Re: [L-I] St Patricks Batallion
In a message dated 4/6/2001 8:51:12 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: om Dublin City to San Diego We witnessed freedom denied so we formed the St Patrick Batallion and fought on the Mexican side" -lyrical clip to a song performed by David Rovics I have absolutely no idea what this event refers to, aside from Irish immigrants siding with Mexicans during the conquest, but that's just from the song. Any help here? It seems to have stumped local friends as well. I went to http://www.google.com, typed in the words "St. Patrick's Battalion" and "Mexico", and among other things found this: http://www.hispanianews.com/archive/2000/March17/01.htm Deserters or unsung heroes: St. Patrick's Battalion The St. Patrick Battalion ( El Batalln de San Patricio) was a unique unit of the Mexican Army during the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848. Some say they were heroic men, some say they were just deserters. What made this outfit exceptional was that it was composed almost entirely of deserters from the United States Army who, after defecting, fought on the Mexican side in five major battles. In Occupied America, Rodolfo Acua states that "there is ample evidence that the United States provoked the war...Zachary Taylor's (General of the US Army of Occupation) artillery leveled the Mexican city of Matamoros, killing hundreds of innocent civilians with la bomba (the bomb)...The occupation that followed was even more terrorizing. Taylor's regular army was allegedly kept in control, but the volunteers (about 2,000 in Matamoros) presented another matter. Taylor knew about the atrocities, but...little was done to restrain the men, of which Taylor himself admitted 'there is scarcely a form of crime that has not been reported to me as committed by them." "An interesting sidelight is that many Irish immigrants, as well as some other Anglos, deserted to the Mexican side, forming the San Patricio Corps (El Batalln de San Patricio)...due 'to the inborn distaste of the masses of war, to bad treatment, and to poor subsistence.' Many of the Irish were also Catholic, and they resented the treatment of Catholic priests and nuns by the invading Protestants. According to Miller's book, Shamrock and Sword, renegades who crossed the Rio Grande formed the nucleus of the unique San Patricio unit of the Mexican Army. The Irish-born deserter, John Riley, later claimed credit for organizing the outfit. In a letter to the Mexican president he stated: 'Since April 1846 when I separated from the North American forces...I have served constantly under the Mexican flag. In Matamoros I formed a company of 48 Irishmen...' By July of 1847, the number of San Patricios had increased to more than 200. During the two years of war, Mexicans called this unique outfit by various names; some designations were official, others coined by the people. Unofficially, the group was called the Irish Volunteers, or the Colorados - or Red Guards - so named because of the many redheaded and ruddy-complexioned men in it, or the San Patricio Guards. Officially, the unit began as the San Patricio Company, an artillery outfit that later expanded to two companies. In mid-1847, the Mexican war department reassigned the men as infantrymen and merged the San Patricio companies into the newly-created Foreign Legion (Legin Extranjera), which some Britons and Americans called the Legion of Strangers. In 1848, the Mexican president expanded the companies and formed the Saint Patrick's Battalion. The San Patricios served under a distinctive military banner. John Riley said the emerald green ensign had an image of Saint Patrick emblazoned on one side, with a shamrock and the harp Erin outlined on the other. A Yankee soldier commented of the San Patricio's standard: "A beautiful green silk banner waved over their heads; on it glittered a silver cross and a golden harp, embroidered by the hands of the fair nuns of San Luis Potos." A wartime newspaper correspondent from New Orleans described the San Patricio flag captured at the battle of Churubusco: The banner is of green silk, and on one side is a harp, surmounted by the Mexican coat of arms, with a scroll on which is painted, 'Libertad para la Repblica Mexicana.' Underneath the harp is the motto 'Erin go Bragh' (Ireland for Ever). On the other side is painting...made to represent St. Patrick, in his left hand a key and in his right a crook or staff resting upon a serpent. Underneath is painted San Patricio." The San Patricios fought in five major battles with the Mexican Army: On May 3, 1846 in Matamoros; on September 21, 1846 in Monterrey; on February 22, 1847 at the Battle of Buena Vista (Angostura, for the Mexicans); on April 17, 1847 at Cerro Gordo, and August 20, 1847 at Churubusco. Its name being derived from an Aztec word meaning 'place of the war god,' Churubusco became the site of one of the bloodiest
[L-I] How conservatives intend to kill the left forever
Right Wing Watch Online ARCHIVE March 2, 2001 Eyewitness Report from CPAC Conference (1) INTRODUCTION A sense of optimism permeated this year's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) hosted by the American Conservative Union Foundation in association with Human Events and the Young America's Foundation on February 15-17, 2001. With Republicans now controlling the House of Representatives, the White House, and with Vice President Cheney's vote, the Senate, those in attendance seemed barely able to control their excitement. After eight years in the shadow of Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party, the leaders and ground-forces of the ultra-conservative movement are now eager to reclaim their place in national politics and reestablish their influence over the nation's agenda. This year's attendees formed of a who's who of right-wing politics, with booths and speakers representing nearly every major right-wing political organization, including the Christian Coalition, the Traditional Values Coalition, the Eagle Forum, Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council and many more. This year's CPAC brought together an estimated 3,000 right-wing activists from around the country, all of whom have been galvanized by the combination of eight years in exile, a rancorous election and post-election process, and George W. Bush's apparent commitment to advancing their agenda. The theme throughout the three days of panels and speeches was an unwavering faith in President Bush and a delight with his actions during his first month in office. His executive order barring federal funds to international family planning organizations that offer abortion services or counseling, his nomination of John Ashcroft for Attorney General, and his proposed $1.6 trillion tax cut are already earning him a place beside Ronald Reagan in the hearts of the ultra-conservative faithful. Moreover, it is readily apparent that the party stalwarts believe that they now have a dedicated friend in the White House. (2) Day One A panel entitled "How Bush Can Fight the PR Assault from the Left" began with an impassioned rant by David Horowitz, author of "Hating Whitey and other Progressive Causes," against everything liberal, from Sen. Ted Kennedy and the Ashcroft confirmation hearings to the NAACP and their election-related ads. Horowitz exhorted the audience that it is now time for Republicans to stop being polite and let the world know that the "Democratic Party is the racist party." "Everything that is wrong with the inner city has been done by Democrats," he claimed, later asserting that Democrats would rather protect and defend criminals than law abiding citizens in the inner city. He even stressed the need to allow local police departments to continue to engage in the practice of racial profiling, because blacks commit more crimes in proportion to their percentage of the population. Thus, Horowitz claimed, outlawing the procedure would only hurt the inner city minorities who are predominantly the victims of such crime. Following Horowitz, Human Events columnist and vehement Clinton critic Ann Coulter informed the crowd that George W. Bush has done a spectacular job during his first month in office, and speculated that perhaps he is far more clever than people had believed. In less than a month, Coulter stated, Bush has managed to totally disarm the Democrat's most cliched criticism: that Republicans are mean. Coulter suggested that Bush has apparently figured out that "all you have to do is go around calling yourself nice," making it surprisingly "easy to hornswoggle liberals." Bush has managed to control the agenda, and will continue to do so, said Coulter, as long as he continues to "treat liberals like small children having nightmares." According to Coulter, it seems as if "the mistake Republicans have been making for years was to treat liberals like adults." To discuss the issues of bipartisanship in the closely divided House of Representatives, House Majority Whip Tom DeLay took the podium to a rousing standing ovation. After a few jokes about his inability to find many speaking engagements in this era of "compassionate conservatism," DeLay quickly went on to assure the audience that the opportunity has finally arrived for right-wing organizations to do great things. DeLay asserted that the Republican worldview, a worldview founded on faith in God, the sanctity of life, the belief in absolute truth and the need for personal accountability, has finally won and will now dictate the nation's agenda, a moment DeLay has been dreaming of for two decades. Stating that he "had never been prouder to be an American than when the House of Representatives impeached the President," DeLay assured the audience that now that honor has been restored to the White House,
[L-I] Could you help me debunk an old lie?
Seems the faddish thing among right-wing circles is to say that leftists are actually closer to being Nazis than are right-wingers. (Yes, they are going partially on the fact that the Nazis chose to call themselves "National Socialists" when in reality their version of "Socialism" meant killing 'enemies of the state' and taking their property.) If anyone wants to volunteer to write an essay that concisely refutes this canard, I'd really appreacite it and I promise to credit the author. Thanks! Tamara ___ Leninist-International mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
[L-I] Nader not as Green as he says he is
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40056-2000Aug16.html Nader Picks a Milder Shade of Green By Cathy Newman Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday , August 17, 2000 ; A20 It's Wednesday, Nov. 8. Think, for a moment, the unthinkable: Ralph Nader has made it to the White House. As America's new president, he now has the power to carry out the Green Party USA's official agenda, which, the nation may be stunned to learn, includes plans to abolish the Senate, to slap a 100 percent tax on the affluent, and to break up firms with more than 10 percent market share. But the man the Greens have chosen to run for president has already thrown out the most radical elements of the Green Party platform. Nader, it turns out, is running with quite another party: the Association of State Green Parties, which champions a far more sober set of policies. The Green Party USA (GPUSA), which calls itself "the original Green Party organization in the USA," traces its history to 1984, 12 years before the Association of State Green Parties (ASGP) formed. But Nader, who is not a Green Party member, says he doesn't "really pay much attention" to the older, more radical party's platform. Of the GPUSA's plans to scrap the Senate and impose a 100 percent tax on all income over 10 times the minimum wage, he says: "I don't like those two positions. . . . I'm adopting positions that disagree with some positions of the Green Party USA. I'm not for the abolition of the Senate. There's so many bad things going through Congress I want two opportunities to stop them." Taxing a maximum wage, meanwhile, he dismisses as "not comprehensive enough. If you really want to have a tax on wealth, have a tax on wealth." He is running instead with the ASGP, which nominated him the Green presidential candidate in Denver last month. The ASGP's longer, more moderate platform is organized under four serious-minded headings--"democracy; social justice and equal opportunity; environmental sustainability; and economic sustainability." While Nader maintains he's running on the ASGP platform, that's not quite how Howie Hawkins sees it. Hawkins, who pulled together the GPUSA platform, insists Nader is embracing both parties. "He's using both of us. I really see the platforms as different in degree rather than direction. The ASGP calls for proportional representation in its platform and the U.S. Senate is inherently disproportional, so you could argue that abolishing the U.S. Senate is implicit in the demand for proportional representation." Nader has made it clear he does not want to become embroiled in Green Party politics and has no interest in trying to unite the two warring factions. His supporters fear that the extreme views of some in the GPUSA are a thorn in his side. John Rensenbrink, one of the founders of the ASGP, who is advising the Nader campaign, admits: "It's a real problem for us, there's no question about that." By abandoning the Green Party's more unconventional ideas, Nader has been able to claim the center ground and gain support from people who would traditionally have felt most comfortable voting Democratic. He has, says Rensenbrink, cast himself as a "majoritarian." In doing so, the Greens' presidential candidate is following in the footsteps of other major party candidates. In 1996, Robert J. Dole, the Republican presidential nominee, said he had not read his party's platform, and certainly didn't feel bound by it. Marshall Wittmann, political analyst at the Heritage Foundation, explains: "Nader's trying to be a conventional unconventional candidate. He's done what many Democrats and Republicans have done in the past, which is to ignore their party's platform, particularly when it intrudes into attempts to attract the mainstream." Wittmann sees Nader's alliance with the Green Party as simple opportunism. "He needed a vehicle, and the Greens were the most attractive and available vehicle to him," he says. By distancing himself from fringe elements of the Green Party, Nader has managed to attract support--or at least sympathetic noises--from a number of unions that would usually find the tree-hugging hippie image of the more radical Greens abhorrent. The Teamsters, who have backed both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates in the past, have not yet decided whether to endorse Nader. But his campaign's emphasis on strong labor laws, universal health insurance and corporate accountability has been applauded by such unions. Union leaders attacked Vice President Gore for supporting permanent normal trade relations for China, and the Teamsters' president even stood alongside Nader at a news conference after the China trade bill passed Congress. "Nader is bringing to the forefront issues that matter to working families. The fact that he's a Green Party candidate is irrelevant," says Bret Caldwell, director of communications for the Teamsters. It's that
