new documentary section

Debtocracy (2011)

by Katerina Kitidi and Aris Hatzistefanou

A documentary produced by the audience. “Debtocracy” seeks the causes of the Greek debt crisis and proposes solutions, hidden by the government and the dominant media. The documentary is distributed free, without usage rights and broadcasted and subtitled in at least three languages.

Inside Job (2010)

by Charles H. Ferguson

A comprehensive analysis of the global financial crisis of 2008, which at a cost over $20 trillion, caused millions of people to lose their jobs and homes in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and nearly resulted in a global financial collapse.

athens 11 may 11

Statement of action and solidarity May 2011 - Declaration of Athens

Last weekend, the Greek Audit Commission Campaign organised a conference on Debt and Austerity: From the Global South to Europe.

Here's their common statement:

We, representatives of movements and activists from across the world, met in Athens to discuss the lessons of previous international economic crises, to offer our solidarity to the European people struggling against unjust austerity programmes imposed by governments and the European Union, and to formulate a plan of economic action which meets the needs of people instead of serving a tiny social elite.

Many countries in the developing world have lived in debt crisis since the 1970s. After bouts of reckless lending by international finance, some of the poorest people in the world faced cuts in income and social provision when the International Monetary Fund imposed sharp austerity policies in return for bailing out banks and financiers.

These policies were unjust and did not facilitate recovery. Instead, they increased the dependency of indebted countries on the power of financial markets, making governments less accountable to their people. Only when a handful of countries demanded their rights and stood up to the imposition of austerity, to the bailing out of financiers, and to the crushing burden of debt did it become possible to recover. This is what happened in Argentina in 2001.

Today, peripheral countries of the EU face a deep debt crisis. They have been pushed into it by the institutional design of the EU which favours big business, by neoliberal economic policies, and by the operations of the international financial system which has become extremely powerful, predatory and unaccountable. In the wake of the international economic crisis massive debts were run up by peripheral countries, partly reflecting the gap with the core of the eurozone, and partly deepening inequality between the very rich and the rest of society. Working people are now forced to carry the burden of these debts even though they have not benefited from them.

Austerity and privatisation measures will squeeze the poorest in society most heavily, while those that created the crisis will be bailed out. The rich and big business will also continue to dodge taxes which could be used to build a fairer society. If these measures go unchallenged, they will have an immense impact on Europe, changing the balance of power in favour of capital and against labour for many years.

The attempt to make working people and the poor bear the costs of the crisis, while the very rich escape, will be opposed by those in the firing line. This means, in the first instance, the people of Greece, Ireland and Portugal challenging the austerity policies of the EU and the IMF, opposing international financial power, and rejecting the slavery of debt. We call on people across the world to show solidarity with movements in these countries struggling against debt and the pernicious policies it brings in its wake.

Specifically, we call for support for:

The democratic auditing of debts as a concrete step towards debt justice. Debt audits which involve civil society and the labour movement allow people to establish which parts of public debt are illegal, illegitimate, odious, or simply unsustainable. They are a tool for working people to ascertain the validity, and to exercise control over repayment of debt for which they are being held responsible. They also encourage democratic accountability and transparency across the administration of the public sector. We express solidarity with debt audits in Greece and Ireland and stand ready to assist in practical terms.

Sovereign and democratic responses to the debt crisis. Governments must be bound primarily by their people, not by unaccountable institutions like the EU and the IMF. The people of countries such as Greece must decide which policies will improve their chances of recovery and sustainability. There is a wealth of experience of effective and radical sovereign responses to the problem of debt. Sovereign states retain the power to impose a moratorium of payments if debt is crushing the livelihood of working people. Even UN resolutions legalise the cessation of payments in a state of emergency.

Economic restructuring and redistribution, not debt. The domination of neoliberal policies and the power of international finance have led to low growth, rising inequality, and major crises as well as eroding democratic processes. It is imperative that economies are put on a different footing through transitional programmes that include capital controls, public ownership and control over banks, and industrial policy that pivots on public investment while respecting the environment. The first aim should be to protect and expand employment. It is also vital that countries should adopt far-reaching redistributive policies. The tax base should become broader and more progressive by taxing capital and the rich, thus allowing for the mobilisation of domestic resources as an alternative to debt. Redistribution should also include the restoration of public provision in health, education, transport and pensions as well as reversing the downward pressure on wages and salaries.

These are the first steps towards meeting the needs and aspirations of working people, while shifting the balance of power away from large capital and financial institutions. They would allow people across Europe, and more broadly across the world, to exercise better control over their livelihoods, their lives, and the political process. They would also offer hope to the young generation across Europe which currently faces a bleak future of scarce jobs, low wages and lack of prospects. For these reasons, justice in confronting the problem of debt in Greece, Ireland and Portugal is in the interests of working people everywhere.

(taken from: http://www.elegr.gr/details.php?id=134)

STOP the construction of Nuclear Plants in Akkuyu and Sinop (Turkey)

from the University of the Aegean

Recently the Turkish Government announced its decision to construct two nuclear plants in the region of Akkuyu and Sinop, a decision which entails great risk for the broader Aegean region, taking into account the region’s seismicity and unique cultural features. A clear proof of the underlying risks involved in the use of nuclear energy is the recent accident in Fukushima, Japan.

The University of the Aegean, sharing the concerns of the residents of the area, where it has been founded and functions, is convinced that the use of nuclear energy has no place in a development with milder environmental characteristic for the societies in the Aegean region. For this reason, it has initiated a petition, aiming at the prevention of the construction of nuclear plants by highlighting the risks involved and by raising the awareness of the academic community, of all conscious citizens and organizations in Turkey, Greece and worldwide.

SIGN THE PETITION

right of asylum

87 Afghan political refugees

60 days of hunger strike in central Athens

17 asylum committees of which only 3 (sub)function

47.000 political asylum claims

10.000 signatures in solidarity

30 estimated years until all claims are considered

quick scratch #1

Capitalism kills any kind of creative romanticism (or idealism).

Gaddafi, his sons, the rebels and NATO

There are many questions running around my head about Gaddafi, his sons, the rebels, the western allies, the international community. These are the words that dominate public dialogue in regard to Libya. These are the main components of this complicated conflict. But do we know what they stand for? What are their agendas? No. And then, there are the victims of this conflict: the dead bodies that are abstractly manipulated by the media, in order to channel opinions and solutions and to legitimise practices. These dead bodies are the only real (material) evidence that this conflict exists – is real. For us, westerners, they are simple representations; for Libyans they are everyday experience. Libya is at war with itself, and 'has assigned' westerners the mission to resolve this conflict.

Western economy is in the midst of the worst crisis of the last 70-80 years. All previous crises were resolved through war, on the grand scale or lesser (but equally intense) scales. Because, in order to legitimise the economic imperatives, ideology indoctrinates public debate – it determines what is normal and what is not. The Great Depression was eventually expressed as World War II. Then consecutive crises during the post-war period were translated to smaller scale conflicts involving peripheral or regional populations (what strange words to describe human beings); conflicts that made up the narrative of the Cold War. Orwell's nightmare was rather accurate in this respect; he talked about the manipulation of the public sphere and the distance between the actual conflicts and everyday reality. They were all happening somewhere far away. Like Libya, for example.

Let me get this straight: I am not suggesting here that the Libyan conflict is constructed by a group of conspirators- that it is a fiction. Rather, I am trying to articulate that our opinions about it are manipulated into yet another conflict that very conveniently landed at the teeth of western imperialism. But the war is real and its consequences are real.

Just when western capitalism is threatened by its own crisis a war comes along. They'll dump the bombs they need to get rid of, and then send the bill to whoever wins the conflict. The absurdity of this situation needs to be looked at: the Libyan rebels, who are being massacred by Gaddafi, ask for help from those who gave Gaddafi his airplanes, guns, artillery. The dictator's power rests on a part of the population and the weapons sold to him by international sellers: whether on the table or under it, is irrelevant. Selling weapons to a dictator has become a legitimate practice, if they do the selling. The rebels had popular support, but lacked (until recently) the western military support. By appealing to the international community, the people of Libya have expressed their will to rid themselves from a dictator. Instead of throwing in more weapons and more death, NATO allies need to withdraw from their god-like position on the international sphere. The UN could perhaps confiscate Gaddafi's arsenal? The international legal system could bring Gaddafi in court? But that would imply a real practice on behalf of the UN, not the symbolic gesture it is accustomed to. And as it usually happens, we westerners now need to give more weapons to the other side, who are now the good guys, as opposed to Gaddafi, who now is evil, and until yesterday he was a friend.

Libya is the battlefield of an economic war. Like Iraq was before it. There are, recently, evidence coming out that western air raids have accidentally hit rebel forces, but they are so grateful for the help and urgency of what these air raids stand for, that their loss is unimportant. The dead on the other side don't matter. They are just numbers. This is how mainstream media present the story. The people, the ones that should lead the way, are in no position to do anything but die – they are the victims of a conflict that is not their own: it is between Gaddafi's sons for succession; it is between the Gaddafi family and the leadership of the rebels (that suddenly presents well nurtured and mannered politicians, an organised military unit led by a proper general, and other elements that demonstrate a well-organised political structure); it is, finally, a by-product of the conflicts within capitalism (the struggle between capitalists for more power and more influence and capitalism’s internal contradictions).

Whatever happens at the end, they will all survive and somehow influence the new status quo. And they will all lead the country (and the world) to the next crisis. And that's how history will be written by those who have access to power. That is, all apart from the dead (the past, present and future victims of the conflicts between the powerful). And the question emerges once again: what are we to do? Not, which side to support, but how will the ongoing massacre be stopped.