---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: neil, 74742,1651
TO: jack/sarah ailey, 73613,516
CC: Andy Austin, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
autopsy, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
barbs, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discussion Bulletin, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Neil C., 74742,1651
Carlos, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recip. Of Conf., INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CSWellen, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Daniels, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
walter daum, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Det/pete, 73174,2070
[EMAIL PROTECTED], INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
neil fettes, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joseph G., INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Golem, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leone Hankey, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leninism, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
marx-gen, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nader/SaraAras, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PLP, PLCD
Earl S., INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SteveO, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Stratman, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tyler, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WCP-Iran, 100260,3324
Paul Z, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DATE: 8/13/99 1:58 PM
RE: IN20
Enclosed are 2 articles from the Communist-left
Internationalist Notes -US # 20 newsletter .
Critiques and analysis on fighting imperialist war
and also on how the bourgeois corporate media , both
the 'left' and right wings of capital slander the
workers movements and struggles.
Neil
LAWV
Communist-left
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: Aaron John Smeaton, INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TO: neil, 74742,1651
CC: jock daborn, 106361,1743
DATE: 8/9/99 11:13 AM
RE: IN20
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from mail01.uwec.edu (mail01.uwec.edu [137.28.1.33])
by spdmgaad.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.3) with ESMTP id OAA28254;
Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [137.28.244.186] by mail01.uwec.edu with ESMTP; Mon, 9 Aug 1999
13:12:21 -0500
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v03130301b3d421c1e592@[137.28.244.234]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 01:12:26 -0500
To: neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Aaron John Smeaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IN20
Cc: jock daborn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Attached is the text version of IN#20. Copies will be sent out shortly.
Aaron
Internationalist Notes 20
Why the Opposition to the War in Yugoslavia Was So Weak
A comrade in Britain wrote the following article. It is printed here in an
effort to spark some reflection on the experience of the latest war and the
relationship of the traditional left to the opposition to the war. Many of
the political organizations have different names but all of them have their
counterparts here in the US as well. Many over here will recognize the
Socialist Workers Party Britain (SWP) by their sister organization the
International Socialist Organization or the ISO. The factions of the
traditional left that supported the arming the Kosovo Liberation Army too
have their counterparts here as well, in the form of the many different
tiny Trotskyist, Maoist and other "anti-revisionist" sects. Supporters of
the would be Labor Party here often refer as working examples to either the
Labour Party in Britain or the Social-Democrats in Germany, both of whom
supported the NATO bombing campaign.
The (undeclared) war in Yugoslavia shows just how totalitarian all
so-called democratic capitalist regimes have become. The USA, Britain and
the other NATO countries all started bombing a state which had not broken
the UN Charter by committing an act of aggression outside its own borders.
Yet there was hardly a word out of place in the supposedly "free" British
press. The state here doesn't need press censorship when the press
publishes virtually only what the NATO leaders want to hear. When Blair
complains that Serbian TV is censored or that Milosevic is a dictator he
only draws attention to his own domination in Britain (NATO showed just how
high they ranked the propaganda war when they bombed the studios of Serb TV
in Belgrade). It is not surprising to find therefore that the original
Rambouillet demands also included the access of NATO to Serb TV
broadcasting.
Ever since they mistakenly allowed us to see the Vietnam War on television
capitalist states have realized that controlling the flow of information
about war is more important than the arguments for starting it in the first
place. In the Falklands and Gulf Wars the TV news was heavily censored and
Kosovo was no different. As NATO had a preponderant military power the,
real war was fought by the media.
For workers back in Britain the situation has been reminiscent of Orwell's
1984. Wars are fought in some remote zone of the planet (although Kosovo is
less than a thousand miles from Britain) and citizens have to pay careful
attention to the media to remember which is the enemy power. Last week it
was Iraq, this week it is Serbia etc. "Slobba" like Saddam was once our
friend but now we learn he is a monster (except that before "we" supported
him because "we" thought he would give us access to Balkan markets and
resources).
All this one-dimensional media coverage obviously goes a good way to
explain why most working class people did not understand that this was a
war against the working class - both Kosovan and Serbian. This explains too
why the opposition to the war was so poorly supported. At first sight Greek
workers put up the most effective resistance. Greek sailors "mutinied"
rather than join the NATO flotilla, while transport workers refused to move
NATO supplies from Piraeus and Salonika. However, when we remember that the
Greek ruling class has huge investments in Serbia (which were depreciating
rapidly under the hail of NATO bombs on Belgrade) and is also Serbia's main
ally, then these movements lose their independent class character.
Next most dramatic were the Italian demonstrations in Rome and at Aviano
(the NATO airbase) which were the biggest in any country involving up to
100,000 people. At the same time there was even something approaching a
general strike in Italy called by the rank and file unions (the COBAS).
Nothing like this was seen anywhere else, but then Italy is right next door
to the Balkans and was the main launch pad for NATO attacks. We should also
make clear that the one-day strike was not really supported by the working
class as a whole but by the most politically committed, although according
to the reports of our comrades of Battaglia Comunista a few workers
independently joined the demonstrations.
In France and the USA the anti-war movement was almost non-existent. The
French government was even able to repatriate Serbs to Belgrade who had
fled to Paris to avoid military service without opposition! In the USA
demonstrations have largely been in the hundreds in each city rather than
in the thousands. Even then, as in Britain there was a fair smattering of
Serb nationalists in these demonstrations.
In Britain there were a couple of demonstrations of around 5000 or so
(despite the claims of the organizers that they were much bigger) in London
and much smaller demonstrations involving a few hundred participants in
provincial cities like Manchester and Glasgow.
A Non-Proletarian Agenda
All these bits of news show that the biggest weakness of the opposition to
the war throughout the world was the almost total absence of the working
class. In fact we could say that the current domination of capitalist
thinking over everyday life would not be possible if the working class were
more active. If we were fighting for our own issues, starting with decent
pay and better working conditions then the state would have to look over
its shoulder at the class war back home. The united offensive of the bosses
and the state against the working class on the economic front has given the
capitalists the confidence to hit workers in the Balkans with the ultimate
attack - imperialist war.
This is why it was important to link the war with all the other attacks we
have had to face over the last few years. It was a challenge taken up by
internationalists of the Communist Left. It was not taken up by the
traditional Left.
"Socialists" for Imperialism
We can perhaps leave aside the Labour Party and the trades unions. The
so-called Labor Movement has a long and dishonorable history, from the
First World War onwards, of supporting the British Empire and "the nation"
in imperialist war. In the First World War the unions signed up to
no-strike deals to aid the war effort. After 1945 it was the Attlee
Government that developed the British nuclear capacity, and it was Harold
Wilson who gave the US support during the Vietnam War. Those who point out
the Labour has always had a pacifist minority from Keir Hardie through to
Christian Socialists like Wedgwood-Benn are not only trying to find an
alibi for Labour but also underlining the fact that the Labour mainstream
(whether New or Old) as always put nation before class. Blair's statements
about "ethical" foreign policy about a fight "for values not territory" are
no different from the same sentiments that imperialists always mouth.
Britain went into the First World War proclaiming its motive as defense of
Belgium when everyone knows it wanted to smash the new German Navy which
was the only threat to Britannia ruling the waves at that time. Blair was
in this war just to get the crumbs from Clinton's cake as Thatcher and
Major joined with Bush to hammer Iraq nine years ago. This is why the
Leftist groups like the Socialist Workers' Party are just misleading
workers when they pretend that New Labour is really new. The Labour Party
(which as we keep repeating has used the Army to break strikes 14 times
since 1945) is an enemy of the working class has been since 1914.
Trotskyism in Turmoil
But if the class character of Labour is absolutely clear, what of the
Trotskyist groups who are constantly trying to win Labour to their ideas
(and in some cases provide the most active members of the Labour Party).
The war in Kosovo showed how completely bankrupt the Trotskyist method is.
The main opposition to the war was the Committee for Peace in the Balkans.
This was an unholy alliance of the SWP, the Stalinoid-now-democratic
Communist Party of Great Britain and assorted Christians and CNDers
(Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament). Their slogan was "Stop the Bombing".
This was totally one-sided. Basically it meant that the Committee supported
Serbia. This was the open and anti-revolutionary position of the
Stalinists. They still think that there is something "proletarian" about
Serbia. This is because it has a lot of state owned industry and this is
their idea of a socialist utopia. Less honest as always were the SWP. They
repeated the "Stop the Bombing" slogan endlessly and published lots of
pictures of victims of NATO bombs but none of Kosovan refugees. This was no
oversight but a calculated policy of support to the state-capitalist
Serbian regime. The SWP were quite right when they pointed out that the
Serbian atrocities got worse when NATO started bombing but they did occur
before that date. Workers in Britain who were fed the Blair line would only
have been confused as to which side to support since the SWP did not stress
that the war on both sides was a war against the working class (but then
talk of class might have alienated their middle class allies in CND et al).
The truth is that the SWP has no clear class perspective and will support
any regime which it sees as anti-American (the US being for them the only
imperialist state).
If the SWP were demonstrating just how far from a class perspective they
were, their smaller rivals were outdoing themselves in Jesuitical
justifications for their insane and anti-working class positions. Workers
Power, Workers Liberty, Socialist Outlook etcetera, all called for arming
the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). When we pointed out that the KLA was
being armed, first by Germany, and then at the last minute by the USA, they
got very angry. They told us that the USA would not support a real national
liberation movement. Wrong again, we said, the USA have give direct
military aid to liberation armies throughout the century. They even
supported HO Chi Minh until 1949 (when the fall of China and the beginning
of the Cold War meant that the US began to see national liberation
movements as the arms of Russian imperialism). The USA would give support
(however reluctant) to any force that would help them realize their
interests. They had after all armed Saddam in Iraq against Iran until he
tried to get too independent.
With the empirical argument lost the Trotskyists shifted to the
methodological. Marxists have always supported "national liberation"
struggles they maintain. Again not true, Marx and Engels in the last
century supported some national liberation movements. But only if they
thought the creation of a new state would help develop capitalism, thus in
the long-term lay the grounds for socialist revolution. One place they
opposed national liberation was in the Balkans. They considered that giving
autonomy to the Balkan peoples would only advance Russian imperialism.
Marxists did not support national liberation in the abstract but as a
concrete step towards working class emancipation. Today, we live in the
epoch of imperialism where there are no progressive national struggles
left. Albanian nationalism is a good example to illustrate this. If the KLA
succeed in getting an independent Kosovo their manifesto calls on them to
create a Greater Albania. This will mean destabilizing Montenegro,
Macedonia and Albania proper. It would create more war and more bloodshed.
So when the pro-KLA Trotskyists give us the moral imperative that we must
support this or that oppressed people (or else we are not Marxist) we can
only reply that they should go back and study what Marxism really is, Lenin
actually ended up with an erroneous position on national liberation
struggles but he did at least frame how we should approach this as any
other issue.
In his Letters on Tactics he criticizes "old Bolsheviks" who:
have played o regrettable a role in the history of our party by reiterating
formulas senselessly learned by rote instead of studying the specific
features of the new and living reality.
(Collected Works Vol. 24 p. 44)
What the Workers Power and Workers Liberty support for the KLA shares with
the SWP and CPB is that all of them put the interests of nations before
classes. In the era of imperialism the only road to freedom is the
international working class revolution. This will abolish national
frontiers and nation-states along with commodity production and all the
other trappings of capitalism. In the meantime revolutionaries have to
propagandize against national interests and national struggles. The days
when the national struggle could be seen as the prelude to the working
class struggle for freedom have gone. As these infernal wars plunge us
further into barbarism, into even greater misery for the working class,
they are a form of class war carried out by a dying imperialist system. In
this historic context there are no intermediary stages for the working
class to go through - the alternative is socialism or barbarism for real.
Those who argue for tactical support for bourgeois forces have abandoned
any revolutionary agenda and thus are renegades from the working class.
Jock
Provincial Hysteria or Preventative Attack
The Party and the GLP are the Objects of Grave Accusations on the Part of a
Journal in Reggio Emilia
This article was published by the comrades of Battaglia Comunista,
publication of the Internationalist Communist Party (Partito Comunista
Internationalista - or PCint) which forms the oldest section of the
International Bureau for a Revolutionary Party. These comrades do work with
GLP (Gruppi di Lotta Proletaria - Class Struggle Groups) many of whom are
comrades as well.
That the so-called mass media, or rather the medium of information, are the
instruments of disinformation and falsification of events, it is not
necessary to be a revolutionary Marxist to understand this, it is
sufficient to have even the slight glimmer of average intellect common to
all human beings. It certainly is true that the war, lieu of the
reappearance of terrorism has caused an acceleration of the process of
twisting reality. Indeed, it is totally predictable, newspapers and
television tripping over themselves to discredit and strike back at the
opposition to the war and to capitalism that the war has generated. Neither
is it important to evaluate how many of those that oppose the war are
coherent or whether they are able to effect the slaughter in the Balkans;
like a monster drunk with blood, the bourgeoisie is quick to tear to pieces
anyone who crosses their path. For example, the "base" unions have been
singled out by various denizens of the political life of the government and
the opposition - as possible "sanctuaries" of terrorism. Now these unions
do not constitute a real anti-capitalist alternative, as they have
demonstrated many times, but notwithstanding this, they are a sign of how
many have been forced into the margins of compatibility with the system,
these come to be seen as an annoyance to the bourgeoisie. In the
generalized vacuum of today, even an openly reformist current as base
unionism is an impediment to the latest turn of the screw on the workers,
that the government is preparing for autumn, constituting the only -
although illusory - point of reference for those who would say "no" to the
bosses and their union accomplices. Both the aforementioned escaped notice;
even this preventative attack that comes from the government and the
opposition "united in struggle" should be a further demonstration of how
the bourgeoisie is no more disposed to tolerate any manner of reformism.
Even our party and the GLP (Internationalist Communist Party and the Gruppi
di lotta proletaria - Workers Struggle Groups) are implicated in this
national witch-hunt by "La Gazzetta di Reggio", the local journal of Reggio
Emilia. The pretext was taken from a leaflet that we had distributed in
Reggio, May 22, during a demonstration against the war. The following
morning the Gazette published an article where they insinuated continuity
between ourselves and terrorism, in which a reporter "was informed" that we
have "distributed delirious communiqués", alluding to the typical language
of the Red Brigades (BR - Brigate Rosse). They then passed to open
accusations. In fact, they explicitly declared that our flyer (also signed
by the GLP) "contained language and methods of armed struggle".
To whoever knows us even only a little, it is evident that there is a
stellar distance separating us from the "language and methods of armed
struggle", but it is also evident that for the average journalist to inform
and inform correctly is the last thing on his mind.
Of no less gravity was the article that appeared in the same paper on May
30, in same alarmist tone. So much so that we would have laughed were it
not so serious:
"The Investigation of a Revolutionary Leaflet - The Police are on the Trail
of the GLP"!
"The leaflet has ended up in the hands of the policeŠ" etc.
"The police investigate", "is on the trail of the GLP? It is as if the
comrades of the GLP were in hiding. They have always had their contact
addresses listed in their review and posted on the Internet as well, they
publish their own initiatives and interventions, in short, they carry out
normal political (revolutionary) work. Even more ridiculous was the
assertion, made with a wink, that "the pamphlet has ended up in the hands
of the police". That would certainly not take a 007, given that the very
same flyer was distributed on a national level for the strike against the
war on May 13. To the contrary, it was in Bologna and then in Reggio that
it passed directly into the hands of the secret police. But why all the
derision? In the face of our firm request for clarification, the gazette in
a short correction, (as if it excused the journalist) the author of the
article in question published a brief telephone interview with one of our
militants where, for better or worse (more for the worse if the truth be
told) elaborated our traditional position on terrorism. The article,
according to the explanation of journalist "that it was not done in bad
faith", if tending banally towards the insipid and empty-headed habit of
sensationalism, in whose basis of "information", both TV and journalistic,
but of a more shady nature, emerges dubiously. Behind all of this there is
the rabid reaction for which we see functioning in the same context as the
formerly "red" (?) Emilia Romagna, against the only ones that had anything
serious to say on the subject of the war and the war mongers.
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
