Monthly Archives: December 2015

My top 5 trends of 2015 – and some predictions for 2016


With best wishes for a healthy and productive 2016!


Debates and struggles around race have taken centre-stage in 2015, with an intensity reminiscent of the 1960s and 1970s struggles around civil rights and black power in the US, and the height of the anti-apartheid struggle in 1970s and 1980s in South Africa.

Episodes of blatant racial discrimination and police brutality against black people have been uncovered and exposed like never before in the US. But the debate radically shifted when these concerns have been brought at the heart of the ideological centres of white privilege: wealthy universities in global centres of capital. In April, South African students obtained the removal of the statue of imperialist Cecil Rhodes at the University of Cape Town. In October, university students joined mass protests to widen access to higher education and radically transform historically white universities in decolonised places of learning.

Race was also at the centre of various protests erupted across the US towards the end of the year. Finally, Rhodes Must Fall in Oxford is gaining momentum, calling for the removal of a Rhodes statue in Oriel College. The struggle is about much more than a sculpture. The movement wants to open a debate about the legacy of colonialism in Britain, a history that the country has never faced up to in the way Germany and Italy had to deal with the horrors of fascist dictatorships.

It is just the beginning. These struggles are likely to intensify in 2016. Predictions about outcomes would be premature, but there is no doubt that once the issue is on the table, it won’t disappear quite as easily as it resurfaced after decades of denial.


The refugee crisis clearly exposed the injustices and violence of the global capitalist system, with razor wire fences erected across Europe uncannily evoking the dark past of Nazi concentration camps. We’ve been hit by a constant stream of news reporting thousands of deaths of refugees fleeing their homes in the Middle East and other parts of Asia and Africa. The Mediterranean Sea is now the geographic symbol of the catastrophe.

Europe has been at the forefront of waging war and producing mass deaths and displacement in the Middle East and elsewhere, but reacted in brutal self-defence when it came to help those in need. A pan-European wave of xenophobic nationalism dictated policy, with border closures resulting in the killing of people desperately searching for safety. A few decades from now, this will be remembered as another genocide by Europeans on people outside their borders marked as cultural and racial others.

In 2015 the idea that Europeans should “come first” in Europe has regained legitimacy for the first time since the conscious rejection of racism in the aftermath of WWII. Far right populist movements are advancing nearly everywhere in Europe – a case in point is the Front National becoming first party in France in the regional elections in early December. Meanwhile, many left-wing leaders and cynical technocrats try to counter xenophobic revolts by giving in to their demands.

More war in the Middle East is justified by ill-conceived plans to quash the much feared Islamic State, an enemy that nobody really understands or knows how to fight. War is used as a diversion to prop up technocratic governments about to be swallowed by the rise of the far right.

The crisis is likely to intensify. We should expect more border closures and more wars. Large parts of the globe are entering a state of semi-permanent conflict, fuelled by the declining hegemony of a Western bloc that is unwilling to accept that its time in history has passed. Within Europe and the US, xenophobic nationalism and white supremacy will continue to rise among the middle classes, turning renegade ideologies into acceptable mainstream.


The African continent has been hard hit by the slow down of the global commodity markets, caused by an ongoing oil war between US and OPEC, declining growth in China, and the lack of a strong recovery in Europe and the US.

After a boom that lasted more than a decade across Africa, the harsh reality is laid bare. High growth levels have not been accompanied by strong infrastructure development and investment in key public goods like health and education. Profits ended in the hands of multinational capital and tiny local elites. States acted as cartels owned by a few multinationals, and negotiated unfavourable deals with various foreign superpowers.

In 2016 the full weight of the economic downturn will unfold, and the convergence of multiple crises – political, economic, social and environmental – is likely to bring major waves of mass unrest across the continent, and more instability in areas already marred by civil conflict and war.

The key issue for African governments, foreign investors and development agencies will be how to deal with masses of discontented and hungry people, calling for radical change and immediate action to address their suffering.


Aside from the refugee crisis, in Europe 2015 was the year the rule of technocracy came under attack by popular anti-austerity movements. Greek people led the charge, with the historic election victory in January of Syriza, running on an anti-austerity left agenda.

Pressed into a corner by international creditors who punished Greece for its refusal to comply, Syriza’s leader and Greek PM Tsipras did his best to deflate one of the most promising anti-austerity movements in recent times. He betrayed the mandate of the January election, and of a national referendum in July that saw a landslide “no” vote against the draconian bailout terms offered by Brussels. With Tsipras’ approval, the much hated bailout was imposed over Greece.

After fresh elections in September, Syriza completed its transformation into a centrist formation talking left and walking right. The new government enforced the worst bailout conditions in the history of Greece, passing laws stripping the country of its assets, imposing further cuts to an already crumbling welfare state, and diminishing protection for home owners unable to pay their mortgages. Harsh pension and labour market reforms are yet to come.

Tsipras’ U-turn had a devastating effect on the morale and prospects of new left movements across Europe, especially in southern countries. New anti-austerity left movement Podemos in Spain did well in the December general election, but lowered expectations by reiterating their support for Tsipras’ transition from radical leftist to austerity technocrat. In Portugal, a shaky alliance between pro-austerity centre-left and the anti-austerity left came to power a few weeks ago, and is already showing major signs of crisis.

A hopeful counterpoint to Syriza’s disappointing trajectory was the election of Jeremy Corbyn as British Labour leader in September. He is in favour of wealth redistribution from corporations and the upper-middle classes to the vast majority of people, and opposes a senseless and costly British war in Syria. His popular policy positions have made him into the main target of attacks by mainstream politicians and big capital. His worst enemies sit in his own party: the ever-green Blairites have no consensus among the wider public, but continue to occupy some of the most influential positions within Labour.

Despite the challenges, there’s still some hope for the European left. 2016 will be the year when new left movements will show their true worth. Corbyn is heading towards a stand-off with the Blairites; the popular anti-technocracy former finance minister of Greece Yanis Varoufakis will launch his own pan-European movement to “democratise the EU”; and Podemos might be able to gain ground with the strategic openings offered by the Spanish political crisis opened by an indecisive election.

We will see whether a new brand of left populism will be able to rally mass discontent against technocracy, and counter the advance of the far right. If Corbyn and Podemos end up like Tsipras, it could be a deadly blow for a viable left alternative to the devastating mix of austerity and war imposed by European technocrats.


If 2014 was the year of inequality – remember Piketty? – 2015 was marked by the increasing realisation that unemployment and precarious work have become a permanent feature of the current capitalist system. With stuttering growth across the global North, the few countries that are experiencing significant GDP expansion like Britain and Spain have seen no improvement for the vast majority of people. In the global South, there is a growing awareness that there is no magical “trickle down” effect that will lift people out of poverty.

Basic income was until recently a niche concept developed in the 1980s by a small group of enlightened philosophers and political scientists with the rare gift of foresight. In 2015 it hit the mainstream, raising hopes across many quarters that it could become an effective policy tool to counter the structural decline of formal employment across the globe. In its “pure” form, a basic income is a grant given to everybody for life, should cover the basics for decent living, and comes with no conditions attached – it’s not means-tested, and you receive it even if you are not unemployed, or you don’t fit in other conventional categories of welfare recipients like children or the elderly.

In practice, the increasing attention by mainstream political parties and technocrats means that the concept has already been changed and adapted to suit disparate agendas, and sometimes conflicting views of the economy. The right likes the idea as a potential quick fix to escalating welfare costs, i.e. give everybody a low basic income, and cut all other benefits. Sections of the left which are more attuned to the changing configurations of capitalism, see it as a necessary measure to guarantee livelihoods and individual freedom in a world marked by exploitative work and rising unemployment.

Europe is leading the conversation: a national basic income pilot was announced by the new centre-right government in Finland; the possibility of city-level experiments is under discussion in several Dutch municipalities; and a national referendum in Switzerland will be held in June 2016, when Swiss people will decide whether an unconditional basic income should be enshrined in the federal constitution.

The debate has also advanced further elsewhere, with Namibia leading the flock in the global South: after a successful pilot carried out between 2008 and 2009, the government has unleashed new plans for some form of basic income grant rolled out at national level as part of an ambitious poverty eradication strategy.

2016 will no doubt puts to the test the potential of this far-reaching measure and its nascent grassroots movement of supporters. With enthusiastic endorsements across the political spectrum, from the free market libertarians of the Adam Smith Institute, to left-leaning thinker and activist David Graeber, the idea has the potential to explode in a global social movement with mass support. It catches the public imagination with its visionary simplicity and pragmatism, and could become one of the essential tools to counter poverty, and free up human resources and social creativity at a time of deep material and existential crisis.


Corbyn has no choice but to sack the Blairites

UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn could soon sack major figures of the shadow cabinet that are opposed to his agenda, especially the principled anti-war stance on the Syrian conflict. A stand-off between Corbyn and the old Labour elite seems inevitable. It’s clear that the Labour majority who support the new leader won’t let the Blairites dictate the party line.

Corbyn is left with no choice but to restructure the top ranks of Labour. If you are in doubt, it’s worth watching again Hilary Benn’s disturbing performance in the Commons in early December, when he delivered an impassioned speech in defence of ill-conceived British airstrikes on Syria.

Varoufakis announces pan-European movement to “democratise the EU”

In a recent interview for the Italian magazine L’Espresso, former finance minister of Greece Yanis Varoufakis announces the formation of a new Pan-European movement in February 2016, with the aim to democratise the EU, rather than working for its dissolution.

“Without a doubt, if we continue along the lines of present policies, that have failed so spectacularly, the centrifugal forces will get so strong that the Eurozone first, and then the EU, will fragment. … No one can tell where the rupture will take place. Maybe in Greece, maybe in Italy, maybe somewhere else. Like in the case of the Soviet Union, where it was impossible to predict how its end would come … we know that the present course is catastrophic for the EU even if ignorant of what will trigger it.”

More instability expected in Spain after indecisive election

More political instability looms in another southern European country. No clear majority emerged from the ballot box in Spain yesterday, and the two-party system seems to be a thing of the past. Neither a centre-right coalition between the PP (28.7%) and the young party Ciudadanos (13.9%), nor a centre-left one between the Socialists (22%) and the new left formation Podemos (20.7%), can form a majority government.

There are other options, including a minority government, or a grand coalition between Socialists and PP. It’s clear that the old parties are rapidly losing ground. But are the new arrivals really that enticing?

As far as the left is concerned, Podemos did very well and above expectations, but its close alliance with another failed attempt at real change, Tsipras’ new incarnation of Syriza, casts more than one doubt. Before you hail another victory of the left against the “bad guys” of technocracy, be reassured that Podemos has no real intention to contest the euro, reject all that is old in politics, or reverse austerity. All these desirable goals run the risk of becoming empty slogans appropriated by certain sections of the rising new left to rally votes without a real plan to deliver.

Far right Front National first party in French regional elections

Very bad results in France’s regional elections: exit polls set xenophobic far right Front National (FN) first nationwide with over 30% of the votes; Sarkozy’s centre-right Republicans at around 27%, and Hollande’s Socialists in third place with 22%. The Front National is ahead in at least six of 13 regions.

The decision to go to war taken so quickly after the Paris attacks was certainly not unrelated to this dismal election result for Hollande, which just shows how bankrupt the whole political system is – in France as elsewhere in Europe. The war engagement is likely to keep the socialist leader clinging to power while his support on the ground crumbles away. And what choice would the French be left with in the next presidential elections? Electing warmongers to avoid the victory of a new kind of fascism?

Hollande’s war and the advance of the Front National are very worrying trends, which have repercussions on the rest of Europe and the world. We are living in dark times, with technocrats using war in a desperate and cynical attempt to cover up their failed economics, while far right populism keeps on firming its grip on politics.

Attenzione, un governo a 5 Stelle non è l’alternativa alla sinistra

Pubblicato sul settimanale Left in edicola dal 5 Dicembre.

Fa un certo effetto ascoltare Paolo Flores D’Arcais in un lungo intervento sui tre valori della Rivoluzione francese – libertà, uguaglianza, fratellanza – che si conclude con un endorsement verso il M5s. Il partito fondato da Beppe Grillo viene indicato come l’unica forza in Italia su cui scommettere per lottare contro il regime dei grandi capitali e della tecnocrazia. Il direttore di MicroMega ha trovato il consenso del costituzionalista Stefano Rodotà, relatore, insieme a lui e al deputato M5s Alessandro Di Battista, in un recente evento organizzato dalla stessa rivista.

Quanto gli argomenti dei 5 Stelle hanno di democratico e solidale? Qual è la visione oltre la crisi dell’euro? Le posizioni di Grillo sulla crisi economica e la questione dei rifugiati fanno emergere più di un dubbio. Non è solo una faccenda di ammiccamenti a una grossa fetta del suo elettorato che ha fondamentalmente valori di destra. C’è qualcosa di più profondo e accuratamente orchestrato nella propaganda anti-rifugiati degli ultimi mesi.

La narrazione del leader utilizza argomenti tradizionalmente di “sinistra” con un’analisi ispirata dall’economia politica anti-capitalista, mostrando i pericoli dello sfruttamento, dello strapotere della Germania nell’euro, e dell’impoverimento dei Paesi del Sud Europa. Ma li intreccia verso una percezione in cui i “poveri italiani” sono le principali vittime, mentre rifugiati e migranti, descritti con falsa compassione, diventano un intralcio. La propaganda contribuisce a formare una generale consapevolezza che individua, appunto, i “nostri” problemi quali prioritari, paragonabili, addirittura, alla devastazione delle guerre e della povertà di posti come la Siria o il Sudan.

Seguendo, purtroppo, intellettuali di “sinistra” ormai votati ad argomenti anti-rifugiati mascherati – vedi Slavoj Zizek e Diego Fusaro – Grillo gioca col fuoco. Egli fa alleanze con partiti xenofobi e razzisti come lo Ukip di Farage, dice che uno come Orban, fautore del filo spinato che evoca i campi di concentramento nazisti, sia stato mal compreso, per poi fingere di prendere le distanze da Le Pen e Salvini. Questa differenza, però, è ormai soltanto nella forma, non certo nella sostanza delle proposte.

Fosse soltanto un fenomeno nostrano, ci sarebbe forse meno da preoccuparsi. Ci troviamo invece in un momento storico cruciale per tutta l’Europa che ricorda molto le divisioni e la frustrazione di popolazioni impoverite e umiliate che appoggiarono il fascismo e il nazismo come risposta ai loro problemi economici e sociali. Allora come oggi, notiamo un’allarmante serie di scambi tra le ali più radicali della sinistra e della destra. C’è, infatti, un disegno più allargato di alcune componenti della sinistra che vedono un’alleanza con il “diavolo delle destre nazionaliste” come unica alternativa all’impero, ormai molto fragile, delle tecnocrazie europee.

Un eventuale governo a guida 5 Stelle rischia – è accaduto con Orban in Ungheria – di diventare ostaggio della deriva delle folle, che vedono la lotta al privilegio come parte di una rivolta generale per ristabilire, non si sa bene come, l’orgoglio del popolo-nazione. Il M5s sta abilmente manipolando queste pulsioni per porsi come una alternativa anti-regime “credibile” a una sinistra in crisi e a una destra “impresentabile”.

Rodotà e D’Arcais, che scellerati non sono, ci hanno probabilmente già pensato. E, come molti avanguardisti, sperano forse domani di essere loro gli anticorpi del regime delle folle, che tende a nutrirsi di odio, piuttosto che di democrazia. In questa crisi globale occorre sottolineare i valori della solidarietà e dell’uguaglianza della nostra Costituzione. Grillo e i 5 Stelle, invece, remano nella direzione opposta.

Vito Laterza è ricercatore in antropologia sociale all’Università di Città del Capo, Sudafrica.

Don’t bomb Syria


Tonight’s vote in the Commons about Cameron’s plans to bomb Syria has a relevance well beyond the UK borders. Things are heading towards a full military invasion with ground troops, with the direct involvement of Western and other armies.

The worrying thing about many objections to the airstrikes is that they point out how bombing won’t be enough, hence the “need” for a ground invasion. Obama has just announced a new “expeditionary force” based in Iraq that will be able to carry out attacks in Syria – in practice, US troops were already carrying out operations in Syria, now they have been given the green light to do so openly.

Many are evoking the spectre of a repeat of the devastation brought about by the wars in Iraq and Lybia, which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and contributed to the rise of the Islamic State. Let’s be frank: this would be much worse.

Civilians would continue to be massacred as the Islamic State does not use conventional army tactics. It’s not clear who the allies and who the enemies are, with hundreds of smaller groups on the ground pursuing all kinds of agendas, many tied to fundamentalist groups and the Islamic State they should supposedly fight. And there is major friction among powerful countries and global superpowers jostling for positions, pursuing multiple agendas that cannot be reconciled, even with a common enemy. Once US, UK, France, Turkey, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others become directly involved, there is a real possibility of a global conflict.

What’s worst, you won’t hear the high trumpets of grand ideological statements of the Bush/Blair era. Rather, politicians in power are busy downplaying the reality and pursuing their own petty interests, hoping that things won’t get that bad, not this time.

UK is key in the alliance, because it has one of the strongest armies in Europe, but also because of its symbolic and ideological role as the closest European ally to the US. If you are in the UK, do whatever you can to stop the madness. If British MPs vote against airstrikes in Syria tonight, it would be a significant setback for this hypocritical and spontaneous alliance of opportunistic warmongers set upon mass destruction.

Visit Stop The War Coalition website for ways to lobby your MP and details on protest actions throughout the country.