100,000,000 People Strike in India

[Enki]

http://libcom.org/news/100000000-worker ... e-28022012

One of the world's largest ever strikes began at midnight on Monday 27th Feb and will end at midnight tonight. Up to 100,000,000 Indian workers from different sectors and industries are calling for a national minimum wage, permanent jobs, and much more.

As reported by libcom blogger working class self organisation in January:

Quote:
Over a dozen of India’s largest trade unions have called for and signed up to the strike. The strike will affect many sectors, including public sector banks, ports and docks, railways, insurance, road transport, energy workers, miners, and aviation workers.
“Recent months have seen a mounting wave of militant worker struggles in India, strikes for union recognition in India’s expanding auto sector, including a two-day occupation of a Hyundai plant, a wildcat strike by Air India personnel, and walkouts by telecom workers and coal miners against the central government’s privatization plans.”

The different unions have a variety of different demands, they include gaining the same rights and protection for temporary and contract workers that permanent workers have, raising and extending the minimum wage, resisting the attacks on trade unions, stopping price rises, the creation of a national social security fund, increase in pensions, and combating corruption.

The workers are demanding a national minimum wage, permanent jobs for contract labourers, social security for informal labourers, pensions for all workers, intervention by the government to stop the rising costs of living, and to end the sell off of publicly owned companies amongst other demands.

Transport, postal services and banking have all been hit by the strike which involves around a dozen unions, with a 'complete shutdown' of banking in Mumbai being reported. Police have been deployed to try to prevent 'unlawful' picketing, with 100 arrests made this morning for obstructing traffic.

[Ibrahim]

This is why China will always have the edge over India. Indians live in a democracy and can act in their own interest. Foreign investment doesn't like that, they like governments that can keep labor in line, with force if need be.

[Zack Morris]

This is why China will always have the edge over India.

Well, at least until they become old and poor in about 30-40 years. Maybe the turtle will pull ahead.

[Ibrahim]

This is why China will always have the edge over India.

Well, at least until they become old and poor in about 30-40 years. Maybe the turtle will pull ahead.

India will retain the youth edge, demographically. Not clear why China would suddenly be poorer than India.

[Zack Morris]

This is why China will always have the edge over India.

Well, at least until they become old and poor in about 30-40 years. Maybe the turtle will pull ahead.

India will retain the youth edge, demographically. Not clear why China would suddenly be poorer than India.

China is still an enormously poor country and it's difficult to see how they will be able to continue growing when their labor force grows older and more expensive. Sooner or later, the authoritarian model is going to sputter. We'll see what the leadership transition in the coming year holds. Time will tell whether their anticipated reforms will amount to anything. Efforts at democratization and establishing the rule of law have been underway for a decade now and have yielded no fruits.

[Ibrahim]

This is why China will always have the edge over India.

Well, at least until they become old and poor in about 30-40 years. Maybe the turtle will pull ahead.

India will retain the youth edge, demographically. Not clear why China would suddenly be poorer than India.

China is still an enormously poor country and it's difficult to see how they will be able to continue growing when their labor force grows older and more expensive. Sooner or later, the authoritarian model is going to sputter. We'll see what the leadership transition in the coming year holds. Time will tell whether their anticipated reforms will amount to anything. Efforts at democratization and establishing the rule of law have been underway for a decade now and have yielded no fruits.

Not sure what you mean about "rule of law" or "anticipated reforms." The country has reformed its economic model so radically and successfully since 80's, and most of the political controls conform to the Basic Law that has been in effect for decades, so there isn't so much a failure to implement a model in China as there is the successful implementation of a model very different than our own.

As to wealth, China is much poorer per capita than any Western nation, but of course with a much higher population, and even so their wealth per capita has steadily increased for decades. In any case the comparison I was making was with India, which is also poor with a massive population.

[Ibrahim]

To get back to the OP, labor organization is something that is good for the Indian workers in that they can defend their rights and interests. My main point was about it being a deterrent for foreign investment, and how that undermines the idea that free market capitalism is inherently allied with democracy or "freedom."

[Carbizene]

China has 70000 protests a year.

i see this amazing strike as a fork in the eye of the 'offshores', they thought they could circumnavigate a hundred years of Industrial Revolution by going offshore and exploiting all over again from year zero, this action brings that anti-Industrial Revolution activity one step closer to demise.

[Ibrahim]

China has 70000 protests a year.

The Indian strike is more impressive because of the massive coordination and also because these skilled trades unions appear to have legal standing that doesn't exist in China.

[Carbizene]

True, this ability to allow open dispute may well be what see's India to overtake China as China may well be riven with structural rigidity that restricts appropriate responsiveness. China's 5000 year old dream of unity at any cost may create a ethos that has no place in the new flat Earth.

[Ibrahim]

True, this ability to allow open dispute may well be what see's India to overtake China as China may well be riven with structural rigidity to allow appropriate responsiveness.

That's what'll be interesting to see. In both cases responsiveness is also hampered by endemic corruption.

[Carbizene]

Corruption is endemic on all, one only needs to see the US as the largest Arms dealer on the Planet to see how deep that rabbit hole goes.

The breadth of the Indian strike suggests a unity in Industrial parties indicative of a society less corrupt than so called first world entities.

[Zack Morris]

Not sure what you mean about "rule of law" or "anticipated reforms."

"Rule of law" means exactly what it normally does: that the country is governed by known, transparent legal rules. It implies order, predictability, and accountability for all. China lacks this.

The country has reformed its economic model so radically and successfully since 80's, and most of the political controls conform to the Basic Law that has been in effect for decades, so there isn't so much a failure to implement a model in China as there is the successful implementation of a model very different than our own.

The model is rule by corruption and selective enforcement. If Beijing's vague, tiresome, and sometimes hopeless convoluted proclamations are anything to go by, there is no coherent "model" being put into place. The "Beijing Model" is something Western authoritarian apologists have imagined.


An interesting book is hitting the shelves this month and the New York Times ran an interesting piece on it today, in the context of Russia. China can broadly be described as an "extractive" rather than "inclusive" society, from the government down to the fundamental culture, which is conformist/exclusive (I don't like the term "collectivist" because I don't think it accurately captures the way Chinese interact with those outside of their immediate circle of concern).

[Ibrahim]

Not sure what you mean about "rule of law" or "anticipated reforms."

"Rule of law" means exactly what it normally does: that the country is governed by known, transparent legal rules. It implies order, predictability, and accountability for all. China lacks this.

It does not. Rather, it has laws very different than our own. Corruption, while problematic, is not any different than it is anywhere. India and China suffer the same consequences from corruption, even though they have different political systems, and the repressive nature of Chinese law actually keeps it slightly more under control in China than it is in India (but barely).

The country has reformed its economic model so radically and successfully since 80's, and most of the political controls conform to the Basic Law that has been in effect for decades, so there isn't so much a failure to implement a model in China as there is the successful implementation of a model very different than our own.

The model is rule by corruption and selective enforcement. If Beijing's vague, tiresome, and sometimes hopeless convoluted proclamations are anything to go by, there is no coherent "model" being put into place. The "Beijing Model" is something Western authoritarian apologists have imagined.

What does recognizing that the Chinese government functions have to do with apologism? I really don't understand what you're saying here. It doesn't conform to any of my experiences.

[Carbizene]

"Rule of law" means exactly what it normally does: that the country is governed by known, transparent legal rules. It implies order, predictability, and accountability for all. China lacks this.

As compared to US corruption which is codified in that members of Congress and Senate can inside trade and be paid in options.

I love how people bitch about China and conveniently overlook violent US Imperialism, New Rome apologists.

No doubt Chinese Authoritarianism sucks but at least they keep it largely in-house and it is their own business unlike New Rome.

[Heracleum Persicum]

"Rule of law" means exactly what it normally does: that the country is governed by known, transparent legal rules. It implies order, predictability, and accountability for all. China lacks this.

As compared to US corruption which is codified in that members of Congress and Senate can inside trade and be paid in options.

I love how people bitch about China and conveniently overlook violent US Imperialism, New Rome apologists.

No doubt Chinese Authoritarianism sucks but at least they keep it largely in-house and it is their own business unlike New Rome.

.

wholeheartedly seconded , Pfui

The most corrupt nation on earth neither India nor Pakistan, but USA

Bill (clinton) was pennyless B4 elected president .. now, he worth (@least) $ 100+ million (last number I read), where did he get his money ? ?

come on, come on

Capitalism corrupted to the bone, by you know who



.