PHM-Exch> PHM press release: "Declare Global economic downturn a health emergency!" (3)

[Claudio Schuftan]

The world in which we live unfortunately does not allow the poor and the
powerless to “offer” anything with which to bargain. That is the reason for
various human grievances and the raison d’être of the struggle. It is the
meaning of “rapport de force” or class conflict, which, under neoliberal
single ideology, are banned concepts.

The poor have offered everything, their lives, their labour, the resources
of their country, and of course their health and wellbeing. But under the
imperative of infinite accumulation, it can never be enough.

They are demanding their rights (and we in rich countries, are supporting
that demand) and these are not amenable to bargaining chips of any kind.

Neoliberalism (probably deliberately) ignores any distinction between means
and ends - both are subsumed under “cost efficiency” (itself very narrowly
defined). We are appealing unashamedly to fairness and justice as absolute
values. That “appeal” is being translated into political action through
demands.

We could possibly use the argument that the powerful countries have signed
up to various human rights treaties and conventions but as we know, these
are not enforceable (but could be made so overnight, bearing in mind that
the WTO agreements are enforceable). But again, this is confusing values
which are absolute with means which are not.

So just a comment on Ted’s point which of course is valid within a certain
framework.  I think it is useful to *explicitly refuse the bargaining
paradigm altogether*. Operating within it, is accepting the current system,
and accepting failure again.

Martin Luther (I think) said “Here I stand. I can do no other”. Without any
belief in the supernatural, it seems to me that statement captures the
essence of the struggle.

The poor stand with empty pockets and no weapons but with incontestably
legitimate demands. Again, they could threaten revolution, (within the
bargaining paradigm). But why should any more poor people die in the
struggle for universally recognized human rights?

Sadly, the confrontation with a deeply violent order, which is not amenable
to peaceful appeal, is likely to produce a violent rather than a peaceful
revolution. Avoiding that outcome must be central to our strategies, as set
out in the People’s Health Charter for example and of course in the UN
Charter.

Alison Katz

 xxx

I did not mean in any way to minimize the urgency of the issues, and in
particular did not mean in any way to suggest that the current economic
crisis does not constitute a health emergency.  It does.

 However, if I “demand” a salary increase from the University of Ottawa, I
will be far more credible if I have more on my side than appeals to
fairness, such as the option of leaving the institution and taking students
and grant money with me – or, conversely, if I can offer the institution
something that it wants but can make the offer contingent on its giving me
what I want.

In situations that do not fit this template, speaking in terms of “demands”
is, unfortunately, an indication of weakness rather than of strength,
especially when the language is used in conjunction with appeals to fairness
or justice.  Sadly, that is the world in which we live.

Now, back to drafting talking points for my introduction to a workshop on
the health case for human rights against the global marketplace at the
International Society for Equity in Health conference next month, which I
hope many PHM colleagues will attend.
Ted Schrecker
xxxx

What would Ted suggest? Should we replace 'demand' by 'humbly request'?

PHM IS attempting to mobilise in the countries where it has affiliates and
supporters around the Right to Health. The global economic crisis should be
included in our campaigning. I would  encourage those not active in
developing a Right to Health Campaign in their countries to do so.

David Sanders.
xxxx

I agree, we need to speak as loudly and clearly as possible.

In Tanzania, government statements on the planned response to the global
financial crisis have emphasised that resource allocations *to
infrastructure* will not be reduced -- with the clear implication that
resource allocations to social services will be reduced. In contrast,
feminist and health activists and others are using every opportunity to
argue that resources need to be increased to social services and social
protection, while taking direct action to protect as well as enhance the
sustainable livelihoods of women and men in both rural and urban areas.

Marjorie Mbilinyi
xxxx
So, let’s move thousands of people into the streets…we ( a group of PHM ,
HIV and MHC activists and others) are going to start working on this…18
months from now, we want 100,000 people on the mall…

Joia S. Mukherjee

 xxxxx

Although I could not agree more strongly with the substance of the
communiqué below, might I add a note of caution about the language of
“demands”?

 Social movements are most effective in articulating their objectives as
“demands” when they can bring tens/hundreds of thousands of people into the
streets, or can exercise some analogously strong influence within the more
rarefied context of multilateral fora such as WHA.  Can PHM realistically
claim to be able to do this?  If not, then I suggest moderating the
language, although not of course the underlying ethical argument.

 Ted Schrecker






 ------------------------------

_______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20090522/a0332f07/attachment-0001.html>