|
The
Michigan Socialist | News | National
The Northeastern
Blackout of 2003:
Yes, it was
terrorism
By MARTIN SCHREADER
Editor,
The Michigan Socialist
 |
| Before and after: Satellite image of the
mid-Atlantic states before the blackout, and on the
evening of the first
night. |
LAST MONTH, residents of the northeastern
United States and the Canadian province of Ontario were the
victims of terrorism.
At approximately 4:10 p.m., Thursday, August
14, 2003, power stations from southeastern Michigan to
northern New Hampshire went down, leaving millions of people
in the dark.
In New York City, hundreds of thousands of
workers, heading home on a hot August afternoon, were trapped
as subways and commuter trains came to a halt.
The scenes of weary commuters walking across
the Brooklyn Bridge and emerging from dark subway tunnels
evoked memories in many of the fate of millions of New Yorkers
in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11,
2001.
Across Pennsylvania and Ohio, and across most
of the metropolitan Detroit area, public utilities collapsed;
the wastewater treatment plant for southeast Michigan, for
example, stopped functioning properly soon after the blackout
began.
Local businesses -- including almost all gas
stations and grocery stores -- closed down, leaving millions
without access to food, drinkable water or gasoline. Roads
were choked for hours as workers and other local residents
fought their way from intersection to intersection.
In many places, the sudden and complete loss
of power led to even greater disaster. The Marathon petroleum
refinery in southwest Detroit exploded when the electricity
that kept the fuel condensers cool cut off, causing the
superheated oil vapor to burst into flames.
In southeastern Michigan, the power surge that
immediately preceded the blackout damaged seven power
transformer stations operated by DTE Energy.
As fewer and fewer power stations were forced
to handle the added demand for electricity, they either shut
down or exploded.
In the first crucial hours of the blackout,
the Michigan government hesitated. Governor Jennifer Granholm
had initially relied on the information given to her by DTE
Energy officials. However, as the sun set on Thursday,
Granholm finally declared a state of emergency in the metro
Detroit area.
For his part, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick,
the agent of DTE and other major capitalist interests in the
City, hid behind a wall of blue, mobilizing the entire police
force and turning the streets of Detroit into an armed camp.
It was not until Friday that Kilpatrick turned his attention
to the residents.
Meanwhile, the deserter-in-chief, George W.
Bush, took five minutes out of his busy schedule of golf and
fundraising for California Republican gubernatorial candidate
(and devoted friend of convicted Austrian Nazi Kurt Waldheim)
Arnold Schwarzenegger to express his "concern" for the plight
of the millions of residents of the northeast.
By Saturday, Aug. 16, power began to return to
most of the areas affected by the blackout. Major cities like
New York, Pittsburgh and Detroit had restored power in most
areas.
By the following Monday, all that was left to
do was pick up the pieces and ask the simple question, "What
happened?"
 |
| While millions of New Yorkers sweltered in the
August heat, guess what was operating
normally? |
TERRORISM. When one speaks of such a thing, it
often calls to mind images of masked men brandishing weapons,
hijackings, assassination and wholesale
destruction.
In a time that is shaped, whether we like it
or not, by the effects of the attacks of Sept. 11, most
Americans have a very definite view of what terrorism
is.
But there are actually many types of
terrorism. Simply speaking, terrorism is the use of violence
and terror by someone to get what they want, and thus there
are many specific types of terrorism in today's
society.
There is, of course, the terrorism of
guerrilla organizations. This kind of terrorism is meant to
achieve a political goal, like the removal of foreign troops
from a given region, or the end of policies perceived as
repressive.
These kind of terrorist groups range in
politics from left to right, though not one of them represents
anything other than the frustration and exasperation of the
so-called "middle class" -- independent producers (e.g.,
farmers and peasants), small business owners, professionals,
etc.
Another kind of terrorism is where guerrilla
organizations operate as a proxy for capitalist
states.
These groups use the tactics of terror to
achieve ends that best serve their paymasters. Sometimes,
these terrorists will use the same rhetoric as the
self-sustained guerrilla organizations, but not for the same
ends.
Politically speaking, these groups are found,
more or less, on the right wing. The Nicaraguan contras
and Afghan mujahedin of the 1980s were state-sponsored
terrorist organizations (the state that sponsored them, of
course, was the United States).
But there is a third kind of terrorism -- one
that does not rely on anonymous groups of masked guerrillas to
carry out their tasks or achieve their goals. These terrorists
do not necessarily need guns or bombs to terrorize a civilian
population.
The famed documentary filmmaker and author, Michael
Moore, in his first book, Downsize This!, opened
with the contrasting of two horrific images. The first picture
was of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City,
Okla., after it had been destroyed by a terrorist
attack.
The second picture was of the old Fisher Body
auto factory in Flint, Mich., the site of the 1936-37 sit-down
strike, and at the time a rotting hulk of steel and
concrete.
Moore asked a pointed question in comparing
these two images: "What is Terrorism?" Is terrorism only the
act of relatively isolated, desperate people, plotting
secretly and illegally?
Is it any less terrorism if it is carried out
by "respectable" people in the name of profit, and done openly
and legally?
More to the point, is it any less terrorism if
the methods are different, but the effect is the
same?
Simply put, the answer is no. From the
perspective of the victim, there is little or no
difference.
Both the victim of individual terrorism and
the victim of capitalist terrorism suffer the privations; both
victims grieve the losses of loved ones; both victims will
never live the same lives again.
Capitalism is terrorism in its highest and
most developed form. It is the systematic coercion of whole
peoples through intimidation, threats and violence.
Whereas the terrorism of armed guerrillas is
demonized as the "greatest evil" ever to befall society, the
terrorism of armed capitalists is lauded and hailed as "the
pinnacle of human achievement."
 |
 |
 |
| (Numbered from top to bottom left.) While
Michigan residents tried to bear the heat (1), find gas
(2) and groceries (3), Governor Jennifer Granholm (4)
hesitated, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (5) called the
cops and George W. Bush (6) tried to
think. |
 |
 |
 |
THIS BRINGS US back to the blackout. It is the
opinion of this author that the blackout was an act of
terrorism.
It was not an act of terrorism in the sense
that masked men with high explosives targeted power plants
with the goal of plunging the U.S. into darkness.
No. It was an act of terrorism in the sense
that the actions of the power utility capitalists led directly
to this attack on the residents of the northeast, and the
terrorizing of millions of Americans and Canadians.
Since the 1980s, the power utility bosses have
pushed for greater deregulation of their industry. They have
demanded this from state and federal governments, and have
used threats, intimidation and bribes to achieve their
goals.
California is a prime example of the kind of
attacks these power utilities have waged. Millions of people
in that state have been subjected to everything from
environmental devastation, and utility bills doubled and
trebled every year, to rolling blackouts, increased
unemployment due to failing businesses and death.
Whatever anyone can say about the effects the
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, had on the communities and people
of New York and Washington, D.C., can also be said about the
effects energy deregulation and downsizing have had on the
people of California and other places.
And that is the point. Is it any less
terrorism if the methods are different, but the effect is the
same?
The effects of utility deregulation have only
brought misery and tragedy. The drive for maximum profits at
the expense of the welfare and well being of the people finds
its most barbaric forms in the "free competition" by power
companies.
Do the energy capitalists expect that working
people receiving low wages can pay a heat bill of $300-plus
during the winter months? If so, what do they expect people to
give up exchange? Food? Clothing? Shelter?
This kind of coercion and extortion is a form
of economic terrorism. But, since it is legal and hailed as
part of the "pinnacle of human achievement," the capitalists
expect that you will silently accept it.
DO NOT ACCEPT it, silently or otherwise. It
has been the acceptance of this terrorism hitherto that has
allowed the energy capitalists -- and all capitalists, for
that matter -- to commit such acts.
Socialists call for the public ownership of
energy utilities, under the democratic control and management
of the energy workers themselves. This is not the same as
re-regulation or state control.
Re-regulation is simply trying to turn back
the hands of time. Anything that can be regulated can also be
deregulated.
Thus, re-regulation is at best a temporary
measure, and cannot solve any problems.
State control of public utilities is also not
a good solution. As long as capitalism rules society, state
control of utilities will mean that the capitalist drive for
profit will govern its actions. It will be a case of "meet the
new boss, same as the old boss."
Even state administration under a democratic
socialist government would be full of dangers.
With the state substituting itself for the
capitalists, the demand for an increasingly powerful
bureaucracy -- to serve as both buffer between workers and the
state, and to serve as the "on-the-ground" managers -- will
lead to the re-emergence or sharpening of class distinctions
and, with them, class antagonisms and the class
struggle.
If a state is going to maintain a formal
"ownership" of an industry, the only way to avoid the
development of a crushing bureaucracy is to ensure that the
workers (possibly in conjunction with consumers) exercise
democratic control over its operations.
Organized bodies of workers from all sections
of the facility, elected as representatives from their
departments, would be able to choose who functions as
management and administration, and for how long.
If necessary, they could possibly rely on
"specialists" -- former managers who are willing to help with
the work -- for advice and assistance. But, the workers
themselves would be the people responsible.
This is democratic socialism in action:
working people joining together, thinking things through and
acting on their decisions. It is at once the most democratic
and the most efficient system possible.
No waste, no bureaucratic red tape, no fat CEO
salaries, no petty concerns about "profit." That is socialism
in
action. | 
