Annual Fundraising Appeal
Over the course of 21 years, we’ve published many unflattering stories about Henry Kissinger. We’ve recounted his involvement in the Chilean coup and the illegal bombings of Cambodia and Laos; his hidden role in the Kent State massacre and the genocide in East Timor; his noxious influence peddling in DC and craven work for dictators and repressive regimes around the world. We’ve questioned his ethics, his morals and his intelligence. We’ve called for him to be arrested and tried for war crimes. But nothing we’ve ever published pissed off HK quite like this sequence of photos taken at a conference in Brazil, which appeared in one of the early print editions of CounterPunch.
100716HenryKissingerNosePicking
The publication of those photos, and the story that went with them, 20 years ago earned CounterPunch a global audience in the pre-web days and helped make our reputation as a fearless journal willing to take the fight to the forces of darkness without flinching. Now our future is entirely in your hands. Please donate.

Day12Fixed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
cp-store

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

The Sickening Endorsement of Christine Quinn for of Mayor New York

When Labor Supports the Enemy

by ARI PAUL

Who is to blame for organized labor’s descent in political irrelevancy? Ronald Reagan? The Koch brothers? Good answers, but maybe we need to look at labor leaders themselves.

Consider the case of this year’s mayor’s race in New York City, one of the last bastions of union political power. There are three candidates in the Democratic Party primary who are considered progressive—former Comptroller and previous mayoral nominee Williams Thompson, current Comptroller John Liu and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio. The front-runner is City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who has over the years curried favor with Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the real estate sector. She also angered labor activists by blocking a measure that would grant sick-days to low-wage retail workers.

The New York Times reported that the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union has endorsed Quinn because she is the most electable in a year when the Democrat will likely face a strong Republican in the general election. United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1500 spokesperson Pat Purcell defended his union’s endorsement of Quinn to City and State saying, “Nowhere has Speaker Quinn said that she opposes paid sick days. She says she supports the concept, but there is a very real conversation to be had about, especially now in light of [Hurricane] Sandy, when do you do a paid sick bill and how do you do it in a way that does not put a burden on an already fragile economy? We’re very supportive of paid sick days, but we also have to look at the big picture.”

Quinn’s campaign is already awash with union money, including donations from the two largest Service Employees International Union locals in New York City, 1199 (health care workers) and 32BJ (building workers, security guards and custodians).

And so the outrage over Quinn’s allegiance to Bloomberg and the business lobby on the sick days bill was clearly all for show, and now Quinn can sleep soundly at night, knowing that shoving her thumb in the eyes of low-wage workers causes no political consequence. According to the RWDSU, she is the “electable” one, meaning the one who has raised the most money and the one closest to the incumbent.

The UFCW Local 1500 line that Quinn supports the bill’s concept is a tad naïve. Anyone who has played the political game long enough knows that when you ask a politician “when?” and she says “later” she really means “never.” Purcell also makes two arguments on behalf of the bosses: one being the “shock doctrine” method of invoking an unprecedented catastrophe to subvert any reform efforts and the other is the implication that worker protection is antithetical to prosperity, as labor activists have gone to great lengths to refute this myth specifically regarding this legislation.

It makes one wonder why unions bother with political endorsements at all. If they’re just going to wait to see which Democrat raises the most cash and then offer to support that candidate, what incentive does that candidate have to return the political favor after he or she is elected? It’s a bit like the insecure kid on the playground who wants to join the in-crowd. He waits to see what dominant opinion is, and then registers his agreement. It’ll make him feel accepted. But none of the cool kids are really that interested.

Political risk aversion is deeply rooted. RWDSU President Stuart Appelbaum had a salary of just under $250,000 in 2011 (2012 data is not yet available), as did UFCW Local 1500 President Bruce Both. Unless rank-and-filers mount an opposition campaign based on these issues, these leaders have little reason to choose principle over closeness with Democratic leaders. In 2014, a single mom working at a fast-food joint my fall behind in her rent because she missed work due to an illness, but these two men will be unscathed in a far away tax bracket.

Here’s the kicker: The city is making progress in passing the sick-days bill, although it has a new line allowing managers to offer sick days or shift swapping. Rahul Saksena, the policy director of the Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York, said “we are concerned about the so-called ‘shift-swapping’ provision, which our members tell us will give restaurant owners and managers the green-light to continue pressuring their workers to swap shifts instead of taking a paid sick day. Shift swapping is the current practice in the restaurant industry.  It is a broken practice that should not be legitimized by the law.”

So maybe Quinn will oversee a sick days bill. It will be one that has been weakened by the political process, sort of like the labor movement.

Ari Paul is a contributor to Free Speech Radio News and the Indypendent. His articles have also appeared in The NationThe GuardianZ Magazine and The American Prospect.