom unanimously embraced the
Democratic primary winner. That would be no surprise, as
the union bureaucracy chains the ranks to the phony
“friends of labor” Democrats, except that the UFT tops
adopted a position of pro-Bloomberg neutrality the last
two times around. (Lot of good it did them.) But the
reformist oppositionists in the teachers union also look
favorably on de Blasio, although some are wary to say so
out loud as it would expose their pseudo-socialist
pretensions.
In contrast, Class Struggle Education Workers and the
Internationalist Group tell the bitter truth: neither
candidate in this election defends the interests of the
poor and working people who make this city run, of the
African Americans, Latinos, Asians and immigrants who are
the targets of racist repression. Democrats and
Republicans both defend the interests of capital. And if
Bill de Blasio could be portrayed as the candidate of
Occupy Wall Street, that is only because that populist
movement, when it demanded anything at all, at most sought
minor reforms to capitalism rather than to replace the
dictatorship of finance capital with the rule of those it
exploits and oppresses.
The wide
support for de Blasio, who at first was dismissed by the
professional pundits as an “unelectable liberal,” stems
from the fact that millions of working people are hurting
badly and fed up with a mayor and government of, by and
for the plutocrats. Even by government statistics,
unemployment in New York City is over 15%, the poverty
rate is over 20% and rising while incomes for the bottom
half of the population are falling. Despite a huge public
outcry, the racial profiling by the NYPD and attacks on
the public schools by the Department of Education continue
unabated. But all the Democratic candidate proposes to do
is to tweak the Bloomberg policies to make them a little
less blatantly offensive.
Income gap? Not enough says the current mayor (whose net
worth soared from $3 billion to $31 billion during his 12
years in office), claiming it would be a “godsend” if “we
could get every billionaire in the world to move here.”
Racial profiling? Bloomberg wants more. Although 87% of
those “stopped and frisked” by the police are blacks and
Latinos, he says they “stop whites too much and minorities
too little.” If working-class residents of the “outer
boroughs” are trapped by snowstorms of inundated by
floods, the CEO of NYC tells them to kick back and watch
TV (if they have power, that is) or take in a Broadway
show (if they can shovel their way out). The race and
class arrogance of this would-be master of the universe is
boundless.
Republican Joe Lhota, who after leaving the Giuliani
administration was a highly paid gofer for the Dolan
family (owners of Madison Square Garden and Cablevision),
has promised more of the same. He accuses de Blasio of
waging “class warfare,” of being a “Marxist” and
Sandinista, referring to a stint the future Democratic
candidate did in the 1980s working for the Jesuits’
Quixote Center delivering food, clothing and medical
supplies to Nicaragua. (Just imagine what wannabe contra
Lhota would have said if de Blasio had worked with the
Maryknolls!) Meanwhile Lhota’s attack ads on TV are
blatant racial fear-mongering, talking about “wilding,”
the phrase used to frame up the innocent black youths who
due to media hysteria and racist police coercion unjustly
spent years in jail in the 1989 rape of the Central Park
jogger.
Photo:
New York Post
What turned the mayoral race around by all accounts. and
what distinguished de Blasio from the other Democratic
contenders, was his TV ad against “stop and frisk”
featuring his son Dante. While the media chatter is all
about his (now presidentially sanctioned) afro hairstyle,
what grabbed people is that they could see that Dante was
precisely the kind of young black man that the cops would
go after. The victims of racist stop and frisk were no
longer nameless and faceless. Meanwhile, most of other
Democrats were tiptoeing around the issue, talking of
modifying it. Yet the only Democratic candidate who said
he would actually stop “stop and frisk” was John Liu, but
he couldn’t get past the campaign finance issue.
The fact is that Bill de Blasio is NOT, repeat NOT,
calling to end the policy of cops wantonly stopping black
and Latino young men on the street. Instead, he explicitly
says “Stop and frisk is a valid police tool.” His platform
only calls for “meaningful stop-and-frisk reforms.”
Meaning what, exactly? Meaning that he will sign a City
Council bill against racial profiling and call on the NYPD
to “reduce unwarranted stops.” Yet the job of the police
is to enforce racist “law and order.” In fact, the entire
policy is a flagrant violation of the Fourth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution banning “unreasonable searches and
seizures.” Any serious opponent of racism and defender
civil liberties must demand an end to all random
police stops and entrapment.
The question of the police is a perfect example of what
the Democratic candidate actually stands for. He calls for
“community policing,” “focused deterrence” and for
“increasing the number of Argus cameras — particularly in
high-crime areas in the outer boroughs.” So he wants to
blanket the projects in East New York or the South Bronx
with police surveillance cameras like they have done to
Lower Manhattan. De Blasio praises his role in enacting
the “Safe Streets, Safe City” initiative in the Dinkins
administration which “significantly expanded the number of
NYPD officers on the streets,” and calls for putting 500
more cops on the streets today by taking them off of
civilian duties. This is a program for more focused racist
repression, not to end it.
Class Struggle Education Workers, Internationalist Group
and CUNY Internationalist Clubs at protest in East
Flatbush, Brooklyn, March 24, protesting police murder of
Kimani Gray. (Internationalist
photo)
Similarly with de Blasio’s education policies. He does
NOT call for an end to privately run “charter” schools or
to school closures, only for a temporary pause
(moratorium) and opposing “unfair” shutdowns. He calls for
charging rent to charters “co-located” in public schools,
and for “increasing parental engagement and communication
in the co-location process,” instead of opposing and
undoing this practice which has caused endless disruption
in the service of a program of privatizing public
education. So after holding off for awhile and charging
them a token lease, Eva Moskowitz and her ilk will still
be able to go about their wrecking operation on the public
schools.
In fact, the future Democratic mayor SUPPORTS mayoral
control which has done so much damage to New York
City’s public schools, he only spouts empty phrases about
“involving and listening to parents.” Meaning what,
exactly? Meaning he would “allow Community Education
Councils an advisory vote on major school utilization
changes” and to “provide insight to the Panel for
Education Policy (PEP).” Big deal. Those of us who defend
public education in the interests of working people oppose
mayoral control lock, stock and barrel, we call for
abolition of the puppet PEP and for the schools
to be governed by councils of teachers, students,
parents and workers, which would decide on such
issues as school closures.
De Blasio recognizes that “unfair suspensions and arrests
to solve minor student behavior” are used to
“disproportionately hurt students of color and students
with disabilities.” But what is his answer? A “Graduated
Response Protocol” prior to arrests. So students will
still be marched out of school in handcuffs, the police
will just “conference” with principals first. The CSEW
demands: cops out of the schools. De Blasio calls
to “improve school transportation,” but he doesn’t say a
word about the Bloomberg administration bidding criteria
aimed at breaking the school bus workers’ union and
replacing qualified drivers and matrons. The CSEW (unlike
the reformist oppositions in the UFT) went all out to
support the school bus workers strike earlier this year.
Sure, Democratic candidate de Blasio wants universal
pre-K, as do Democratic president Obama and Democratic
governor Cuomo. Sure, but hardly cutting-edge: ever since
Head Start was begun in the 1960s it has been shown that
pre-school programs have a major impact on education. He
wants school breakfasts more available. Of course – it’s
hard for students to learn when they’re hungry. Against
bullying and for more after-school programs. Fine, but all
this is to sidestep the fact that there is a war on
public education, against teachers and against teacher
unions, and that war is being spearheaded by the
Democratic Party, from Barack Obama on down.
As a loyal Democrat, a Mayor de Blasio will carry out
that war. He will enforce “the new teacher evaluations
mandated by the state,” which have nothing to do with
improving education and everything to do with driving out
union-conscious experienced teachers. Far from opposing
the privatization of public education, he wants to develop
“a minimum of 100 community schools” based on the model of
Harlem Children’s Zone, the charter run by millionaire
Geoffrey Canada. He wants to connect technical high
schools to a college, industry or business. This
is Obama’s campaign for corporate takeovers of schools, by
Microsoft, Motorola and Verizon in Chicago, and by the
IBM-connected P-Tech that gutted Paul Robeson HS in Crown
Heights.
Contrary to portrayals of de Blasio as a “liberal
firebrand” (New York Times), a theme which plays
well in liberal New York, de Blasio is basically a
“mainstream” Clinton Democrat (he was an official in the
Housing and Urban Development Department under Bill’s
administration and managed Hillary’s Senate campaign in
New York). Along with his populist rhetoric, he has been
cozy with real estate developers, notably Bruce Ratner,
who co-hosted de Blasio’s 50th birthday fundraiser party
and who has yet to build any of the promised affordable
housing in the Atlantic Yards boondoggle backed by de
Blasio.
Since the primary, de Blasio has been assiduously
appealing to business tycoons, saying finance is New
York’s “hometown industry.” He had a private sit-down with
media moguls Murdoch and Zuckerman, as well as with the
heads of Goldman Sachs, Viacom and other top-tier Wall
Streeters. And according to the Wall Street Journal,
de Blasio has raked in far more in campaign contributions
from big-ticket donors ($4.2 million) than has Lhota ($1.3
million).
Meanwhile, New York City public employee unions are all
pushing to “back Bill.” Almost all their contracts have
run out, as Bloomberg’s City Hall dragged its feet (and
union leaders preferred to wait for the successor to the
labor-hating mayor). The powerful Transport Workers Union
Local 100 demonstrated October 29 several thousand strong
for a new contract, and the United Federation of Teachers
(UFT) is gearing up its phone-banking operations to get
out the vote next week. But as de Blasio poses as the
classic “friend of labor” Democrat, even he is saying that
there is no way the unions will get full retroactive pay
hikes.
As for opposition currents in the unions, an October 25
posting on the ICE (Independent Community of Educators)
blog asks, “Is There Room For Optimism Under de Blasio?”
Its answer is that a letter from the Democratic candidate
to Bloomberg’s puppet PEP calling for a moratorium on
school co-locations and closures, “is cause for a little
optimism.” An earlier post (“No Tale of Two de Blasios,” 6
October) argued that “The odds of a sell out will increase
significantly if we do nothing and just sit back and wait
for de Blasio to do right by the public schools.” Since
the Democratic soon-to-be mayor supports mayoral control,
it called for recommending that he name “strong public
education activists” for the toothless PEP. Talk about
putting lipstick on a pig!
At a special UFT Delegate Assembly in September on
endorsement of a mayoral candidate following the
Democratic primary, Marjorie Stamberg, a delegate from
District 79 who is an activist of Class Struggle Education
Workers, sought to speak against endorsing Democrat de
Blasio and to call for a workers party. In the past she
has several times called to oppose any candidate with “D”
or an “R” after their name on the ballot, or indeed any
capitalist candidate. But in flagrant violation of
Robert’s Rules of Order, UFT president Michael Mulgrew
refused to allow any opposition speaker, and the motion
was rammed through, with delegates of the Movement of Rank
and File Educators (MORE) either voting for it or sitting
on their hands.
The massive discontent in the ranks of labor and among
the poor and working people which has fueled the
outpouring of support for de Blasio, as happened before
with the election of black Democrat Barack Obama in 2008,
will inevitably be frustrated. The reason is simple:
the war on the unions, on immigrants, on hard-hit African
American, Latino and Asian populations in the U.S. are the
result not of a policy or even a party, but of the
decaying capitalist system, as are the imperialist wars
waged by the U.S. in the Middle East. To confront this
onslaught, no amount of tinkering or tweaking or
“triangulating” by supposedly “progressive” capitalist
politicians will make a damn bit of difference.
We need a class-struggle workers party to fight for a
workers government, and we need it now! ■
Return to THE
INTERNATIONALIST GROUP Home Page
|