Vol. 19, No. 3
VOICE OF THE MARXIST-LENINIST PARTY OF THE USA
25ยข March 1, 1989
[Front page:
Bush and Congress, Hands off Central America!--Join the March 18-20 demonstrations;
Defend abortion rights with mass struggle--International Women's Day;
Union hacks bluster while Eastern employees shut it down]
IN THIS ISSUE
| Step Up the Defense of Women's Rights! |
|
| Aims of anti-abortion leaders; 'Pro-life' hypocrisy in Klein case.................................... | 2 |
| Pro-choice marches; Rallies in Canada; NOW condemns pro-choice militants.............. | 3 |
|
|
|
| Down with Racism! |
|
| Rising against police murder in Tampa; Shut down racist Chicago bar; Navajos resist relocation; March vs. Brooklyn police murder; Protest of nazi skinheads in California.. | 4 |
| 100 skinheads march vs. racism in Minneapolis............................................................... | 9 |
|
|
|
| Strikes and Workplace News |
|
| Stewart-Warner workers fight layoffs; Picket at Detroit post office; Students walk out for LA teachers.................................................................................................................. | 5 |
| Bush budget exposes 'kinder, gentler' myth..................................................................... | 5 |
| Bush repays Tower for contragate whitewash................................................................... | 5 |
|
|
|
| U.S. Imperialism, Get Out of Central America! |
|
| FMLN proposals attempt to avert the social explosion; Rhetoric of 'political solution'.. | 6 |
| Farm workers strike in Guatemala; INS concentration camps for Central American refugees............................................................................................................................. | 7 |
|
|
|
| Death to Apartheid in South Africa! |
|
| Hunger strike by prisoners; Berkeley rally supports hunger strike.................................. | 11 |
|
|
|
| The World in Struggle |
|
| LA rally supports CP of Iran............................................................................................. | 11 |
| Workers revolt in Venezuela; Palestinians arrested by Jordanian tyranny; Portuguese Marxist-Leninists mark 3rd anniversary........................................................................... | 12 |
|
|
|
| 20th anniversary of ACWM(ML): revolution based on working class............................ | 10 |
Bush and Congress, Hands off Central America!
Defend abortion rights with mass struggle
Union hacks bluster while
Eastern employees shut it down
Step up the defense of women's rights
DOWN WITH RACISM!
Strikes and workplace news
'89 budget exposes myth of a 'kinder, gentler' Bush
Bush pays off Tower for whitewashing contragate
On the new proposals from the FMLN leadership:
No more attempts to avert the social explosion!
Rhetoric vs. reality in Salvadoran 'political solution'
U.S. imperialism, get out of Central America!
20th anniversary of ACWM(ML):
Base the revolutionary movement on the working class
Death to apartheid in South Africa!
Los Angeles: Solidarity rally with Iranian communists
The World in Struggle
Workers and poor revolt in Venezuela
Portuguese communists mark anniversary:
Jordanian tyranny arrests thousands of Palestinians
Join the March 18-20 demonstrations
The dark night of death-squad tyranny still reigns in El Salvador. But a fire is burning, piercing the darkness with radiant light. It is the firestorm of militant struggle by the workers and peasants against the U.S.-backed regime.
Workers' strikes are on the rise, resisting the poverty imposed by the Salvadoran capitalists and the imperialist companies. Over the last several months, massive demonstrations against the dictatorship have engulfed the streets of the capital, San Salvador. The insurgent guerrilla movement continues to be a thorn in the side of the regime. Since this past fall, a new round of armed actions has stung the fascist military. The mass upheaval is lighting the path forward for liberation. It is showing the potential for strengthening the revolutionary movement till it sweeps away the generals, the oligarchy, the ruling class politicians and U.S. domination.
The Salvadoran people have built their struggle in the face of terrible repression. Tens of thousands have been slaughtered. And today a new wave of assassinations and jailings is being carried out by the army and death squads.
The responsibility for this bloodbath does not lie just with a handful of tin-horn generals and politicians in El Salvador. Standing behind the regime is massive support by U.S. imperialism. Half of the regime's budget comes from the U.S.; last year alone over half a billion dollars went to propping up the Salvadoran tyrants.
The "Two-Track" Policy
U.S. support for the regime is a bipartisan policy. The policy of stamping out revolution in Central America in general and in Nicaragua and El Salvador in particular is pursued by both Democrats and Republicans. For years the Democratic-controlled Congress has bankrolled the Reagan-Bush administration's aid requests. For years, the Democrats have barely even squabbled with the Reagan policy on El Salvador because Reagan agreed to support the Christian-Democratic reformist Duarte as the head of the death-squad regime. Both White House and Congress have pursued the "two-track" policy of seeking a "political solution" to isolate the revolutionary movement at the same time as carrying out a "military solution" of wild bloodletting.
The Democratic politicians in turn are pledging to continue this bipartisan work of suppressing revolution. They are working for a joint policy with Bush on Central America. As Democratic House leader Jim Wright puts it, the Democrats want to "find an avenue we can walk together." As a token of good faith, the House Democrats have even killed their own bill requiring the President to inform Congress within 48 hours of covert actions.
The Arias Plan
Today the "two-track" policy is expressed in the Arias plan. It promises that if the insurgent people give up their struggle to overthrow the death-squad regimes, then some reforms will be granted. It promises the Nicaraguan people that if they give financial and political privileges to the pro-contra forces, and if they allow the American and Latin American bourgeoisie to finance the pro-contra political campaigns in Nicaragua, then the bands of contra thugs will be dispersed.
After over a year of the Arias plan, the contra camps still exist in Honduras. All that has been achieved is that the Nicaraguan workers and peasants have been bled white to pay, in the midst of economic crisis, for new privileges for the pro-contra bourgeoisie. The Sandinista government has agreed to one concession after another in Central American "summit" conferences.. But Nicaragua has more than just the reformist one-time revolutionaries of the Sandinista front and the pro-contra capitalist right wing. There are also militant workers and poor peasants rallied around the Marxist-Leninist Party of Nicaragua. They stand opposed to the illusion of reconciliation with the pro-contra capitalists and the dream of reconstruction with U.S. and world bourgeois aid. Instead they call for continuing and deepening the revolution towards socialism.
The New FMLN Proposals
Meanwhile the leadership of the FMLN/FDR anti-government coalition in El Salvador believes that there is something good in the Arias plan and the U.S. "two-track" policy. They fail to see that the "political solution" is just the flip side of the "military solution." After years of fighting, and under pressure from revisionist and reformist forces around the world, they have grown impatient with a decisive victory over the oligarchy. They are seeking to reach a deal with the Salvadoran bourgeoisie and, especially, with the White House and Congress. They advocate that imperialism and the bourgeoisie will agree to some reforms if the masses give up their demand to sweep away the economic and political interests of the Salvadoran bourgeoisie and its U.S. backers. They have replaced revolution with the idea that neither side will agree to surrender. But if there is no revolution, the Salvadoran oligarchy and the genocidal military will be left with their power intact.
Following these ideas, the reformist FDR leaders Ungo and Zamora have formed the Democratic Convergence to run in the upcoming Salvadoran elections on a platform that gives up the people's militant demands in favor of becoming a parliamentary party. At the end of January the FMLN guerrilla commanders issued a proposal to recognize the legitimacy of the outcome of these elections, even though they are to be held under the rule of the death-squad regime, if they were postponed six months and certain other conditions were met. More recently, the FMLN leaders went further and offered to end the armed struggle and recognize the Salvadoran military machine as the sole army in El Salvador, provided some reforms were made. (See articles on page 6 on the FMLN proposals.)
What Is True Solidarity With the Oppressed of El Salvador?
Should we in the solidarity movement go along with the Arias plan and the FMLN proposals? Should the solidarity movement become lobbyists for a deal between the White House and the FMLN? Should we forget about the repeated statements in Congress and the press about the real purpose of the Arias plan and instead present such deals as part of an "irreversible process toward^peace and a political solution"? Should we endorse the goal of a compromise and hence limit our perspective to leaving the oligarchy in power, leaving the Salvadoran military and the U.S. State Department to call the shots, and forcing the workers and peasants to restrict themselves to minor tinkering with their chains?
The leaders of CISPES and other reformist solidarity organizations say yes. They say it is the only way to end the terror against the masses.
Solidarity With the Revolution
The Marxist-Leninist Party says no, we should not help pacify the workers and peasants of Central America. We must not help the U.S. State Department and Pentagon disarm the FMLN and the Salvadoran movement generally. We must render all-out support to the insurgent workers and peasants, including the fighting masses inside the FMLN, by opposing U.S. imperialist counterinsurgency plans tooth and nail. We must fight against U.S. aid to the death-squad regime and against U.S. military intervention just as we did in the days of the Viet Nam war. We must demand that U.S. imperialism get out of El Salvador and Central America totally: every soldier, every adviser, every CIA agent, and every plunderer. We must also back up the workers and peasants of El Salvador against the Salvadoran exploiters.
To support the Arias plan and to believe that a deal with the White House and Congress can replace a revolutionary victory means death to a militant solidarity movement. The support of the reformist solidarity organizations for the Arias plan is one of the reasons they were so quiet during the U.S. presidential election campaign. It is one of the reasons why protests over the continuing brutal pressure by the U.S. and Latin American bourgeoisie against Nicaragua have dwindled away. And it prevents exposure and struggle against the actual imperialist plan for suppression of the Salvadoran people.
Workers! Solidarity activists! Let's support the struggling masses of Central America by greeting the Bush administration with militant protest. We must oppose imperialist domination of Central America whether it comes through the Pentagon or the State Department, the bloody bayonet or the sly deal for disarming the masses. The liberation of the oppressed will not come from the likes of Bush or Congress, or through finding some common ground with the Salvadoran oligarchy. It will come through the revolutionary struggle of the working masses themselves. Let's go all out to build up a powerful mass movement in support of the revolutionary struggle in Central America.
End U.S. aid to the death-squad regime in El Salvador!
Down with Bush and Congress!
No to U.S. dictate, military or political!
U.S. imperialism, get out of Central America!
Support the revolutionary movement in Central America!
[Photo: Students from the University of Ei Salvador protesting outside the campus against the death-squad murder of a fellow student on February 3.]
March 8 is International Women's Day. A day initiated by the international working class movement in 1910 to push forward the struggle for the liberation of women.
This year, International Women's Day comes at a time when we see the first shoots of a much-needed renewal in the fight for women's rights. The focus of the current revival is the struggle in defense of women's right to abortion.
Since last summer, the holy bullies of Operation Rescue have been unleashed as shock troops of the anti-abortion movement. They are launching assaults on abortion clinics around the country. They terrorize the women who go to the clinics, and above all, they want to create the impression with their noisy publicity stunts that mass opinion is on their side. And for sure, the capitalist media obliges by giving them a lot of publicity.
Still, opinion polls show that the majority support the right to choose. But opinion registered through polls will not stem the reactionary drive against abortion rights.
We must not forget that rights are won through struggle, and they can only be defended by struggle. Although Operation Rescue did not wish it this way, a welcome byproduct of its antics is that they have resulted in galvanizing pro-choice actions around the country.
Abortion Rights Especially Important for Working Class Women
Whatever one may personally think of abortion, one must defend legal abortion as a necessary right for women.
This right is especially important today when the capitalist offensive is making the lives of working class and poor women ever more difficult in terms of jobs, housing, child and medical care.
As well, whether legal or illegal, abortion will be available to the wealthy women who can afford private doctors and trips abroad to places where abortions are allowed. But it is the poorer sections who would be in a bind.
The experience of the time before abortions were legal in the U.S. shows that - outlawing abortions won't end abortions. Instead it would simply mean that every year hundreds of thousands of poor and desperate women will risk permanent injury and even death with unsanitary back-alley abortions.
Anti-Abortion Movement Part of Offensive Against All Workers
The workers as a whole, women and men, must join together in the defense of abortion rights. This is an issue of justice, and an issue of standing up for a democratic right of special importance for the women of the class.
The anti-abortion movement is in fact a deeply anti-woman movement. It is not concerned with easing the condition of women and children, and "pro-life" ex-president Reagan actually directed his Justice Department to spend millions of dollars trying to strike down the weak state laws that prevent employers from firing women when they take off to give birth. The religious leaders of the anti-abortion movement paint the millions of women who have had abortions as murderers, and "kinder, gentler" Bush pondered whether they should go to jail like criminals. The anti-abortion movement blames society's ills, not on capitalist exploitation with its combination of exhausting overwork and demoralizing unemployment, but on mothers who work outside the home, painting working women as selfish egoists.
The anti-abortion movement is, in fact, a weapon of the bourgeoisie against the rights of the workers as a whole.
It is a tool of the bourgeoisie to galvanize a right-wing movement. They want to use their emotional, lying appeals about the "right to life" to draw masses into a reactionary crusade for a full-scale right-wing agenda. An agenda to put "women in their place," to better exploit the workers, to spew racist poison, and to wage war against working people abroad.
On page 2 we carry an article on the aims of the anti-abortion leaders, using their own words to show where they stand.
For Mass Struggle, Not Begging the Capitalist Politicians!
In the coming weeks, there are more pro-choice actions being planned. Women, workers and youth should mobilize for these demonstrations.
March will be yet another month of struggle against Operation Rescue. They have announced plans to organize more clinic blockades, around Good Friday (March 24-26). In various cities, counter-demonstrations are being prepared for.
On April 9 a march on Washington has been called to support choice and women's rights generally.
Unfortunately, the organizers of April 9, dominated by the leaders of the National Organization for Women (NOW), are not interested in building the mass struggle. Their orientation is that rights will be defended by lobbying Congress.
They want to use the April 9 march as an auxiliary to lobbying. This is in keeping with their policy of voting for liberal politicians as the answer to all of life's problems.
And they fiercely oppose militant action. In Michigan they even issued a vicious statement against pro-choice militants and tried to undermine actions against Operation Rescue. Everywhere they preach a quiet policy against Operation Rescue, seeking to rely on the police and courts instead. On page 3, we carry an article on the Michigan NOW statement.
The NOW leaders' policy will only allow an open door for the right wing. We have seen well enough the futility of relying on the Democrats to oppose the Reaganites. But NOW's policy isn't the misguided idea of some individual NOW leaders, it's the natural policy of an organization dominated by bourgeois and well-off women. They have so much faith in the establishment that they are afraid of actions which shake things up and mobilize people into active struggle.
The struggle for women's rights will dissipate if it falls under the grip of this bourgeois policy. We need to build the fight for women's rights not on the shoulders of the establishment, but on the shoulders of working class and poor people. We ought to build it up as part of the independent movement of the working class.
We urge a big turnout on April 9. But we also urge that other voices than NOW should speak out. Let the voice of the militant fighters for women's rights, the voice of class conscious workers, also be heard.
As we go to press 8,500 mechanics, baggage handlers and other ground workers have struck Eastern Airlines. They are fighting demands of Texas Air, Eastern's parent corporation, for $125 million in pay and benefit cuts. They are also standing up to Texas Air's obvious attempts to bust the unions -- as it already did, with the help of the government, at Continental Airlines.
The strike has shut down virtually all Eastern flights. Some 5,900 flight attendants, about 3,500 pilots, and other Eastern employees have honored the strike. Numbers of them joined the picket lines. And leaders of the International Association of Machinists (IAM) and the AFL-CIO are threatening to extend the strike to other airlines and to the commuter railroads.
Texas Air expected the strike to collapse the first day. Instead, the united struggle of the Eastern employees has shut the airlines down. Their strike deserves the strongest support of all working people.
At the same time, no trust can be placed in the union leaders who head this strike. Have these AFL-CIO bureaucrats, after years of bending their knees to virtually every takeback demand, suddenly decided to unleash the power of the workers to beat back the capitalist concessions offensive? Don't bet on it. One only needs to,look at their demands to see that the union bureaucrats are not standing up for a serious fight against concessions.
Wishful Thinking That Bush Will Help
While the workers want to put a stop to concessions and win wage increases, the basic demand of the union leaders is for the Bush administration to intervene and settle the contract. This is the demand of the IAM leadership, and it was endorsed by the AFL-CIO Executive Council meeting the last week of February. The union officials hope that the government will freeze, rather than cut, wages and give a slap to the intransigent Texas Air chairman Frank Lorenzo.
But expecting the big business government of Bush to side with the workers against big business is like wishing for a kiss from the rabid dog that just bit you.
Bush loudly let it be known that the Reaganite concessions offensive is still on. He sided with Eastern's demand that the government not intervene in the contract dispute. And he declared his administration would "not tolerate" any attempt to extend the strike beyond Eastern. Various court injunctions have already been thrown up against sympathy strikes on rail lines.
Meanwhile, liberal Democrats have joined with the Republicans to call for new legislation banning "secondary boycotts" throughout the transportation industry. The Democrats are once again proving that this is a bipartisan offensive of the capitalists against the workers.
We Need a Serious, Organized Battle Against Concessions
Instead of actually organizing the potential power of the working class, the union leaders put their hopes in the Democrats and in Bush's posturing about a "kinder and gentler" America. Their threats of extending the strike were more a bargaining maneuver than a serious effort to organize the workers.
They have no real plans to shut down the rest of Texas Air, even though they howl about Lorenzo's goal of eventually shifting flights to his other, nonunion operations. They have no real plans to shut down other airlines. After all, the IAM officials have already given up the idea of sympathy strikes at other lines where they have contracts because that would be "illegal" under the no-strike clauses they themselves negotiated. And they have no plans to defy court injunctions and new laws banning sympathy strikes, even though the government has been threatening these for weeks. In short, they have threatened to spread the strike, and "totally disrupt" the transportation industry, but without taking any of the necessary steps to carry this strike through against repression from the capitalists and the government.
Obviously, the union hacks' plans were not for a serious strike. But why did they call for solidarity here, when they have refused to call for such solidarity in past strikes and have even been splitting workers up into smaller and smaller bargaining units? It seems they hoped that, at most, a short strike and a few threats would get Bush and Congress to settle the contract. As this groundless hope is dashed, the workers should not expect the union bureaucrats to realize their mistake and begin a serious struggle.
Despite the bureaucrats' antics, the initial strike solidarity at Eastern has shaken Texas Air. And if the rank and file persist in struggle and organize themselves, then the strike could spread out of the control of the union misleaders. That's what is needed. It is the united mass struggle of working people, not hope in the capitalist politicians, that has the possibility of breaking the concessions onslaught.
With their tearful, emotional appeals, the anti-abortion movement leaders want the masses to believe that they are just concerned about the "right to life" of the unborn. But they have a bigger agenda than that. Their talk of "life" is just a hypocritical cover for a general assault on the rights of poor and working class women.
The organizers of the anti-abortion movement have a full-blown anti-women, anti-worker, and love-the-rich political program. Look at what the antiabortion honchos say in their own words:
Jerry Falwell
The head of the Moral Majority is probably the best known spokesman for the "right-to-life" movement. He has declared his full support for Operation Rescue and recently donated $10,000 to them.
He and the other leaders say that their fight against abortion rights is part of a more general fight to defend the "traditional family" from the encroachments of the women's rights movement. What role to they seek for women in society?
"Good husbands who are godly men are good leaders. Their wives and children want to follow them and be under their protection. The husband is to be the decision maker and the one who motivates his family with love."
"From astronaut to zoologist, nearly every occupation has been invaded by women, who are pouring into the labor market almost twice as fast as men."
"Many women today say that they must work for economic reasons. Although inflation has placed a financial burden on the family, we are overly concerned with material wealth." (All quotes from Listen America, 1980)
It is easy for a rich guy like Falwell to denounce women who have to work as merely chasing "material wealth." For the wealthy hypocrites of the anti-abortion movement, food, rent and medicine for working class women are not something to be "concerned" about.
Pat Robertson
This is another big-name leader of the "right-to-life" movement. He is a big shot in the Republican Party. He ran for president last year on an ultra-right wing platform. Robertson and Operation Rescue have a close working relationship.
In the January 1988 issue of Conservative Digest he explained some of the very materialist and secular reasons why some of the capitalists support the drive to outlaw abortion.
In "the abortion problem, and the unwillingness of couples to have children...we have a demographic crisis...ten or fifteen years from now we won't have enough able-bodied young people to man our armed forces;... there won't be enough new families being formed to provide the growth we need in industry; the tax base will be declining and our GNP will either be stagnant or in decline. This has long-term consequences not only for America but for what we know as Western Civilization. Our share of the world population has been shrinking dramatically."
This shows that if you scratch the surface of the "pro-life" movement you find a pro-profit movement whose first consideration is the market and manpower requirements of the businessmen and generals.
What is even more monstrous is that this is exactly the rhetoric of the racists who shriek that the growing non-white percentage of the U.S. and European populations is signaling the doomsday of civilization. In fact the Nazis used this same argument in their drive to outlaw abortion -- women must be breeders to spread the "master race."
Richard Viguerie
He is a major behind-the-scenes leader of the right wing. He is the founder of Conservative Digest and is a trusted political fundraiser and cause-promoter for the capitalists. He is very forthright in explaining the program of the rich in promoting the anti-abortion movement:
"The abortion issue is the door through which many people come into conservative politics, but they don't stop there. Their convictions against abortions are like the first in a series of dominoes. Then we lead them to concern about sexual ethics and standards among young people. This leads to opposition to secular humanism. Then, particularly in schools with its purportedly decadent morality, we point out that secular humanism is identified as both the godfather and the royal road to socialism and communism which points the way to commitment to minimally regulated free enterprise at home and aggressive foreign and military policies to counter the communist threat from Russia and its surrogates."
In other words the real intent of the anti-abortion organizers is to build a fanatical movement in favor of maximum exploitation of workers at home ("minimally regulated free enterprise") and "aggressive foreign and military policies" to defend the world empire of the rich.
Randall Terry
He is the national founder and leader of Operation Rescue.
"If we successfully mobilize enough of God's people to end this holocaust, we will have the power and momentum to bring change in other critical areas of our culture. A resounding victory against abortion would start a domino effect that could go as far as the grace of God and hard work should take us.
"We...struggle for...a nation where once again the Judeo-Christian ethic is the foundation of our politics, our judicial system, and our public morality; a nation not floating in the uncertain sea of humanism, but a country whose unmoving bedrock is Higher Laws."
This shows that their aim is a religious state, a Christian regime. This is the same orientation as the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Islamic Republic regime in Iran, here using the Bible instead of the Koran as the justification for imposing a tyranny on the masses.
(Based on the Feb. 25 "Boston Worker," paper of MLP-Boston.)
The anti-abortion forces are always railing about how they are only extremists in the cause of "life." They denounce women who have abortions and all pro-choice people as murderers.
But it's no secret that many of these very same "pro-lifers" are the biggest enthusiasts of the Pentagon war machine -- hardly the credentials with which one can claim to be for "life."
The recent intervention of anti-abortion forces in the Nancy Klein case in New York comes as another big exposure of "pro-life" hypocrisy.
Nancy Klein suffered a severe head injury in a Long Island auto accident last December 13. She has been in a coma ever since. Doctors said her chances of recovery were not being helped by the fact that she was pregnant.
Hoping to help Nancy's chances to recover, her husband Martin, with support from her parents, decided to authorize an abortion. Martin Klein filed a petition January 26 to be declared his wife's guardian.
At this point, John Short, a long-time anti-abortion organizer, intervened, along with an attorney. They demanded that the petition be rejected and that instead they be proclaimed Nancy Klein's guardians.
Instead of denouncing this ridiculous intervention, the court held two days of hearings, and even the Nassau County District Attorney's office got involved, bringing its own medical witnesses to oppose Klein. After five more days, the judge eventually ruled in favor of Martin Klein.
Then Short appealed to a higher state court, which stayed the lower court's rulings while arguments were heard. Two more days the abortion was delayed. The court ended up deciding not to hear the appeal. The process was repeated with the State Supreme Court. And then Short went on to appeal to two Supreme Court justices. Without success.
The antics of the pro-lifers delayed the abortion for two weeks, increasing the danger of the procedure.
Imagine! A woman is in a coma, unable to act for herself. Both her husband and parents agree that she should get an abortion to improve her chances of recovery. But complete strangers demand to intervene. You'd think such an attempt would have been rejected outright. Instead the courts force the family to go through a big rigmarole.
This should have been a routine enough procedure. But this is America in the 80's, and the right-wing antiabortion forces, with support from the Reagan and Bush administrations, are feeling their oats.
In this case, however, the anti-abortion effort backfired. It dramatically exposed the callousness of the "pro-life" hypocrites. It should make those who feel drawn towards the emotional appeals of the "pro-life" movement think again about what the anti-abortion crusaders are all about.
The right-wing offensive against abortion rights is bringing forth a welcome revival of the movement in defense of women's rights. Last month, there were more actions in support of the right to choice on abortion.
Detroit
On February 18 a picket protested a bogus pregnancy center. This is one of those centers which advertises itself as a "pregnancy counseling" center but is really an outfit set up by the "right-to-life" movement for the purpose of terrifying pregnant women who are considering abortion.
Protests at similar bogus pregnancy centers were also organized in Washtenaw County just outside of metro Detroit.
On February 25, the fanatics of Operation Rescue launched a surprise blockade at the Womancare clinic in Sterling Heights, north of Detroit. A lively picket of 75 pro-choice people formed soon afterward, ready to escort patients into the clinic. They carried signs and shouted slogans. The pro- choice demonstration included a contingent of students who came from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, an hour's drive away.
The police threatened to arrest pro-choice picketers if they went near the door of the clinic. At the same time, they took their time removing the antiabortion fanatics. After a couple of hours, the blockaders were removed and the clinic reopened.
Los Angeles
Operation Rescue attacked two clinics on Pico Boulevard on February 11. But they were greeted by several hundred pro-choice protesters who shouted "Not the church, not the state, women must decide their fate!" Pro-choice forces had mobilized early at clinics throughout the area and quickly redeployed themselves when they found out where Operation Rescue attacked.
The clinic owners did not share in the spirit of the pro-choice protesters. One clinic did not open at all. At the second one, the anti-abortion people stayed outside for nearly six hours, after which one of their leaders went inside with the police, and reemerged with the announcement that no abortions were scheduled there and his supporters could disperse.
These are reported to be the first assaults by Operation Rescue in the Los Angeles area. OR considers them to be dress rehearsals for bigger attacks in March. They are planning further blockades against clinics between March 22-24. But pro-choice forces are also gearing up to oppose them.
[Photo: Pro-choice activists picketing phony abortion clinic in Detroit, February 18.]
[Photo: Los Angeles]
The liberal bourgeois leaders of NOW (National Organization for Women) are dead set against any militant resistance to the anti-abortion fanatics of Operation Rescue (OR). All across the country the NOW higher-ups have done their best to prevent masses of angry people from confronting the holy hypocrites of Operation Rescue.
In some cities, the NOW leaders have conceded to calling protests at clinics against OR, but only because they fear losing influence with pro-choice people. But even in these places, the NOW policy is to try to keep the protests as tame as possible.
The role of the NOW leaders against militancy in the pro-choice struggle was sharply brought out in Michigan, where they went so far as to issue a disgusting statement on January 21 which denounces the progressive masses up and down and blames them for the violence at Michigan abortion clinics.
The NOW statement is headlined: "Michigan NOW Denounces Violence at Abortion Clinics [in] Detroit." On the surface this may look like it's directed against OR's assault on the clinics. But no, the statement declares quite directly that its target is the opponents of OR. "The Michigan Conference of the National Organization for Women (NOW) joined with other pro-choice organizations in the state today in denouncing the actions of the Committee to Defend Abortion Rights."
The committee NOW denounces is one that has sponsored recent pro-choice actions in the Detroit area. Besides the groups in the committee itself, its protests have also been attended by others, including the Marxist-Leninist Party.
NOW goes on to say: "The Committee to Defend Abortion Rights intends to counter the efforts of Operation Rescue through direct confrontation to prevent Operation Rescue participants from blocking entrances to Detroit-area abortion clinics this morning...."
"'Pro-choice organizations in Michigan and around the country carry out their work through peaceful and nonviolent actions,' National NOW Board member Marian McCracken said. 'The confrontational tactics of the Committee to Defend Abortion Rights, on the other hand, are deplorable, and we are appalled by their actions. They definitely do not represent the pro-choice movement.'"
Not only does NOW come out flailing against a militant policy in the fight against OR, but it takes upon itself the right to say who is or isn't part of the pro-choice movement 1 The NOW statement, after having pointed out that the Committee to Defend Abortion Rights includes groups who have the word "revolutionary" in their names, charges that the committee "has an agenda far removed from that of protecting the right of a woman to choose an end to a pregnancy." In typical McCarthyite red baiting style, the NOW statement says "These people are seeking publicity, and they consider this a prime opportunity to recruit new members into their ranks." The pro- choice militants are even charged with "betraying Michigan women" who want to preserve the right to choice.
Such a statement makes clear that the development of an energetic mass movement requires active struggle against the sabotaging activities of the NOW leadership.
The Committee to Defend Abortion Rights has criticized NOW's statement and has continued to call pro-choice actions. Unfortunately, however, among those who dominate this group, there is a strong tendency to find some way to conciliate NOW. There is a fear among the reformist left that the movement can go nowhere unless it gets the support of such "broad" liberal forces like the NOW leaders, the labor bureaucrats, and so forth. Such a view is a prescription for disaster. If it prevails, the criticism of the NOW leadership will end up meaning very little. What NOW's treachery underscores is the necessity to develop a militant trend independent of the bourgeoisie and especially the bourgeois liberals.
(For a reprint of Michigan NOW's full statement, see the February 15 issue of The Workers' Advocate Supplement.)
Abortion rights are also under attack in Canada. The right-wing fanatics of Operation Rescue have begun to organize to shut down abortion clinics, as part of an effort to outlaw abortions in Canada.
In January and February, they targeted abortion clinics in Vancouver and Toronto. In Toronto hundreds of pro- choice protesters prevented disruption of the clinics.
In Toronto the anti-abortion forces even tried to mobilize outside the home of a local activist who organizes escorts for women visiting clinics. But while 50 pro-choice activists showed up to defend her, only one person from Operation Rescue turned up and a few others drove by.
January was the first anniversary of a decision by the Canadian Supreme Court nullifying anti-abortion laws. Since then, abortion has been decriminalized, but access and funding vary from province to province. The conservative Mulroney government is expected to introduce legislation into parliament to outlaw abortions once again.
Just two weeks after the black people's struggle exploded in Miami, new flames of resistance swept Tampa. The spark igniting the street fighting was another racist murder by the police.
On the night of February 1, policemen carried out a drug sting operation in the black community of College Hill. During the operation the police beat a 40-year-old black man with nightsticks, handcuffed him, and threw him into the back of the police car face down. Edgar Allen Price died an hour and a half later at a Tampa hospital.
Even while the arrest was going on, black youth began to pelt the police with rocks and bottles. When news of the racist murder spread through the streets of College Hill, the neighborhood exploded with rage. For over three hours around 100 black youth fought pitched battles with the police. A television news van was hit with shotgun blasts as it cruised through the neighborhood. The masses not only targeted the police but took out their rage on the local shopkeepers. One meat market was burned down and several stores were looted.
The following night the youth continued their protest. Rocks and bottles were thrown at the police and trash bins were set on fire. One police officer was hospitalized and there were at least nine youths arrested.
Mayor Denounces the Youth as "Hoodlums"
Soon after the street fighting began, Tampa's Mayor Sandra Freeman breezed into College Hill in an evening gown. In the wake of the Miami fighting, she decided on a get-tough policy. She denounced the youth as "hoodlums." Calling out hundreds of policemen to repress the masses, she declared, "We aren't going to tolerate this." Later, Freeman blamed outside agitators for the disturbance. "The message is very clear," she said. "You come over here and incite riots, you're going to get arrested."
But it was the racist murder by police that "incited" the masses. And city officials have fallen all over themselves trying to cover up this fact.
Policemen first claimed that Price hit his head, all by himself, on the cement. Later a city official argued that he died from a "cocaine-induced heart attack." Still another official's account was that Price suffocated while lying face down on the back seat of the squad car with his hands handcuffed behind him.
Some capitalist newspapers reported that police officials denied that they beat Price at all. Meanwhile, Police Chief Austin McLane admitted, "Yes, we hit him with nightsticks." But he denied responsibility for the killing. He claimed, "We did it in the fashion that we are trained to do it in the academy. We are trained to temporarily disable, not permanently injure or kill."
Still, the six-inch gash on Price's head and the eyewitness accounts of black residents prove otherwise. As one woman described it, "They beat him. They beat him all around the yard."
Fifty people, including MLP activists, protested outside Connelly's bar on the north side of Chicago on February 4. The bar had been a haven for racist thugs and a source of racist violence in this somewhat integrated community. Protesters denounced the shooting of a black man at the bar and demanded its closing. It turned out that the bar had already shut down to avoid protests. The activists shouted: "Keep Connelly's closed" and "Stop the racist attacks."
Last fall, Gregory Hemenstyne entered Connelly's bar to get some change. He was greeted by a barrage of racist insults. Angry, he later returned. He was pistol-whipped out in front of the bar. And later he was found shot twice in the abdomen and left for dead in a nearby apartment building. Fortunately, Gregory survived. The assailants have been identified as the bar owner and his sons. They were determined to keep Connelly's bar a segregated, racist hangout. The shutdown of this racist hole in the wall is a victory.
On February 2, Navajos confronted a fencing crew in the Big Mountain area of northeast Arizona. Two Navajos and seven of their supporters were arrested.
The government continues to assist the energy monopolies to steal land historically inhabited jointly by the Navajos and Hopis. Twelve years ago, to give the energy companies access to the rich coal deposits in the area, Congress ordered the forced relocation of some 15,000 Native Americans. But many resisted the eviction and the struggle has continued.
Currently the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is dividing off sections of the area into "land range units." These sections are then fenced off. And water diversion projects are set up to channel the scarce supply of water away from the remaining native people and to the energy corporations. The Navajos are trying to resist the fencing operations.
Rich Navajos Sell Out the Masses
In the fight for their land, these native people have had to confront not only the government's BIA, and National Guard, but also some of their own tribal chieftains. These bourgeois have sold out the interests of their own peoples to Peabody Coal and other energy giants.
Peter MacDonald, the Chairman of the Navajo nation, has stolen so much money from tribal funds, and has taken so many bribes from the energy companies, that he has become known as Peter MacDollar. MacDonald, a successful aerospace engineer, returned to his tribe in the 1960's in the name of helping his people manage their finances. He apparently managed the money right into his own pocket.
According to the March 6 issue of Time magazine, evidence of his corruption recently came out in the Senate's Select Committee on Indian Affairs. MacDonald's own son testified that whenever his father was in need of cash, he would call one of his benefactors and demand "golf balls" -- a code word for thousand dollar cash payments. MacDonald Jr. would then go pick up the bribe. MacDonald also pilfered tribal funds for such things as the $600,000 remodeling of his office and the $18,000 charter of a private jet to take his family to the 1988 Orange Bowl. And in July 1987, MacDonald arranged for the Navajo tribe to purchase a ranch in Arizona for $33.4 million. Two days before, an oil company had purchased the land for only $26.2 million. MacDonald was to get a $750,000 kickback on the scheme. By the time the plot was exposed, he had received an initial payment of $75,000 in cash and the use of a $55,000 BMW car.
While MacDonald has filled his vaults by selling out the land and mining interests of his people, the vast majority of Navajos live in dire poverty. They face severe unemployment and health problems. Half of their homes have no electricity or flush toilets. It is a section of the more impoverished Navajos who chose to remain on the reservation and to fight the theft of their land. Their fight against the energy giants deserves broad support from around the country.
[Photo: Brooklyn, January 28: Hundreds of people march, demanding that the racist police killers of Juan Rodriguez be brought to justice.]
On January 28, about 250 demonstrators took to the streets in the Bushwick Park section of Brooklyn to once again demand justice for Juan Rodriguez. The demonstrators marched through the streets where the Dominican immigrant had lived, cheered on by people from the sidewalks along the way.
One year ago, Juan Rodriguez was beaten to death by four New York City police in his own home. At the time of the beating, two sets of handcuffs locked his hands behind his back. Despite admitting that "blunt force injuries of head, body and extremities [were] sustained during a struggle with police," the NYC Medical Examiner's Office concluded with a whitewash -- claiming Rodriguez' injuries could have been self-inflicted.
Nevertheless, the persistence of the movement has recently forced the government to indict several of the police responsible. The racist murderers must pay for their crimes.
Two days later, 500 people attended the Brooklyn funeral of yet another victim of New York's racist police. Stephen Kelly was an elderly black man who worked as a small contractor. When he arrived home on January 23, he was blocked from parking by a double- parked car. After Kelly honked, a dispute ensued with the off-duty police officer, Radames Ortiz, who had double- parked the car. Ortiz pistol-whipped Kelly and pumped two bullets into him. Those attending the funeral decried the racist violence of the NYC police department.
About 500 protesters rallied against what was billed by white supremacists as the "First Aryan Woodstock" in Napa County, California on March 4.
Former KKK leader Tom Metzger and his White Aryan Resistance (WAR) group had predicted that thousands of skinheads would show up for a day of racist music and propaganda at a private farm about 45 miles northeast of San Francisco. But less than a hundred appeared.
Meanwhile, hundreds of policemen were brought in to protect the skinhead gangs from the anti-racist protesters. Despite the police protection, the demonstrators got their hands on at least one of the racists. He was dragged across a barbed-wire fence by the demonstrators when a handful of racists tried to get into the anti-racist protest.
The MLP actively organized for the anti-racist protest at plants and schools. In its call for workers, students and young people to join the fight against the racists, the Bay Area Workers' Voice pointed out:
"The TV and the media are giving the nazi-skinheads a big promotion. The publicity stunts of a half dozen racist goons are used to exaggerate their size and success. At the same time, no one should think that just because the nazi groups are small they do not have to be taken seriously.
"They pose a danger because they are part of the racist politics of the rich capitalists against the workers and poor.
"They are part of the politics that gave us the George Bush campaign featuring scare tactics using the mug shot of the black convict Willie Horton.
"They are part of the politics that has just made yesterday's klan leader David Duke the newest Republican in the Louisiana legislature.
"They are part of the politics of divide and rule. They are part of racist campaigns against blacks, Latinos and others, as well as bigoted attacks against gays. They are part of the extreme right-wing gangs that are being built up to strike against all working and progressive people....
"We cannot accept the advice of the Democratic politicians and their reformist friends to avoid confronting the nazi-racists and hope they will go away. No. They are being actively promoted by the media. Provided facilities and support by wealthy sponsors. Protected by the courts and the police. Encouraged by the whole politics of the capitalist rulers, right up to the Bush administration.
"The nazi-skinheads must be confronted. They must be denounced. They must be driven back into their holes by anger of the people."
(Excerpted from Feb. 2 "Bay Area Workers' Voice," paper of the MLP-San Francisco Bay Area.)
In recent months the capitalist news media and talk shows have been filled with promotion of racist skinhead activities. Nazi organizations and the KKK are actively recruiting among skinheads to get fresh foot soldiers for their racist and fascist crusade. An impression is being created that all skinhead youth are racists and neo-nazis.
But for some young people skinhead dress and culture are a gesture of rebelliousness against the system in general. Many of these youth are progressive and anti-racist. A section have participated in anti-racist demonstrations or other forms of struggle.
One such action was held on January 15 in Minneapolis. One hundred anti-racists, mainly skinhead youth, demonstrated against the highly publicized activities of racist skinheads in that city. They rallied at the University of Minnesota. They condemned the administration for its continued investment in South Africa and protested the arrest of students for trying to paint over racist graffiti.
They then marched into the nearby community, shouting anti-racist slogans. The marchers boldly painted over neo-nazi graffiti, replacing them with slogans such as "Fight racism!" and "Abolish apartheid!"
This militant action concluded a weekend conference of about 150 skinhead youth from 10 cities. They discussed their experience in the fight against racism and how to build up the anti-racist movement.
[Graphic.]
On February 22, about 40 people rallied in front of Stewart-Warner. They protested the company's announced layoff of 164 workers. Stewart-Warner is owned by British Tire and Rubber (BTR), a highly profitable multinational conglomerate. The layoffs are part of its plans to eventually close this operation and shift some of its production to another plant. Angry workers marched out of the factory carrying placards declaring such things as: "BTR Don't Tread on Me," "BTR is in the green, We're seeing red," "BTR Breaks Promises," "Fight plant shutdowns, Keep Stewart-Warner open."
Afterward workers went over to a nearby school where a rally of 130 people took place. Unfortunately, the leadership did not seem interested in building the mass movement against plant closings. Rather, the rally was geared towards diverting the workers into the mayoral campaign -- into putting aside their own mass struggle against the company and instead placing their trust in the empty electioneering promises of the Democrats.
(Based on an article in the March issue of the "Chicago Workers' Voice," paper of the MLP-Chicago.)
[Photo.]
Spirited picketers marched in defense of fired Royal Oak letter carrier Mark Mitchell on February 8 at the Fort St. General Mail Facility -- headquarters of the Detroit Division. For two hours, in bitter cold, the picketers shouted slogans calling for Mark's reinstatement and denouncing management harassment. When groups of workers exited the building, a spokesperson gave a brief talk explaining Mark's case and calling for support. The picket was organized by the Detroit Branch of the Marxist-Leninist Party.
Postal workers entering and leaving the building greeted the picket with enthusiasm and interest, sometimes shouting slogans along with the picketers. Nearly 750 copies of Detroit Workers' Voice were distributed well before the picket ended, and 100 buttons were handed out. A number of workers showed their solidarity by signing a petition calling for Mark's reinstatement.
Mark Mitchell is a letter carrier at the Royal Oak Post Office who was unjustly fired after defending himself from physical mishandling by a despised supervisor-in-training named Dave Lerner. Harassed by Lerner all morning October 25, Mark finally had enough and attempted to leave the hot situation that had built up. But Lerner pursued Mark and grabbed him, which prompted Mark's self-defense.
While Mark was suspended and later fired, management has rewarded Lerner by having him work continuously as afternoon supervisor at Royal Oak.
Meanwhile, Mark is facing increasing hardships without an income and is up against felonious assault charges. His trial originally scheduled for February 21, was postponed.
(Taken from Feb. 28 issue of "Detroit Workers' Voice," paper of the MLP-Detroit.)
The contract dispute of 22,000 Los Angeles teachers has received a big boost from the students. Thousands and thousands of junior and senior high school students have staged dozens of walkouts and other actions to support teachers' demands for increased pay and better schools.
The teachers have been without a contract since last June. The school superintendent, who makes $142,000 a year and has a police chauffeur receiving $90,000 a year, is crying that the school board is too poor to meet the teachers' demands for a 21% wage increase over two years. He's claiming even a smaller raise will be given only by cutting school curriculum and some jobs. The teachers are opposing the cuts while sticking to their wage demands.
As the on-again-off-again negotiations have dragged on, the teachers have launched a number of protests. More than 85% of the teachers, for example, participated in a grading boycott. They refused to file midterm grades with the school district. Instead, they gave the grades directly to the students on report cards prepared by the union. The school superintendent threatened to withhold any teacher's paycheck who has failed to turn in grades on official district forms by March 3.
Students Take Action
The grading boycott helped to spur on student protests that had begun in January. The students are mad at the way the school board is mistreating the teachers and ignoring the educational needs of the students. Hundreds demonstrated at school board meetings. In early February, over 2,200 students walked out of their classes at four junior high schools. Dozens of other walkouts followed.
In some cases police were rushed in to restore order. Students taunted the cops and pelted them with eggs and rocks. Suspensions have also been used against the students. Fifty were suspended after they walked out of one suburban school on February 1. The principal of the school was quoted as crying, "It was anarchy. We took a very hard line."
The teachers are taking a strike vote on March 7. But the union bureaucrats won't call a strike until summer, when the school year is over, because an earlier strike would be illegal. Nevertheless, the struggle is heating up with the support of the students, and the timid bureaucrats could lose control over the teachers. In 1986 and 1987 numbers of LA teachers staged wildcat strikes in order to press their demands.
(Based in part on a February 13 leaflet of the LA Supporters of the MLP.)
Before he left office, Reagan submitted his final budget -- a budget fully in the Reaganite tradition of handouts for the wealthy, megabucks for the war machine, and cutbacks in social programs.
A few weeks later, Bush submitted his modifications to Reagan's proposals. The next day, newspaper headlines screamed: "A sharp turn away from Reagan," "Bush proposes billions for social needs," "Bush cuts military, hikes aid for schools, housing, environment,"etc.
Actually, Bush's budget has only small differences from Reagan's proposals, while keeping their essence intact. But you wouldn't know this from the coverage by the media or the remarks of the politicians in Washington.
And it wasn't just Republicans who praised Bush's budget. The Democrats also applauded Bush. John Conyers, liberal congressman from Detroit, typified the Democratic praise. He lauded Bush for a "refreshing sensitivity to the concerns of middle-income and working Americans, to a clean environment, and improved education and to fundamental problems that face the nation."
But was this really so? Did George Bush really break away from Reaganism and start a new day?
Don't bet on it. What they said about Bush is fiction, pure and simple. It's nothing but a whitewash.
A Shell Game
The differences between Bush's budget and Reagan's pale in comparison to their similarities. Altogether, Bush would spend less than a penny out of every dollar differently, and a Washington Post article described that the Bush cuts in domestic programs may be even "more draconian than Reagan's." (National Weekly Edition, Feb. 20-26)
* The war budget remains in place.
For the military budget, Reagan had asked for 5% more than last year. Bush asks for 3%. Big deal. The military budget will still amount to a huge $300.6 billion.
What's more, Bush's adjustment is no big surprise. Although Reagan asked for the extra money, it was widely known that this wouldn't be approved.
* Still more handouts to the wealthy. In the next few years, Bush plans to spend tens of billions to bail out the Savings and Loans banks, although through accounting tricks he says only $1.9 billion of it will come out of this year's budget. This crisis was made by the capitalists' greed for fast bucks, but it will be the working people's tax money that goes to bail them out.
But wait, there's more. Bush wants to cut the capital gains tax on businessmen, which will reduce federal revenue by nearly 12 billion. It is the wealthiest 5% of the population who earn about 85% of all capital gains. Bush also proposes $300 million in new tax breaks for the oil and gas industry.
* And still more cutbacks. Bush made a big show that he's asking to spend a few billion dollars more on some social programs. But the truth is, the extra spending is small change compared to what he wants to cut. He wants to cut Medicare, the federal health program for the elderly, by $5 billion. And he proposes cutbacks in benefits for federal employees and retirees.
What's even more significant is Bush's proposal for a freeze on domestic spending, out of which he plans to save $9 billion. He did not specify how this will be done, leaving the details to be worked out by Congress. But it is assumed in Washington that this $9 billion will come out of the very same type of cutbacks that Reagan himself proposed in his plan.
We Don't Need Cosmetics, But a Real Change
Those are the facts. George Bush remains committee to Reaganism. But the politicians and press want to feed us the image of a Bush who is oh-so concerned and caring for the ordinary people.
The truth is, Bush was installed in power to carry on the assault on the working people on behalf of the rich. But Bush and the capitalist class feels that this attack must be continued with a touch of makeup. The rulers of America want the people to be soothed by Bush's promises of a "gentler, kinder nation."
The wealthy at the top are hoping that empty promises will pacify the anger that's been building up at the bottom. In this dirty task, politicians of both capitalist parties have joined together. And the same media which gave Reagan his so-called Teflon armor now builds up the myth of a reformed Bush.
A real turn away from Reaganism will not come from the goodness of the government of the rich. It will not come from Bush. Nor will it come from the Democrats who have been a partner in Reaganism, first under Reagan and now hand in hand with Bush.
To really turn things around, what's needed is for the workers and poor to stand up for their demands. This requires mass struggle. There are no gains for the working people without fighting for them.
The news is full of Bush's attempt to appoint Tower as Secretary of Defense. All the attention is on Tower's boozing, womanizing, and war contract profiteering. Both liberal and conservative, however, find it perfectly reasonable that Tower is being paid off for his role in whitewashing contragate.
When the contragate crisis was hitting at the Reagan administration, Reagan and Bush turned to John Tower to get them out of their problems. They appointed the "Tower Commission" to clear things up. And Tower obliged by issuing a report that whitewashed the crimes of the Reagan administration and suggested that it was all a question of making some minor adjustments in how the National Security Council worked. In particular, Tower whitewashed Bush of any wrongdoing.
And now Bush has reciprocated by fighting stubbornly to have Tower get that's been building up at the bottom. In his position as Secretary of Defense. It is a payoff for Tower's loyalty in contragate and other dangerous moments for Bush.
But do the Democratic contragate warriors object to this corrupt contragate payoff? Not at all. As for covering up Watergate, they participated in this too. Senator Inouye, head of the Senate contragate committee, has talked of his desire to ensure that contragate did not bring down the Reagan administration. So why should the Senate democrats hold the contragate whitewash against Tower?
Nor do the Democrats object to Tower's stance as a right-wing militarist. This too is never mentioned in their opposition to Tower. They take it for granted that the most right-wing, warmongering figures should have their finger on the nuclear button.
In El Salvador, each month brings new demonstrations, strikes and armed actions by the workers and peasants. The "low-intensity" Vietnam-style war by the U.S.-backed tyranny has utterly failed to smash the people's spirit. The revolutionary movement is on the upsurge. Meanwhile the Salvadoran bourgeoisie is turning to the death-squad ARENA party to step up more repression against the masses, and the reactionary generals are debating "total war" versus stepping up the "low-intensity" war.
In this situation, the question of the path for the people's struggle in El Salvador is. also growing more heated. It has become even sharper with the recent proposals by the leadership of the FDR/FMLN (Democratic Revolutionary Front/Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front), the umbrella organization of most anti-government left- wing forces.
For some time now, the leaders of the FDR/FMLN have lost faith in a decisive victory over the Salvadoran tyranny and its U.S. backers. Instead they have been searching for a deal with the White House and the Salvadoran death-squad parties in the name of "peace," and they have also toured Latin America seeking out the leaders of the bourgeois regimes in Latin America to help in this deal. They continue to wage the mass struggle, including the armed guerrilla movement, but they regard it as a means to gain leverage for such a deal.
On January 23, the FMLN leadership issued a proposal expressing the desire "to avoid the social explosion." Social explosion is, of course, simply a vivid term for revolution. The FMLN leadership offered to accept the legitimacy of the results of the presidential elections held under the terrorist rule of the death-squad bourgeoisie, providing some conditions were met.
One Step After Another
The Salvadoran tyranny did not accept this deal. So on February 21, the FMLN commanders went further still. They offered to disarm and to recognize the legitimacy of the reactionary Salvadoran military provided the size of this military was cut back and certain other conditions were met.
These proposals by the FMLN leadership amount to an offer to accept the present power structure, with only such changed as would be accepted by Washington and the Salvadoran bourgeoisie. This would be a horrible setback to the heroic struggle of the Salvadoran masses. Solidarity with the revolutionary movement, of which the FMLN is the major organization, does not require supporting these plans. On the contrary, true friends of the revolutionary activists must make up their own minds about the realism of these recent proposals.
Legitimizing Elections Under the Tyranny
The FMLN proposal on the elections admits ' 'our people no longer believe in elections because they consider them fraudulent" (as reproduced in the CISPES paper Alert!, February 1989). And no wonder! Tens of thousands of anti-regime masses have been murdered or "disappeared" by the military and the death squads. Even Duarte's own Christian-Democrats are subject to attack by the hit-men of the ultra-fascist ARENA party. Clearly, democratic elections are impossible under such conditions of terror.
In the past, the FDR/FMLN justly denounced the Salvadoran elections as a farce.
But over a period of time, the leadership of the FDR/FMLN has changed its views. First it claimed that is was not necessary to sweep away the tyranny. Instead legitimate elections supposedly could be carried out by a new government if it instituted "power-sharing" between the insurgent left wing and the reactionary parties.
In the January 23 proposal, however, the "power-sharing" idea is itself tossed aside. Instead the elections are to be postponed from March until September, and "the present government [is to] remain during the whole transition period." During this transition period, this government, consisting of Christian-Democratic Duarte presiding over an ARENA parliament, is to carry out certain measures. In this case, the FMLN leaders say they will "Accept the legitimacy of the electoral results."
What does it mean to "accept the legitimacy of electoral results"? If this means anything at all, it means that the FMLN leadership would recognize the victor in the presidential elections as the legitimate ruler of El Salvador.
As well, on February 7, the FMLN proposed a cease-fire of one month before and after the elections if its proposal is accepted. But how the FMLN leadership could keep fighting at all, while recognizing the legitimacy of the president of El Salvador is, of course, their secret. Such a recognition would do tremendous harm to the morale and orientation of the fighting masses.
A Utopia
Of the six measures proposed for legitimizing the elections, the most basic one calls for "an immediate cessation of assassinations, abductions and repression against the popular movement and complete respect by the Armed Forces for the electoral activity of all parties." Thus the FMLN leadership holds that El Salvador may be converted to a paradise of democracy under the tyranny. Not only will the elections supposedly be free. We are even supposed to believe that the Salvadoran rulers will end all repression and thus, presumably, tolerate the unchecked growth of strikes and demonstrations. And this although even Duarte's Christian-Democrats, one of the Salvadoran ruling parties, cannot assure their own freedom from the death squads.
Trailing the Reformists Ungo and Zamora
The FMLN proposal claims that if the government meets its conditions for promoting the elections it will "call upon its entire social base to participate in the electoral activity, encouraging people to support and vote for the platform and candidates of the Democratic Convergence." This means that the FMLN leadership will not even put up its own platform in the elections which it wants to legitimize. The Democratic Convergence is not the same as the armed guerrilla movement. It was organized by such reformist leaders as the FDR's Ungo and Zamora. While boasting to activists of their "political alliance with the armed left," they have repeatedly denounced the continuation of the armed movement to bourgeois reporters. They have campaigned on a platform of bartering away the guerrilla movement -- and also the economic and political demands of the working people -- in order to win a deal with the Salvadoran bourgeoisie and the U.S. government.
For the FMLN leadership to pledge all-out support for the Democratic Convergence is to declare its political unity with the platform of ending the revolutionary movement. And it is to declare that it too is willing to oppose the workers and peasants making demands that. cut too deeply into the profits of the rich capitalists and landlords, just as Ungo and Zamora do.
Moreover, even in the unlikely event that the Democratic Convergence were to win the elections, the military, as always, would remain the real power behind the scenes. A Democratic Convergence government would be little more than a reformist cover for the generals, just like the Duarte regime which came to power promising reforms. Or it would be overturned by the military.
The lesson of Chile should be kept in mind. There the people's forces actually succeeded in electing the reformist Allende to be president, and the reformists preached about the wonderful "democratic" traditions of the Chilean military. The result was that the workers were left prey to a military bloodbath from which Chile has yet to emerge. And the Salvadoran military does not even have the allegedly "democratic" background of the Chilean one. It has instead already been hardened by years of bloody "counterinsurgency" war against the people.
Legitimizing Whom?
But the Democratic Convergence has previously admitted that it has no chance of winning. FDR/FMLN spokesperson Arnaldo Ramos now declares that "if we participate in truly free and fair elections there's no question that we will win." (Alert!, p. 1) But whatever the case in "truly free" elections, it is still quite unlikely that the Democratic Convergence would win in the type of elections that the Salvadoran tyranny and the White House would agree to. This means that either the ARENA fascists -- who are currently favored to win -- or the Christian- Democrats will take the elections. Thus by recognizing the "legitimacy" of the election results, the FMLN would actually be legitimizing the victory of bloodstained reactionaries. And if these reactionaries are now "legitimate," what happens to the revolutionary movement against them?
An Offer to Give Up the Armed Struggle
Soon after their offer to legitimize the election results, the FMLN did, in fact, offer to disarm in exchange for some reorganization of the army and police. Specifically, the FMLN calls for reducing the size of the armed forces from their present level of 60,000 soldiers to 12,000, the size of the military prior to the escalation of the civil war in the 1980's. They want the police and security forces to be put under the Ministry of the Interior (that is, under a separate political police headquarters) instead of the army as at present. And the FMLN wants Duarte to punish "those responsible for massacres and political crimes." (New York Times, Feb. 22, p. 1)
These, of course, are the demands before they are further watered down by bargaining with ARENA and the Christian-Democrats.
But none of these things will seriously change the nature of the armed forces. With no guerrilla war to contend with, a smaller army will still be formidable. After all, El Salvador was still a military dictatorship when its army was at the 1978 size. And what is to prevent the army from expanding later on or even preserving secret reserves, as has been done more than once by various bourgeois regimes? What is to prevent a wholesale retribution in one big surprise operation against the disarmed masses?
Punishing those responsible for massacres and political crimes is fine. But these crimes are not merely the product of a few demons. They are the systematic policy of the whole military-political hierarchy. Can anyone seriously believe that this hierarchy, which to date has not punished a single officer despite countless massacres, is going to agree to hang itself? This demand for punishment could at most end up as a few token wrist slaps, or a few scapegoats especially for the murders of the American nuns and Archbishop Romero. To believe that war crimes will be punished by the war criminals is ridiculous.
Furthermore, accepting the military implies accepting the status quo that is protected by the military. It means tolerating the whole system of poverty and oppression and imperialist domination, with only those changes that the military will tolerate.
For the Overthrow of the U.S.-Backed Tyranny
As of this writing it is not clear whether the FMLN proposals will be accepted by the Salvadoran rulers. If implemented, these proposals would undermine the revolutionary movement for the sake of a deal with Bush and ARENA. If they establish the "irreversible" process for "peace" and a "political solution" that the FMLN leaders speak of, this would mean one additional deal after another until the masses agree to put down their weapons in the countryside and tone down their radical economic and political demands. And so far, when the FMLN proposals have not been accepted, the FMLN leaders have followed them up with additional proposals, one after another, offering to give up even more.
The solidarity movement in the U.S. cannot accept the role of being a midwife for these plans. To support this strategy means to replace the building of an anti-imperialist movement with the development of a minor pressure group. It means abandoning radical criticism of Bush and Congress and instead promoting that Bush and Congress can be pushed into being a humanitarian benefactor of the Central American peoples. It means replacing anti-imperialism with utopian schemes for the imperialists ceasing to be imperialists and instead showering Central America with development grants.
We think that the solidarity movement should instead support the liberation demands of the Central American workers and peasants. It should instead expose and combat the imperialism of Washington and stand up for the defeat of imperialism.
[Photo: Demonstration in solidarity with the Salvadoran people at the University of Washington in Seattle, January 20.]
The two recent proposals from the FMLN leadership are being presented in the most exalted and even revolutionary colors. For example, Arnaldo Ramos, spokesman for FDR/FMLN (Democratic Revolutionary Front/ Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front), asserts that the FMLN election proposal "is offering the exciting challenge of hope for real social change." (See Alert!, paper of CISPES (Committee in Support of the People of El Salvador), Feb. 1989, p. 7)
But the FMLN leadership speaks another tune in the proposals themselves. On the same page with Ramos' big talk about social change, Alert! puts the FMLN proposal which reads:
"We say to the forces with decision-making power that if the war continues, their economic and political interests are on the road to collapse."
What could this mean other than that the proposal is designed to avert this collapse? What could it mean except that the FMLN leadership is suggesting that it will agree to respect the "economic and political" interests of the Salvadoran bourgeoisie provided the bourgeoisie agrees to the proposal?
But if the elections, under FMLN's conditions, will save the interests of the rich and powerful, how are they also going to bring "real social change"? It doesn't matter how some smooth talker can try to reconcile these things through rhetoric. If the Salvadoran tyranny and its blood-drenched military agrees to a settlement of the civil war on the assurance that their "economic and political" interests won't be harmed, and then in their own view these interests are seriously harmed, why won't they resort again to death squads and the military solution?
Class Interests In Conflict
After all, the present struggle in El Salvador has deep economic and political roots. These roots include the sharp contradiction between the heavily exploited workers and peasants and the local landlords and exploiters. They include the vicious exploitation of the local toilers by the imperialist corporations. The "economic and political interests" of the Salvadoran regime include the maintenance of this exploitation and of the political tools, the repressive forces, that enforce it upon the workers and peasants.
If there is to be progress in El Salvador, if the masses are to achieve their economic and political interests, they must trample upon the interests of the Salvadoran and American bourgeoisie. The hope of reconciling these interests by, say, increasing wages a bit or giving some peasants land but maintaining landlordism and exploitation, is a vain illusion.
The Christian-Democrat Duarte already tried this road of promises to both sides. But instead of bringing the country peace, he ended up presiding over the intensification of the genocidal counterinsurgency war. With the full blessings of the White House. This was not due to some character flaw of Duarte's. It was due to the impossibility of satisfying both the toilers and the exploiters.
Will There Be a Social Explosion?
A similar contradiction exists on the question of a social explosion. Ramos, defending the FMLN proposal, tells the activists that "A social explosion is inevitable and irreversible inside El Salvador." (Alert!, p. 6)
The FMLN proposal, however, appeals to the bourgeoisie that it is "a last effort to avoid the social explosion by providing the elections with a higher purpose so that they can contribute to a lasting peace." (Alert!, p. 7)
Indeed, the FMLN proposal declares that it wants to prevent the elections from being "the detonator of a major political crisis."
Thus the FMLN leaders are presenting this proposal to the masses as a tool of social explosion, and to the bourgeoisie and Bush as the alternative to social explosion and political crisis. This is how they reconcile the interests of the masses with the bourgeoisie and U.S. imperialism. The masses get high- flown rhetoric, and the bourgeoisie gets offers of assistance.
Freedom From Imperialism?
There is similar double talk on the question of U.S. domination of El Salvador.
The FMLN election proposal denounces "a total dependency of our country on the United States" and demands "the United States government must remain outside of the electoral process and not provide support to any party." It appears to oppose U.S. dictate.
However, the basic point of the proposal is to provide a basis for a deal from U.S. imperialism. The success of this proposal even requires that the U.S. government impose it on ARENA and the Salvadoran military.
This appeal to Bush and Quayle is no secret. FDR/FMLN spokesman Ramos claims, "This is the kind of proposal they [the U.S. -- ed.] cannot reject out of hand." Meanwhile CISPES, a group in the solidarity movement which hails the FMLN proposal, writes hopefully in Alert! that "The proposal may have driven a wedge between the Salvadoran government and its U.S. backers. The State Department indicated that the proposal merited serious study...." (Alert!, p. 6) And some news sources claim that secret negotiations between the Bush administration and the FMLN have begun.
But how can one both oppose U.S. domination and be concerned about tailoring one's proposals to make them acceptable to the White House and the State Department? How can one talk of revolutionary change while banking on Bush and Quayle to be the midwives?
U.S. imperialism is not about to accept proposals that will threaten its grip on Central America. It is interested in the FMLN proposals only because it thinks that they may lead to a deal that will pacify the Salvadoran activists without threatening continued U.S. domination and exploitation of El Salvador. Strangely enough, the FMLN and CISPES leaders find something positive and noble in such a motivation and even appeal to the American bourgeoisie with the very argument that their proposal will stave off revolution in El Salvador. As Ramos puts it, "The FMLN's elections proposal is telling the political parties in El Salvador and Washington that the only way the social explosion can be redirected is by a process of true negotiations."
Behind the Revolutionary Bravado
The FMLN leadership is covering over their reformist proposals with revolutionary bravado. The more their proposals concede to Washington and the Salvadoran tyranny, the more revolutionary their declamations. It is being presented that the FMLN could simply carry out an insurrection at a moment's notice if they wished too -- it is just that the FMLN leaders want to give "peace" a chance. CISPES editorializes that "The FMLN/FDR stands ready realize a popular victory. The FMLN/FDR are utilizing their accumulated political and military strength in an all-out offensive, setting the stage for a decisive confrontation for power." And it goes on to claim, "The revolutionary movement is poised to topple El Salvador's death-squad government by sparking a general rebellion if all other means are exhausted." (Alert!, p. 2) And in an interview in the February Alert!, FDR/ FMLN leader Ramos leaps with ease over the obstacles. The Salvadoran army will simply disintegrate. The growth of its repression against the masses is simply a sign of its weakness.
If it really were possible to stage a successful revolutionary overthrow of the tyranny at the present, then it would be the height of treachery for the for the FMLN leadership to postpone it for months and years on end. The revolutionary moment does not last forever.
But when speaking to Bush and the tyranny, the FMLN leadership puts forward a different idea. Their proposal says that "In this war, there are as yet neither victors nor vanquished" and "the idea that either side would agree to surrender is therefore illogical and lacking in realism." It ends up proposing "to recognize the existence of a single army." (New York Times, Feb. 22, p. 4)
Here the FMLN leaders present that the war is basically deadlocked. Hence they conclude that a decisive victory of either side is out of the question.
For the FMLN leaders, this deadlock doesn't exclude continued fighting or even a popular offensive. But for what aim? Juan Ramon Medrano ("Commandante Balta"), one of the leaders of the People's Revolutionary Army, talked to a reporter from the San Francisco Examiner. He put forward that the planning for an insurrection was to get leverage with the U.S. government. "We want to convince Washington that we are a serious player here, to make them sit at the bargaining table with us." He rules out the very idea of a decisive victory. In his view, so what if the FMLN could overthrow the tyranny. He put forward that U.S. imperialism has the "capacity to destabilize any government in the region. That's why we have to be accepted by the U.S. even if we don't want to be." (San Francisco Examiner, Feb. 12)
So behind the revolutionary bravado lies utter defeatism. The idea is the fighting has the aim, not of a popular victory, but of getting a deal with imperialism, because it is allegedly impossible to live without an agreement with Bush and the Pentagon.
In our view both the bravado about the ease of an insurrection and the defeatist views about the impossibility of revolution are wrong. It seems to us that the movement in El Salvador faces a difficult situation. But the popular upsurge in El Salvador, coming right in the midst of an extensive political crisis, is of tremendous importance and revolutionary potential. And it exists in a Central American situation which is far from static. What is needed is a serious attitude towards preparing the revolution, and judging what its next step should be. Only this can determine what type of "social explosion" is imminent, and whether it is time for the "general rebellion."
The defeatist views about the need for a deal with Bush go against the reality of the present situation. What is needed is vigorous utilization of the present mass upsurge and political crisis in El Salvador in order to strengthen the mass revolutionary movement, and not plans to avert the political crisis. What is needed is deepening the social content of the revolution in El Salvador, and not engaging in daydreams about reconciling the workers and peasants with the capitalists and landlords. What is needed is serious revolutionary strategy that deals with the reality of the sharp class conflicts and the irreconcilable contradiction between U.S. imperialism and the toilers' interests in Central America.
[Graphic.]
On January 23 about 50,000 agricultural workers in Guatemala launched a militant strike. The strikers are mainly cruelly exploited migrant laborers who slave away on the cotton, coffee and sugar plantations. They demanded a raise in the minimum wage in agriculture to $3.70 a day and improvements in conditions.
Clashes With the Police
The strikers occupied some 30 big plantations to press their demands. Meanwhile, union leaders asked for a dialogue with Guatemalan President Cerezo. Cerezo answered by sending in riot squads and military police on behalf of the owners.
Fierce clashes ensued. The sugar refinery workers offered stiff resistance to the police sent to smash their occupation of the refineries. Workers erected barricades, stoned the police and damaged trucks attempting to cross picket lines. The police, using tear gas and clubs, eventually removed the strikers. But on their way out, strikers set cane fields and equipment on fire.
The police actions illustrate the nature of the Guatemalan government which has not changed under the Cerezo presidency. The Cerezo presidency was promoted as providing a civilian government that would tame the trigger-happy military. In fact under Cerezo the generals and death squads continue to rule the roost, press censorship continues, and the peasants are forced to live in so-called "model towns" under constant army surveillance.
20,000 M-16s for the Army
The Guatemalan government enjoys the warm support of U.S. imperialism. Last year Bush and Congress collaborated to send $148 million to prop up this regime. Now Bush is at it again. Recently the State Department authorized the sale of 20,000 M-16 rifles and Bush is sending another warplane for good measure. The administration also is requesting another $9 million in "non- lethal" military aid and plans another $12.5 million in private commercial weapons sales to Guatemala.
Watchdogs or Lapdogs?
Some liberals in Congress have squawked that they weren't consulted about the rifles and warplane. After all, lethal weapons shipments to Guatemala have supposedly been banned since 1977. But it seems that commercial weapons transactions under $14 million are not subject to Congressional review. And since the rifles allegedly only cost $13.8 million, they're legal. Once again the Congressional watchdogs prove their worthlessness.
The government's Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has just set up a concentration camp in south Texas near the Mexican border. It is meant to detain refugees who are fleeing Central America.
Once again we are witness to the callousness of U.S. imperialism. First, the U.S. government devastates Central America, by backing death-squad dictatorships and strangling Nicaragua with economic blockade and a filthy contra war. Then, when thousands of ordinary men, women and children flee from this ravaged area, the U.S. government wants to put them in concentration camps.
Camp Set Up With Bipartisan Support
The south Texas camp is surrounded by barbed wire and patrolled by 100 INS guards. This was an already existing detention center, to which the INS has added tents so that up to 5,000 people can be held. Already nearly a thousand persons have been put there.
This camp is meant for single men. Nearby the INS has had the Red Cross set up "soft detention" for women, families and children. They are required to show up for a daily roll call. If they don't, they are faced with immediate deportation.
The policy setting up the concentration camp was announced February 20 by INS Director Alan Nelson. The INS has let it be known that the policy was decided upon after consultation with politicians from both the Republican and Democratic parties.
A Stepping Up of Repression
It used to be that Central American refugees who applied for asylum in the Rio Grande Valley were not detained while their applications were processed. Since that took some time, the refugees could travel if they had the ability.
At the end of last year, the INS wanted to tighten up this policy and ordered that refugees who wish to apply for asylum must remain in the area where they make their first contact with the INS. This order forced more than a thousand people to camp out in the open in vacant lots or abandoned buildings with no water or food -- and no work of course -- in towns like Brownsville.
A Federal Court overturned the original INS order, and many of the refugees scattered away from the border towns. The reply of the INS has been to step up its repression by setting up outright concentration camps.
The new INS policy says that all asylum applicants will be processed in a single day and those denied would be detained while awaiting appeal. The INS admits that most of those who apply will not get asylum and will end up getting put in detention. As well, those caught by the Border Patrol before they have a chance to apply for asylum would also be put in detention.
Giving one day to process asylum requests shows that the talk of processing asylum applications is a sham, meant mainly for cosmetic purposes to show that the government upholds "due process." In reality, the whole policy is aimed at terrifying the refugees and forcing them back.
The mentality of the INS can be better understood from one official's comment to a TV reporter that she could not understand why "detention per se has such a negative connotation. After all, they are fed, housed " This is the mindset of a jailer, of an apologist for concentration camps.
The Discriminatory Policy of the INS
The U.S. government is making a big hue and cry about the thousands of refugees who are coming from Central America. In particular the INS says that the recent problem began with a large number of Nicaraguan immigrants crossing the border.
It is true that the number of Nicaraguan refugees has been increasing. But as long as the Nicaraguans coming to the U.S. were wealthy contras and their backers (like Adolfo Calero who owns a condo in Miami), there wasn't much of a problem for the U.S. government. These were their wealthy, right-wing friends. But in recent months, the number of Nicaraguan workers and peasants fleeing the economics crisis and the U.S.-backed contra war has increased. It is this kind of refugee that the INS wants to discourage, not the rich ones.
Refugees from other Central American countries have felt the "discriminating hand" of La Migra (the INS) for years. Salvadoran, Guatemalan and Honduran refugees seldom try to apply for political asylum even when they have been directly threatened or attacked by the death squads and the police-military forces in their countries. The U.S. government has been quite clear that it does not want to give asylum to refugees fleeing governments that support U.S. imperialism. They have deported many into the waiting arms of the executioners.
The dirty policies of the INS towards the Central American refugees need to be protested. This protest should also be included within the actions against U.S. imperialist intervention in Central America.
No to the persecution of the refugees from Central America!
Twenty years ago a small group of revolutionaries in the stood up and proclaimed that the working class, the modern proletariat, is the revolutionary class. And it set about the business of organizing that class into its own revolutionary political party as the paramount task of the day.
The American Communist Workers Movement (ML) was founded on May 12, 1969. The struggle it started eventually led to the founding of the Marxist- Leninist Party in 1980. That history provides important lessons for the struggle today to organize the workers and build up the party.
With this issue of "The Workers' Advocate" we carry the first in a series of articles on different aspects of that history. This article deals with the debate on the class basis of the revolution in the U.S., which was one of the key controversies that led up to the formation of the ACWM(ML).
On What Class Must the Revolution Be Based?
"Of all the classes that stand face to face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class. The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of modern industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product." Manifesto of the Communist Party, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels.
In its founding statement, the ACWM(ML) boldly proclaimed "it is the historic mission of the working class of America to lead in a class war, united with the racial and national minorities, revolutionary intellectuals and other oppressed peoples, for the final overthrow of the American monopoly capitalist class."
This idea, that the working class has a revolutionary mission, that it is the force that can rally all the other oppressed in revolutionary struggle, was by no means a settled question in the revolutionary movement of the 1960's.
Out of the liberation movements of the Afro-Americans, Chicanos and Puerto Ricans, the raging battles against U.S. aggression in Vietnam, the mass actions for women's equality, and so forth, a broad section of people turned to the goal of revolution. But there was tremendous confusion over how this revolution was to be made. For years one of the key debates that raged in the movement was over what was the principal force for revolutionary change -- on what class was the revolution to be based?
Is the Working Class Bought Off?
For decades, the capitalists pushed the idea that the workers were no longer oppressed but, instead, represented a rising middle class. They ballyhooed the buying of TV's and cars as the proof that an increased standard of living had put an end to the class struggle. They did not notice the broad sections of workers who were bypassed by the "American dream," or the continual guerrilla warfare on the shop floors, or the number of young workers who took part in the black rebellions and anti-war battles.
No, instead, the workers' movement was defined as the movement of the union bureaucracy. And the union bureaucracy was indeed taking its place in the middle class. It was part of an upper strata of workers that had grown following World War II, bought off out of the super-profits U.S. imperialism reaped from world domination.
The union bureaucracy opposed the workers forming an independent political movement. Instead, it submerged the workers in a liberal-labor alliance within the Democratic Party. The union bureaucracy opposed the class struggle. Instead, the labor hacks preached class peace. While occasionally heading up strikes, the union bureaucrats strove to channel every struggle of the workers into new schemes for labor-management cooperation.
Unfortunately, these ideas of the bourgeoisie found influence in the revolutionary movement. Some groups, in the name of upholding the working class, trailed after the union bureaucracy and its policy of class collaboration. Others, in the name of rejecting the class peace preached by the union bureaucracy, concluded that the entire working class was bought off and began searching for another force to base the revolution on. The ACWM(ML) stood up against both of these trends and based itself on the revolutionary capacity of the working class.
Mired in the Aristocracy of Labor
Pro-Soviet revisionists like the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), trotskyites such as the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), and social-democrats had long betrayed the revolutionary aspirations of the working class. They continued to speak in the name of the workers. But for them the workers' movement was nothing more than chasing the tail of the union bureaucracy.
Chief among these sellouts was the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). At one time it had been a revolutionary party of the working class. But in the mid-1930's it was corrupted by revisionism.
In the name of building a broad united front, the CP pushed the working class to follow the alliance of the liberal capitalists and the labor bureaucrats within the Democratic Party. It developed an economist approach -- political struggle is for the liberals, the economic struggle is for the workers. And even in the economic struggle, it subordinated the workers to the union hacks. In the name of unity of the workers, it gave up independent organization of the workers and advocated a "left-center" coalition of the union bureaucrats. In short, it merged into the union bureaucracy.
Once a party of the militant rank-and- file workers, the CP gradually changed its class basis. It became a party of various petty bourgeois strata and of the aristocracy of labor, of the thin privileged stratum of workers who were the conduit for bourgeois ideas into the workers' movement.
Middle Class Assumptions
Young people then coming up in the revolutionary movement were disgusted by the betrayal of the CP, the SWP and other reformist groups who were a constant drag on the struggle of the masses. They were looking for an alternative. But a series of theories emerged to divert the revolutionaries from a conscious fight against revisionism. Instead of cutting through the opportunism of the CP and other reformists, instead of exposing how they were based in the bought-off labor aristocracy, the prejudice was spread that the working class itself was bought off and that revolutionaries must base themselves in some other stratum of the population.
For example social-democracy spawned various theories of a "new working class." One claim was that the technological revolution was destroying the old working class -- whether by job' elimination or raising them to a skilled middle class. And that white collar workers were now becoming the vanguard of social change. These theories not only turned away from the industrial workers, the unemployed and others being pressed to the wall by technological development, but also from the growing number of blue collar workers in the service sector and from the lower stratum of white collar workers whose jobs have become increasingly proletarianized. These theories turned out to be a justification for limiting work to a stratum of intellectuals and technocrats.
Similarly, there was the Black Panther theory of the "lumpen proletariat." Actually, the Panthers directed themselves towards the "street youth" and urban poor -- a section of the population that has been part of or is very close to the working class but which is threatened with being declassed and driven towards lumpenism. In fact, numbers of the youth recruited by the Panthers were from working class families, including leaders like Fred Hampton whose father was an industrial worker. The street people the Panthers focused on were not, by and large, the actual lumpen proletariat -- those who Marx described as that "passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of old society." (Manifesto of the Communist Party) Unless they climb out of the underworld of crime and corruption, the lumpens are more prone towards being bought off by the police and the powerful than they are to revolution. But the Panthers glamorized the lumpen proletariat to detach the street youth from the class they were closest to, away from the more disciplined and class conscious workers, and into reformist self-help community schemes.
And then there was "third world-ism." Influenced by revisionist theories of Mao, Castro and Che Guevara, some Of the sons and daughters of the bourgeoisie theorized that there is no revolutionary class in the U.S. And that, therefore, a revolutionary in the heartland could do nothing other than wreak some havoc that might provide moral support for revolutions in third world countries. The Weatherman faction of SDS dressed up their guilt-tripping moralism in the Maoist schema of "encircling the cities" of the imperialist metropolises with the "countryside" of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
In another variation, third worldism thought that in the U.S. only the nationalities, without class distinction, were revolutionary. And that, therefore, revolutionary work could only be tailing after the nationalist leaders even when their politics served only to make the masses cannon fodder for the interests of the upper stratum.
The Turn to the Working Class
In the later part of the 1960's, a whole section of the revolutionary movement began to reject these petty-bourgeois prejudices and to turn to the working class. Revolutionaries in the black people's movement, the Chicano movement, the draft resistance movement and so forth began to base more of their activity among the workers. And many began going into the factories and other work places to organize among the rank-and-file workers.
This turn was spurred on by the motion that broke out among the workers themselves. There were various political phenomena, such as the rise of the GI movement, that was based on the working class youth and burst out widely against the imperialist war towards the end of the 1960's. As well, in a strike wave that erupted beginning around 1967, the rank and file began to show their muscle in a series of wildcats spreading from the coal fields, to the auto industry, postal workers, truck drivers, and other industries.
The comrades who founded or later joined the ACWM(ML) were part of that revolutionary trend that began to root itself in the working class. There were comrades, for example, who took part in various of the workers' wildcats such as that of the coal miners in eastern Kentucky and of the black workers at International Harvester and Ford in Louisville. And others who were active in strike support for the farm workers, telephone workers, and others. Some came out of the "FTA" newspaper at Fort Knox, one of the first underground anti-war newspapers organized by GI's. Others came out of the Cleveland Draft Resistance Union (CDRU) which' was formed in the spring of 1967 and centered its work on organizing working class youth into militant mass actions with a conscious stand against imperialism. Later, CDRU activists formed a Marxist study group and decided to go to the workers in the factories. And in the summer of 1968 they united a broader group of revolutionaries into the Cleveland Workers Action Committee. Its members had or took jobs in the factories, participated in the struggles of the workers, began political agitation among the workers, and took up the regular study of Marxism-Leninism.
Lower and Deeper to the Real Masses
In the struggle to forge the Marxist study group and later the Workers Action Committee, the activists ran head up against many of the petty-bourgeois prejudices against the working class and began to find in Marxism-Leninism the true theory for revolution.
They fought against third worldist terrorism of the Weatherman type that was advocated by some people who joined the Marxist study group. They fought the line of lumpenism, advocated by elements who were influenced by the Panthers and by the National Organizing Committee -- an SDS offshoot that attempted to follow the lumpen line among white youth. And they began to criticize the economism of the CPUSA, SWP and the Progressive Labor Party.
The beginning stirrings of the working class, the experience that was gained in actual organizing among the workers, and the ideological fight against revisionism and reformism increased the activists' confidence in the revolutionary capacity of the workers and in the revolutionary theory of Marxism-Leninism. They were learning the truth that despite decades of betrayal which had held the workers' movement in check, underneath the bureaucrats and privileged strata the basic masses of the working class were stirring.
Back in 1916 Lenin explained both the basis for the betrayal of the revisionists and union bureaucrats and the fact that this betrayal could not hold down the masses forever. He pointed out:
"For the trusts, the financial oligarchy, high prices, etc., while enabling the bribery of a handful in the top layers, are increasingly oppressing, crushing, ruining and torturing the mass of the proletariat and the semiproletariat.
"Engels draws a distinction between the 'bourgeois labour party' of the old trade unions -- the privileged minority -- and the 'lowest mass,' the real majority, and appeals to the latter, who are not infected by 'bourgeois respectability.' This is the essence of Marxist tactics!
"...it is therefore our duty, if we wish to remain socialists, to go down lower and deeper, to the real masses; this is the whole meaning and the whole purport of the struggle against opportunism. By exposing the fact that the opportunists and social-chauvinists are in reality betraying and selling the interests of the masses, that they are defending the temporary privileges of a minority of the workers, that they are the vehicles of bourgeois ideas and influences, that they are really allies and agents of the bourgeoisie, we teach the masses to appreciate their true political interests, to fight for socialism and for the revolution...." (Imperialism and the Split in Socialism, V.I. Lenin, Oct. 1916) 1916)
The comrades who came out of the revolutionary movement learned this truth. The formation of the ACWM(ML) marked the turn to systematically putting this Leninist line into practice. But that story will have to await another article.
[Photo: Striking truck drivers stone scab trucks in Cleveland, 1970. ACWM(ML) actively supported this militant wildcat.]
[Graphic.]
[Photo: The hunger strike of South African political prisoners was supported by actions of people outside the prisons. Here 300 demonstrate in Johannesburg on February 18 demanding the release of the detainees.]
Black anti-apartheid fighters imprisoned in South Africa launched a hunger strike on January 23. They demanded the release of the over 1,000 activists being held under the racist government's state of emergency laws. Some of the detainees have been in jail for nearly three years without a trial or even being charged with a crime.
The strike began among 20 detainees at Diepkloof Prison in Soweto. In a short time it spread across the country. By early February 300 prisoners had joined together to refuse everything but water.
The defiant spirit of the prisoners was an inspiration to the black people. Solidarity meetings and actions were organized in several cities. On February 18th, 300 workers and students defied the government ban on demonstrations and marched through the streets of Johannesburg. They demanded the release of all detainees.
Reformists Fall for Regime's Lies
The hunger strike put the apartheid regime in a difficult position. Fearing a mass upsurge, the government sought to defuse the situation by talking vaguely about releasing some detainees.
These lying promises would have had little credibility had they not been lapped up by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and other reformist personalities.
On February 17, a victory was declared in the hunger strike, after a group of lawyers and clergymen, including Tutu, met with South African Law and Order Minister Adriaan Vlok. The reformists called for an end to the hunger strike, saying that Vlok had promised to release most of the hunger strikers. Tutu crowed, "It shows that success can also be achieved through negotiation, through nonviolent action."
Out of the 300 strikers, 170 gave up their fasting after this announcement. But 130 others continued the hunger strike, despite the call of the reformist leaders to quit.
Two weeks later, only 74 prisoners had been released. So much for Tutu's faith in the good will of Law and Order Minister Vlok.
This latest battle in South Africa again shows up the harm done to the anti-apartheid movement by the liberal and reformist forces like Tutu. The detainees' hunger strike was beginning to spark off a new wave of popular struggle by the black people. But it was the reformists who fell for the government's ploy to defuse the growing crisis. It was they who urged the strikers to give up and put their trust in the word of a lying racist politician.
The anti-apartheid struggle will be that much stronger when it casts off the influence of the liberals and reformists and sticks to the road of struggle.
On February 23, a hundred students joined together for an anti-apartheid rally in Biko Plaza at the University of California in Berkeley. The demonstration was called by the Campaign Against Apartheid to show solidarity with the hunger strike by prisoners detained without charges in South Africa.
The MLP supported the call for action and distributed 2,000 leaflets in support of the hunger strike.
The U.S. capitalist media gave the scantiest coverage to the detainees' struggle in South Africa. For them, it only became a major story when the South African government made its lying promises to free some prisoners and the reformist leaders like Tutu agreed to call for an end to the hunger strike.
Under these conditions, the February 23 rally and the work done for it broke through the media distortions and kept alive the spirit of solidarity with the courageous struggle of the oppressed masses of South Africa.
[Photo.]
Three hundred people packed Dodd Hall at the University of California in Los Angeles on February 18 to celebrate the anniversary of Komala, the Kurdistan section of the Communist Party of Iran. The program for the evening included cultural events and a video of the struggle of Komala against the Islamic dictatorship in Iran.
A supporter of the MLP gave a message of solidarity. He condemned the mass executions of political prisoners that have been taking place since last summer. Despite talk of an amnesty by the regime, 600 more are reported to have been killed in the jails in January.
The comrade saluted the revolutionary struggle organized by the Communist Party of Iran. He supported taking the news of this struggle into the anti-intervention and other protests. In connection to this, he made an appeal to the audience to come to the upcoming March 18 demonstration in Los Angeles against U.S. intervention in El Salvador and take part in bringing anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist politics into the movement.
[Graphic.]
Venezuela blew up the last week of February. The workers and poor exploded in rage against price increases brought on by new austerity measures of the government.
For the masses in Venezuela, life has been getting worse and worse in recent years. Wages are down to levels which were in effect two decades ago. The outrage that triggered off the current rebellion was a 30% increase in the cost of public transport fares.
This was too much for the people, who went into the streets in protest. Thousands of demonstrators blocked highways and city streets with barricades, burning tires, cars, and buses. The protesters threw rocks and debris at police, who attacked them with guns and tear gas.
Caracas the capital was paralyzed by the protests, as all schools, offices and stores shut down. All public transport came to a standstill. The poor stormed into stores, taking away food and appliances. In the shantytowns of Caracas, snipers shot back at soldiers with guns and homemade weapons.
The rebellion spread from Caracas to cities throughout the country.
The government of President Carlos Andres Perez clamped down harshly on the protesters. In the first four days alone, some 300-500 people were reported killed and the morgues in Caracas were overflowing. Thousands were injured.
The government imposed a dusk-to- dawn curfew and suspended all constitutional rights. Public gatherings were banned and the government given authority to censor the press. About 10,000 people were arrested.
The Real Face of Social-Democracy
What is this government in Venezuela that's putting the squeeze on the masses and which murders several hundred workers in a few days? Is this a military regime or a right-wing dictatorship?
No, Carlos Andres Perez, the newly elected president, is from the Democratic Action party, which is a social-democratic party associated with the Socialist International. Such a party speaks in the name of democracy and swears to be committed to social justice. But those are merely the words with which social-democracy swindles the masses. The truth is, like the military dictators and right-wing regimes elsewhere in Latin
America, the social-democrats are also a party of the ruling capitalist exploiters. That is the explanation for the austerity policy and the bloody repression. Real life has again shown the true face of social-democracy.
Perez took office February 2. Since taking office he has been phasing out price controls on a wide range of consumer goods and services, and this has allowed prices to shoot out of sight for the poor. Gasoline prices have gone up 90%. The masses are also suffering from shortages of necessities like coffee, salt, flour, and cooking oil. Inflation this year is expected to rise to 70%, double that of 1988.
In the 1970's Venezuela went through a boom because of its petroleum exports. The government also took out big loans from foreign banks. But in the 1980's, with the worldwide depression in oil prices, the country's export earnings have sharply fallen off. Meanwhile, the country's foreign debt is $33 billion, putting Venezuela right after Brazil, Mexico and Argentina.
Like other bourgeois leaders around the "third world," President Perez' policy is to squeeze interest payments out of the hides of the masses. Perez is trying to please the capitalist bankers of the International Monetary Fund by proving to them that he is a "responsible" leader. In other words, he wants to show that, for the sake of continuing the tribute to the multinational banking houses, he is ready to cut the living standards of the workers and he is ready to put down any popular rebellion with fire and sword.
Nevertheless, the mass rebellion has shaken the regime. Following its ferocious repression, the government came out with a string of promises to calm the people down. It announced a 30% wage hike for public employees and set up an anti-poverty agency. Private capitalist groups said they would raise salaries in the private sector. All these promises are just sops to calm down the masses, they are not meant to seriously improve the people's conditions of life and work.
That too is in the nature of social-democracy, to follow the shooting down of workers with promises of reform.
The workers cannot put their faith in these promises. Only their determined struggle can fight back against the austerity measures of the IMF and the bourgeoisie. And by developing the class struggle into a socialist revolution the workers will find the way out of the misery imposed by the bloodsucking capitalist system.
[Photo: Venezuelan protesters battle riot police in hand-to-hand combat.]
(Last November, the "Communist Organization -- Workers Policy" (Politico Operaria) marked three years of struggle to rejuvenate a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist current in Portugal. They held a successful public celebration in Lisbon, a report of which was carried in the November-December issue of their journal. It has been translated by "The Workers' Advocate.")
On November 12, Politico Operaria organized a celebration to commemorate its third anniversary. This coincided with the initiation of the new series of the journal. More than 200 people attended. If any doubts had remained, the attendance in warmth and the solidarity of these people served to confirm once more that our project is suitable for resisting the adverse situation and for reinforcing ourselves.
Those who came included the two nuclei from Porto, of Almada and of Amadora, the workers of various work places of the Lisbon region, and the comrades from Spain and Sweden who came to Lisbon especially for this purpose.
After a snack, the program was initiated with a slide show. It tried to show a small history of the activity of the OCPO. As well, pictures of the difficult struggle of the communists of Nicaragua and Iran were presented.
Rigo and Amir performed a skit showing the repudiation of militarism.
After this Francisco Martins Rodrigues spoke about the reason for the existence of Politico Operaria. (This speech was reproduced elsewhere in Politico Operaria -- see next issue of The Workers' Advocate Supplement.) Two worker comrades, Artur Carvalha of Porto, and Francisco Baranita of Amadora, described the present situation at their work places, the STCP and the Sorefame.
Following this, Candido Fereira read poems of Brecht and Alexander O'Neill. At last Jose Mario Branco closed the program with songs of denunciation and resistance. These were warmly applauded.
A Positive Balance
When the first issue of Politico Operaria came out in October 1985, there were those who may have foreseen a short life for us. There were also those who may have confused us with a group of "disenchanted Communists" on the road towards adhering to the merits of democracy.... They were proven wrong, one and all.
Although with a circulation much smaller than we would prefer, and at the cost of much sacrifice, Politico Operaria has maintained regular publication and has created a circle of loyal readers.
Beginning with a small group, with reduced forces, we have been capable of seriously dealing with some theoretical problems. The discussion of these has permitted us to shape ourselves as an autonomous current, in rupture with revisionism and its shameful child, centrism.
Simultaneously with this theoretical effort, which we defined from the beginning as fundamental, we have sought to maintain ourselves tied to political action and intervention in the workers' movement. We think this preoccupation has been reflected in the various issues we published.
Besides this, we established a positive relationship with other groups in the sector of the so-called extreme left. This permitted us to unite forces for joint actions around common objectives, of which the SCR -- Solidarity Against Repression -- stands out as an example. This has also allowed us to look at the possibility that other actions of greater political scope against the right and reformism might be viable in the future.
All this is very little, compared to what we still want to be. There is a long road to travel and the difficulties are many. But, with the active support and solidarity of our readers and friends, we are certain of being capable of carrying forward.
[Graphic photo.]
According to a report in the February 6 edition of Business Week, King Hussein's troops in Jordan have been combing Palestinian refugee camps and arresting those considered radicals. So far a total of 7,000 people have been arrested and sent south, to be interned in camps. The internment camps are located out in the desert along the border with Saudi Arabia.
The Palestinian people have long known that King Hussein of Jordan is no friend of theirs. This tyrant who rules Jordan with an iron fist is notorious for repression against Palestinian activists. In the last year, he has put down any attempt by Palestinians to organize solidarity actions with the intifida (uprising) in the West Bank and Gaza. King Hussein is scared to death by the prospect that the Palestinian intifada may spread to the toiling masses inside Jordan.
However, there are those who prettify the Hussein regime. This includes the leadership of the PLO, which has moved to the right and is working for a deal with Israel. The PLO has declared in favor of a Palestinian confederation with Jordan. They think this will play well with the U.S. and other Western imperialists who recognize the Hussein regime as a guardian of capitalist stability in the Middle East.
But Hussein remains as reactionary as ever. And the future of Palestinians in a state confederated with the Jordanian tyranny -- if such a thing were to materialize -- would be a bleak one. Just look at what's happening in Jordan today.
Venezuela blew up the last week of February. The workers and poor exploded in rage against price increases brought on by new austerity measures of the government.
For the masses in Venezuela, life has been getting worse and worse in recent years. Wages are down to levels which were in effect two decades ago. The outrage that triggered off the current rebellion was a 30% increase in the cost of public transport fares.
This was too much for the people, who went into the streets in protest. Thousands of demonstrators blocked highways and city streets with barricades, burning tires, cars, and buses. The protesters threw rocks and debris at police, who attacked them with guns and tear gas.
Caracas the capital was paralyzed by the protests, as all schools, offices and stores shut down. All public transport came to a standstill. The poor stormed into stores, taking away food and appliances. In the shantytowns of Caracas, snipers shot back at soldiers with guns and homemade weapons.
The rebellion spread from Caracas to cities throughout the country.
The government of President Carlos Andres Perez clamped down harshly on the protesters. In the first four days alone, some 300-500 people were reported killed and the morgues in Caracas were overflowing. Thousands were injured.
The government imposed a dusk-to- dawn curfew and suspended all constitutional rights. Public gatherings were banned and the government given authority to censor the press. About 10,000 people were arrested.
The Real Face of Social-Democracy
What is this government in Venezuela that's putting the squeeze on the masses and which murders several hundred workers in a few days? Is this a military regime or a right-wing dictatorship?
No, Carlos Andres Perez, the newly elected president, is from the Democratic Action party, which is a social-democratic party associated with the Socialist International. Such a party speaks in the name of democracy and swears to be committed to social justice. But those are merely the words with which social-democracy swindles the masses. The truth is, like the military dictators and right-wing regimes elsewhere in Latin
America, the social-democrats are also a party of the ruling capitalist exploiters. That is the explanation for the austerity policy and the bloody repression. Real life has again shown the true face of social-democracy.
Perez took office February 2. Since taking office he has been phasing out price controls on a wide range of consumer goods and services, and this has allowed prices to shoot out of sight for the poor. Gasoline prices have gone up 90%. The masses are also suffering from shortages of necessities like coffee, salt, flour, and cooking oil. Inflation this year is expected to rise to 70%, double that of 1988.
In the 1970's Venezuela went through a boom because of its petroleum exports. The government also took out big loans from foreign banks. But in the 1980's, with the worldwide depression in oil prices, the country's export earnings have sharply fallen off. Meanwhile, the country's foreign debt is $33 billion, putting Venezuela right after Brazil, Mexico and Argentina.
Like other bourgeois leaders around the "third world," President Perez' policy is to squeeze interest payments out of the hides of the masses. Perez is trying to please the capitalist bankers of the International Monetary Fund by proving to them that he is a "responsible" leader. In other words, he wants to show that, for the sake of continuing the tribute to the multinational banking houses, he is ready to cut the living standards of the workers and he is ready to put down any popular rebellion with fire and sword.
Nevertheless, the mass rebellion has shaken the regime. Following its ferocious repression, the government came out with a string of promises to calm the people down. It announced a 30% wage hike for public employees and set up an anti-poverty agency. Private capitalist groups said they would raise salaries in the private sector. All these promises are just sops to calm down the masses, they are not meant to seriously improve the people's conditions of life and work.
That too is in the nature of social-democracy, to follow the shooting down of workers with promises of reform.
The workers cannot put their faith in these promises. Only their determined struggle can fight back against the austerity measures of the IMF and the bourgeoisie. And by developing the class struggle into a socialist revolution the workers will find the way out of the misery imposed by the bloodsucking capitalist system.
[Photo: Venezuelan protesters battle riot police in hand-to-hand combat.]
(Last November, the "Communist Organization -- Workers Policy" (Politico Operaria) marked three years of struggle to rejuvenate a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist current in Portugal. They held a successful public celebration in Lisbon, a report of which was carried in the November-December issue of their journal. It has been translated by "The Workers' Advocate.")
On November 12, Politico Operaria organized a celebration to commemorate its third anniversary. This coincided with the initiation of the new series of the journal. More than 200 people attended. If any doubts had remained, the attendance in warmth and the solidarity of these people served to confirm once more that our project is suitable for resisting the adverse situation and for reinforcing ourselves.
Those who came included the two nuclei from Porto, of Almada and of Amadora, the workers of various work places of the Lisbon region, and the comrades from Spain and Sweden who came to Lisbon especially for this purpose.
After a snack, the program was initiated with a slide show. It tried to show a small history of the activity of the OCPO. As well, pictures of the difficult struggle of the communists of Nicaragua and Iran were presented.
Rigo and Amir performed a skit showing the repudiation of militarism.
After this Francisco Martins Rodrigues spoke about the reason for the existence of Politico Operaria. (This speech was reproduced elsewhere in Politico Operaria -- see next issue of The Workers' Advocate Supplement.) Two worker comrades, Artur Carvalha of Porto, and Francisco Baranita of Amadora, described the present situation at their work places, the STCP and the Sorefame.
Following this, Candido Fereira read poems of Brecht and Alexander O'Neill. At last Jose Mario Branco closed the program with songs of denunciation and resistance. These were warmly applauded.
A Positive Balance
When the first issue of Politico Operaria came out in October 1985, there were those who may have foreseen a short life for us. There were also those who may have confused us with a group of "disenchanted Communists" on the road towards adhering to the merits of democracy.... They were proven wrong, one and all.
Although with a circulation much smaller than we would prefer, and at the cost of much sacrifice, Politico Operaria has maintained regular publication and has created a circle of loyal readers.
Beginning with a small group, with reduced forces, we have been capable of seriously dealing with some theoretical problems. The discussion of these has permitted us to shape ourselves as an autonomous current, in rupture with revisionism and its shameful child, centrism.
Simultaneously with this theoretical effort, which we defined from the beginning as fundamental, we have sought to maintain ourselves tied to political action and intervention in the workers' movement. We think this preoccupation has been reflected in the various issues we published.
Besides this, we established a positive relationship with other groups in the sector of the so-called extreme left. This permitted us to unite forces for joint actions around common objectives, of which the SCR -- Solidarity Against Repression -- stands out as an example. This has also allowed us to look at the possibility that other actions of greater political scope against the right and reformism might be viable in the future.
All this is very little, compared to what we still want to be. There is a long road to travel and the difficulties are many. But, with the active support and solidarity of our readers and friends, we are certain of being capable of carrying forward.
[Graphic photo.]
According to a report in the February 6 edition of Business Week, King Hussein's troops in Jordan have been combing Palestinian refugee camps and arresting those considered radicals. So far a total of 7,000 people have been arrested and sent south, to be interned in camps. The internment camps are located out in the desert along the border with Saudi Arabia.
The Palestinian people have long known that King Hussein of Jordan is no friend of theirs. This tyrant who rules Jordan with an iron fist is notorious for repression against Palestinian activists. In the last year, he has put down any attempt by Palestinians to organize solidarity actions with the intifida (uprising) in the West Bank and Gaza. King Hussein is scared to death by the prospect that the Palestinian intifada may spread to the toiling masses inside Jordan.
However, there are those who prettify the Hussein regime. This includes the leadership of the PLO, which has moved to the right and is working for a deal with Israel. The PLO has declared in favor of a Palestinian confederation with Jordan. They think this will play well with the U.S. and other Western imperialists who recognize the Hussein regime as a guardian of capitalist stability in the Middle East.
But Hussein remains as reactionary as ever. And the future of Palestinians in a state confederated with the Jordanian tyranny -- if such a thing were to materialize -- would be a bleak one. Just look at what's happening in Jordan today.