www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 1 Visitante están viendo este tema.
How Swedes and Norwegians Broke the Power of the ‘1 Percent’by George LakeyWhile many of us are working to ensure that the Occupy movement will have a lasting impact, it’s worthwhile to consider other countries where masses of people succeeded in nonviolently bringing about a high degree of democracy and economic justice. Sweden and Norway, for example, both experienced a major power shift in the 1930s after prolonged nonviolent struggle. They “fired” the top 1 percent of people who set the direction for society and created the basis for something different.Both countries had a history of horrendous poverty. When the 1 percent was in charge, hundreds of thousands of people emigrated to avoid starvation. Under the leadership of the working class, however, both countries built robust and successful economies that nearly eliminated poverty, expanded free university education, abolished slums, provided excellent health care available to all as a matter of right and created a system of full employment. Unlike the Norwegians, the Swedes didn’t find oil, but that didn’t stop them from building what the latest CIA World Factbook calls “an enviable standard of living.”Neither country is a utopia, as readers of the crime novels by Stieg Larsson, Kurt Wallender and Jo Nesbro will know. Critical left-wing authors such as these try to push Sweden and Norway to continue on the path toward more fully just societies. However, as an American activist who first encountered Norway as a student in 1959 and learned some of its language and culture, the achievements I found amazed me. I remember, for example, bicycling for hours through a small industrial city, looking in vain for substandard housing. Sometimes resisting the evidence of my eyes, I made up stories that “accounted for” the differences I saw: “small country,” “homogeneous,” “a value consensus.” I finally gave up imposing my frameworks on these countries and learned the real reason: their own histories.Then I began to learn that the Swedes and Norwegians paid a price for their standards of living through nonviolent struggle. There was a time when Scandinavian workers didn’t expect that the electoral arena could deliver the change they believed in. They realized that, with the 1 percent in charge, electoral “democracy” was stacked against them, so nonviolent direct action was needed to exert the power for change.In both countries, the troops were called out to defend the 1 percent; people died. Award-winning Swedish filmmaker Bo Widerberg told the Swedish story vividly in Ådalen 31, which depicts the strikers killed in 1931 and the sparking of a nationwide general strike. (You can read more about this case in an entry by Max Rennebohm in the Global Nonviolent Action Database.)The Norwegians had a harder time organizing a cohesive people’s movement because Norway’s small population—about three million—was spread out over a territory the size of Britain. People were divided by mountains and fjords, and they spoke regional dialects in isolated valleys. In the nineteenth century, Norway was ruled by Denmark and then by Sweden; in the context of Europe Norwegians were the “country rubes,” of little consequence. Not until 1905 did Norway finally become independent.When workers formed unions in the early 1900s, they generally turned to Marxism, organizing for revolution as well as immediate gains. They were overjoyed by the overthrow of the czar in Russia, and the Norwegian Labor Party joined the Communist International organized by Lenin. Labor didn’t stay long, however. One way in which most Norwegians parted ways with Leninist strategy was on the role of violence: Norwegians wanted to win their revolution through collective nonviolent struggle, along with establishing co-ops and using the electoral arena.In the 1920s strikes increased in intensity. The town of Hammerfest formed a commune in 1921, led by workers councils; the army intervened to crush it. The workers’ response verged toward a national general strike. The employers, backed by the state, beat back that strike, but workers erupted again in the ironworkers’ strike of 1923–24.The Norwegian 1 percent decided not to rely simply on the army; in 1926 they formed a social movement called the Patriotic League, recruiting mainly from the middle class. By the 1930s, the League included as many as 100,000 people for armed protection of strike breakers—this in a country of only 3 million!The Labor Party, in the meantime, opened its membership to anyone, whether or not in a unionized workplace. Middle-class Marxists and some reformers joined the party. Many rural farm workers joined the Labor Party, as well as some small landholders. Labor leadership understood that in a protracted struggle, constant outreach and organizing was needed to a nonviolent campaign. In the midst of the growing polarization, Norway’s workers launched another wave of strikes and boycotts in 1928.The Depression hit bottom in 1931. More people were jobless there than in any other Nordic country. Unlike in the U.S., the Norwegian union movement kept the people thrown out of work as members, even though they couldn’t pay dues. This decision paid off in mass mobilizations. When the employers’ federation locked employees out of the factories to try to force a reduction of wages, the workers fought back with massive demonstrations.Many people then found that their mortgages were in jeopardy. (Sound familiar?) The Depression continued, and farmers were unable to keep up payment on their debts. As turbulence hit the rural sector, crowds gathered nonviolently to prevent the eviction of families from their farms. The Agrarian Party, which included larger farmers and had previously been allied with the Conservative Party, began to distance itself from the 1 percent; some could see that the ability of the few to rule the many was in doubt.By 1935, Norway was on the brink. The Conservative-led government was losing legitimacy daily; the 1 percent became increasingly desperate as militancy grew among workers and farmers. A complete overthrow might be just a couple years away, radical workers thought. However, the misery of the poor became more urgent daily, and the Labor Party felt increasing pressure from its members to alleviate their suffering, which it could do only if it took charge of the government in a compromise agreement with the other side.This it did. In a compromise that allowed owners to retain the right to own and manage their firms, Labor in 1935 took the reins of government in coalition with the Agrarian Party. They expanded the economy and started public works projects to head toward a policy of full employment that became the keystone of Norwegian economic policy. Labor’s success and the continued militancy of workers enabled steady inroads against the privileges of the 1 percent, to the point that majority ownership of all large firms was taken by the public interest. (There is an entry on this case as well at the Global Nonviolent Action Database.)The 1 percent thereby lost its historic power to dominate the economy and society. Not until three decades later could the Conservatives return to a governing coalition, having by then accepted the new rules of the game, including a high degree of public ownership of the means of production, extremely progressive taxation, strong business regulation for the public good and the virtual abolition of poverty. When Conservatives eventually tried a fling with neoliberal policies, the economy generated a bubble and headed for disaster. (Sound familiar?)Labor stepped in, seized the three largest banks, fired the top management, left the stockholders without a dime and refused to bail out any of the smaller banks. The well-purged Norwegian financial sector was not one of those countries that lurched into crisis in 2008; carefully regulated and much of it publicly owned, the sector was solid.Although Norwegians may not tell you about this the first time you meet them, the fact remains that their society’s high level of freedom and broadly-shared prosperity began when workers and farmers, along with middle class allies, waged a nonviolent struggle that empowered the people to govern for the common good.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
Muy bueno el aporte, la verdad es que no conocía esta historia.Eso sí, también le le digo que 15 años de protestas no violentas comandadas por el partido comunista en hispanistán hasta conseguir el poder y echar a la castuza, suena a ciencia ficción fantástica por lo menos.
SI lees con detenimiento el artículo veras que no fueron tan "no violentas". La oligarquía envió a la policía y al ejercito a reprimir a los huelguistas, y crearon milicias para reventarlas. Como ha pasado y pasará siempre.
it’s worthwhile to consider other countries where masses of people succeeded in nonviolently bringing about a high degree of democracy and economic justice
Al igual que la comuna de parís, hubo ciudades que selevantaron contra los poderosos y se mandó al ejercito a aplastar el levantamiento, lo que provocó huelgas generalizadas. Una cosa que hicieron muy bien es mantener a los parados en los sindicatos, aunque no pudiesen pagar las cuotas. Imaginaos lo que se conseguiría aquí si los sindicatos mayoritarios no fuesen unos traidores comprados a golpe de subvención como los que padecemos. Imagina el poder para negociar mejores condiciones de vida y trabajo que tendría un sindicato del estilo de la CGT ó la CNT respaldado además por los 5 millones de trabajadores asalariados expulsados del sistema. Los poderosos nunca comparten su trozo del pastel por las buenas. Sin no luchamos y nos unimos, seguirán haciendo con nosotros lo que les dé la gana.
La posibilidad real de morir congelado en horas (aunque estes en casa) es un insuperable aliciente para mejorar los estándares de vida y luchar por ellos. En mi opinión esta es la base para el desarrollo social de los paises cercanos al ártico. Otro aspecto importante de la climatología es la necesidad de que todo este perfectamente planificado, y que la gente haga mas vida interior (reduciendo las relaciones y aumentando la posibilidad de ser mas reflexivo).El problema de los paises templados, incluso calurosos, es que nadie muere por el clima (y raramente por falta de alimentos), esto nos lleva a poder soportar mejor los desmanes de nuestro 1%, que la planificación pueda ser mas flexible, o que se haga mas vida exterior (aumentando las relaciones personales y disminuyendo la posibilidad de ser mas reflexivo).
Cita de: Maple Leaf en Enero 28, 2012, 17:04:16 pmLa posibilidad real de morir congelado en horas (aunque estes en casa) es un insuperable aliciente para mejorar los estándares de vida y luchar por ellos. En mi opinión esta es la base para el desarrollo social de los paises cercanos al ártico. Otro aspecto importante de la climatología es la necesidad de que todo este perfectamente planificado, y que la gente haga mas vida interior (reduciendo las relaciones y aumentando la posibilidad de ser mas reflexivo).El problema de los paises templados, incluso calurosos, es que nadie muere por el clima (y raramente por falta de alimentos), esto nos lleva a poder soportar mejor los desmanes de nuestro 1%, que la planificación pueda ser mas flexible, o que se haga mas vida exterior (aumentando las relaciones personales y disminuyendo la posibilidad de ser mas reflexivo).WTF? Rusia es bien fría y nunca ha sido precisamente un caso de éxito económico. Islandia se ha dado a la economía de casino, con trágicos resultados. Y por poner otro contraejemplo, el soleado estado de California es por si solo la octava potencia económica del mundo [1]. Y algo deben reflexionar, pese a que el sol supuestamente invite a lo contrario, para que por aquellos pagos haya empresones como HP, Oracle, Intel, Advanced Micro Devices, nVidia, Apple o Cisco, que no se dedican precisamente a apilar tochos. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California
No nos hagamos trampas al solitario, que tenemos ya un bagaje y una edad. Las industrias con raíz en California han tenido y tienen a todo el aparato de águilas, halcones y buitres para protegerlos dentro y fuera. No es que jueguen en otra liga, es que no hay liga alguna. Hubiera sido muy descarado y contraproducente tener todo asentado en la vieja Nueva Inglaterra. Texas surte, California produce y el nordeste protege y comercializa. ¿Cómo nos puede extrañar que tuvieran éxito?
Hay muchos factores, ciertamente, hay esta el caso de los rusos, que a pesar de haber sido muy combativos en la lucha por una sociedad con mejores estándares de vida, no han podido desarrollar una protección social satisfactoría.Sin embargo, si nos vamos a paises punteros en protección social (algo que no tiene nada que ver con el desarrollo económico, como desmuestra el caso de EEUU) hay que citar, a la cabeza, a paises como Noruega, Suecia, Finlandía y Canadá, cada uno con sus particularidades.
Cita de: Pensativo en Enero 28, 2012, 18:33:53 pmNo nos hagamos trampas al solitario, que tenemos ya un bagaje y una edad. Las industrias con raíz en California han tenido y tienen a todo el aparato de águilas, halcones y buitres para protegerlos dentro y fuera. No es que jueguen en otra liga, es que no hay liga alguna. Hubiera sido muy descarado y contraproducente tener todo asentado en la vieja Nueva Inglaterra. Texas surte, California produce y el nordeste protege y comercializa. ¿Cómo nos puede extrañar que tuvieran éxito?Es lo que tienen los fanatismos, también la variante odio-a-los-USA: que toca retorcer los hechos para adecuarlos a la doctrina.Escribo estas líneas desde un ordenador HP que compré hace unos meses. Fue cosa de los pajarracos que mandan en Estados Unidos: nada tuvo que ver que estuviese harto de PCs clónicos ruidosos y que a los pocos meses de empezar a funcionar empiezan a mostrar averías raras. Las bases de datos Oracle son malas de narices, al igual que las tarjetas gráficas nVidia y, por último, un compañero de trabajo se compró un iPhone porque un marine de los Estados Unidos le puso una pipa en el pecho cuando se disponía a adquirir un modelo fabricado por Samsung, empresa coreana.Y podría tirar unas cuantas líneas más poniendo contraejemplos que ponen de manifiesto su fanatismo o ignorancia; o ambos, que suelen ir de la mano.Por cierto, hay una empresa tejana del sector de la TI muy importante llamada Texas Instruments. El circuito electrónico integrado lo inventó un empleado de esa empresa, al que le dieron el premio Nobel de física y todo.Y ¡ah!, olvidaba mencionar que IBM es una empresa radicada en el estado de Nueva York, que creo que cae por la costa este de los Estados Unidos.Las trampas hagáselas usted a otro, ¿vale?
La mayoría de los chismes que citas están hechos en China por empresas chinas. Me juego lo que quieras a que tu flamante HP "americanou" pone "assembled in Malaysia" ó algo parecido. Dos ensambladores chinos fabrican la inmensa mayoría de los portátiles "de marca americana" hoy en día (Foxxcon e Inventic). Ídem con los gadgets de Apple. Las empresas americanas solo ponen el diseño, el marketing, el logotipo y el monopolio legal para poner la mano al final del proceso para cobrar. En cualquier caso, quédate con todas tus empresas y chucherías electrónicas yanquis y a cambio dame una cobertura médica universal y una distribución equitativa de la renta: Se vive infinitamente mejor en Suecia, Finlandia, Noruega y Canadá, especialmente si tienes alguna enfermedad y el seguro médico privado no te cubre. Tampoco tendrás que pedir un préstamo para que tus hijos puedan ir a una universidad. Luego además en tu querida California puedes ver escenas como esta.... que estoy seguro que no podrás encontrar en escandinavia...Southern California Shanty Town / Tent City