ASQ—Issue 3
Summer 2010
Interview with Thai Political Exile,
Giles Ji Ungpakorn
By Hanah Fisher-Forman, Elizabeth Shirk, and Alec Plant
Giles Ungpakorn is a former university professor currently
in exile in the UK on charges of Lese` Majeste. This
interview was conducted in April 2010, before the govern-
ment crackdown that ended the Red Shirt protests.
This interview was conducted by Elizabeth Shirk and
Hannah Fisher-Forman. Some of these questions were
written and edited by Alec Plant, of Autonomy Alliance.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: What is the most important
agent for promoting and protecting human rights in Thai-
land?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: We should see the Red Shirts as a
mass social movement for democracy. This is an historic
moment. Never before have we seen ordinary working
people in Bangkok and the provinces (workers and small
farmers) organised into such a large movement in open
society. Naturally they have various beliefs, many like
Thaksin, but it is a mass social movement never the less.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The Red Shirts are trying to expand
and defend human rights right now. The foreign media and
a few international human rights organisations are also
helpful.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Agreed. Do you think the Red
Shirts' demands go far enough considering the racist,
sexist, and anti-gay comments the leaders of the movement
have made?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: I have been listening to the live TV
broadcasts from the protest site for over a month. The
leaders are varied. Nattawut is the most progressive. He
corrects people when they make anti gay or racist
staements. But this is a raw movement. People develop
their political understanding in struggle.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: In the end, the demands for real
democracy will involve removing the army from politics
and removing the monarchy or at least making the monar-
chy like Britain. That involves a social revolution.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Do you think this type of revo-
lution is likely?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: Yes, but that doen't mean that it will
be successful. Thailand is already in a revolutionary situa-
tion with deep divisions in society. The majority of Red
Shirts no longer like the monarchy because of what has
been done in the king's name. The army is hated (for the
3rd time in history). The police are refusing orders, the
lower ranks of the army are unhappy and the Red Shirts
have announced that they are "serfs" (Prai) in a class
struggle against the elites.
INS ID E TH IS IS S U E :
Thailand 1
SB 1070 1
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Do you think that it is true that many Chumbawamba 2
of the Red shirt protesters have been paid by Thaksin to protest
for the cause?
Fifth International 3
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: No, you can see lots and lots of evidence of
how this grass roots movement raises funds in every community.
No one would stand firm against the army for over a month just Starbucks Workers Un-
because they were paid to come. Thai citizens are very capable of ion
4
understanding why democracy is important. Thasin's government
brought pa universal health care system (better than the USA). Quality Control
5
They know they are defending the right to chose a government
which gives them benefits. Thai citizens have faced down the
army in 1973, 1976, 1992, 2009 and today.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: You criticize the PAD for their use of violence in your talks, what about the
violence the Red Shirts implemented during their protests? Subquestion: Do you believe violence is
sometimes necessary to bring about reform? If so, how and when?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The PAD used guns and home made bombs. They drove a van over a policeman repeatedly.
They took over government buildings and the airport with the help of the army. What violence of the Red Shirts are
you talking about?
Hannah Fisher-Forman: From the media that we are exposed to such as the Bangkok Post, we have heard of a
couple instances of Red Shirt protesters carrying arms into the protests, riots, along with destruction of public prop-
erty. Does this not constitute as a form of violence?
Continued on page 6.
Immigration Reform No One Should Believe In
By Andy Lucker
Last April, Arizona’s State Senate passed Senate Bill state property. Whereas, probable cause refers
1070. Essentially, SB 1070 breaks down like this: to people’s personal property, like one’s house,
Local, state, and federal authorities are now entitled and requires a warrant based upon serious
to ask anyone they have ―reasonable suspicion‖ of not evidence to pin on a suspect to search the
being in the country legally for full proof of citizen- property; merely having reasonable suspicion
ship. So, if someone was stopped by a police officer to search someone’s house is insufficient.
on the highway or walking down the street, s/he SB 1070 would allow Latino communities
would be expected to show proof of citizenship. to be patrolled, stopping everyone police see to
Aside from the root causes of immigration, this ask for proof of citizenship. Though the bill
policy subtly assumes that one could discern docu- may not say that anything about racial profil-
mented from undocumented people in Arizona, ing—stating that arrests and investigations
merely by getting a closer look at the suspect. It also s h ou ld n ot b e c on d u ct ed w h en
applies a legal precedent – ―reasonable suspicion‖—a "complaints...are based solely on race"— race
bit unusually. Reasonable suspicion is typically used can still be a component of the suspicion.
as grounds to search minors, or people already utiliz- The Department of Homeland Security
ing public resources that are suspected of hiding Office of Inspector General did a study this
evidence. year in which they found severe lack in training
For example, if a school has reason to suspect and oversight to safeguard against racial profil-
students re hiding marijuana in their lockers, a school ing among police when cracking down on
can search all the lockers, because these lockers are undocumented workers. To think that vague
Continued on page 3.
 P AGE 2
ABCDEFG: An Interview with Boff Whalley of Chumbawamba
Chumbawamba: ABCDEFG
No Masters Co-operative Records
Copyright 2010
Northern England's finest export for the past two and a half decades has
undoubtedly been Leeds' punk turned folk turned dance pop turned
back into folk again Chumbawamba. Actually, Chumbawamba's music
has always been an amalgamation of these styles, but since 2002's,
Readymades, the band's sound has gradually tipped in favor of more
straight-ahead folk, all the while maintaining the intelligent social
commentary they've been known for. From their earlier punk rock
concept albums, which addressed the electoral system and the hypoc-
risy of first-world charity to the global poor, to the celebratory pop
songs of their 90's output, Chumbawamba has forged a musical legacy
by dodging alternative music convention and creating songs with a
solid humanistic bent. Long time fans will know what to expect from
this latest offering, ABCDEFG, not because the band has become pre-
dictable but rather because they've proved their ability to dredge the
depths of people's history in order to craft songs actually about some-
thing.
ASQ: Chumbawamba records are known
for having fairly detailed liner notes, put-
ting the songs in a very specific context.
That being said, is there anything about the
songs on the new album not mentioned in
the accompanying lyric book that you'd like
to share with our readers?
Boff (Chumbawamba): Well what we
rarely do is talk about the music and the
way it's constructed and put together. Not
that we're musos desperate to show our
prowess or anything, but we certainly spend
a lot of time on the music and harmonies
and writing and rehearsing, fine-tuning and
changing things. And then we do
sleevenotes and interviews which are almost
exclusively about the subjects and issues we
write about. Inevitable of course, because
it's mainly what marks us out from a lot of
other bands. And I suppose it's a good thing because if I ever pick up an
interview with, say, Coldplay or U2, I realise that mostly all they do is
talk about their music and bloody hell it's boring to read about. Give me
a monkey-man Liam Gallagher mouthing off about which cartoons he
watches anyday!
ASQ: Over the past few years, Chumbawamba has changed from an
eight piece subversive pop band into an equally subversive five piece
folk band. Do Anarchist politics still influence the current band mem-
bers as much as when Dunstan, Harry, Alice, Paul and Danbert were
still in the group?
Boff: For me, when I personally sit down to write something for or
about the band then I'm as influenced as I ever was by the radical ideas
I've grown up with, and by an almost instinctively-anarchist response to
the world around us. And when I go to a Chumbawamba meeting I'm
aware that it's still run along very egalitarian lines, taking into account
all the issues which go into making something truly co-operative. Like
gender politics and power politics and our ideas on propaganda and
music and art and all that. Mind you this all sounds like it's some for-
mally-organised and very boring committee instead of a band. I mean
most of the time is probably taken up (like it always was) talking rub-
bish and taking the piss and having a laugh. Myself I want anarchists to
be typecast not as well-organised revolutionary po-faced ideologists but
as people who first and foremost laugh and work communally and look
like they're enjoying life. And then from that starting point you can
move on to the politics of anger and change and organisation. So any-
way the short answer is 'yes'. I could've said that at the beginning and
not put you through all that round-the-houses stuff.
ASQ: A common criticism of Chumbawamba from orthodox punks is
that the band turned its back on "real punk rock" when the group
started making danceable, lyrically positive songs. Please recount the
decision making process which led to the Slap! album and the several
records that followed it.
Boff: We were raised on punk, not punk rock. They're very different
things most of the time. I was at school and the radio was full of in-
S UM M E R 2 0 1 0
credibly stagnant heavy rock and boys playing guitar solos and middle-of-the-road
meaningless trite pop and then punk came along, and within a year or two I was
listening to situationist anti-monarchy ranting (the Pistols), girls screaming about
supermarkets (The Raincoats), small bloke with acoustic guitar singing about pov-
erty and racism and boredom (Patrik Fitzgerald), angry class politics (The Clash),
half-dressed girls asserting feminist ideas over dub reggae (The Slits), aging dis-
abled artschool funky drop-out singing Sex & Drugs & RocknRoll (Ian Dury), etc
etc I could go on forever. And then with the whole Crass thing there was an extra
dimension, and it was still weird and unpredictable. And it wasn't all four blokes
with loud guitars, but eventually that's what it became. I thought that was sad, that it
turned into a very stable, predictable form rather than an anything-goes attitude. It
became punk rock. By the time we got into making our own music we were utterly
determined to be a punk band, not a punk rock band. Our third album, before Slap!,
was an acapella album of English rebel songs. After that we did an album of 101
songs about sport. Then by the time we came to be making Slap! there was a whole
revolution in music based on dancebeats and samples and hip-hop and technology,
and we just fell in love with it and wanted to use that technology. And of course a
lot of the punk rockers didn't like it, they wanted us to belong in a certain box
forever. Which is never going to happen. And when we toured the West coast of the
USA around that time we were gobsmacked to hear people
slagging us off for "going disco"! And of course by then
Maximum RocknRoll had said they wouldn't review our
records because we weren't punk. They were wrong; we
were and still are punk; we're just not and never were punk
rock.
ASQ: Do you have a favorite Chumbawamba related mo-
ment when you felt the band was accomplishing what it
originally set out to do?
Boff: I think those moments are about us all laughing to-
gether. Without trying to minimise the importance of what
we've always tried to do politically and culturally, doing
benefits and raising awareness and trying to provoke debate
and discussion, all that stuff … the best times were when
we all laughed together at something. I'll give you an exam-
ple. We played on the David Letterman show in New York.
It was recorded in the afternoon and would go out "as if it
was live" that evening. Everything was fine until we played
our song and changed the words so that we sang 'Free
Mumia Abu Jamal' instead of the usual chorus. We finished
the song and all hell broke loose. In the dressing room
people were pleading with us to re-record the song without the controversial lyric.
Producers running around with clipboards and frowns. David was very unhappy,
apparently. Ha! They told us, "If you don't re-record the song, we won't show it on
national TV" so we just laughed and left the building. And in this moment we were
all laughing at the ridiculousness of it all. We didn't care about their threats, we just
laughed and laughed. Then later it was on TV and they'd kept it in, and we laughed
some more. I have to say, there are lots of moments like this. Moments where we
realise that what we're doing is both worthwhile and funny at the same time.
ASQ: Thanks for your time. Any final remarks?
Boff: Yes. I have seen your 'Selected Discography' (below) and I think it's skewed
and unbalanced. Is the selected discography meant to represent our history in musi-
cal terms, political terms, cultural terms? I know it's all opinion, but I think Never
Mind the Ballots (your first choice) is a bit of a dud. It was important at the time,
the British Elections, but we recorded and wrote it too quickly. It's flawed, and a bit
boring I think. Better by far is the first album Pictures of Starving Children Sell
Records, an attack on the 'Live Aid' spectacle. And English Rebel Songs is really
important because it's us moving away from guitars and trying different things
(acapella harmonies). Shhh and Anarchy I agree are good signposts. And Showbusi-
ness is a nice gathering-together of stuff, live. The sleevenotes to that CD are worth
reading. And then … Readymades? Hmmm, not sure about that. I'd go for
WYSIWYG which is the culmination of the pop/rock/culture stuff and along with
Negativland it works because it's weird and funny and sums up the time. Sorry to be
so pedantic. It's fair enough that we have our own views on what our best stuff is!
Selected Discography:
Never Mind the Ballots (1987)
Shhh! (1992)
Anarchy (1994)
Showbusiness! (1994 compiled from two concerts in Leeds. probably the best place
to start.)
Readymades (2002)
This interview was conducted via e-mail between Autonomy Alliance member David
Feldmann and Boff of Chumbawamba. David can be reached at stlwobbly@gmail.com.
A UTO N O M Y & S O L ID AR ITY Q UAR TE R L Y P AGE 3

SB 1070—continued from page 1. tioned by Arizona public policy. There have long been
wording will not sanction police with the ability laws on the books against employers and workers having
to move into known immigrant communities undocumented contracts, but those have rarely been
stopping anyone and raiding anywhere is naive. enforced; and when they are enforced, it’s almost always
SB 1070 gives police free-range to run into on workers, to scare them and drive them further under-
Latino neighborhoods in Arizona, carding almost ground. This does nothing to acknowledge the immigrant
anyone. rights’ slogan, ―We Want the Right Not to Migrate!‖ The
No States – No Borders – No Human Is Illegal state doesn’t care about people. It cares about approval
The fact is that Latino immigrants are pouring ratings, creating fear, legitimizing itself, and pleasing its
over the border US-Mexico border as a result of constituents, including its financiers. To this, the rich and
the historical relations between the US and Mex- powerful conquer and divide, erect borders, and create
ico. During World War II, there was a shortage of hysterical fear campaigns.
farm workers in the South, because so many men
were fighting in Europe. So, the US negotiated a Resistance
policy with Mexico to bring Mexican families to Four students were arrested protesting this law at Senator
these Southern US farms to work over the sum- Photo by Joseph Voves John McCain’s Office; three were undocumented. This
mer for low American wages. (However, these wages were relatively high for courage is paramount in the face of this law. Hip-hop
Mexican workers, which encouraged a flood of Mexican surplus labor to pour artist Chuck D has come out against the bill, which has become a famous point of
over its Northern border.) This agreement was supposed to simply keep US protest. A more unorthodox form of protest seems to be emerging in Arizona, too…
agribusiness on its feet, until the soldiers returned, but US agribusiness bene- from sports.
fited too much from it to end it. The Phoenix Suns offered public statements and speeches at a game at their
After its 1947 expiration, the Bracero Program was continued up through home, US Airways Center, where demonstrators and Al Sharpton gathered in protest
1964. That’s two generations of workers making a living by travelling North of against these ―Juan Crow‖ laws. Everyone from owners to Charles Barkley from ―Los
Mexico for farm work. Nobody expected this to end the migration, but crimi- Suns‖ had something to say against the bill. Moving to baseball, where 27.7% of
nalizing it would drive illegal wages down even further through state fear and Major League Baseball Players are Latino, many players have released statements
intimidation. against SB 1070. The Arizona Diamondbacks are scheduled to host the 2011 All-Star
NAFTA was a 1994 Clinton era policy, which the US Department of Game, and many MLB players have said they will refuse to participate, even if chosen
Labor and American labor unions predicted would increase unemployment in to play.
Mexico and increase Mexican immigration to the US. This was, apparently, Michael Weiner, Executive Director of the Major League Baseball Players
what the capitalist class wanted—more fearful and cheap labor. US agribusiness Association, has released a public statement against the bill, exposing the negative
flooded the Mexican economy with US-government subsidized goods produced impacts the bill would have against players and their traveling family members when in
with highly industrial machinery, forcing Mexican peasants to compete with Arizona. "The Major League Baseball Players Association opposes this law as written.
Monsanto and ConAgra in the US. As Mexican peasants could no longer make We hope that the law is repealed or modified promptly. If the current law goes into
a return on their crops, they could 1) produce something that would make a effect, the MLBPA will consider additional steps necessary to protect the rights and
profit, like marijuana, 2) go underground and move to where they can find jobs, interests of our members."
the US, 3) try to adapt to the rapidly changing economy that requires skills they Players have made blunter statements, as have fans, but the Diamondbacks are the main
don’t have, relocation, and work cycles they’re unaccustomed to—work in a focus. Diamondbacks owner Ken Kendrick was a major financial backer of the whole
low-wage sweatshop or maquiladora. bill, which has made his team’s away games have a traveling road-show of SB 1070
Our state has destroyed the Mexican economy and left them with the controversy. At almost every away game immediately after the passing of 1070, they
rational alternative of immigrating without following the bureaucratic proc- faced demonstrations of unhappy baseball fans. This is coupled with a new campaign,
esses. Meanwhile, the state and media are foaming at the mouth to break up largely based around baseball fans and immigrant rights activists on Facebook, to
families, leave children hungry, and put undocumented workers back in the boycott the Diamondbacks.
situation where illegal drug trade or being beaten at work are the next best
Andy Lucker is a member of Autonomy Alliance and is a member of the International Associa-
rational alternatives for their livelihood.
tion of Machinists, Local 660. Andy can be reached at andrewlucker@gmail.com.
SB 1070 states that what police have done for a long time is now sanc-

On A Fifth International
By Andy Lucker
In November 2009, at the International Encounter of Left Parties, held in Cara-
cas, Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez declared, ―the time has come for us to
convoke the Fifth International.‖ This flare threw nearly every socialist organi-
zation in the world into a frenzy, deciding what it should be.
What About One Through Four!?
Chavez argued that capitalism rapidly developed in Europe, leading to their
earlier creation of oppositional socialist movements and political Internationals.
For example, the First International was the oldest, most basic (and vague) of
Internationals, composed of socialists, like Karl Marx and Frederich Engels, and
even anarchists (before the Paris Commune). An anarchist International—which
ran with many different official titles—was formed as a result of the centralist
tendencies within the First, which resulted in the expulsions of anarchists, like
Bakunin. Shorty after anarchists and state-socialists went their separate ways,
their Internationals became less mobile and dissolved. The Second International
formed after the First dissolved, but failed to remain true to its principles, includ-
ing Social Democrats who supported nationalism and capitalism to the most
disgusting extents, like defending World War I.
The Third International, the "Comintern" (Communist Interna-
tional), was originally a split from the Second, and was called for by Bolsheviks
in Russia. (For theoretical disagreements, I recommend V.I. Lenin's The War
and the Second International, New York: International Publishers, 1932.) This
included most anti-capitalist organizations in the world that were interested in
joining. However, as the Russian Revolution came into full swing, much distrust
developed between many anarchists and Communist Party members. While
debate within the International was held somewhat openly, the free flow that was
had before the Paris Commune was never found again. After the Russian Civil
War, anarchists were still being persecuted in Russia, and eventually, even tried
and true Leninists who held true to their principles against capitalism, like Leon
Trotsky, were also persecuted . So, on the run from the new Russian state, Trotsky
formed the Fourth International, calling for a political revolution to overthrow
Stalin and his political bureaucracy.
Why Another?
While there are problems with Marx, Bakunin, expulsions , Social Democrats,
Lenin, and Trotsky, these were all valiant attempts to unite the Left. Chavez sees
the Bolivarian Revolution as seriously threatened by imperialism—and he should,
after a US-backed coup in 2002—and follows his fear with the notion that a Fifth
International should be based around anti-imperialism. This suggestion seems
basic, however, its subtle conclusions are not quite so basic.
President Chavez’s anti-imperialist ideas are exhibited among many
Leftists. Well known Venezuelan activist Julio Chavez did an interview during the
five-month PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela) Congress (ending in April
2010) on the need for a Fifth International . Julio seems consistent with others in
espousing the reasoning behind an ―anti-imperialist‖ ideology, revealing some
bizarre theoretical conclusions in an interview with Kiraz Janicke and Frederico
Fuentes (―The First Socialist International of the 21st Century,‖ April 28, 2010,
VenezuelanAnalysis.com).
In it, Julio Chavez defended Hugo’s reasoning for the Third World to
begin a new, Fifth International. He argued that it should be composed of:
not just specifically those raising the historical project of socialism, but that
anti-imperialism should be the common element that brings us all together.
P AGE 4
This doesn’t sound inherently bothersome to most socialists, but it flows directly
to an unprincipled conclusion:
We say that this call has to have a broad character, and it is possible that in
some countries, such as in the Middle East, there are organizations and
movements fighting against some expressions of imperialism and interna-
tional Zionism as such, but that are not socialist in essence, in the program-
matic sense. But, undoubtedly, they are fighting imperialism. That’s why
we say that it could be that in some Islamic countries that do not have
socialism as an ideological element, for example the case of the Islamic
Revolution of Iran, which is anti-imperialist, that this element will be an
element that will convoke as many parties, organizations, movements of
the world to raise the battle, the confrontation with imperialism.
Broad characters are great, but principles are priceless. For decades, Communists 1
defended the idea that socialists should unite with capitalists to make capitalism
better, to the point that we should later exist in a stage where the capitalist nation-
state would move onto a transition to socialism. But the fact is that capitalism
involves deception and exploitation, which is why it is inherently unfair and
unprincipled; capitalism should be opposed by revolutionaries at all times and its
beneficiaries shouldn’t be collaborated with, if we sincerely want its end.
In the same sense, sexism, racism, homophobia, authoritarianism,
and other oppressions exist. How are we to unite with the right for Iran to exist as
a homophobic, sexist, authoritarian regime that massacres any group or individual
that steps even slightly out of line with its nation-state? This defense of Third
World politics is unprincipled. Just like the way Nikolai Bukharin and Joseph
Stalin argued for a ―popular front‖ to fight right-wing governments (by defending
liberal capitalism), Julio Chavez is suggesting we ally with anti-imperialist sexists
to move away from capitalism.
Capitalism is not the only problem!
Every human society in all of world history has had natural needs to fulfill as a
species. We need to eat, so we make functions out of the objective world by
producing, consuming, and allocating food, and we call this an economy. We
need to continue existence, so we procreate, rear and socialize, and sexualize, and
these fulfill kinship necessities. We need to feel, so we attach emotions, get
creative, and communicate, and these fulfill cultural necessities. We need to make
decisions, so we participate, learn empowerment, and seek policies to be fair, and
these answer political questions. Massively effecting one sphere of social life
may effect others, but none of them reigns supreme over others.
We could not have the military industrial complex without schools to rear
children with nationalism, banking-system educational methods, racist media
campaigns, and a state that seeks war. Ending imperialism, or even capitalism,
does not constitute maintaining all principles. Defending Iran against the United
States today seems comparable to siding with the Taliban in the Afghan-Soviet
War of the 1980s. Only a heterosexist man who is not a part of the politically
repressed opposition in Iran would defend the Iranian state to the point of seeking
it as an ally.
Sadly, this partially explains why President Chavez has reasoned his at-
tempted alliances with countries like Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia. This
is the depressing aspect of the interview with Julio Chavez; he explains what
appears to be the ideological backdrop for some of Hugo Chavez’s kookiest
Starbucks Workers Union
On March 20, 2010, Autonomy Alliance
hosted a discussion about the Starbucks
Workers’ Union (SWU) at Black Bear
Bakery in St. Louis, MO. Anja Witek
and Erik Forman, both organizers for
SWU and Starbucks’s employees, led
the talk. They explored topics ranging
from Starbucks’s ―socially conscious‖
corporate image to personal experiences
trying to unionize their local shops.
Forman and Witek covered the bleak
working conditions for employees of the
company. Both explained that all non- Erik Forman and Anja Witek (SWU-IWW), at
management positions are part-time, Black Bear Bakery
that it is difficult to attain health insur-
ance through the company, that the company does not provide a living wage, and
that the company is an ―at-will employer,‖ meaning employees can be fired for
almost any reason.
Despite the fact that Starbucks is an ―at-will employer,‖ the Industrial
Workers of the World (IWW) have been working to unionize shops under the
V O L UM E 1 , I S S UE 1
actions and statements. It is an embarrass-
ment for the Left, making it difficult for us
to argue our defense for what we want…
―Yes, I want a world in which all people
have a right to sexually choose their consen-
sual partner, which is why I align myself
with the Iranian government immediately
after their President’s anti-Semitic bab-
blings.‖ Hopefully, this will not be the
attitude of the whole Fifth International, if it
comes to be.
A Participatory Socialist International
On January 21, 2010, Michael Albert of
ZNet put out a call for a Participatory So-
cialist International, following Chavez’s call
for the Fifth International. Albert’s call was followed by a draft proposal, which
ZNet Sustainers can sign on to endorse as a proposal to future congressional
assemblies to ratify a Fifth International’s existence. The proposal includes
principled approaches to resolving sexism, racism, capitalism, authoritarianism,
pollution, and international relations. (The proposal is available online, at
<http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/groups/people-for-a-psi>.) It’s a
worthwhile attempt to get more than strictly anti-capitalists onboard and ex-
panding the Left’s social scope, while touching on some common problems of
the Left globally, but will it be taken seriously by the rest of the global Left?
My guess is not entirely. But, that is not to say that we should not
participate to get as much of its program accepted as possible, and continually
propose and re-propose those strategic points omitted from a future Fifth Inter-
national’s program. We don’t make democracy by abandoning decisions; we
participate! If a Participatory Socialist International can be constructed, or a
Socialist International made as participatory as possible, we must be there! If
there are problems of sexism, racism, authoritarianism, or capitalism to be
fought against in an upcoming Fifth International, we all must be there to put an
end to these viruses before they gain intellectual support to excuse them. If we
aren’t there, then the sexist betrayers in the anti-imperialist movement will more
easily create a new misogynist state.
In other words, please:
 Participate in the creation of a Fifth International!
 Sign the online petition (above) to endorse a PSI!
(http://www.zcommunications.org/newinternational.htm)
 Make sure the First Socialist International of the 21st Century is
not dominated by a new oppression!
1.By ―Communists,‖ I mean Communist Party members, specifically those not in the Left
Opposition. This includes Nikolai Bukharin, as well as Social Democrats that grew to accept
working with the capitalist class to form a ―popular front‖ to fight off the most reactionary
forces. This became known as ―two-stage‖ theory.
Andy Lucker is a member of Autonomy Alliance and the International Association of Machin-
ists, Local 660. Andy can be reached at andrewlucker@gmail.com.
banner of the SWU. Perhaps the biggest hurdle to unionizing shops is the US
labor laws that allow companies to make it nearly impossible for any workplace
to unionize. Thus, the SWU had to organize itself as an ―unofficial union.‖
The SWU sees itself as a viable alternative to some of the larger, more
well-known unions because of its focus on improving working conditions and
the lack of union bureaucracy. The speakers explained that this lack of bureauc-
racy allows them to solve day-to-day problems much more quickly and effi-
ciently (albeit sometimes confrontationally and illegally). Witek gave a specific
example of this: her union held a demonstra-
tion outside of her shop after an employee was
unjustly fired. Although the SWU is small in
scope right now, Witek and Forman are hope-
ful that once more employees of Starbucks
find out about it the union will increase in size.
Both organizers visited several of Starbucks’s
shops in St. Louis and received many positive
responses from workers, most of whom knew
nothing of the union prior to their visit.
A UTO N O M Y & S O L ID AR ITY Q UAR TE R L Y
Quality Control: Diary of An Alienated Worker
In a culture filled with ram-
pant consumerism and individual-
ism, I decided at a young age that
I wanted to have a job where I
didn’t contribute to the nastier
side of our culture, a job where I
could actually ―give back.‖ The
first job I ever had that I thought
was ―giving back‖ was working
as a nurse’s aid at a local hospital.
I was nineteen years old, and I
worked the graveyard shift. What
could be more meaningful than
being the last person someone
might see before they died, gaz-
ing into their eyes as they slowly
inhaled and exhaled their final,
labored breaths? Or so I thought.
Perhaps one of the least romantic aspects of my job was changing dia-
pers on elderly patients. I didn't think of it as anything more than that—part
of my job. Push, shove, pull, strap. It was a mechanical process for me.
Myself a piece of machinery, my patients just the objects moving on the
conveyor belt. Reflecting on this experience, I now know that I should have
savored my patients more, talked to them more, comforted them more. But,
when I sometimes had up to twenty-seven patients a night, changing diapers
was a time-consuming process, and it was more efficient for me to just
move on to my next patient.
My patients suffered as a result of this push for ‖efficiency‖; they were
reduced to numbers, to diapers to change, to call lights to answer—to ob-
jects. As I hurried from room to room, my goal was not to care for them, but
to make sure that I signed a sheet of paper on all the doors that stated I had
at least checked in on all the rooms once an hour. If I didn’t, I would get
―talked to‖ by my supervisor. In the nurse’s station, this efficiency mani-
fested most blatantly, where patients were known only as ―Room 27‖ or
―Room 36.‖
The hospital, meant to be a center of care, operated more like a business,
valuing only efficiency and cutting out staff wherever they could. As a
result, the nurses and aids could not complete their jobs without treating
patients like objects—it just wasn't pragmatic. We didn't have time to make
rounds, check vitals, change diapers, or any one of a number of our job
requirements and sincerely care for our patients as
individuals. The hospital administration even
encouraged us to not think of our patients as pa-
tients but as customers.
This efficiency model would eventually slap
me in the face whenever my own grandmother got
sick. She was diagnosed with cancer, and, not two
months after her diagnosis, she was in the hospital
and was going to be on my floor.
On the nights my grandmother was in the
hospital, I remember stopping by to see how she
was doing. As she lay in a small, misshapen ball in
her bed, I noticed the pale, yellow tint her skin had
taken. Her face looked tight and thin, as though her
skin were nothing more than plastic melted onto a
skeleton. As her dull, green eyes glanced across the
room, they looked large and placid, nothing more than little puddles water.
Through it all, she talked little, even to me. I overheard the other nurses
saying she was in a lot of pain, and she usually only called out when she
needed a pain pill.
After she had been in the hospital for a couple days, a nursing assistant
asked me one night if I could help her change Mrs. Doe’s (my grand-
mother's) diaper. Trying to maintain professionalism, I agreed and walked
down the stark hallway to her room. As we walked in, infomercials blared
from the cheap, hospital television. When I bent over my grandmother to
undo her soiled diaper, she gave me a sweet, sheepish smile. The nursing
assistant and I swiftly pulled the dirty diaper out from under my grand-
mother and were beginning to replace it with a fresh one, when my grand-
P AGE 5
mother looked at me and soberly
said, ―I remember when I was
changing your diapers.‖ Her tone
was not of sweet sentiment but of
solemn, stoic detachment. Then she
looked at me with one soft, silent
tear and turned her face away with
shame. As I finished changing the
diaper, I had no idea what to say.
My grandmother gazed at the
television, as though she was fix-
ated on the seedy set of infomer-
cials.
Sitting there in that tiny, stark
room, I began to wonder how I
could treat my own grandmother as
I had all my other patients. How
could I watch her die, as I had
slowly watched many of my patients die? How could I make money off of
changing my own grandmother’s diaper?
I had to strap the same cheap diapers on her, cleaning her with the same
cheap moistened wipes. Anytime I stopped to visit my own grandmother, I
had to write my initials on a sheet of paper, so the supervisors would know I
had been there. And, the visits couldn’t be very long; I had other patients to
check on, charting to complete, and reports to file. At the hospital, it was not
cost-effective for me to treat my grandmother like my grandmother, or even
someone I cared about.
I quit that job shortly after, the vision of my dead grandmother still haunt-
ing me in the sterile halls of the hospital. I continued with school and gradu-
ated with a degree in education. I was convinced that this would be a much
better career—I didn’t have to deal with death, and by seeing my students on
a daily basis, I could really grow with them and care for them as individuals.
Much of this, however, has not lived up to my expectations. Much like
working at the hospital, there is a new, similar push for efficiency in schools.
With No Child Left Behind (NCLB) still rattling forward and Obama’s recent
extension of NCLB, Race To The Top (RTTT), gaining momentum, there is a
strong thrust to standardize education and treat students more and more like
objects.
Case in point—one of the requirements of the new educational policies is
for students to be assessed ―fairly‖ and ―objectively‖ more frequently.
Sounds wonderful, right? Well, in reality this has
meant that my high school students have been taken
out of class at least eight times in the past year for
standardized testing, not including the state’s two-
day blitz of standardized testing for Juniors. When
teachers are asked to examine students at meetings,
we are told that our decisions about their future must
be ―data driven,‖ or based on these standardized test
results.
Seeing students only based on their testing re-
sults pushes teachers to treat students like objects.
Several states have already passed into law that at
least 50% of a teacher’s evaluation must be based on
students’ standardized test performance. To exem-
plify this, our superintendent has slipped during one
of our faculty meetings by referring to our students
as our ―products.‖ What he was implying was that our students were what we
produced, and the tests were our ―quality control.‖
Social institutions under capitalism, such as hospitals, schools, prisons,
etc., want us to treat others like objects because it is more efficient by its own
measurements. It's quicker, cheaper, and easier to standardize and observe.
As humans, though, we must fight such dehumanizing efforts to enforce
callous measures of efficiency and standardization. To get to know each
other. To humanize each other. Capitalism has stripped us of careers that
make it easy to give back to our communities and add meaning to our lives.
If there is some tangible way to give back today, I believe it comes in the
form of fighting against the institutions, the governments, the administra-
tions, the bosses, or the authorities that want us to dehumanize each other.
We must fight to act like humans, not machines.

Keep up to date on local events
and issues on our website:
www.autonomyalliance.org
Contact us to get involved, if you
have questions, or if you would
like to voice an opinion to be
published:
autonomyalliance@gmail.com
Letters to the Editors
If you have an opinion or
suggestion for the printing of
Autonomy & Solidarity Quarterly, a
comment on a news event, an
opinion about a social issue, or
would like to see something
published about a specific subject,
please, email us, at
autonomyalliance@gmail.com.
Autonomy & Solidarity
Quarterly is collectively and
democratically edited by
Autonomy Alliance.
Autonomy Alliance exists
for general educational
purposes, to expose all
oppressive institutions and
propose non-oppressive
solutions, to ally in
solidarity with other agreed
upon events, struggles,
organizations, or coalitions,
and to network with
oppressed peoples to act
and discuss in an open,
safe, and shared forum,
despite disagreements.
Thailand Interview—Continued from page 1.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The Bangkok Post is a government mouth-piece,
so is the Nation. Foreign media are much more reliable.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Agreed!
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The Red Shirts have never carried arms into the
protest site. They seized some serious weapons off soldiers and stacked
them up on stage and then gave them to the police. No destruction of
property has occured (unlike the PAD who wrecked government house).
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The Red Shirts would be justified (in my view) to
use defensive violence. But so far they have refrained.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Do you consider the defacing of democracy monument in
Bangkok a form of destruction of property? Would you say that the Red Shirt move-
ment has been completely non-violent since the beginning of the protests
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: Yes they have been very disciplined, despite provocation eg. tanks, live ammunition, lies, rubber bullets, tear gas dropped
from helicopters, 20 killings by soldiers... They wrote stuff on the democracy monument. That isn't a problem, it can be washed off. But actually
you might say it is "taking ownership" of this highly significant monument which was initially built by Pibun (a military dictator) in the 1930s.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The soldiers shot live rounds which damaged the monument.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: We were able to see the monument while in Bangkok and this demonstration was very moving for us. We have
heard a variety of things concerning the Monarchy and their position about human rights. What role do you think the Monarchy plays in
protecting human rights?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The monarchy has never ever protected democracy or human rights. The King is weak and unprincipled. He goes with
whoever is in power, especially the army. His main role is to provide legitimacy for the actions of the elites, military etc. His sufficiency Econ-
omy justifies social inequality. But he has no power over the military. He has never intervened in a crisis unless it was obvious who had won.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Do you think for this reason along with always siding with the elite groups could eventually lead to its dissolution?
Do you think it should? We are told repeatedly that the dissolution of the Monarchy would cause chaos; therefore, would it be unwise to elimi-
nate the Monarchy now due to the current political unrest?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: The monarchy has never stopped chaos e.g., 1970s and now. Declaring a republic would not make any difference to
stability. It would help strengthen democracy, however. The future of the monarchy is very shaky.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Do you think his death would cause political unrest? We are told that many people are restraining themselves from
participating in the conflict out of respect for the Monarchy. Do you think the King really has this much influence?
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: No one (either side) has ever restrained themselves out of respect for the monarchy. There is already deep unrest. His
death will merely be an excuse for more propaganda.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: two more questions and then I have to go...
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Ok, could you tell us a little
about your lese majeste charges, and what this means for
free speech in Thailand.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: I wrote a book criticizing the 2006
coup which investigated how different groups reacted to
the coup, including the king. If academics can't write pro-
democracy books without facing 15 years in prison, then
there is no free speech.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: If it would be okay and you
have the time, is it possible for us to send you a few Free
questions via e-mail?
Hannah Fisher-Forman: You can answer them when- Event
ever you get the chance.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: I'm very busy, sorry.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Liz and I will be using this
interview for our field experience, but we were wondering
if this interview could be published in a St. Louis maga-
zine or ZMag. If not, we of course completely under-
stand.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: You are free to publish anything. Music by David Rovics and The Lodge Brothers
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: Good luck with your studies
Speakers include Rosemary Feurer (author of Radical
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Once again, thank you very
Unionism in the Midwest 1900-1950) and Jeremy Brecher
much for your time and responses.
Hannah Fisher-Forman: You also! (author of Strike!)
Hannah Fisher-Forman: Have a lovely afternoon!
Giles Ji Ungpakorn: Bye Refreshments Provided
Saturday, July 10, 2010, 1:00 p.m.
Alec Plant is a member of Autonomy Alliance and student at Webster
University. Alec can be contacted at the.alec@gmail.com. Wilson Park (29th & State St, Granite City, IL
James Kelman is a Scottish writer of short stories and novels. Born in
1946, Kelman's earliest stories were published in the early seventies.
Who’s Who? Without romanticization or denigration, Kelman vividly portrays Scot-
tish working-class (and often unemployed) life with direct, gritty prose. In
defiance of the stolid, middle class pretensions of so much UK literature,
his work has become known for its coarse language and phonetically
written Glasgow dialect (the setting of most of his stories). Notable short
fiction includes "Acid," a brutal half page story of a fatal workplace
accident, "No Longer the Warehouseman," and "Not Not While the
Giro." His most famous novel, How Late it Was, How Late, depicts the
downfall of an unlikeable drunk who is the victim of police abuse. Upon
winning the prestigious Booker Prize in 1994, one contest judge resigned
in disgust calling the book "a disgrace," prompting Kelman to respond
that English haughtiness and intolerance to other cultures was as en-
trenched now as it was during the heydays of the British Empire. While
not as popular as fellow Scot, Irvine Welsh (whose novel Trainspotting
James Kelman catapulted him into fame) Kelman is firmly established in the literary
world, with several decades of solid, class-conscious work as proof.