Tunesia – the revolution continues

protesters facing riot police in the streets of Tunis

Clashes continue in the streets of the Tunisian capital, denouncing the new “unity” government that includes many figures from the ousted Ben Ali regime.

The revolution in Tunesia is not over yet, as the above picture shows. In the west we only tuned in when it hit the climax and we’re already starting to tune out again now that the situation has been declared to be resolved. Ben Ali has been made into a scapegoat, with his erstwhile supporters and collaborators attempting to keep their own power and skins through this government of national unity, while placating the protesters with gestures like the release of political prisoners. These are steps in the right direction, but the fundamental problems of the country are not resolved by them. The same people who oppressed it are still largely in power, still think that they can calm down the protests with small concessions, that once things have calmed down they can go back to dividing the country’s wealth amongst themselves. The protestors know this and hence stay out on the streets, unwilling for now to be placated this way.

Meanwhile French capital sees the fall of Ben Ali as an opportunity to penetrate Tunesia further, as also reported in Ahram Online. But for that to be the case, the revolution and protests need to end soon. some sort of compromise, like this national government between the old regime and its opposition needs to be reached. In situations like this, when the common enemy, Ben Ali, has been vanquished, but the structures of the old regime are still in place and able to act to defend themselves, is when revolutions get derailed, as inherent class differences come to the fore.

The protests didn’t just call for greater political freedoms after all, but also more basic economic freedoms. What’s on offer now from the old regime is greater political freedom, a somewhat more representative government and a place at the table for the old elite and middle class opposition to Ben Ali and his party, the the Rassemblement constitutionnel démocratique (RCD). And with the chief kleptocrat gone, there are also economic spoils to be had for those opposition leaders willing to help shore up the old elite. And at the same time there’s foreign pressure, from France as Tunesia’s largest trading partner, but also from other “western democraties” to get the unrest dealt with quickly and get things back to normal.

Which leaves the ordinary men and women of Tunesia out in the cold, their economic and political grievances so far unheard. How they will respond to these attempts to freeze the revolt is uncertain. It’s likely that their answer will be largely determined by class: the petit bourgeoisie, small shop owners, traders and the like, will likely want the unrest to end sooner rather than later, even if this largely means a return to the status quo, just sans Ben Ali. For the working classes and working poor, this return will be more difficult and much less desirable. The protests got started when Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire. He had been unable to find meaningful employment, resorted to selling fruits and vegetables on the street in Sidi Bouzid to support himself and his family and then the police took his fruit cart from him, denying him his last means of existence. That was enough for him to set himself alight and that was the spark (no pun intented) that started the revolution. For people like Bouazizi anything that allows the RCP to remain in government, that doesn’t stop the cronyism and the plundering of the nation’s economy by the political elites, is a defeat. That’s why the protests continue: they need to win to survive or face the same slow death again, only with a slightly nicer government in power.

The first cut is the deepest

the budgets cuts hit the poor in London hardest

How the cuts in the grants central government provides local councils will be divided over London. It’s the poorest countries (deep red and mainly in the centre on the map above) who get the biggest cuts, the richer outer boroughs being hit relatively lightly. From the Londonist, which also has the raw data for the stat geeks amongst youse.

Second wave of student protests hits London

spot the tiny rogue minority

Lenny calls it the biggest student rebellion since 1968:

Several fires burn on the tarmac, someone gives an impromptu speech from atop a concrete wall, and a chant goes up: “Let us out! Let us out! Let us out!”. I am in the middle of Britain’s student revolt, and I am amazed by the high spirits of thousands of kettled children and teenagers. For my part, I can only think how cold it is. Things keep “kicking off” on the frontlines between police and protesters. Further up Whitehall, a huge crowd of kids has gathered outside the kettle. I’m told the younger kids are walking around telling the police to go fuck themselves. They’re so angry, more than I can explain, about being kettled in. When asked, the sheer righteous fury they express is impressive. The slogans that occasionally start up resonate throughout the wide avenue – “they say cutback, we say fightback!”, “Tory Tory Tory, out out out!”, and, yes, “one solution, revolution!”. The police apparently claim they’ve made toilets available to us. They have not. There are two cubicles outside the kettle, which may be toilets but we can’t access them. We have no water or food, and we are kept warm only by the fires. But still, people sing, dance, do the hokey kokey (yeah), and chant. This resilience is fuelled by white hot anger.

Nick Clegg showing his pledge not to raise student fees

According to the Dutch news, which lead with it in the eight o’clock bulletin, the students were actually trying to storm parliament. But much more happened today, as the demo list at the Anticuts website and the rolling coverage from the Socialist Worker make clear. Protest went on throughout the UK, including in Scotland, which is not affected by the proposed cuts itself. The students are angry, as are their younger brothers and sisters still in secondary schools, not to mention their parents, to be faced by massive fee increases needed to pay for the bankers’ crisis. and a lot of that anger is aimed at the LibDems, who had promised not to do so before the election. As Roobin puts it:

Election promises aren’t binding? I guess legally they’re not, but if politicians don’t have to honour what they say during the 6-4 week period every 4-5 years when they are obliged to seek popular approval why should the public respect the results of general elections, or any elections? What is left of any democratic notion in government?

In general, public disappointment with the LibDems is high, as is also seen in the results of a few recent local elections that saw their vote be hammered. The end result of the ConDem government just might be the complete destruction of the LibDems as a valid political party — public anger is high already even though most of the government’s plans so far have just been plans, not yet reality.

Social cleansing (1)

How the cap in housing benefits will work out, courtesy of Comment is Free commenter Texaspete82 (original here:

There are four parts to the HB reforms which will all be implemented by October 2011. The key reform – which affects 750,000 people and raises half a billion pounds per year – is the first of these.

1. Local Housing Allowance capped at the 30th percentile rent in every local housing market area (i.e. the level which allows – in theory – 30% of houses in the area to be afforded)…

2. …except in London, where the cap has been set significantly below this level (£250/week for 1 beds, £400/week for 4 beds)

3. A further 10% cut will be applied to those who have been unemployed for 1 year or more, to punish them for the crime of living during a recession

4. Housing Benefit capped at the 4-bed house rate to punish large families

To look at the full impact of this, you need to consult the VOA – the Government Agency responsible for setting Local Housing Allowance rates.

They’ve helpfully provided a table looking at the median rental rates (the current caps) and the 30 percentile rental rates (the future caps) in each local housing market area http://www.voa.gov.uk/lhadirect/Documents/LHA_percentile_rates_Oct_2010.html

Do have a look.

In Central London, the 30th percentile rent for a 4-bed is £850/week. There is no chance of anyone being able to afford to live in central London on housing benefit – the cap is set at less than half of the 30th percentile level. You could consider the poor to be “cleansed” from the area perhaps.

After moving out, they will not be eligible for the £400/week payment – this is only valid in central London remember. Elsewhere the 30th percentile cap applies. Let’s say they move to Outer South London, where their rent would be capped at £299/week. This is not an outragous rent for a 4-bed house – I challenge you to find a 4-bed house at this rate in this area. I live in this area, and I pay £210/week for a very small 2-bed flat in a down-at-heel area (and even then because I got a great deal from moving in when building work was still going on around me, and the landlord had to abandon plans to sell during the recession). Even my flat is £26/week beyond the 2-bed allowance for the area – and I don’t understand where all the 2-bed flats for £800/month are around me. I’m lucky – I have a decently-paid job (for now at least) and don’t claim HB, but it must be a worrying time for families who work in minimum wage jobs and rely on Housing Benefit to make ends meet.

If they lose their job, they have the further challenge of finding a 4-bed property for £270/week (or a 2-bed for £730/month). Not a chance.

And many, many people lose out beyond London too. Let’s imagine a family live in a 5-bed house in Tyneside and both parents lost their jobs in the recession in 2008. They are currently able to claim £207/week housing allowance. After the cap is applied, they are now only able to claim £140/week (£155 minus the £15 penalty for being unemployed). The Government will take £67/week from them. £3,500 taken from the poorest in society, in addition to spending cuts and VAT rises etc etc. This is not sharing the pain fairly is it?

Can you see what the fuss is about now?

The Tories have done a great PR job on getting the focus on the £400/week cap (despite the fact next to no-one will claim this, as it only applies in central London and there are no 4-beds to rent at half the 30th percentile rent) . Maybe a journalist may like to, say, scrutinise the plans and challenge the lies.

As Pete shows that much reported maximum of 400 pounds per week people can recieve in housing benefits is a red herring. There were rents are high enough that you might get it, they’re too high to be of much use, while elsewhere you would recieve a much lower rate still not enough to cover your rent.