Sun, 17 May 1998 12:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 12:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Franklin Wayne Poley <culturex@vcn.bc.ca>
Subject: Is New York Reinstitutionalizing SLAVERY? was Quebec workfare violates human rights. (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 12:46:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Franklin Wayne Poley <culturex@vcn.bc.ca>
To: Bill Bartlett <billbartlett@vision.net.au>, WORKFARE-DISCUSS@icomm.ca
    letters@nytimes.com, mailbag@barronsmag.com, letters@globeandmail.ca,
    Timeletter@aol.com, lettertoed@thestar.ca, voice@echonyc.com,
    ww@workers.org, letter.editor@edit.wsj.com,
    Sue.Shellenbarger@news.wsj.com, tell.headlinenews@cnn.com
Subject: Is New York Reinstitutionalizing SLAVERY? was Quebec workfare violates human rights.

Have you noticed that no-one gives any public discussion in defence of 
workfare? The politicians and some media only issue one way 
pronouncements. Mayor Guiliani of New York has even instructed his staff 
explicitly to NOT discuss the 35,000 workfare slaves in New York. Premier 
Harris of Ontario doesn't discuss workfare. As you have noted Bill they 
had to cleverly repackage it in Australia to get away with it. How did 
they pull it off in Scandinavia? Maybe it took everybody by surprise 
because it was early in the game.
   Now I am wondering if anybody on the two current affairs lists cc'd 
above would care to defend workfare? If they do I suggest we hear them 
out before jumping all over them. IMO Guiliani has re-introduced SLAVERY 
to the world, cleverly repackaging it as something else. Is this "The 
American Way" for C21 leadership of the New World Order?
FWP.

On Mon, 18 May 1998, Bill Bartlett wrote:

> Viggo Andersen wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >What I found most interesting about the piece is that a
> >Court has actually debunked workfare programs as being
> >operated on false pretences by not delivering the promised
> >(work) training and instead forcing recipients into "regular
> >work requiring minimal skills" without providing the
> >independency of the system that comes with "regular work"
> >i.e. a job.
> 
> This court ruling is important because it dispels the pro-workfare
> propaganda which paints workfare as beneficial to claimants. It is vital to
> dispel that fog, to let people see clearly. Of course it appears that
> Canada has already gone to the next stage of workfare, which entails
> abandoning the beneficial pretense. With the "training" pretense abandoned
> the stark reality of workfare is exposed, allowing it to be fought in the
> open. Now that's what I call reform.
> 
> But I take it that in Denmark this stage has not yet been reached? Your
> government is still introducing workfare provisions under the guise of
> "training", "work experience", etc. I share your frustration as the former
> labor government in Australia, with great success, introduced workfare here
> under cover of just such a lie. (Having lost the public relations battle to
> bring in blatant work-for-dole.)
> 
> These are all important lessons to recall when discussing reforms to
> workfare. Firstly that "improvements" to workfare boil down to following
> the Scandinavian model of a workfare that adds insult to injury by
> operating under the cover of being beneficial to its victims.
> 
> Secondly, this latest infringement of the civil rights of workfare slaves
> is not an abberation, except in that it is unusually blatant. As people
> have commented already, more subtle methods are usually employed. But it
> goes with the workfare territory for the right to organise to be curtailed
> in some way, you don't negotiate with slaves. The lesson being that reform
> of workfare is not possible, any reforms will, at best, be mere window
> dressing, serving to give it a more publicy acceptable face.
> 
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas.


*** False Creek Model Village in Vancouver. Join the discussion of an
exciting Millenium Project:http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/falsecreek
to subscribe to list; http://www.vcn.bc.ca/fc for backgrounder. ***