There are three issues present in the current agenda of the state and society, struggles that the existing polarization could not conceal or burry. (Photo: Haitham Moussawi)
It is customary for public life, especially in democratic systems, to revolve around issues of disagreement between political blocs. Citizens are divided according to their support for whichever side, based on what they see as their interest and the interest of society.
This is the fundamental principle for regimes: framing the questions, managing different opinions around them, and implementing decisions. However, in Lebanon, the mechanics of the system have been obstructed, thus disrupting the state’s work.
On the ground, this is manifested in a divide between the issues that relate to the lives of Lebanese – those existing outside the country’s “politics” – and issues that relate to the threat of civil peace, and other questions that the state has no responsibility or real influence.
This is the fundamental principle for regimes: framing the questions, managing different opinions around them, and implementing decisions. However, in Lebanon, the mechanics of the system have been obstructed, thus disrupting the state’s work.
On the ground, this is manifested in a divide between the issues that relate to the lives of Lebanese – those existing outside the country’s “politics” – and issues that relate to the threat of civil peace, and other questions that the state has no responsibility or real influence.
However, the whole political scene is occupied with the latter questions. It is false to assume that political forces in Lebanon are divided over livelihood alternatives for its citizens.
There are three issues present in the current agenda of the state and society, struggles that the existing polarization could not conceal or burry.
The first issue is the regularity of state functions. The struggle of the Union Coordination Committee (UCC) showed that the state failed its honesty exam. Despite describing the cabinet decision to send the salary scale to parliament in the last ministerial session as a historic feat, it has still not been implemented..
Even worse, if the draft is written, referred to parliament, and approved there, its existence will always be in peril.
The second issue is the freedom of unions, in both establishment and action. The struggle of Spinneys supermarket workers indicated that there is no real space to create an apolitical union in Lebanon. Employers squash union bids by hunting would-be members and destroying their chances of obtaining a permit.
The third issue is the importance of collective work contracts. The struggle of the bank employees proved that all the talk about bargaining between the two sides of production is poppycock. If not, then how was the Lebanese Bankers Association allowed to assault the only actual collective contract remaining in the country?
In every sector it seems the alternative to rational bargaining between capitalists and unions is humiliation, pushing the Lebanese to violence, or both.
We stand today at a crossroads. The current polarized political system has damaged the state and demolished its authority. Workers’ struggles, on the other hand, revived an agenda that would support an actual state. It is truly a historic juncture.
Charbel Nahas is an economist and the former telecommunications and labor minister of Lebanon.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment