Te Whiti o Rongomai III (1830 – 1907)

Māori culture and war have often been closely entwined. After the development of horticulture and farming a “Warrior Culture” developed. This went on to become a core element of their society for the majority of time they have inhabited the islands of New Zealand. Different and competing groups of Māori often killed each other as they fought over land and resources which resulted in the enslavement or death of their enemies.

In the early 1800’s the British sought out to make New Zealand part of the vast British empire, which could more accurately be described as the “Brutish Empire”. The crown murdered many Māori and put a bounty on Māori heads – five pound for a head and ten pound for that of a chief. In 1867 the situation was dire with only 40,000 Māori surviving from the population of 85,000 only half a century prior. Māori culture was set to be crushed as they suffered huge blows fighting the better equipped Europeans, who’s population on the land was now close to half a million, and many died from new diseases brought to New Zealand from Europe.

In 1869 as a response to this a visionary Māori leader known as Te Whiti announced the year of “Trampling Underfoot”. Unsurprisingly the British took this as a sign of victory but they had no understanding of what Te Whiti was saying. The year of “Trampling Underfoot” was an announcement of resistance it was the year in which the people in power were to be humbled. He planned to get a separate treaty between Māori and Pakeha (whites), a treaty between equals. He is quoted as saying

 

 "The Pakeha have some useful technology but not the kindness of heart to see that Māori also possessed much great technology which if adopted would lead to stability, peace and a great new society."

 

He was going to achieve this without using violence. As many Pakeha were welcome to come to New Zealand but Māori would remain the proprietors of the land.

 

For ten years Māori from all over the country, and a few Pakeha, travelled to Te Whiti’s settlement/sanctuary at Parihaka, the only condition for their entry was that they destroyed all of their weapons. Te Whiti, a chief in a society that had war in its very foundations saw that violence never leads to peace. He is quoted as saying

 

"No good thing has ever been wrought by violence ... there is no reason why violence should continue to have power over us... if any man molests me I will talk with my weapon- the tongue".

Many of the Māori who came to Parihaka carried ploughs with them. All the food consumed in Parihaka was grown there so that British goods could be boycotted.

 

Ten years after Te Whiti’s announcement, on the 26^th of May 1879, Te Whiti came up with a plan of how to use the many ploughs that had been gathered at Parihaka in a great act of non-violent civil disobedience. All over the district, where Pakeha occupied Māori land that had not been disputed since its rightful owners were killed or driven-out, Māori started to plough the land. They received abuse and many death-threats but always remained calm and polite and continued to plough all day and every day. Te Whiti said

 

 "Go put your hands to the plough. Look not back. If any come with guns or with swords, be not afraid. If they smite you, smite not in return. If they rend you, be not discouraged. Another will take up the good work."

 

This is exactly what happened.

 

Settlers and the government alike did not know how to combat Te Whiti’s non-violence. Some fled, some built fortresses and trenches, and some called for a “War of Extermination” – the headline chosen by the local newspaper. Unsurprisingly the government started to arrest the ploughmen and Te Whiti sent out five more each day. Every day they would get arrested without resistance and were shipped to Dunedin where they were held without trial. As the government could see that the people of Parihaha were undeterred they sent in the army who prepared for war... however when they arrived they did not know quite how to react to Māori warriors, who had fiercely fought Pakeha columns and won, giving them gifts.

 

By 1880 the government had spent over one million pounds and the prisons were full. The media reported on the event and it turned into a national scandal. All the prisoners were released. At this point hundreds of Māori were working the reclaimed fields. In response the army finally decided to attack. They were met by the entire population of Parihaka singing and praying. Te Whiti was finally arrested. Without his leadership the movement at Parihaka continued with Māori refusing to pay taxes and launching more ploughing campaigns.

 

Te Whiti died in 1907 and was buried under a cloud of white feathers. Although Māori did not regain their land and are less than 20% of New Zealand’s population, the struggle for Tino Rangatirotanga continues to this day. The people at Parihaka whom Te Whiti inspired are credited with stopping a war of genocide that would not have stopped until all Māori had died. He had a huge influence on the thoughts and actions of Mahatma Gandhi who read about him while in South Africa.

 

Te Whiti is a person to look up to and we must follow in his footsteps until all of the oppressed, all over the world are liberated.

 

J.Llewellyn   

Radio 1 and VSM

Dunedin’s Radio 1 was told in early July that there were recommendations for its sale, in bureaucratic terms, a recommendation is more of a threat than an option. OUSA had taken a decision without any consultation, neither the students nor the radio station were contacted until the announcement was made. It was a shock to everyone in Planet Media, the umbrella company that controls Critic and the iconic student radio station. According to Sean Norling, producer of Radio 1, the decision has no taken into account the interests or desires of the students. It also sets a precedent though.

Radio 1 and all other student services are being attacked as a product of the threat VSM poses. The Voluntary Student Membership Bill was drafted by ACT initially in 2005 but it wasn’t drawn into parliament until 2008. Heather Roy says tertiary students are “forced to join an organisation and pay the fees that they set.”# For this reason ACT is seeking to amend the Education Act of 1989 to “uphold students’ right to freedom of association”#. Currently all university students except those at the University of Auckland are automatically enrolled into their respective student unions and in exchange receive representation and services, ranging from counselling and advice, to entertainment and interest groups.

ACT is hiding behind a façade of democracy, saying their bill would allow students to have a choice, however the introduction of VSM would actually lead up to a forecasted 90% reduction in membership. At the end of the day this would mean less funding and, as a result, students associations could disappear altogether and with them all the benefits one gets from being part of the student union. ACT says it “does not seek to damage or limit students associations.”# Its bill though would do exactly that. In Australia, VSM lead to “closure of health, counselling, employment, childcare, welfare and academic advocacy services.”# The universities were forced to take over the services hitherto provided by the students associations; fees increased dramatically meaning fewer students had the chance to attend tertiary education and those who could were getting worse services and were less protected against fee rises than previously.

OUSA contacted financial advisers Deloitte. The audit the company made recommended the sale of Radio 1, saying the station is economically unviable- a fact disputed by the Radio 1 staff. Who it can be sold to is a mystery, as it is a non-profit organisation and the buyer would be obliged to accept the charter attached to the non-commercial 91 fm bandwave. What’s more worrying than any potential buyers though, is the fact that OUSA can sell off services without having to consult its members. This is why Sean Norling considers OUSA undemocratic, and serious constitutional changes need to be made. If not, OUSA will be able to get rid of other important services such as the food bank, Clubs and Socs, Unipol or Queer support. Students should be able to have an active voice in OUSA, especially when it comes to decisions that affect them. If any service is to be removed from the students, we should be given a chance to hear the debate behind the brick wall and we should be given the chance to express our opinion on the issue- what is democracy about otherwise?

Radio 1 turned its dials to the pop music currently around for a week after the decision was anounced as a form of protest. Whether you like current music or not is not the issue, the issue is that without Radio 1 we will not have the choice of music and the rising talent currently in Dunedin and in New Zealand. Radio 1 is an alternative radio station, with its speakers booming the songs volunteers choose. Because Radio 1 is a student radio station, run by the students, with local music, giving ample opportunity for the diversity of expression existant in Otago. Losing Radio 1 would constitute a loss of culture and identity, it would also set a precedent: OUSA will prove itself to be an undemocratic institution, unconcerned with the people it represents and the people it affects.

OGNA supports all protest action taken by Radio 1, the symbolic switch off of its programing that took place between the 3rd and 9th of July is an effective form of protest that clearly achieved its goal: to get people talking. Right now though we need people acting, signing petitions, demanding their fair say. Democracy is at stake.

D. F. Benson-Guiu

Woman and Non-Violent Action in Africa: Two stories of success!

Liberia, 2003: Ordinary women end extraordinary violence.

Women Protest In Liberia

The West-African nation of Liberia has a history of fighting for people rights and freedoms. It was founded by freed American slaves and the country’s coat of arms declares, “The love of liberty brought me here.”

Despite this fantastic start for the nation recent decades have been far less hopeful with corrupt government and drug-fueled militias run by warlords raping and killing where ever they pleased without repercussions. This comes after years of imperialist struggle to grab diamonds and other raw materials which has left Liberia 176^th out 179 countries on the United Nation Human Development Index. Hundreds of thousands fled. Others were trapped by the unending violence, unable to flee. As one Liberian woman later remembered, “My children had been hungry and afraid for their entire lives.”

In the first few months of 2003, a group of women decided to try to end the conflict once and for all. Dressed all in white, hundreds of them sat by the roadside, on the route taken daily by President Charles Taylor, rebel leader-turned-president. The president’s motorcade swept past, slowing down only briefly. But the women returned, day after day. In pouring rain and blazing sunshine alike, they danced and prayed. The protests gained momentum; Religious leaders spoke out in support of the women’s demands. Radio stations began reporting sympathetically on the roadside protests. A protest leader, declared in front of the cameras, “We are tired of our children being raped. We are taking this stand because we believe tomorrow our children will ask us: ‘Mama, what was your role during the crisis?’”

Pressed on all sides, Taylor agreed to talk. He met with the women’s leaders in the presidential palace. Peace talks began but it soon became clear that the talks were going nowhere. Even as the warlords basked in the comfort of their luxury hotel, they worked the phones, directing a renewed orgy of violence at home in the Liberian capital, Monrovia. The women decided that enough was enough. Determined to focus on the human cost of the war, they barricaded delegates into the room where the talks were taking place. One of the negotiators, Nigerian General Abdulsalami Abubakar, remembered later: “They said that nobody will come out till that peace agreement was signed.” One warlord tried unsuccessfully to kick his way out of the room. Others tried (and failed) to escape through the windows.

The men with guns agreed to talk seriously at last. A peace deal was struck and Charles Taylor went into exile. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf became Liberia’s first peacefully elected president, Africa’s first woman leader. It was ordinary Liberians who reclaimed the country and demanded peace. Even though this movement was never aimed at creating a socialist society, it is a great example of what can be achieved using non-violent action. Non-Violent organizations are needed to work as leaders in these movements, link all struggles around the to build a mass movement which will lead to equality and democracy.

Kenya, 2009: No sex without peace: Women unite in a nationwide bedroom strike.

The Prime Minister's wife even participated in the sex strike.

This is a more recent example of Non-violent action. I am sure that Aristophanes never intended his Lysistrata story to be taken literally. His play was a satire, a way of pressing for an end to the death and destruction of the long-running Peloponnesian War in Greece in the 5th century BCE. The story played with an obviously unthinkable idea: that women, by withholding their consent to sex, could do something to end a brutal conflict. Two thousand years later, Lysistrata has achieved a real-life momentum of its own.

In Kenya in 2009, many feared a renewal of the post-election violence that had brought the country to the brink of catastrophe a year earlier. The relationship between the two main political rivals, Prime Minister Raile Odinga and President Mwai Kibaki, remained dangerously tense. Women’s groups, fearing another descent into violence, urged men to settle their differences and, as they put it, “begin to serve the nation they represent.” To emphasize the point, they announced a sex strike. They were perhaps inspired by a similar action taken in Sudan in 2002, when thousands of women in the South took up the practice of “sexual abandoning” to compel men to end the twenty-year civil war in which an estimated two million people had died.

Rukia Subow, chair of one of the groups in Kenya, argued, “We have seen that sex is the answer. It does not know tribe, it does not have a party, and it happens in the lowest households.” The strike gained widespread support, even the prime minister’s wife, Ida Odinga, declared that she supported it “body and soul.” Women’s groups welcomed the success of the action as Kenyans began talking about issues that are affecting them. And it got the politicians talking.” The women even persuaded some sex workers to join the strike. It ended with a joint prayer session. The prime minister and the president finally agreed to talk.
As with the example of Liberia this movement was never intended to create socialism. It does however serve as a great example to show how unity and creative strike action are effective ways to change society in the interests of the vast majority.

J.Llewellyn
Thanks to Steve Crawshaw and John Jackson and their book , Small Acts of Resistance: How Courage, Tenacity, and Ingenuity Can Change the World © 2010 by Steve Crawshaw and John Jackson, Union Square Press, a division of Sterling Publishing Co,. Inc.

A Continuing Struggle Regarding the Status of Women: Pro-democracy Movements in the Middle East

The strong presence of women in recent pro-democracy protests Iran, Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt created an atmosphere of excitement regarding the 100th Anniversary of International Women’s Day (IWD) on March 8 this year. 

Iran in particular has seen decades of very public women’s liberation movements, exemplified by the ongoing One Million Signatures Campaign that aims to gain one million signatures to petition for a change in discriminatory laws against women.

A mural painted by the organisers of the One Million Signatures campagin

March 8 signified an opportunity to celebrate recent victories, the newfound unity between Middle Eastern men and women in the fight against oppression and inequality, and to make a public statement about the currently changeable social and political atmosphere. 

In the week leading up to IWD, however, there was a strong reminder that the recent political changes are only one step towards the desired objective of a democratic society unblemished by gender-, race-, or sexuality-based discrimination; the newfound position of Iran on the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW).  The CSW is a body "dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women," noble a purpose inconsistent with Iran’s horrendous record of upholding the most basic human rights. 

Iran’s election for the 2011-2015 position on the Commission was passed in April 2010, just a week after senior cleric and acting Friday prayer leader of Tehran, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, stated that the wearing of revealing clothes by Iranian women is to blame for the nation’s increasing number of earthquakes. 

“Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes,"

Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media; A laughable but serious blow to women across the world who choose the right of self-expression and determination in the face of oppressive religious dogma. 

Understandably, the election of Iran to the CSW was passed despite stark opposition by Iranian activists for women’s rights.  A letter signed by 214 activists and endorsed by over a dozen human rights bodies was written to the UN detailing Iranian laws that demonstrate the nation’s lack of commitment to gender equality:

"Women lack the ability to choose their husbands, have no independent right to education after marriage, no right to divorce, no right to child custody, have no protection from violent treatment in public spaces, are restricted by quotas for women's admission at universities, and are arrested, beaten, and imprisoned for peacefully seeking change of such laws.”

 Iran, a country that legalizes the stoning of adulterers, the rape of virgins before execution, sigheh (temporary marriage), and forced wearing of the hijab is now to have a leading voice on global issue affecting women.  Notably, Iran does so despite having signed the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.  Such incongruence between actions and words of Iran highlights the inability of organisations such as the UN to effect real change whilst working within the constraints of the corrupt bureaucratic system of our current society.   This is just one example of the failure of the UN to act in the interests of the majority of the world’s population. 

Regarding the election of Iran to the CSW, UN defence of its decision rests on geographic principles; the principle of equitable regional representation, UN officials say, must be taken into account when offering membership. 

Acknowledging this, Iranian activists argued one representative from Asian nations, as opposed to the normal two, would be preferable to elevating Iran to the commission in light of the “the highly negative ramifications of Iran’s membership in this international body."  But it seems such recommendations have fallen on deaf ears. 

Sadly, signs of ensuing negative ramifications can already be seen.  Only months after its election to the CSW in 2010, 18-year-old Iranian Navid Mohebbi was arrested with charges of threatening national security, promoting anti-Iran propaganda, and insulting current and former leaders of Iran – a guise for the real ‘crime’ of keeping a blog supporting women’s rights. 

Navid’s crime was to be a friend to women of his country and write the about domestic violence, economic and education inequality, sex trafficking, and forced genital mutilation that is part of Iran’s current social reality. Navid’s 2010 IWD post read:

“For the women of my own country who are being brutally suppressed in the most vicious manner, I wish a society without violence, oppression and without gender-specific violence."

Following his arrest, Navid was subject to interrogation, held in solitary confinement for extended periods of time, denied legal counsel or contact with family; essentially, denied a fair trial. 

Luckily, a petition initiated by A Safe World for Women containing the signatures of 600 Change.org members was successful in suspending Navid’s three year sentence, Navid being released on Christmas Day 2010; A tribute to the effectiveness of non-violent protest in the face of grave oppression. 

It is an anomaly that a body dedicated to advocating and pursuing the advancement of women in society could appoint to its governing board a nation whose government is actively opposed to achieving such a goal. 

Yet such incongruence is to be expected under Capitalism.  Any organisation “committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights”, as the UN states they are, is doomed to fail in a society where the means of production are owned by a special few, production is based on profit not need, and workers are increasingly exploited as a means to obtain ever-increasing profit. True change can never come about in a system where a small majority own most of the world’s wealth and control the lives of the majority.

A fundamental change to the economic state of society is needed to ever achieve equal living standards, full possession of human rights, equal opportunity and a lack of gender-, race- or sexuality-based discrimination. A fundamental change that will never come from the UN is needed to achieve Navid’s dream of an egalitarian, oppression-free society, not just in Iran but across the world.   An economic system in which the means of production are commonly owned and controlled co-operatively based on the needs of society as a whole, where the distribution of wealth serves the interests of society as a whole, is needed for this to be achieved.  That is, socialism is needed. 

The struggle for women continues, most notably at this point in history in the Middle East.  Actions greater than what diplomatic organisations such as the UN can provide are needed for true progress.  The key to ending all oppression is through the self-emancipation of the working class.  We need to create active non-violent organisations to lead the struggle. 

R.L.Bradley

Our Last Ocean: All for a Plate of Fish?

The Ross sea is the most pristine and productive marine ecosystem on earth.  It is home to at least 10 mammal species including the Antarctic minke and killer whale, half a dozen species of birds, 95 species of fish and in excess of 1 000 invertebrate species.  Untouched by widespread pollution, invasive species, mining or overfishing,  the Ross Sea,  otherwise known as ‘the last ocean’, is a living laboratory providing us with our last chance to understand how healthy marine ecosystems function. 

This invaluable opportunity, however, is slowly slipping away.  Since the first fishing vessel from New Zealand was sent into the Ross Sea in 1996, international fishing fleets have targeted this remote and pristine ecosystem to harvest the Antarctic toothfish.  The most dominant fish predator in the Ross Sea, the Antarctic toothfish can grow in excess of two metres in length and over 150 kg in weight – a valuable catch for fishermen who are able to sell this “white gold” as Chilean sea bass to high-end restaurants around the world. 

So great is the market for Chilean sea bass that up to 20 long-line vessels from a dozen different nations can be found in the Ross Sea extracting up to 3 000 tonnes of toothfish – the ‘total allowable catch’ (TAC).  This fishing is done in spite of known detrimental impacts: scientists have observed a decline in killer whales, which prey almost exclusively on Antarctic toothfish; scientists are now almost unable to catch toothfish for research that has been taking place since the 1970s, when they were once able to easily catch several hundred in single season. 

New Zealand’s position in the development of this devastating plundering of natural resources, as well as its current position in the international debate regarding the protection of the Ross Sea, deserves special attention.   Aside from being the source of the first fishing vessel to enter the Ross Sea, New Zealand was one of the two counties (the United Kingdom being the other) whose fisheries campaigned and won a Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) eco-certification label for fisheries in the Ross Sea in November last year.

This eco-certification was awarded despite three years of protest by Ross Sea scientists and advocacy organisations; the MSC’s blue label’ brands Ross Sea fisheries as sustainable, despite an internationally-recognised lack of evidence.   Significantly, the MSC allowed the final decision of whether to award the eco-certification to be made by Moody Marine Limited, a company contracted and paid for by New Zealand and UK toothfish fishers.  As Richard Page, Greenpeace International Oceans Campaigner has publically stated,

“The fishery should never have been considered for certification in the first place and now, through a convoluted and deeply flawed process, Moody Marine…has been allowed to ignore the inputs from dozens of independent scientific experts and its own peer reviewers to give the blue label to the fishery.”

In objection to the overall situation, and in particular New Zealand’s involvement, The Last Ocean Charitable Trust was established in 2009.  This non-profit organisation based in Christchurch, the gateway to Antarctica, has been campaigning to raise public and political pressure in order to establish a Ross Sea marine protected area (MPA).   MPAs are the ocean equivalent of national parks, acting to limit human impact and thus protect the natural and cultural values of an area.

It is hoped the Ross Sea MPA would encompass the entire ecosystem, including the continental shelf and slope.  A proposal for the MPA was co-ordinated by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC) in September 2009.  The proposal included a statement signed by more than 450 scientists stressing the importance of the Ross Sea’s unique ecology, and that it is imperative to preserve this ‘living laboratory’ through an MPA. 

The proposal was presented to the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), the international body responsible for managing the marine living resources of Antarctica.   The CCAMLR formally came into force in 1982 and is now 25 nations strong, New Zealand being one of the original members.  It operates under a strict set of conservation clauses that aim to prevent such things as the overharvesting of marine resources, and to maintain the ecological relationships of harvested species. 

Yet an obvious failing of CCAMLR is the inclusion in its 25 members of nations who are the chief consumers of Antarctic toothfish: the People’s Republic of China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States of America. New Zealand’s dual position as one of the biggest fishers of the Ross Sea, set to profit from the sale of the Antarctic toothfish at $70 a kg, and member of the CCAMLR is further damning of the Commission’s purported unbiased position as protector of the Antarctic. 

Such bias in the CCAMLR may well influence the next designation o f MPAs around Antarctica in 2012.  The CCAMLR has identified the Ross Sea as warranting protection; support from member nations the next step towards putting the ASOC proposal into practice.  As a ‘key’ nation of the Commission, New Zealand could play an important role in swinging votes towards full protection of the Ross Sea. 

New Zealand has the important geographical position of being the closest country to the Ross Sea, as well as the historical position of being a signatory nation of the initial Antarctic Treaty.  The Last Charitable Trust is campaigning for the New Zealand government to uphold history and its highly publicised ‘Clean Green’ image and lead the way to a Ross Sea MPA.  A clean green image that has recently come under fire on BBC World where John Key was confronted with the sad reality of River Manawatu in the southern North Island being one of the most polluted in the Western world. 

As a revolutionary socialist organisation, OGNA supports any campaign aiming to prevent the pillaging of our natural environment.  The loss the Ross Sea, our Last Ocean, for the sake of the profit from steak of fish must be stopped. By stopping further fishing in the Ross Sea we can preserve the last intact marine ecosystem on Earth.

New Zealand’s status as a capitalist country whose highest priority is the increase of profit is a boundary towards all environmentally friendly causes and campaigns.  The natural wealth of our country cannot compete with the allure of the profit that can be gained from harmful fishing, unsustainable farming, mining of indigenous and precious land etc.   To prevent the plundering of our natural resources, a new social and economic system is needed where overproduction and profit are not the guiding principles of industry.  

The spread of awareness and the united activity of those concerned is the start to making a true difference.  To join the force of over 600 people on the Last Ocean Charitable Trust’s petition, head to http://www.lastocean.co.nz/ and put pressure on the government to support the Ross Sea MPA proposal.   A petition alone will not change the system that is the root of the problem.  But from small actions big things can grow.  The first step to bigger things is the development of a non-violent movement that seeks to establish a system that connects everyone in the plight to solve all environmental problems.  A movement that is willing to take direct action to the establishment of socialism.  

R.L.Bradley

Film Review: The Cove (2009)

Our rating: 4 ½ stars

Academy Award Winner for Best Documentary of 2009, The Cove exposes the devastating annual slaughter of dolphins in the Japanese fishing town of Taiji. 

Described by Rotten Tomatoes as “guerrilla journalism at its best”, The Cove utilises evades constant police intimidation to use free-diving world champions, underwater microphones and high definition cameras disguised as rocks to break down the many forms and consequences of the Japanese dolphin trade.  Initially shocking is the fact that several times more dolphins are killed annually by the Japanese – as many as 23, 000 – than their highly publicised slaughter of Antarctic whales.  Migrating dolphins are herded into a hidden cove where they are netted and killed by spears and knives. 

The dolphin meat, containing dangerous levels of mercury, is then sold as the more expensive whale meat, as well as being sold to schools to use in the mandatory school lunches.  An interview with two local politicians campaigning, unsuccessfully, for the removal of dolphin meat from school canteens is featured. 

Most intriguing is the alleged buying by Japan of votes in the International Whaling Commission so to prevent anti-whaling legislation from being introduced.  Such ‘bought’ countries include Cambodia, Ecuador, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Laos and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. 

Notably, these countries are on the lower end of the scale of economic strength. The unharnessed ability of Japan to use its monetary power to sway international bodies supposedly protecting our natural wealth in their favour is outrageous. 

The courage of long-time dolphin campaigner Ric O’Barry to pull together a team of outspoken and unafraid non-violent activists and reveal another side of the profit-driving exploitation of our precious environment is commendable.  An incredible film that has seen the spread of activism, even in Japan, regarding the urgent need to protect our water-bound friends.


R.L.Bradley

Unite! The Power of Unions and the Way Forward

The Unite trade union is New Zealand’s fastest growing union gaining 600 new members every month and 25000 in the last five years. It has successfully organised groups of workers that until recently were viewed as un-organisable working in often short-term employment in hotels, restaurants, casinos, cinemas, call centres, security, malls andlanguage schools. Workers from every sector are now joining because they want a union that will work positively with their employer but will also fight for them. When Unite started a campaign in 2005 to win union contracts most members had no breaks and earned less than $10 an hour. Unite was the first union to win 15 minute rest breaks for 90% of members and won wage rises of up to $6 an hour.

Unite protests in West Aukland!

Unite fights to improve workers wages and work conditions through negations to dynamics strikes that range from lively picket lines to “Tea-ins” where workers don’t work but instead drink tea in the staffroom. Unites red flags can been seen at the forefront of any protest, marches, pickets or strikes. These are not just about workers rights but also environmental movements and anti-war movements. It has run may successful campaigns including the “supersize my pay” campaign which after a year of campaigning got the minimum wage pushed up from $9 an hour to $12; a campaign to get security hours for part time workers; and a campaign that banished workers. They are now working to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and are planning action during the Rugby World Cup. Experts have predicted the event will pump as much as $1.15 billion into the economy and Unite union national secretary Matt McCarten said workers should share that. He was quoted in the New Zealand Herald as saying "We don't want to disrupt the games, but we have a job to get some of that wealth and share it around a bit." Hospitality workers will be required to work longer and harder than ever during the world cup and as it stands, while their bosses reap the benefits of the extra cash, they, who ensure this event can happen, gain nothing more than fatigue. Room rates in many hotels are set to go up tenfold. The wages of workers not at all.

In any employment relationship there is always more power with an employer. When workers join together it can take some of that power back. Workers create society’s wealth, but have no control over its production and distribution. A socialist society can only be built when workers collectively take control of that wealth and democratically plan its production and distribution according to human needs instead of profit. This is the first step to creating global equality. The working class is the vast majority of society and is the key to the fight for socialism. Workers’ central role in production gives them a social power to paralyze the system like no other social force: the strike. It is therefore the only part of society that can overthrow the current system and lead the struggle to end oppression for all people.

Unite is an example of what trade unions across the country and the world should look like but unfortunately many unions no longer work like this. Trade union officials often pay themselves salaries closer to the employers they negotiate with than the workers they are meant to represent and workers no longer feel that unions really represents their interests -or, perhaps more importantly, that they have any organizational input or say as to what the union does or does not do. Unite union works with a grassroots democratic model where its members have a say in how the organisation is run unlike the top-down pyramid systems inherent in capitalist society that are seen in most unions today. Union bureaucracy is inherently conservative, and therefore, as a social layer, resists not only true and large progressions for workers but ultimately, revolution. The consciousness and activeness of the working class however, can and does change very dramatically from period to period, but as a class, workers are capable of overcoming the “ruling ideas” of society and, through their own activity, becoming capable of fundamentally reshaping society.

This cannot be achieved without organisation which cannot happen without unions. The increase of membership in unions and the creation of new unions is the first thing that must happen with rising class consciousness to transform consciousness into action to create social change. This on its own cannot completely change society - to move beyond the limits of unions, the working class must build organizations—preferably organizations of workplace delegates—that overcome the sectional divisions unions take for granted (between workplaces, between different skills and between different industries).  And it must build rank-and-file organizations inside the union movement that guide the struggle forward when the union officials act as a block to further struggle.

According to the British Socialist and Trade unionist Tom Mann, “The object of the unions is to wage the class war and take every opportunity of scoring against the enemy.” One cannot imagine such a statement passing the lips of a single trade union leader today although Unite certainly comes closer than any other. Unions of the past held in common the idea that socialism must come from below as a product of working class self-activity. That commitment meant a determination to organise the unorganised. For example, the Massachusetts textile workers’ strike of 1912 involved some 23,000 strikers who spoke at least 14 different languages. The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) organised them all using mass pickets and 10000 strong daily protests to win. This is what Unite is starting to do today- however class and political consciousness in New Zealand and many western countries is at an all time low. This means that is a slow struggle, however, as history has shown many times, this could change quickly at any moment.

Socialism is working-class self-emancipation. Only mass struggles of the workers themselves can put an end to the capitalist system of oppression and exploitation. We support trade unions as essential to the gain for workers’ economic and political rights. To make the unions fight for workers’ interests, rank-and-file workers must organize themselves independent of the union officials. Organisations that will fight for the rights of the oppressed are dedicated to non-violent action and are needed to lead the struggle for equality and it is vital that their members are involved unions in their work places in order to create change.

Unite is by far the most promising union in New Zealand and is an example to follow. They are now campaigning to raise the legal minimum wage to $15 an hour. If they win, then all workers will get a pay rise – making lives for the majority that little bit easier.

J. Llewellyn