alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Once again, a confirmation that we are an irrelevancy and effectively have no political presence. An unpalatable fact to swallow, i grant you, but reality seems to bear this out.Do we continue to blame authors, apportioning the blame to their bias, or do we start wondering if perhaps we are not doing enough (which i don't accept, having seen the time and energy many members put into promoting our case)— or begin to question that we have perhaps been doing wrongly?If many lesser organisations and even individual persons get more prominent exposure than we do…shouldn't we be asking ourselves why.
Oh, i do think he has changed his narrative a bit…he is talking the talk for getting the liberal/left on his side but he never walks the walk.He claimed there was no better than a 50 per chance of anyone remaining alive in Great Britain by the year 2000. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”Did he humbly admit he was mistaken…no, instead he shifted the goal posts, "If you look closely at England, what can I tell you? They're having all kinds of problems." He also claimed that by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. He forecast that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989. He made much of his experience of India but India’s total fertility rate is down from 5.9 in 1951 to 2.3 in 2011. India is expected to reach replacement level fertility of 2.1 by 2020. The fertility rate in urban India is already below that at 1.8. So, India is actually stabilising its population and far from explodingBut my post wasn't really aimed at someone i believe to be an academic charlatan but that it suits the Guardian to promote his views…point the finger at everything except the real culprit – capitalism. The problem isn’t population but they cannot concede that.If there is any progress in reducing family sizes, it isn't the NGOs or the philanthropists but poor women in the developing countries empowering themselves and as i reported in the other thread it is they who are taking control of their own bodies via abortion.It maybe free-market think-tank but this is worth a long readhttps://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/ExplodingPopulationMyths.pdf
In October, Scotland’s chief medical officer told Scottish health boards that the drug Misoprostal could be taken outside a clinical setting. The drug is the second of a two-drug combination used in early abortions.
Quote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misoprostol#AbortionMisoprostol is used for self-induced abortions in Brazil, where black market prices exceed US$100 per dose. Illegal medically unsupervised misoprostol abortions in Brazil are associated with a lower complication rate than other forms of illegal self-induced abortion, but are still associated with a higher complication rate than legal, medically supervised surgical and medical abortions. Failed misoprostol abortions are associated with birth defects in some cases. Low-income and immigrant populations in New York City have also been observed to use self-administered misoprostol to induce abortions, as this method is much cheaper than a surgical abortion (about $2 per dose) The drug is readily available in Mexico. Use of misoprostol has also increased in Texas in response to increased regulation of abortion providersWomen seeking abortions have been required to take both drug doses in a hospital or clinic.Pro-abortion rights groups backed the change, including Abortion Rights, the Family Planning Association and the Scottish Humanist Society. Jillian Merchant, vice-chair of the group Abortion Rights, said that the change would make Scottish practice reflect current practice in the U.S., France and Sweden. “Patients are not required to take pills in front of the prescribing clinician for any other condition. Abortion should be treated no differently,” said Merchant.Scottish bishops objected that “making abortion easier ignores the disturbing reality that an innocent human life is ended,” the U.K. newspaper The Catholic Herald reports.The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Scotland will argue in court that the relevant legislation, the 1967 Abortion Act, did not intend to allow abortions at home. The legislation requires the presence of doctors, nurses or medical staff. John Deighan, CEO of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Scotland, argues, “Many vulnerable women who may be desperate about the situation they are in will be pushed towards what is seen as the easy option of being handed some drugs and sent home to stop being a problem for society.” He continued, “The move to trivialize abortion is one that harms women and creates an environment where some women are even urged to have an abortion because it does not suit others,” Deighan continued, saying the government plan amounts to approving “backstreet abortions.”https://cruxnow.com/church-in-uk-and-ireland/2018/03/21/in-scotland-pro-lifers-say-at-home-abortion-pill-could-pressure-women/
Rates of abortion have dropped significantly across the world in the past quarter-century, but the decline has been predominantly in the developed world, according to a report by the US-based Guttmacher Institute.
Quote:“Legal restrictions do not eliminate abortion,” the report said. “Rather they increase the likelihood that abortions will be done unsafely, as they compel women to seek clandestine procedures. Indeed, abortion tends to be safer in countries where it is broadly legal and in countries with a high national income.”Globally, the rate of abortion fell between 1990-94 and 2010-2014, from 46 to 27 per 1,000 women of reproductive age. But in developing countries, the abortion rates declined from 39 to just 36 in the same period. Globally, the rate of abortion fell between 1990-94 and 2010-2014, from 46 to 27 per 1,000 women of reproductive age. But in developing countries, the abortion rates declined from 39 to just 36 in the same period.“It is good news that the unplanned pregnancy rate has declined worldwide,” said Gilda Sedgh, one of the report’s authors. “But it is not good news that there are wide differences across the world between developing and developed countries.”
Quote:Marjorie Newman-Williams, vice president for external affairs at Marie Stopes International, said: “At a time when we see several governments around the world trying to increase restrictions on women’s access to safe abortion, and in some cases even to contraception, this report is a beacon of common sense. Restricting abortion does not stop women from having them. All it does is drive women to desperate measures, putting their health and lives at risk. Every day, 130 women die as a result of an unsafe procedure. It is vital on this issue that governments are led by the evidence rather than resorting to well-trodden myths and prejudices. Giving people the power to decide the size of their family is an essential component of development, lifting families out of poverty and strengthening security and resilience. Countries can only benefit by accepting that this need exists and providing safe, quality services to meet it.”In 2014, at least 22,800 women died from complications of unsafe terminations. Unsafe abortions occur in developing countries where restrictions are concentrated and also where there is inadequate provision, even when legal. As of 2017, 42% of women of reproductive age live in the 125 countries where abortion is highly restricted (either prohibited altogether or allowed only to save a woman’s life or protect her health). In the 14 developing countries where unsafe abortion is prevalent, 40% of women seeking a termination develop complications that require medical attention. As of 2017, 42% of women of reproductive age live in the 125 countries where abortion is highly restricted (either prohibited altogether or allowed only to save a woman’s life or protect her health).The report found that abortions occur as frequently in the two most restrictive categories of countries – such as Malta, where it is banned outright, or Ireland, where it is allowed only to save the woman’s life – as it does in the least restrictive category, where it is allowed no matter what the reason.“Improved contraception use and, in turn, declines in unintended pregnancy rates are the likely driver behind the worldwide decline in abortion rates,” said Susheela Singh, vice president for international research at the GI. “Most women who have an abortion do so because they did not intend to become pregnant in the first place. Meeting the need for contraception is critical to bringing down rates even further.”Of the 56 million abortions that occurred annually between 2010 and 2014, an estimated 55% were deemed “safe”: done by a trained practitioner and by a recommended method. Just over 30% were “less safe”, where only one of these conditions was met, and 14% were “least safe”, when neither was met, according to the report.The safety of abortion procedures has improved because of advances in clinical guidelines and broadening legality in a number of countries, the study said. In addition, where abortion laws are highly restrictive, the increased use of the drug misoprostol has also improved safety.It concluded: “Even when used by an untrained person, misoprostol is still safer than traditional methods of clandestine abortion that are considered the least safe, such as inserting sharp objects into the uterus or ingesting toxic substances.”Improved contraceptive use meant that across the world the number of unwanted pregnancies dropped substantially, it said.https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/mar/21/abortion-rates-drop-dramatically-rich-countries-terminations-study
Mississippi’s governor has signed the nation’s tightest abortion restrictions into law. It becomes law immediately and bans most abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation. The law’s only exceptions are if a fetus has health problems making it “incompatible with life” outside the womb at full term, or if a pregnant woman’s life or a “major bodily function” is threatened by pregnancy. Pregnancies resulting from rape and incest are not exempted.Abortion rights advocates are calling the law unconstitutional because it limits abortion before fetuses can live outside the womb. The owner of Mississippi’s only abortion clinic, Diane Derzis, opposes the law. Her clinic would be forced to turn away women who seek abortions after 15 weeks and refer them out of state, where the number of clinics is also dwindling in the face of legal and legislative challenges by a resurgent anti-abortion, religious right movement.The law, also known as the Gestational Age Act, also says a person found guilty of performing an abortion after 15 weeks of gestation will face a felony conviction and up to 10 years in prison and could have their medical license suspended or revoked.Mississippi, a relatively poor state, has the highest infant mortality rate and worst overall ranking in the nation for children and infant care.https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/19/mississippi-abortion-law
Quote:Clearly there are very real medical and ethical problems involved in the question of abortion and ultimately it is for the individuals themselves to decide. However, these problems are exacerbated because of the nature of the society in which we live. In a sane world, probably no one would opt for abortion as a method of contraception. The fact that women are forced to do so in present society says something about that society and the conflicting pressures to which people are subjected; for example the cost and responsibility of parenthood, the ambivalent attitude towards contraception advice for young people and the lack of resources that are devoted to researching and developing new, safer and more effective alternatives to present methods of contraception.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/women-and-socialism
Quote:Abortion is a very serious issue and should not be viewed as an extension of the means of contraception. Today, these latter means are generally readily available. This writer feels that, where a sexually-active couple wants to avoid what is a traumatic experience, especially for the female partner, then there is a responsibility to avail of suitable means of contraception. Ultimately, this is simply respect for the female participant in the sex act and this respect should be a fundamental aspect of sex education. Unfortunately, many of those who support the so-called “pro-life” stance are bitterly opposed to sex education beyond the most vague biological facts. As we have already observed, they are the same people who have fought a bitter rearguard action against the easy availability of contraceptive devices. As far as their opposition to abortion is concerned, most of the religious “pro-lifers” are less concerned about human life and more concerned with religious strictures…Socialists can respect the views of people motivated by the idea of protecting all forms of human life out of regard for the supremacy of humanity. That after all is what Socialism is about. Unfortunately, most of those within the so-called pro-life organisation are concerned more with the strictures of religious leaders and less with genuine concern for human beings.We are constantly reminded of the genuine tragedy of beseiged Ghouta but as been mentioned , little crtism is aimed at those prepared to resist to the last innocent's life.Compare with Afrin and the Kurdish resistance.
Quote:The commanders of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) were evidently convinced that Afrin was indefensible and pulled out because they had no alternative. If this was the case, then they were wise not to fight to the finish in a battle they were bound to lose with heavy loss of life… the YPG are determined and experienced soldiers but they have no air defence or heavy weapons and knew they could not win.A follow-up link to a Chinese worker blog that is a satirical account of Karl Marx visiting the Foxconn factory in Chinahttp://chuangcn.org/2018/03/marxconn/
The Government is using “devolution as an excuse” to avoid liberalising abortion laws in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has some of the strictest laws on abortion in Europe, as women are banned from getting terminations in all but the most extreme circumstances. Rape and incest are not deemed valid reasons for seeking abortions. Pro-choice campaigners said lives were being put at risk by “antiquated, offensive laws” in Northern Ireland.The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (Cedaw) recently declared that thousands of girls and women were being exposed to “horrific situations”, either by being forced to carry pregnancies conceived through rape and incest to term or having to travel to procure legal abortions. It said the UK routinely violates the human rights of Northern Irish women by restricting their access to abortion.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-devolution-northern-ireland-abortion-reform-theresa-may-dup-a8258841.html
Did come across an Independent article on the marches http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/thousands-europe-march-protest-racial-religious-discrimination-a8261331.htmlOrganisers of a march in Glasgow said around 1,500 campaigners took to the streets.The BBC, however, did make space to celebrate Kate and Harry on a St Patrick Day parade and report on a Welsh St Patrick Day event…
I have often used the Guesde article and also cherry-pick an even earlier one is from the Chartist, Ernest Jones
Quote:“I contend that co-operation as now developed, must result in failure to the majority of those concerned, and that it is merely perpetuating the evils which it professes to remove… That the co-operative-system, as at present practised, carries within it the germs of dissolution, would inflict a renewed evil on the masses of the people, and is essentially destructive of the real principles of co-operation. Instead of abrogating profitmongering, it re-creates it. Instead of counteracting competition, it re-establishes it. Instead of preventing centralisation, it renews it—merely transferring the role from one set of actors to another. Your co-operative ranks are thinned, your firms find, one by one, they can no longer in make the returns equal the expenses, they cannot sell as cheap as the capitalist, they can therefore no more command the market, their co-operative fires die out in quick succession, stores and mills close over their deluded votaries—and the great ruin will stand bald, naked, and despairing in the streets.”http://gerald-massey.org.uk/jones/c_misc_letters_etc_1.htm scroll down for the article A Letter to the Advocates of the Co-operative Principle, where presents his own solution – a national unionSince the Rochdale Pioneers of 1844 we have near-on two hundred years of cooperative practice so the criticism isn't just some theoretical rejection of a tentative project but built on empirical evidence of cooperatives under capitalism that has been tried and tested and found to have failed.I am always surprised that many left-wingers still promote them as stepping stones on the path to socialism.Why aren't they also advocating monastic "socialism", although the more nuanced often approve of Dhammic socialism which appears much more progressively hip to them.Many working-class Scots youth swear blind by one particular product of some monks — Buckfast fortified tonic wine (hic!)
