Which Way Forward for the Freedom Movement?



30-07-2022: The Freedom Movement faces a fork in the road. After the horrific lockdowns have been lifted, and odious vaccine mandates in some places have been withdrawn, the outlook is somewhat altered from the political shock of brutal Covid repression circa 2020-21. While freedom fighters bravely and heroically resisted by building and sustaining arguably the largest movement in Western political history, some loathsome debris of the fear pandemic remains. For many workplaces, unconscionable vaccine mandates are still in place, depriving those wary of the near genocidal mRNA injections from accessing employment. Detestable facemask mandates are still in place in many places of retail, hospitals and on public transport – although the vast majority of people are simply ignoring offensive signs falsely stating they are required. In some countries, proof of a double shot of the toxic Covid brew is a prerequisite for entry, meaning total freedom of movement has not been fully restored.

Backfiring sanctions create cost of living crisis

NATO’s proxy war via Ukraine is being militarily crushed by the far superior military might of Russia, and the economic sanctions applied by Washington and Brussels with the aim of regime change in Moscow are instead rebounding against working people in Europe and the USA. Inflation is almost out of control, fuel prices have skyrocketed, food shortages are real (even if deliberately created) and mortgages and rents are continuing to rise. In many places, housing even for some workers with two or more jobs is prohibitively expensive. Demands to address these issues are starting to appear where the freedom movement still continues to mobilise around the world. While demands for the end of scientifically unjustifiable vaccine and facemask mandates remain, they are tied in with calls to address the cost-of-living crisis because it is obvious that there is a common source for both of them.

To grow and develop, the freedom movement must at least be open to discussion and debate from all of its members and supporters about what it is up against and where is the path forward. While it is certainly a positive that the movement welcomes people from all backgrounds, there needs to be clear demands raised as proposals. “Freedom” should remain a goal, but this can mean different things even amongst those committed to fighting for it. There may not be agreement amongst all what freedom means, and there are certainly different views about what we are up against. Yet everyone can learn from a fair discussion and debate, and news of such a parley may very well draw in a new layer of people who are thoroughly disillusioned with “The New Normal”.

The Workers League argues that we are not battling “globalism” per se, but global capitalism in its last death throes. Capitalism traverses different stages depending on its age, but today it has well and truly been in the stage of monopoly capitalism – or imperialism – for over 100 years. Many in the freedom movement yearn for pre-monopoly capitalism, for the era of laissez-faire capitalism – by which they basically mean free competition with little or no government interference. Yet this era also ended more than 100 years ago, and it is impossible to turn back the wheel of history to such a “golden age”. Even if it was possible to break up corporate monopolies and return large industry to hundreds of small capitalists which would then compete in a “may the best company win” scenario, this would, sooner or later, lead us back to the enormous problems we have today. Free competition produces its opposite – monopoly. Therefore, the only way forward is to expropriate these monopolies and make them the property of the whole of society. Yet this means raising the working class to political power.

The global elite are closet “socialists” ?

Many in the freedom movement labour under the mistaken notion that the global elite behind “The Great Reset” and “pandemic” repression are in fact closet socialists or communists. The fact that the largest beneficiaries of the “Covid” wealth transfer were also the richest capitalist billionaires in history (e.g., Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos), should put an end to such a conception. Regardless, we are prepared to discuss and debate this idea, along with all others. To some extent though, this conception is understandable given the limitless treachery displayed by a plethora of so-called left parties, Trade Union bureaucrats and virtually the entire “progressive” political milieu, including social-democratic and Green parliamentary parties. Almost every organisation which self-describes itself as “socialist” or “communist” did not hesitate to bloc with the very billionaires and imperialist states to which they had previously sworn opposition. With these “leftists” in many cases even urging harsher lockdowns and the building of more Covid camps, it is little wonder some view “communism” as an evil.

As we have stressed, however, this fake left are purveyors of liberalism, not socialism – to say nothing of communism. Liberalism is the ideology of the medical fascism which was imposed during Covid, some of which remains in place. Fascism can adopt any ideology that falls within the capitalist sphere, and liberalism is well within these bounds. Genuine socialism, on the other hand, would never compromise itself by serving the ruling classes which currently need extensive working-class repression to cling to its rule. Real socialism is about improving the human condition and ending the exploitation of working people by finance capital. Authentic socialists should have been the first to take up the fight for freedom against the repression of the state which represents a tiny fraction of society.

Further confusing matters is the unfortunate fact that the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) were and are one of the worst vendors of Covid hysteria and imposed some of the most brutal lockdowns. It is true that there is much that is totalitarian about the PRC government, and this is of course intolerable. Yet this is an example of Stalinism (a conservative bureaucracy presiding over a predominantly nationalised and planned economy), and not at all of socialism, let alone communism. Even so, workers in China were able to push back against some aspects of Covid mania. For example, the first and only vaccine mandate attempted in Beijing was withdrawn within 48 hours after a public outcry. Arguably, Covid repression was worse in the West than it was in China. Nevertheless, the horror of Stalinism is easily avoided provided working people do not confuse it with “communism”.

From the peaks of the Canadian truckers to the millions strong demonstrations against vaccine mandates in the UK and Australia, the freedom movement has already moved mountains. To achieve its goals though, the movement needs to reach a higher political level, and at the very least outline a common set of demands. Being against something is the starting point for a movement, but the “globalists” can sustain protests of any size if such a movement does not outline a goal which is antithetical to their ends. We argue that the aim which Klaus Schwab cannot tolerate is a movement for the raising of workers’ councils which can then be defended from the whip of the counter-revolution. This incipient workers’ state can then win freedom by consigning “globalism” to the dustbin of history.



E: workersleague@redfireonline.com

Photo credit: http://www.cbc.ca

One thought on “Which Way Forward for the Freedom Movement?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s