|
LETTERS, ... and responses
Why Vote? Children of Jerusalem David Rovics writes (to SeeingRed and his mailing list): Hi folks, Well, I've written a song that has so far elicited more response to me, personally, both positive and negative, than most. So I thought I'd not shy away from sending the lyrics out to my email list, and pointing out that on my website, www.DaviDrovics.com, you'll now find a link to an MP3 of the song (posted by Mark Weaver to the IMC website). On my website you'll also find some new gigs listed for the fall, and there are more to come (but many more would be welcome!). Hope to see you on the road and in the streets. --David Rovics Children of Jerusalem by David Rovics Did you see them prayingNote: If you're one of the good people who are preparing to write me to tell me that this song is subjective, I'll just respond to that quickly here and perhaps save you the trouble of making this allegation, to say that, yes, it is subjective. It is in opposition to massacres, which, whatever your perspective on the causes of the situation, are happening right now. If you have something more specific to say about the song other than that it is subjective or that it's author is ignorant, I welcome your words. Eckardt replies: Wonderful, moving lyrics. As for those objecting to them, never waste your time trying to communicate with ardent Zionists. They'd defend Israel turning Palestinians into soap and lamp shades in industrial death camps -- and say "look! they’re attacking us!" at the same time. I wish I could hear the song over the Net, but I haven't installed/figured out mp3 yet. Someday. Sooner than Zionists will stop being the Übermensch of the Middle East. Perspectiva Mundial needs help Revolutionary Spanish magazine needs volunteers The September issue of Perspectiva Mundial printed August 24, will also be the first that can be viewed at www.perspectivamundial.com, the magazine's new web site. The paper's editors are appealing for volunteers to help prepare future issues for the web page. Perspectiva Mundial is the monthly Spanish-language socialist magazine that carries a selection of key articles translated from the Militant. The cover of this month's print edition features the July 21 union representation victory by packinghouse workers at Dakota Premium Foods in Minnesota. The headline reads, "Meat packers win a union--now preparing to fight for contract." The issue also contains a report of victorious strikes by the United Mine Workers in Wyoming and New Mexico, and two features--an extensive report on the recent Active Workers Conference in Ohio, and chapter 2 of The History of American Trotskyism, by James P. Cannon. In the first stage of preparing a Perspectiva Mundial issue for publication on the web, staff writers will convert the articles into a simple digital text file. Next, a volunteer will copy the articles from these files onto special web-page templates. The articles will then be transferred from the computer's hard drive onto the web via a server--a remote computer--that hosts the files. Once there, they can be accessed around the world through the Internet. Fluency in Spanish is needed. Volunteers must be able to use a word-processing program, and some familiarity with e-mail and other basic online functions will be a help. Most important is the commitment to getting Perspectiva Mundial on the web on time every month. Potential volunteers can contact Perspectiva Mundial at TheMilitant@compuserve.com . Weed in Cuba Tami writes: I have a question for you that I've always wondered about Cuba. I mean here you have this revolutionary government that overthrows capitalism and outlaws weed. What gives? I'm sure they know how it is criminalized in the US - why not get rid of the criminalization in Cuba? Granted - I don't know that much about what their laws are there, but I was just wondering if you knew. Eckardt replies: If I said much of anything about this subject I'd soon be talking out of my nether end.. It’s not something I've ever studied or even asked about. I think first you'd have to know about weed's history/role in Cuban culture -- things are different in different countries. For instance very few people use mushrooms in the U.S. even though they're easy enough to grow or find. Also --just me thinking out loud here-- consider Cuba's situation in the world: a small revolutionary island miles from the most powerful and evil empire in the history of the world –one which has maintained a state of war against them for over forty years. One nuclear submarine could exterminate all life in Cuba with the push of a button. The only reasons they survive are their prestige and their revolutionary consciousness and commitment Would the legalization of and (let's just assume) fairly common use of marijuana contribute positively to that? Hmm? Can you imagine Che or Fidel sitting round getting high? Then there's the matter of getting the country tied up with illegal activity and mafiosos. I mean either they'd have to buy the stuff from gangsters (that's who grows it). OR they'd have to grow it themselves, inevitably meaning some people would find a way to export it ... to gangsters (that's who sells it [I ain't talking about the friend you pick up a dime from]). Look up the stuff around General Ochoa (head of Cuban forces in Africa, executed for cocaine smuggling) in The Militant (if you're lucky you'll even find a letter I wrote and they published). I think it has some relevance. By the way, up until around a year ago Cuba tolerated a little private dope smoking by tourists. But people started getting out of hand --it's one thing to have a couple quick tokes in your room, another to pass joints around in the clubs, smoke it on the streets and hand it out to Cubans. As far as I know, no one has been arrested, but they do let you know it's not cool. Any in case, it's a sovereign country. They have the right to make their own laws. Especially when it’s the one country in the world where the vast majority actually hold political power.... Aren’t all governments bad? Erik writes: I've been digging through all sorts of fantastic philosophy: John Stuart Mill, Wilhelm von Humboldt, all the classical authors... truly a wonderful enlightenment of the mind and soul. In essence, I've been considering several points, all which can be boiled down into one simple, concise maxim: Is it proper for stronger individuals to impose upon weaker individuals their ideals of what a society should be? This doubles for all groups; if socialists become strong they can use force to bring about change, if capitalists become strong so they will, too; if fascists become preeminent, then they, too, will enforce their doctrines on society. So it somewhat invalidates rights, too, at least a real, practicable concept. Rights may exist in theory, though in practice they are virtually nonexistent. What are your views on the appropriateness of state-force (in German the word is Staatsgewalt)? Eckardt replies: It's certainly educational to go back and read the classics. But if it's not in historical context it can also draw you into old thinking that people have advanced past (there's been a lot of experience and discussion and thinking since John Stuart Mill). Problem is you pose the question just like it was posed several centuries ago, in the early days of the bourgeois-democratic (capitalist) revolution. That was when new notion of a sole Man appeared (as opposed to the modern seminal thinkers, Sam and Dave, and their concept of a Soul Man) -- [sorry, couldn't resist....] Anyway, as I was saying -- The bourgeois-democratic concept of an individual with rights was a tremendous advance against the feudal notions of King/Church/state equaling God and therefore being the repository of all power and rights. That's what lies behind your [paraphrased] question of 'aren't all governments repressive?' -- which can be ultimately translated into "aren't all things other than ME (be it majority rule or minority rule) infringements on ME?" The easy answer is "yeah -- so what?" But it’s better to say that you should follow the discussion up into the 19th century where the fruit of the once-progressive capitalist revolutions was revealing its rotten core. The rights of the individual turn into justification for dispossessing the vast majority of humanity-- fundamentally through violence. After all, trading beads for Manhattan, building a factory where workers are lucky to live 3 or 4 years, even giving away smallpox-laden blankets are all nothing but pursuing your sovereign right to look out for your own interests. Capitalist ideology cries: Let all men do this! And let the marketplace select the most successful! Marxism --incorporating the best of bourgeois-democratic thought while also moving beyond it-- recognizes that governments are essentially repressive. "The state is but a body of armed men...." in Marx's famous words. (that's why we use the word "dictatorship" to describe the state -- as in the best known but unfortunate [given it's identification with the "communist" dictatorship of Stalin] phrase "the dictatorship of the proletariat." Of course nobody mentions that its alternative is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.) But for Marxists "the truth is concrete." And the question is what CLASS the state represents. In other words, you can't just draw a formal equal sign between all states. In particular, the dictatorship of the proletariat is unique in history for two reasons -- one, it's the first state representing a majority instead of a minority; and two, because it begins the process of withering away, in other words eliminating all states for all time. (For a great imagining of pure communism [stateless, classless society] read the sci-fi novel Journey to Tomorrow by James Hogan. Very funny, very subversive.) For a far better account of all this I'd recommend reading (or re-reading) the most important book in the world, The Communist Manifesto. Next read State and Revolution by Lenin (which is largely a re-presentation of Marx's thinking on these questions). Finally, I recently received a number of quotes from Che Guevara. They seem like a good way to close out. "The dictatorship of the proletariat is at heart the ever-expanding organization, expression and, when necessary, enforcement of the popular will at all levels of society, in order to gradually eliminate classes and exploitation. Strengthening this class dictatorship - and not the state apparatus itself - is the essence of the socialist transition, and mass socialist democracy - not state repression - must be its linchpin." "I am not interested in dry economic socialism. We are fighting against misery, but we are also fighting against alienation. One of the fundamental objectives of Marxism is to remove interest, the factor of individual interest, and gain, from men's psychological motivations. Marx was preoccupied both with economic factors and with their repercussions on the spirit. If communism isn't interested in this too, it may be a method of distributing goods, but it will never be a revolutionary way of life." "The bestiality of imperialism. A bestiality that knows no limits, that has no national frontiers. The bestiality of Hitler's armies is like the North American bestiality, like that of the Belgian paratroops and that of the French imperialists in Algeria. "For it is the very essence of imperialism to turn men into wild, blood-thirsty animals determined to slaughter, kill, murder and destroy the very last vestige of the image of the revolutionary or the partisan; in any regime that they crush under their boots because it fights for freedom. The statue of Lumumba destroyed today, but rebuilt tomorrow, reminds us of the tragic story of this martyr of the world revolution and make sure that we never trust imperialism. In no way at all! Not one iota!" --Ernesto Che Guevera Pro and con SeeingRed JR writes: I could never agree with anything that Tony Blair has ever had to say. Until today, when he managed to give you are yours the most appropriate name that I would never have thought possible. "Idiots Beneath Contempt" It fits so perfectly - you should change your name. IBC would be easily recognised by 93% of the (world) population. Eckardt replies: In terms of grammar, JR, we idiots are a step ahead of you. Still your suggested moniker isn’t a bad one. Surely the Milosevic forces were muttering "Idiots beneath contempt" as they surveyed the angry crowd of half a million workers ... probably about ten minutes before the crowd summarily removed them, their corrupt and murderous "betters." Conor writes: it's quite sad actually that it didn't take me but 10 seconds to see a typo on your main page | the boy's name is elian gonzalez, not elian gonzales | look into proofreading your material before you post it Eckardt replies: It is sad, and we apologize. We aim for a publication without errors (and apply the same standards to e-mail we send, too). We do fact-check our own material, plus proof-read it and everything else we run. Unfortunately, it’s hard for us to correct stuff after it slips through and gets posted (or enters while shuttling material from machine to machine, from program to program). Right now only the volunteer webmaster can edit things after they’re posted, and his time is limited. We’re working on getting the rest of us access while minimizing the danger of an amateur key-stroke taking down the whole site. Meanwhile everybody can help out be letting us know about any mistakes you see. The correct spelling is "Elián González." Tim writes: This magazine has a rare and refreshing emphasis on international affairs. Too often, left-leaning online publications read like a collection of local issues with this strike and that police beating covered in great detail. Don't get me wrong, these are important issues but Seeing Red has a particular ability to bring home the point that the problems of the South Bronx or Havana or Chiapas are all emanating from the same source. Eckardt replies: Gracias, amigo.
_____________
home
|
subscribe
|
talk
|
help-about
|
back issues
|
resources
|