The Workers' Advocate

WORKERS OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE! 25¢

Volume 12, Number 7

VOICE OF THE MARXIST-LENINIST PARTY OF THE USA

July 20, 1982

[Front page:

Condemn the U.S.-Backed Israeli Invasion of Lebanon!;

All the capitalist parties oppose the working class--The Democratic Party Preaches Reaganomics;

Steel workers, get organized! STOP THE CONCESSIONS RAILROAD!;

Reagan Denounced Across Western Europe]

IN THIS ISSUE

Condemn the U.S.-Backed Israeli Invasion of Lebanon!

All the capitalist parties oppose the working class

The Democratic Party Preaches Reaganomics

Steel workers, get organized!

STOP THE CONCESSIONS RAILROAD!

Reagan Denounced Across Western Europe

Reagan indicts resisters

Another step towards the draft

June 12--A Huge Protest Against the Nuclear Arms Buildup

To fight nuclear weapons, fight imperialism!

Why we reject the nuclear freeze

The fight against nuclear weapons can't be left to the good will of Reagan, Brezhnev, or the generals

Fight the GE Capitalists' Productivity War!

Seven-Month Strike at American Standard in Pittsburgh

Struggle Is the Answer to the Capitalists' Takeback Demands!

Brown & Sharpe Strike Enters Tenth Month

1,500 Workers Stand Firm Against Concessions

Brooklyn, N.Y.

Nursing home workers strike for higher wages

Denver transit workers strike against wage cuts

From its "original vision" to the invasion of Lebanon

Zionism Is Racism

What are Begin's aims in butchering Lebanon?

Arab reaction stabs the Palestinians in the back

A new wave of struggle against apartheid racism

1,300 arrested at Livermore Labs

No to Nuclear Weapons Research!

Condemn the Racist Murder of Willie Turks!

Provisions of the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill

Down with the attacks on the immigrants!

Caribbean Progressive Study Group Enters Its Fifth Year

Maoists, Khrushchovites and Trotskyites Side With the Junta

Opportunists Sacrifice the Argentine Workers to the Generals

What does Leninism teach us about the Falklands War?

Communist Party (Reconstructed) of Portugal:

An Unjust War

Enver Hoxha's new book sheds light on recent revelations in the bourgeois press

U.S. Government Organized Nazi Collaborators to Attack People's Albania

GET ORGANIZED!

Social-Democracy, Instrument of Capitalism

New Victories of the Salvadorian People

How the Democrats 'Oppose' Reagan's Aggression in El Salvador

More on the March 28 elections farce

Condemn the U.S.-Backed Israeli Invasion of Lebanon!

Every day the list of crimes committed by the Israeli invaders against the Palestinian and Lebanese people continues to grow. The Israeli troops and their allies continue their brutal siege of west Beirut. The Israeli bombs and shells are all "made in the USA." Food, water and medical supplies have been cut off in an attempt to starve the half million inhabitants into submission.

Already, more than 10,000 civilians have been killed by Israeli air raids and shelling. Anti-personnel cluster bombs are being used indiscriminately on civilians. Tens of thousands are going without treatment for their wounds because the zionist invaders are blocking medical supplies, levelling hospitals, and dragging away the doctors as "suspected terrorists." The Israeli troops are rounding up the entire adult male Palestinian population into interrogation centers. Thousands are being shipped to concentration camps to be tried as "criminals," tortured and executed.

Through this bloodbath, Begin aims to crush the Palestinian resistance movement. Through this example of Lebanon, Begin aims to break the will of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and elsewhere in their struggle for the liberation of their homeland from the zionist yoke. Begin also hopes to subjugate Lebanon and to annex the south of Lebanon outright.

Support the Heroic Cause of the Palestinian Resistance

The Palestinian people are facing a ring of enemies. But the resistance of the five million Palestinians has never been and never will be broken. Each new crime against them has only strengthened their resolve to fight for their liberation and for the overthrow of their oppressors -- the Israeli zionist regime.

This unconquerable fighting spirit has been demonstrated in the mountains and villages of Lebanon, in Sidon, Tyre and now west Beirut, where the Palestinian liberation fighters have fought with enormous courage and determination against the Israeli invaders. Despite being vastly outnumbered and outgunned, the Palestinian and Lebanese guerillas have struck heavy blows on the zionist forces.

This unbreakable will is also being displayed on the streets of the occupied West Bank and Gaza. There the Palestinian youth are demonstrating their solidarity with their brothers in Lebanon, standing up fearlessly to the crack down of the Israeli troops, confronting automatic rifles with sticks and stones.

Reagan Unleashes the Storm Troopers of Zionist Israel

Reagan is wringing his hands and "deploring the bloodshed" in Lebanon. But everyone knows that it is the Pentagon which has supplied the tens of billions of dollars of tanks, warplanes, and cluster bombs which made this massacre possible. And everyone saw that when Begin visited the White House to report to his boss, the two were all smiles and kisses.

In fact, all of the U.S. imperialist politicians are applauding the zionist butchers. Reagan, Haig and the other ultra-militarists have been joined by Kennedy and the other liberal "doves" of the Democratic Party who are gushing with enthusiasm for the slaughter which the Israeli invaders are perpetrating in Lebanon.

Now Reagan is hatching plans to commit U.S. troops to this murderous aggression. He has already "agreed in principle" to send in U.S. marines to assist in "escorting" the Palestinian liberation fighters out of west Beirut. A U.S. naval task force of 50 warships, led by four aircraft carriers and carrying 1,800 marines, has been assembled in the eastern Mediterranean for "possible operations in Lebanon."

The ongoing massacre of the Palestinian and Lebanese people by the Israeli invaders is a crime against humanity. But Reagan and the U.S. imperialists are also dripping with the blood of the carnage in Lebanon, because they are the ones who have armed the zionist war machine to teeth and because they are the ones who have unleashed Begin and his gang of rabid killers.

If the U.S. marines land in Beirut to assist the Israeli invaders in their criminal objectives, Reagan and t^e U.$. imperialists will bear that much greater responsibility as hangmen of the freedom-loving Palestinian and Lebanese people. It should not be forgotten that once before, in 1958, the U.S. marines invaded Lebanon to crush the liberation struggle of the Arab people.

The U.S.-backed Israeli invasion of Lebanon is another result of the aggressive course of U.S. imperialism. It comes fresh on the heels of the U.S. backing of the British imperialists in the senseless slaughter in the South Atlantic. And it comes at a time when the Reagan administration is getting deeper and deeper into its own Viet Nam-style war of aggression in El Salvador.

The U.S.-backed Israeli invasion of Lebanon has aroused outrage among the working people in the U.S. and around the world. It once again demonstrated the need to step up the mass struggle here at home against U.S. imperialist aggression and war. Today, when the brave Palestinian and Lebanese people are in their hour of need, let all working and progressive people rally to their support and loudly condemn the U.S.-Israeli aggressors.

Down with the U.S.-backed Israeli invasion of Lebanon!

No U.S. marines in Lebanon!

Down with U.S. imperialism and its zionist henchmen!

Victory to the Palestinian and Lebanese people!

[Photo: On June 18, while zionist henchman Menachem Begin addressed the United Nations, more than 5,000 people marched outside the UN in support of the Palestinian liberation struggle and vigorously denounced the U.S.- backed Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Similar demonstrations have been held in cities throughout the U.S. and around the world.]

[Map.]

[Back to Top]

All the capitalist parties oppose the working class

The Democratic Party Preaches Reaganomics

The Democratic Party held its midterm national party conference in Philadelphia at the end of June. This year is an election year, and the Democrats are putting together their campaign strategy. The working people are once again to be besieged by these sweet-talking hucksters as they present themselves as the "alternative" to Reaganism. Don't organize, the Democrats will tell the people, don't go on strike, don't demonstrate in the streets and, for god's sake, don't talk of the class struggle. No, just readjust the system a little by voting Democratic. Meanwhile the top labor traitors in the AFL-CIO are moving towards even more direct affiliation with the Democratic Party than previously; they are telling the workers that the Democratic Party will solve their problems. So the question is: what did the Democrats have to say at their midterm conference?

First let us examine the economy. Today the working people are suffering from almost two years of Reaganomics. The Reagan administration has championed cutting wages and pensions, breaking strikes, and discriminating against blacks, Mexicans and immigrants. Social programs have been slashed in the face of the deepening of the depression. This plan has not been an accident, or a miscalculation, or the result of eating too many jellybeans. On the contrary, it is the conscious, cold-blooded policy of squeezing the people to the wall for the profit of the monopolies, the policy of ensuring fantastic profits for the filthy rich while throwing the burden of the depression onto the backs of the workers and the unemployed. It is the program of the whole class of monopoly capitalists, who rub their hands in glee calculating how much wage rates can be cut each time another million workers are thrown into the ranks of the unemployed. This policy is called "reindustrialization' ' or "revitalization" of the economy.

The Democrats -- for Reaganomics

Well, what did the Democrats have to say? Did they condemn the exploiters? Not on your life! Did they call on the workers to organize? Horrors, no! To the capitalist moneybags, the Democrats pledged that they could administer Reaganomics even better than Reagan. To the workers, the Democrats fumed and sputtered and tried to make everyone forget about their "honeymoon" with Reagan. They tried to hush up the fact that the "reindustrialization" program of the Democratic Party and the labor bureaucrats is exactly the same as Reaganomics. Instead they solemnly declared that the Republican program -- yes, the very same program that the Democrats have voted for again and again in Congress -- had "drawn a safety net around a small, wealthy minority while working families, the elderly poor, children from disadvantaged homes and members of minority groups have fallen through the holes." True enough, but all the Democrats proposed was to make the holes even bigger.

Did the Democrats propose to mend the "holes" in the "safety net"? No. Did the Democrats even propose to restore the cutbacks in the social programs slashed by the Reagan administration, to say nothing of extending these programs to make up for inflation and for the huge needs generated by the depression? No. Did the Democrats propose to increase the minimum wage to keep up with inflation? No. Did the Democrats even bother to suggest how the ten million unemployed, the tens of millions of working poor, the tens of millions of workers facing wage cuts, concessions and inhuman speedups, should try to make ends meet? No.

However, the conference workshop on the economy did adopt a proposal that insisted that all congressional budgeting should be on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, so that each new program must include a new source of revenue or the elimination of an old program. With this proposal the Democrats pledged to the capitalists that they too thought that the present-day miserly social programs were too extravagant and that they too could administer cutbacks a la Reagan.

The Democrats -- for Cutting the Taxes on the Rich in Half

At the same time, the Democrats proposed more and yet more benefits for the "small, wealthy minority." They proposed to cut the income tax on the big capitalists and top executives in half. The Democrats went so far as to advocate eliminating the progressive income tax and instead moving towards a flat-rate system that has the same rates for rich and poor. They ardently embraced this Reaganite proposal that, until now, was even embarrassing to the Republicans. It is the Democratic Party and such social-democratic crusaders as Ralph Nader who have come out as the spearhead of this new campaign by the sycophants of the rich.

The Democrats cry out that Reagan and the Republicans are "draw(ing) a safety net around a small, wealthy minority" when they cut taxes for the rich. But when the Democrats do the exact same thing, they would have us believe that this is allegedly the very heart of "fairness" and concern for the workers, minorities and the poor. Why, the kindly old Democrats have even been "fair" enough to have proposed a "modified" flat rate system with a "surcharge" above a certain level so that the marginal income tax rates will vary from 14% at the bottom to 28% at the top. Reagan should be proud of his loyal disciples in the Democratic Party! He proposed cutting the nominal rate of taxation on the rich from 70% down to 50% in three years, while the Democrats are proposing to go one better -- down to 28% in one jump.

To justify this plan, the Democrats plead that taxes will be lower for almost everyone. Do they take the people for fools? Someone has to pay. Either the taxes are slashed for the rich moneybags and the poor make up the difference, or the rich are made to pay and the working people get some relief. One way or the other. The Democrats have made clear which side they are on by demanding that the rate for the overbloated exploiters be cut in half.

The Democrats say, in their defense, that all they really want to do is cut away the scandalous tax loopholes of the rich and simplify the notoriously complex income tax code. What a fraud! The very Democrats who compete with each other in Congress over inventing new subsidies for the rich are now posing as deadly foes of tax breaks for the rich! If the Democrats really wanted to cut loopholes and simplify the tax laws, then they could have proposed exactly that and left out the huge new subsidies for the rich. However, given that the heart of the Democratic plan is to slash the rate for the top bracket down to 28%, what they are really doing is instituting one big loophole for the small, wealthy minority across the board.

In fact, the talk of eliminating loopholes is just a big deceptive fraud. The main loopholes of the rich are to be maintained. Indeed, from the capital gains tax to special corporate privileges to incorporating families as businesses and foundations, the tax shelters of the rich are bound up closely with corporate tax law and not simply the income tax code. And the Democrats are collaborating with the Republicans in slashing the corporate taxes right and left. At the same time, it appears that the Democratic talk of eliminating loopholes is directly aimed at the working people. Along with the Republicans, they are going to debate whether to tax social security benefits, or strike pay, or unemployment insurance, and so on down the line. For example, the Democrats are presently against taxing social security benefits, but everyone knows that they will have to make compromises to get the rest of their bill through Congress. Moreover, it should be noted that for some time the IRS has had its eyes on taxing the workers' fringe benefits, and such plans are also being floated in Congress. While quibbling over the three martini lunches of the executives, they are really moving to tax the workers for the value of employer-paid medical and dental plans and so forth. This could amount to taxing the worker, not on his take-home pay, but on an alleged "income" that might be as much as double his take-home pay.

The plan of the Democrats to eliminate the progressive income tax is part of the general trend over the last few decades of shifting all taxation onto the workers. The proportion of federal revenue that comes from corporate taxes has declined year after year, while the percentage from the income tax has increased. The social security tax, which has grown heavier and heavier is a notoriously regressive tax in which the wealthy pay no more in dollars (to say nothing of percentage) than a skilled worker. Taking all the levels of government together, more and more weight is being put on the sales tax and on flat-rate income taxes. Indeed, discussion has even begun on instituting a federal value- added tax, which is essentially a sales tax. The Democrats, at their midterm convention, denounced the progressive income tax in order to remind the capitalists that the Democrats are in the forefront of this process of removing all taxation from the exploiters as fast as possible.

On this and other economic issues, the plan of the Democrats, as expressed at the conference by Rep. Albert Gore, Jr. of Tennessee, is to "capture the center of American thought." To be precise, they want to capture the "center" of the thought of the capitalist exploiters. This is why the Democrats are just as Reaganomic as the Republicans. This is why they promise to cut the taxes for the rich and to chop the social programs. They are reassuring the class they represent, the monopoly capitalists, of their continued loyalty and usefulness.

The Democrats -- for Imperialism and War

But economics was only one of the issues dealt with in the Democratic Party conference. There is also the question of war and peace. The workers and all progressive people are denouncing the unrestrained militarism of the Reagan administration. Reagan is arming to the teeth. Why? For peace? Obviously not. He is arming to back up the warmongering and adventurous policy of U.S. imperialism, to secure zones of influence for exploitation by the U.S. multi-national corporations, and to ensure U.S. domination of a vast global empire. Reagan is working to crush in blood the liberation movements of the people in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, the Middle East and so forth. At the same time, he is preparing for a "winnable nuclear war" with his imperialist rivals, the Soviet social-imperialists.

What do the Democrats counterpose to this? Do they denounce U.S. imperialism? Not in the slightest! Do they support any of the liberation movements and pledge their backing? Of course not! Do they pledge opposition to the draft? Just the opposite -- remember that it was Carter who reintroduced registration for the draft and painted the Army life as women's liberation. Well, do they even oppose the unrestrained arms buildup? On the contrary, their midterm conference stressed that the Democratic Party could administer an arms buildup better than the Reaganites. They committed themselves to a buildup of the conventional armed forces as an absolute "imperative," to use their word. They stressed the need to maintain and strengthen the huge nuclear arsenal under the pretext of "the maintenance of overall parity"- with the Soviet Union. They followed Reagan step by step in threatening the American people with "the Soviet buildup...continuing beyond any reasonable justification" and called for a "measured response," i.e., more weapons and yet more weapons.

In brief, the Democratic Party pledged its firm loyalty to U.S. imperialism. Far from opposing even the extremes of Reaganite militarism, it only stressed that the Democrats could build up a yet more powerful military machine of mass slaughter than the Republicans. They denounced Reagan's policy only for being "spasms of spending without plan or purpose" that are impossible to sustain, that don't have enough bang for the buck, and that might discredit the idea of militarism in the eyes of the masses. Instead, the Democrats called for "a steady, sustainable modernization of our military forces." How is this different from Reagan? It is six of one and half-dozen of the other. It should be recalled that Reagan's record- breaking military budgets are simply the continuation of Carter's record- breaking military budgets.

The Democrats -- for Israeli Aggression Against Lebanon

But the Democrats had a rare opportunity to show if they disapproved of any of Reagan's most flagrant warmongering. Simultaneously with the conference, the Israeli Zionists were invading Lebanon, trampling Lebanese sovereignty, dropping cluster bombs intended to kill the maximum number of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, propping up the Lebanese fascist Phalangists, and generally drenching the region in blood. As is well known, Israeli zionism is just the cats-paw for U.S. imperialism. The weapons are U.S., the encouragement is from the American militarists, and the financing is U.S. Well, what did the Democrats have to say about the U.S.-backed invasion of Lebanon?

The Democratic Party was ecstatic over the exploits of the zionist storm-troopers. For years, the Democratic Party has campaigned hard on the theme that the Republicans are too soft to give enough support to Israeli zionism and only the Democrats can be relied on. During the present invasion of Lebanon, such "left" Democrats as the social-democrats Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda of the Campaign for Economic Democracy have gone all out to praise zionist aggression. They even traveled to southern Lebanon and Israel with the express aim of raising the morale of the aggressor army, where Jane Fonda was photographed giving flowers to Israeli troops trampling Lebanese territory.

At the midterm conference, the Democratic hacks, liberal and conservative alike, spoke one after another in praise of the Zionists. They passed a bloodthirsty resolution echoing the Reaganite and Israeli lies justifying this aggression, saying that the zionist bloodletting had created "a new opportunity to build a lasting peace for the people of Lebanon." This is the same way of creating opportunities for peace by invading your neighbors as Hitler used when he invaded Poland in 1939 -- only both then and now the genuine peace will only be built by the defeat of the aggressors.

Even at the Democratic Party conference itself someone complained, pointing out that the resolution has "absolutely no mention of the thousands who were killed, no mention of the recall of [Israeli] troops." So the conference had to quickly add a last minute amendment stating that ' 'the Democratic Party states its regret at all loss of life on both sides" but still not calling for the removal of the Israeli troops. How one is supposed to avoid killing people while massacring the Lebanese and Palestinian people, besieging Beirut, and ensuring "greater security" for the zionist theocracy that has driven the Palestinians out of their homeland is a mystery which ranks up with the mystery of how the Democratic Party "honey-mooners" with Reagan can claim to be the alternative to Reaganism.

The Democrats on Nuclear Freeze

It is significant that this conference of warmongers came out in support of the nuclear freeze campaign. This shows once again that the propaganda for nuclear freeze is of use only to the imperialists. From the most extreme warmongers of the stripes of Henry Jackson and the top bureaucrats of the AFL-CIO to the hypocritical doves, the Democrats all united behind the nuclear freeze. This convention, which called for a huge arms buildup as a "measured response" to the Soviet Union, passed a resolution strongly endorsing and supporting the agitation for a nuclear freeze.

The nuclear freeze campaign is taken by many to be a protest against the arms race; they sign petitions and vote for referendums in order to express their outrage at militarism. But the Democratic midterm convention showed that the nuclear freeze concept is actually a big hoax behind which the militarists continue to arm to the teeth while singing songs of moderation. The nuclear freeze resolutions do not condemn imperialism, either by name or implicitly, but simply call on the chief warmongers to negotiate among themselves to maintain their nuclear parity. This is not what the masses want -- they want a real fight against imperialism and militarism.

Build the Independent Movement of the Working Class!

On issue after issue the midterm conference pledged to follow Reaganism down the line. While throwing curses to the gallery against Reagan, while shouting right and left about how "unfair" Reagan is and how antilabor he is and so forth, the Democratic Party politicians pledged to continue Reagan's policies and to administer them even better than Reagan. We have briefly discussed the economy and militarism, but this holds true on the other issues as well: on immigration, on repressing the people in the name of fighting crime, and so forth. The Democrats are especially anxious to prove that they can be just as tough in suppressing the people's movements as the Republicans, that they too can build more and more jails, fund more and more police, and pass more and more draconic laws.

This does not mean that the working class should be indifferent to the coming federal election. On the contrary, the class conscious workers should make use of the electoral circus staged by the Democrats and Republicans in order to expose the hideous character of all the capitalist politicians. Our Party will denounce the capitalist parties and show that the 1982 elections are being held to determine which representative of the capitalist slavedrivers -- the sneering Republican Reaganites or the leering, fast-talking Democratic Reaganites -- is to represent the capitalist class in Congress and crush the workers. We will use the elections to inspire a profound hatred against the capitalist fakers and thus to inspire the masses to build up the independent political movement of the working class.

It is up to the working masses to organize themselves for struggle. This is the only real alternative to languishing under the Reaganite hell.

We must push forward the mass struggle -- the strikes, demonstrations, mass actions and the whole range of activities of the mass movement. We must circulate revolutionary literature and disseminate the Marxist-Leninist science. And we must build up the solid organization of the working class. This way the working masses will build up their own strength and become a mighty army facing the capitalists in the class struggle. This way the working masses will organize themselves in the struggle against Reaganite reaction into a powerful force for the socialist revolution.

The role of the Democratic Party "opposition" is to prevent the workers from getting organized. By empty phrases against Reagan, the Democrats try to gain the people's confidence. Meanwhile the Democrats embellish the basic Reaganite program, "honeymoon" with Reagan, and even take the lead in proposing such new Reaganite measures. as throwing out the progressive income tax. But the advance of the class struggle will smash the schemes of the Democratic Party fakers to smithereens.

Fight Reaganite reaction!

Down with the Democratic Party -- the party of disguised Reaganism!

Down with all the capitalist parties!

Forward against Reaganism, capitalism and imperialism!

[Back to Top]

Steel workers, get organized!

STOP THE CONCESSIONS RAILROAD!

Steel workers, get organized to fight concessions!

The "big eight" steel monopolists are preparing to tear up the present Basic Steel Agreement in order to take back a whole slew of gains the workers have previously won. By August 1 of this year, the steel billionaires hope to put into place a new contract that will eliminate the annual wage increases, reduce the cost-of-living allowances (COLA) and incentive pay, cut back extended vacation time, and change long-established work rules. These cuts will amount to an average of from $2 to $3 an hour for each employed steel worker and the permanent loss of thousands of additional jobs. And this is only the beginning.

Encouraged by the Reaganite wage-cutting offensive that has already hit workers in the auto, trucking, rubber, meat packing, and other industries, the tycoons of steel are speaking of eventually slashing the workers' pay almost in half. Donald Trautlein, the chairman of Bethlehem Steel, for example, claimed that steel workers make "80% to 90%" more than workers in the rest of the manufacturing sector and he demanded "Steel wages must be brought in line." (Wall Street Journal, June 7, 1982) These are the arrogant aims of the rich steel capitalists.

But what is worse, Lloyd McBride, president of the United Steel Workers (USW), and the other top union bureaucrats are supporting the capitalists' demands. For almost a year negotiations have been going on behind the backs of the workers. On June 18, at the meeting of the USW's Basic Steel Industry Conference held in Pittsburgh, the local presidents voted 263 to 79 to give McBride the go-ahead for "discussions" to settle a concessions deal. And right now they are working feverishly on the national and local levels to draw up the specific takebacks with the aim of railroading them through by August 1.

The rank-and-file steel workers are disgusted with the betrayal of the union hacks and have begun to voice their outrage against concessions. The workers at U.S. Steel's Fairfield, Alabama works rejected local concessions despite the company's threat to close the mill. In June, the workers in USW locals at Bethlehem Steel's mill in Burns Harbor, Indiana and at U.S. Steel's mills in Lorain, Ohio and Homestead, Pennsylvania voted unanimously against reopening the national contract. Many other locals, including at J&L, Inland, Republic and Midwest Steel, have also passed resolutions against concessions. On June 18, 150 steel workers picketed the USW meeting in Pittsburgh. The union bureaucrats wouldn't even allow the workers into the meeting. Twice McBride's thugs physically ejected protesters from the building. But the workers denounced the union hacks and declared, "We didn't make the steel industry in the shape it's in, we're not going to pay for it." These and other examples show that the mood growing among the steel workers is for a fight against the arrogant concessions demands of the monopolies.

The collaboration of the top USW hacks with the monopolies is a serious obstacle to this struggle. As well, the large-scale layoffs and mill closings create a difficult situation. But the workers have no other choice than to take matters into their own hands, to organize themselves for battle. The 285,000 workers in the "big eight" and the additional 100,000 workers in other steel companies that adhere to the Basic Steel Agreement through "me too" clauses, are a powerful force. It is time to stand firm and to strike a blow not only for the steel workers, but for all the workers who are facing the capitalist concessions drive.

Steel workers! Expose the lies of McBride and the steel tycoons. Confront the USW hacks at union meetings and denounce their sellout to all the workers. Join with the workers of the MLP to distribute leaflets, to put up stickers and to write anti-concessions slogans on the walls. Build networks of militants to campaign against concessions and to prepare slowdowns, demonstrations and other mass actions. Steel workers, get organized! No concessions to the steel billionaires!

Steel Capitalists Try to Blackmail the Workers

Now let us examine this concessions railroad in detail.

The steel capitalists have launched a huge propaganda barrage with the theme that the steel industry will collapse unless the workers hand over billions of dollars in concessions. In the newspapers and on the television, with special films and letters to the workers, the steel tycoons over and over again threaten the "ultimate liquidation" of the steel companies. McBride, too, has joined this chorus. At the June 18 USW meeting, McBride claimed that "several steel companies have current cash-flow problems that may cause them to file bankruptcy before the expiration of our current contract." These are nothing but hysterical lies aimed at blackmailing the workers.

It is true that the steel industry is in a severe over-production crisis. Production has fallen to as low as 42.5% of capacity and some 110,000 workers have been thrown into the streets. Nevertheless, the "big eight" steel monopolies are rolling in dough. In the period from 1972 to 1980 they made profits to the tune of $11.7 billion while the big banks raked in an additional $4.3 billion off loans to the steel makers. In 1981 alone, even though production had begun to plummet, the steel giants made over $2.4 billion in profits while the banks cleared several hundred million more in interest payments. (Compiled from the annual reports of the steel corporations and Standard and Poors) Now, in the first quarter of 1982, after paying out huge sums to their executives, to their stockholders, and to the banks, the big eight companies taken together still only lost $4.9 million. (Compiled from American Motor News, April 29, 1982 and Standard and Poors) So, while the crisis in steel is devastating the workers, the steel billionaires are living like kings.

Clearly these capitalist parasites should be forced to use their vast wealth and resources to provide jobs or a livelihood for all the workers they've mercilessly thrown into the streets. But instead the monopolies are issuing ultimatums that they'll close their mills. And the union bureaucrats are trying to create an hysteria that only if the workers pay can the industry and jobs be saved. What an outrage!

Capitalists Demand Job-Cutting Takebacks

Giving concessions to the steel tycoons will never save the workers' jobs. In fact, a big part of the concessions that the steel monopolies are demanding aim directly at cutting back jobs.

For example, besides various pay cuts, the steel billionaires want to slash the extended vacation time program and other paid time off. These cuts alone will cost thousands upon thousands of steel workers' jobs.

On top of this, they want to make radical changes in the work rules. Right now negotiations are taking place at individual mills and on the national level over such things as allowing additional contracting out of work; combining, in various ways, the different craft jobs; forcing production workers to do maintenance and repair work; forcing maintenance workers to do production jobs; etc. These kinds of changes will wipe out a huge number of jobs and will force those who are still employed to work at a killing pace in even more murderous, unsafe conditions.

Concessions to Pay for Job-Eliminating "Modernization"

Furthermore, a big part of the concessions money snatched from the workers' pockets will be reinvested in modernization programs that will eliminate even more jobs.

Since the mid-1960's the steel tycoons have been systematically modernizing their mills to force greater production out of fewer and fewer workers. From 1966 to 1978, years with similar levels of production, productivity (the number of tons of raw steel produced per worker per year) rose by about a third. For the capitalists this meant profits. But for the workers it meant an enormous loss of jobs. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, from 1965 to 1980 the steel capitalists eliminated some 144,600 steel workers' jobs.

In the period since the boom year of 1973, the steel capitalists have poured over $25 billion into modernizing the steel industry. (Standard and Poors, Outlook, 1982) This has been a period of severe over-production crisis, with chronic under-utilization of capacity and frequent crashes in steel production. In this situation the steel capitalists have been working to wipe out "excess capacity," shutting down entire mills, reorganizing production on more efficient lines, while introducing new, more productive machinery.

The current crash in production is only accelerating this process. The Wall Street Journal predicts that, as a result of modernization, even after production levels recover, some 40,000 of the well over 100,000 workers now on layoff will never get their jobs back. (June 24,1982)

The steel tycoons' demands for concessions aim at nothing less than making the workers pay for this modernization and further job elimination.

Concessions Don't Save Mills

Giving concessions won't even necessarily keep individual mills or companies from closing down. It is a well- known fact that the monopoly capitalists will use a business or plant to squeeze every drop of profit from the most exhausting overwork and impoverishment of the workers. They cancel contracts, lay off workers, cut wages, sell off machinery piece by piece, rob the workers' pension funds, make one financial reorganization after another, and get tax breaks and subsidies from the government. And once the workers are ruined, the monopoly capitalists will simply close down the plant or business and throw out the workers to starve on the street.

It should not be forgotten that at Wisconsin Steel, at U.S. Steel's Ohio and McDonald Works, and at several other mills the workers gave the capitalists concessions only to see their mills shut down entirely within the next few years. In fact today, with the deep crisis of over-production, even highly modernized mills are being put on the chopping block. Take McLouth Steel for example. This has the most modern machinery and is one of the most efficient mills in the world. Yet it went bankrupt. The McLouth workers have given up millions of dollars in concessions to save the mill. But their money has gone into the vaults of National Bank of Detroit, Prudential Insurance and other financial parasites. There is little hope that the mill will be kept open.

The workers must not give concessions to the billionaires, but turn their energies to a fight against them. Only by organizing mass struggle against the rich can the workers have any hope of defending their jobs against the capitalists' plant closings and layoffs.

Empty Promises of Job Security

Despite the obvious need to fight against concessions, the top USW bureaucrats argue that the workers can "trade" concessions for "job guarantees." A quick look at some of the "job protection" schemes that the union hacks are cooking up shows that they are little more than cheap rhetoric and empty promises.

One of the chief "job security measures" has to do with trading concessions for a voice in investment policy. In recent years many of the big steel corporations have been putting money into diversification, investing in more profitable enterprises outside of the steel industry. U.S. Steel, for example, recently spent $6.3 billion to buy Marathon Oil. The union bureaucrats claim that if the capitalists just spent more on modernizing the steel industry, instead of diversifying, then somehow jobs would be saved. In fact, McBride is now threatening that no concessions will be given unless the steel capitalists provide "written guarantees" that they will reinvest the concessions money solely in modernizing steel. And such job-eliminating modernization is labeled "job protection." How ridiculous!

Of course the billions of dollars spent for diversification shows that the steel capitalists have money to burn. But why not fight to make them use this money to provide the laid-off workers with jobs or a livelihood? The union bureaucrats will never fight for such a demand because they are completely enslaved to the profit drive of the capitalists. As the June 10 New York Times reports, "Mr. McBride, a strong defender of the free enterprise system, has said that the only reason a steel company is in business is to make money...." And so McBride wants to give them more, all the while promising the workers that if the steel capitalists just become rich enough then, someday, somehow, a few jobs will trickle down to the workers. McBride's "job protection" plans are nothing but pure Reaganomics.

Similarly, the USW bosses are promising "job protection" through a fight against foreign competition and imports. Such "patriotic" calls in favor of the U.S. steel tycoons against their monopoly capitalist competitors in Japan and Europe are aimed at splitting the workers, at making the workers compete over who will receive the lowest pay, work the longest hours, at the fastest pace, in the harshest conditions. The American workers are supposed to sacrifice so the U.S. monopolists can be top international dogs. But this benefits neither the U.S. steel workers nor their class brothers in Japan and Europe. It benefits only the capitalists who reap greater profits from the additional exploitation of the workers. Instead, the workers in the U.S., Japan and Europe should support each other and fight for every cent they can wring from the capitalist exploiters. However, the USW bosses are not interested in such a struggle. They are quite militant about fighting the foreign capitalists, but when it comes to fighting to defend the workers' jobs and pay against their "own" domestic capitalist exploiters the sellout union hacks become gentle as lambs.

The USW bureaucrats are also talking about putting some money, perhaps up to $100 million out of the billions of dollars in concessions to be stolen from the workers, into the exhausted supplemental unemployment benefit (SUB) fund. First of all, this money should have been taken from the capitalists, not taken from the workers' wages. Moreover, since the SUB fund paid out around $200 million in 1981 through the first few months of 1982, this means that at best some workers will get some benefits for a few more months and then the fund will again collapse.

Other "job protection" schemes, similar to those recently negotiated in the auto industry, are being discussed. While the details of such plans for the steel workers have not yet been made public, it should be pointed out that in auto these measures have been worthless. Since the auto contract was signed thousands upon thousands of additional auto workers have lost their jobs, plants have been closed, and benefits for most laid-off workers have run out. Giving concessions simply will not save jobs.

If McBride and the other USW hacks were really concerned about job protection, then they would organize a serious fight against the steel billionaires. They would fight against the contracting out of work, the job combinations and automation. They would fight against cuts in paid time off and shutting down of mills. They would demand jobs or a livelihood for those already laid off. But these sellout union bosses aren't really looking to protect the workers' jobs. Rather they are working night and day to protect the profits of the steel capitalists.

ENA Has Brought Disaster to the Steel Workers

It should be remembered that the belly-crawling USW hacks also promised that collaboration with the capitalists through the Experimental Negotiating Agreement (ENA) would protect the workers. The USW hacks claimed that by taking away the national strike weapon and imposing "class peace," the ENA would "curb layoffs," "provide for job security" and bring about "higher pay." But from 1973, when the ENA was first written into the contract, to 1980 the steel workers permanently lost some 85,000 jobs. At the same time the ENA wage and COLA raises have been so small that the soaring inflation has eaten away at the workers' pay. And now the capitalists want to take away even these meager pay guarantees.

The class peace imposed by the ENA has not protected the workers a single bit. Rather, it has led them to the dangerous situation that they face today. If the workers are to defend their jobs and pay they must take matters into their own hands. They must blow up the "class peace" dictated by the fascist ENA and rise against the class collaboration of McBride and the other top USW bureaucrats.

Take Up Mass Struggle Against Concessions

Right now, the USW bureaucrats and the steel tycoons are working behind the scenes to put the final touches on a new sellout concessions contract. And when they have agreed to cut wages, COLA, and so forth, the contract will simply be imposed. The workers do not even have the right to vote on it! Right now, behind closed doors, the USW hacks and the steel monopolists are also negotiating the local contracts. And when they have agreed to cut incentive pay, to combine jobs, and so forth the workers will not even have a say in whether to accept or reject them. These contracts too are to be shoved down the workers' throats! Steel workers, this situation is intolerable! It is an outrage which must be opposed. It is time to organize! It is time to struggle!

Today the capitalists face a most serious economic crisis. The massive layoffs, the plant closings and bankruptcies convincingly prove that the capitalists cannot even run their own enterprises. They have no solution to the crisis of the capitalist system. They cannot even ensure that the workers can continue to eat and live. The capitalists have proved themselves completely unfit to rule. Only the working class has the solution to these problems. By carrying out the socialist revolution to overthrow the capitalist government, the working class will organize production so that all are employed and so that all who work share the constantly growing benefits of their social labor.

The concessions drive of the capitalists means that the workers must get organized to defend their jobs and their livelihood. No Concessions! is the workers' battle cry. Mass struggle is the workers' weapon. The struggle of the steel workers is one of the streams of the great class battle between labor and capital. The workers must fight to make the rich bear the burden of the capitalist economic crisis. They must use the fight against concessions to organize themselves as a revolutionary force, as a class independent of and opposed to the capitalist exploiters. Salvation is not to be found in the "class peace" of the ENA nor in the lying promises of the union bureaucrats and the capitalist politicians, but in the advance of the mass struggle and the development of revolutionary organization. Steel workers, get organized to fight concessions. This struggle is not just for yourself, but will assist the workers in every industry. It will play its role in organizing the workers as a powerful and united class, a class capable of leading the revolt of all the exploited and oppressed masses against the rule of the capitalist parasites.

[Cartoon.]

[Back to Top]

Reagan Denounced Across Western Europe

Ronald Reagan visited Western Europe during the first two weeks of June. High among his priorities on this tour was to try to dampen the flames of the powerful movement against U.S./ NATO war preparations which has. been raging among the working masses of Europe. But in country after country, massive demonstrations took place to protest the visit of the warmongering chieftain of U.S. imperialism. In all, over a million people demonstrated against Reagan during his ten-day trip. This shows that Reagan's attempts to subdue the masses with cheap talk and phony posturings about peace have not gotten him anywhere.

In these demonstrations, the war preparations of Washington and other NATO imperialist powers were vigorously denounced. As well, the demonstrators shouted their opposition to U.S. imperialist aggression in El Salvador, Thatcher's war in the South Atlantic, the U.S.-Israeli invasion of Lebanon and other acts of imperialist piracy and bloodletting. While the main thrust of these demonstrations was against U.S. imperialism and its Western allies, many demonstrators also voiced their protest against the war plans of Soviet social-imperialism. The demonstrations once again showed the growing strength of the movement against imperialist war preparations in Europe.

Reagan Greeted With Protests Everywhere He Went

FRANCE: Reagan first flew to France where he was to participate in the Versailles summit of the leading imperialist chieftains of the Western bloc. On June 5th, 20,000 workers and progressive people filled the streets of Paris and held a rally at the Place de la Bastille. The march was organized in the face of bitter opposition from the "socialist" president of France, Francois Mitterrand, and his Socialist Party as well as the "Communist" Party of France. The Socialist Party ordered its members not to participate, while the "Communist" Party of France announced its own "peace" demonstration for a later date when Reagan and the other imperialist chieftains would not be around to be offended. The revisionists also scheduled the annual picnic of their youth organization for the same day as the June 5 demonstration. The trade union centers led by the social- democrats and revisionists also did their best to sabotage the demonstration.

But despite this sabotage, the June 5 action was one of the largest anti-imperialist demonstrations in Paris in many years. The demonstrators included militant contingents of immigrant workers, including Haitians, Latin Americans, Arabs, Turks and Iranians. The demonstrators denounced the planned deployment of Cruise and Pershing II medium-range missiles in Europe. Many voices were raised against the militarism of the French imperialists. As well, slogans and banners protested the fascist dictatorships propped up by imperialism around the world, such as in Haiti, Turkey, El Salvador, etc. Sections of the marchers also protested the war preparations of Soviet social-imperial- ism and the Warsaw Pact.

At the closing rally, the police tried to disrupt the demonstration but they were successfully resisted.

ITALY: That same day, 300,000 people marched through Rome in a five-hour action against the nuclear arms race of the two superpowers. The marchers passed in front of the U.S. Embassy, the Soviet Consulate and the Italian Ministry of Defense. The people expressed their deep hatred for the warmonger Reagan and his plans for a nuclear war with the Soviet bloc. They hung Reagan in effigy and shouted such slogans as "Reagan, executioner! and "Reagan brings war to Italy!" The Rome demonstration also raised the demand for a halt to the construction of a NATO base near Comiso, Sicily which is scheduled to deploy 112 cruise missiles. The struggle against this base has been a major focus of the anti-war movement in Italy.

BRITAIN: The following day, June 6, about 250,000 people demonstrated in London against Reagan's visit to Britain and against the NATO war preparations. They raised calls against placing cruise missiles on British or European soil. This was one of the largest anti-war demonstrations in the country's history. Many protesters also raised their voices against Thatcher's colonial war in the Falklands.

On June 7, despite massive police intimidation, there was another demonstration of 3,000 people against Reagan in front of the U.S. Embassy. Afterwards, the picketers marched through the streets of London.

WEST GERMANY: From Britain, Reagan flew to West Germany where there were three major demonstrations during his two-day stay.

On June 10 in Bonn, where Reagan was attending a NATO summit, 350,000 people massed for the largest rally in West Germany in decades. They marched in several separate demonstrations through Bonn and converged in a field directly across the Rhine River from the buildings where the NATO leaders were meeting. Expressing their hatred for Reagan's militarism, they shouted "Reagan go home!" Some signs read "Beat Reagan into Ploughshares!" Two thousand of the demonstrators made their way past police and marched up Bonn's main government avenue. They pulled down NATO, American and British flags and burned them before the police were able to push them back.

On the same day as the Bonn demonstration, there was a demonstration of 35,000 people in West Berlin protesting the buildup of nuclear weapons in Europe. It was reported that among the demonstrators there were several hundred Palestinian residents of the city who marched shouting "Reagan orders, Begin kills!" and other slogans demonstrating their hatred of Reagan and Israeli aggression.

On the following day, Reagan himself arrived in West Berlin for a three-hour stop before returning to the U.S. For the whole week preceding (his visit, the West Berlin authorities carried out widespread repression against those who were organizing against Reagan's visit. The authorities proclaimed all demonstrations illegal for the duration of Reagan's stay in West Berlin. In addition, the police organized a big "clean up" campaign to suppress the large volume of literature against U.S. imperialism. Police raided the headquarters of the coalition which was calling for actions against Reagan and confiscated some of their equipment. During the week, police stopped at bookstalls to tear off the "Reagan Go Home!" stickers which one journal had printed on its cover. It was also reported that about 1,500 people were stopped and checked upon entering the city from West Germany; 74 were detained.

Nevertheless, 100,000 people turned out in demonstrations to condemn Reagan's visit in defiance of the ban. Demonstrations began in several areas of the city around 10 a.m. and continued past Reagan's departure in the afternoon. There were several fierce clashes of demonstrators against the police. These clashes were described by the West Berlin Interior Minister as having "a strength and brutality never before seen in this city."

The militant clashes with the police were concentrated in two areas of the city: the working class Schoneberg district, only a few blocks away from where Reagan was posing for photographers at the Berlin Wall; and the

Charlottenburg district, near the castle where Reagan was addressing a select audience of invited bigwigs from West Berlin.

Nollendorf Square in the Schoneberg district was the scene of the fiercest fighting. Some 3,000 demonstrators assembled there in the morning, many using their banners to carry stones stretcher-style into the square. They shouted "Reagan is a fascist!" and wore stickers saying "Reagan Go Home!" "Send Ray-Gun Home on a Cruise" and other slogans were painted on buildings around the square.

The police used trucks and rolls of barbed wire in an effort to trap and contain the demonstrators in the square. But the demonstrators replied in coordinated attacks, hundreds storming the barricades together and hurling paving stones and railroad flares at the police. They tore away the barbed wire and set up barricades of their own with overturned cars, construction material and large pieces of furniture pulled through smashed store windows. They then set their barricades on fire.

Helmeted police, armed with shields, clubs, tear gas and water cannons, made a ferocious assault on the protesters, driving them back. Convoys of police trucks occupied the square, but the fighting continued as the masses escaped through side streets. In all, 280 demonstrators were arrested and at least five police were injured.

Besides these demonstrations described above, there were also other actions against war preparations in Europe. For instance, on June 6, 100,000 people rallied in Spain protesting that country's recent entry into NATO and the presence of U.S. bases in Spain.

Reagan's Cheap Words of Peace Fall on Deaf Ears

The large numbers of people pouring into the streets of Europe against Reagan show the deep hatred and contempt they have for this chieftain of U.S. imperialism. Quite properly, Reagan is seen as the epitome of U.S. imperialism's rabid warmongering. He is seen as the promoter of the scenario of "demonstration" nuclear shots over Europe, of the idea of a "winnable" nuclear war, and so forth. In fact, it was well known that one of the main missions of Reagan's trip was to press his imperialist allies to step up their military budgets further.

As well, during the time he was in Europe, Reagan took the opportunity to call for what the bourgeois press has described as a new "crusade against communism." With this call, on the one hand, Reagan tried to drum up support for his adventurist warmongering against his imperialist rivals in the revisionist Soviet bloc, who are not real communists but betrayers of the inspiring communist heritage of Lenin and Stalin. On the other hand, he really meant a crusade against communism, which to him signifies all the revolutionary and liberation struggles of the world's peoples as well as the immortal revolutionary ideas of scientific communism. From the rostrum of the British parliament Reagan declared his goal "to consign Marxism- Leninism to the ash-heap of history." But as many other two-bit reactionaries who have made such declarations before have found out, it is not Marxism-Leninism but the Reaganites and capitalist reaction which are being relegated to the museum of antiquities by the forward march of the revolutionary' struggle of progressive mankind.

Indeed, the Reaganites are terrified of the progressive masses. The growing upsurge of the anti-war movement in Europe has made them tremble. Thus on the eve of his European trip, Reagan's advisers asked him to sprinkle some imperialist pacifist holy water on his war-hungry tongue. The U.S. militarists think that the people will swallow the war buildup easier if Reagan mentions the word "peace" more often and offers some fraudulent peace and disarmament proposals.

Thus on the eve of his trip, Reagan tried on this new make-up and announced that a new round of arms talks would begin on June 29 with the Soviet Union over medium-range missiles. And in Europe itself, Reagan hypocritically tried to portray himself as the leader of the peace movement. In Bonn he declared: "To those who march for peace, my heart is with you. I would be at the head of your parade if I believed marching alone could bring a more secure world."

But the European working masses were not fooled by Reagan's new pacifist make-up job. They knew what he represented and was in Europe for. Thus, the masses shouted from one corner of Europe to the other: Reagan go home!

Social-Democrats and Revisionists Scab on the Anti-War Movement

One of the notable features of the recent wave of demonstrations in Europe was the open collaboration of a number of the major social-democratic and revisionist parties with U.S. imperialism against the anti-militarist masses. In several European countries, the social-democrats have been entrusted with the leadership of the imperialist governments, such as West Germany and France. These social-democrats are not only vigorous boosters of the German and French bourgeoisie's own frenzied militarization but are also loud champions of U.S. imperialism's missile buildup in Europe.

These "socialist" chieftains outdid themselves in bowing and scraping before Reagan. While Mitterrand hosted Reagan with gala banquets, the social- democrat Schmidt made the bootlicking comment to Reagan during the Berlin demonstration that "If there are demonstrators busy during your stay here, that is because their basic democratic rights are defended by your soldiers." (New York Times, June 12, 1982) At that very time, the German authorities in West Berlin, a city bristling with U.S. troops, were attacking the demonstrators with clubs, tear gas and water cannons. Such is the way Herr Schmidt and his NATO imperialist allies defend "basic democratic rights."

We have already noted that in France the social-democrats tried their best to prevent the anti-Reagan rally from taking place. In this they were helped by the revisionist Communist Party which has four minor cabinet posts in the Mitterrand government. In Italy, too, the Socialist Party, which is part of the ruling coalition, called for boycotting the Rome demonstration "because they thought it was unfair to target the American president alone." (Washington Post, June 8, 1982)

Meanwhile, other social-democratic and revisionist forces tried to sabotage the demonstrations from within. They did their best to tone down the militant character of the demonstrations. For example, Erhard Eppler, a leader of the "left" wing of Schmidt's Social Democratic Party of Germany, threatened prior to the Bonn rally that he "did not intend to participate in a purely anti-Reagan demonstration" (Time, June 14, 1982), in order to tone down the denunciation of Reagan and U.S. imperialism. The "left" social-democrats and others tried to prevent any militant condemnation of U.S. imperialism.

As well, the opportunist forces tried to restrict any denunciation of the warmongering plans and aggression of their "own" bourgeoisie. Thus, in Britain, for example, the "left" social- democrats did not dare include opposition to the Falklands war in their call for the London demonstration. This also exposes the emptiness of their anti-Reagan posturings. After all, the U.S. imperialist yoke in the European countries can only be successfully fought by organizing against the European imperialist bourgeoisie which is the ally of U.S. imperialism against the working masses of Europe and the world.

But despite the attacks of the bourgeoisie and the sabotage of the social- democrats, a million people poured into the streets in powerful protests. In France, they defied the counsels and sabotage of the social-democrats and revisionists. In Britain, France, Germany, etc., despite the silence of many of the official organizers, many voices were heard not just against Reagan but also against the aggressive militarism of the domestic imperialist bourgeoisie, the closest allies of U.S. imperialism. And in Berlin, a hundred thousand defied a police ban and successfully protested Reagan's visit. These battles herald the even more powerful clashes that are bound to come as the European anti-war movement develops.

[Photo: On June 11th, 100,000 people filled the streets of West Berlin in militant demonstrations against Reagan's visit to that city. Throughout the day, demonstrators fought pitched battles with the police.]

[Photo: On June 5th, 200,000 people marched through Rome against U.S./NATO war preparations.]

[Back to Top]

Reagan indicts resisters

Another step towards the draft

Recently the Reagan administration announced the names of the first three young men it intends to prosecute for refusal to register for the draft. This decision marks another step in Reagan's drive to reinstate the draft. In January 1982 Reagan endorsed the system of registration for the draft, throwing aside his campaign rhetoric about opposing a "peace-time draft." Thus Reagan took up the torch that was lit by Carter before him. In late March, the director of the Selective Service, Thomas Turnage, told Congress that one half-million young men had failed to register for the draft. Now the Reagan administration is taking the next step in preparing the draft by threatening the nonregistrants with indictments which carry possible jail sentences of up to five years and fines as high as $10,000.

Why is the Reagan administration so anxious to register youth for the draft? This is because it is part of the war buildup of U.S. imperialism. The Reagan administration is frantically building one weapon after another. But there must be someone to shoot those weapons. There must be cannon fodder to fill the armed forces. The government is also registering young men for the draft as part of the militarization of society. The standing army is not just a weapon against the "foreign threat" but against the working people at home. It is a dull, oppressive weight that reinforces reaction in every sphere of life. The government wants to use the draft or compulsory alternative service in order to drill the young men with the habit of unthinking obedience to the command to smash strikes, break up demonstrations and trample other peoples. It is militarizing the women as well, and it is introducing the maximum regimentation into the whole society, from plans for a national identification card to the beefing up of the system of prisons, jails and police spying agencies.

But the young people are not docile tools to be molded as the government pleases. The specter of the upsurge of the 1960's cannot be so lightly waved away. The youth are asking: to what end are we being asked to sacrifice our lives in foreign war? to what end are we being asked to trample our neighbors and suppress the mass movement at home? And the youth are seeing more and more clearly that the aim of the U.S. army is to back up U.S. imperialism and enforce the profits of the big multinational corporations. The youth are seeing that the U.S. armed forces trample other countries in order to defend and expand a vast U.S. empire around the world, while the strikes and demonstrations at home are to be broken in order to defend these same exploiting companies, to enforce low wages and racial discrimination, and to subject the whole country to the rule of the billionaires. This is making the youth indignant, for to shed blood to defend exploitation and imperialism is to stain one's honor and defend injustice.

Government Repression and the Mass Struggle

So today both the government and the young people are asking questions. The Reagan administration is asking: how can we compel the youth to fight for imperialism? The youth are asking: how can we make our voices heard in opposition to militarism, exploitation, and imperialism? How should we oppose the draft and huge military machine of mass slaughter?

The Reagan administration finds the answer to its questions in coercion, in using force against the working masses, and in passing one reactionary measure after another. It is fascizing the country as fast as it can. It makes use of indoctrination via lying school books and of lies broadcast by TV and the newspapers. Nevertheless, it knows that it can never convince the masses of youth to show enthusiasm for Reaganite reaction. So it resorts to force, to fostering racist gangs, to building up the police, and to making the country into one large prison camp. With respect to registration for the draft, the Reagan administration has two plans: a) to prosecute them, and b) to make draft registration a precondition for receiving various government benefits and to coordinate draft registration with school attendance, IRS records, and so forth. It is already putting both methods into effect.

Thus recently the Reagan administration has chosen some 150 target cases and handed down the first three indictments. It makes not the slightest pretext of administering evenhanded "blindfolded" justice. On the contrary, it carefully selects the cases to be tried on the basis of political criterion. According to its own statements, it is trying to avoid areas where the prosecution would be too unpopular and might arouse strong feelings. This demonstrates that, despite all their outward show of some democratic forms, the real monopoly capitalist rulers of this country are quite conscious of standing in opposition to the working people and of exercising a fierce dictatorship against the mass struggles.

At the same time, the youth are seeking the way to oppose militarism and reaction. The answer lies in the development of the mass struggle. Alone, the individual is powerless to fight the brutal coercion of the reactionary militarists. United, the progressive people are a powerful force before which the reactionaries quake.

The development of the mass movement requires the organization of mass actions and demonstrations. It requires the building of solid organization. And it requires the study and dissemination of revolutionary literature which tells the truth about the present system of exploitation and imperialism. It requires orienting the struggle squarely against imperialism and against the imperialist parties, the Democrats and the Republicans.

Right from when Carter first introduced registration for the draft, our Party plunged into the struggle against this scheme. We waged a big campaign including distributing a special issue of The Workers' Advocate in tens of thousands of copies at post offices, factories, in communities, and so forth. This issue explained what was needed in the mass struggle. It also dealt with such issues as whether to register or not. Today, when the persecution of the nonregistrants is beginning, this question naturally arises once again. For this reason, we are accompanying this article with extracts from the article "Get Organized!" from this special issue of The Workers' Advocate dealing with the struggle against war preparations.

The development of the mass struggle is the path that will strike a real blow at imperialism and imperialist war preparations. But the mass struggle must overcome various obstacles. Besides its declared Reaganite enemies, it also faces hidden enemies. In particular, the friends of the Democratic Party have opposed the orientation of mass struggle and anti-imperialism.

The friends of the Democratic Party are faced with a definite dilemma with respect to the struggle against the draft. This is because it is Carter and the Democratic Party who began the registration for the draft and the record-breaking military budgets. It is the Democratic Party also which took the lead in arguing for the drafting of women. Many Democratic Party politicians are campaigning for the draft right now. Meanwhile the Democratic Party national mid-term conference tried to out-Reagan Reagan on the issue of national defense.

How then can this warmongering Party be presented as the savior of the struggle against militarism and imperialism? The friends of the Democratic Party do their best. They dressed up the militarization of women as allegedly being women's liberation and became supporters of " Pentagon-feminism." At the end of 1980 and beginning of 1981 they opposed the mass actions in order to avoid embarrassing Carter and the Democratic Party. They tried to harmonize the struggle with the Democratic Party's demand for a bigger and yet bigger army by diverting the mass movement away from fighting imperialism into arguments about what was the best way to strengthen the army and how much force was adequate to defend U.S. imperialism.

Finally, when Reagan came out for draft registration, such friends of the Democratic Party as the Reverend Barry Lynn, self-styled leader of the anti-draft movement, sighed in relief: "Registration is no longer Jimmy Carter's program." (Detroit Free Press, January 8, 1982) But this does not mean that they supported vigorous anti-imperialist mass actions or even that they took a firm attitude against Reagan. Just as the Democratic Party "honeymoons" with Reagan, so too the various friends of the Democratic Party sought a "national consensus" with the Reaganites with regard to the draft. Some of them preferred to demand that Reagan live up to his campaign promises about the draft rather than denouncing them, while others brought the reactionary Reaganite Libertarians into the anti-draft conferences and meetings.

With respect to registration, many of the friends of the Democratic Party are advocating a moralist stance. Instead of doing wide-scale agitation against militarism, they instead denounce everyone who registers as soldout. Instead of fighting the war mongering capitalist parties, they cast scorn on the overwhelming majority of the youth, who find no alternative to registration. They take an unrealistic attitude to nonregistration, for it is a fact that failure to show up for conscription has never stopped and will never stop an imperialist war. It is significant that it is precisely the Reaganites in the movement, such as the Libertarians, who find it convenient to ascribe supernatural powers to draft resistance in order to detach the struggle against militarism from the struggle against capitalist imperialism. Such a stand, whether by the Libertarians or by the friends of the Democratic Party, is no real support to those who refuse registration, but instead empties their stand of its real value in helping to develop the mass movement.

The anti-imperialist stand is the stand that will develop the mass movement against militarism, a movement that is a real challenge to imperialist war preparations. Although our Party does not give the general slogan to refuse registration nor do we create illusions about this form of struggle, our anti-imperialist stand provides firm support for those who take the path of not registering and explains to them the role their stand plays in the overall movement. It is the anti-imperialist stand which provides the orientation for the steps that must be taken today in response to the announcement of the first prosecutions of the nonregistrants. We must denounce this new step towards the draft by Reagan and use the outrage of the masses against this new crime of the government to organize them for the anti-imperialist struggle.

[Back to Top]

June 12--A Huge Protest Against the Nuclear Arms Buildup

On June 12 hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people poured into the streets in the biggest protests ever held in this country against the nuclear arms buildup of U.S. imperialism.

Seven hundred and fifty thousand people demonstrated in New York City alone. Manhattan was brought to a virtual standstill as workers, young people, students, oppressed nationalities and other progressive people paraded through the streets to a gigantic rally in Central Park. It is reported that perhaps 10,000 people from other countries came to add their voices to the protest. There were some 2,000 Canadians in attendance at the rally. A contingent of 1,000 Japanese were enthusiastically applauded as they passed by on the march. Europeans, fresh from a week of demonstrations against Reagan across Western Europe, also showed up. And there were workers from Australia, anti-apartheid forces from South Africa, liberation fighters from El Salvador and the Mideast, and activists from many other countries who joined the protest.

The "nuclear freeze" organizers of this demonstration tried to remove from it all militancy and any political content so that the action would not target any of the forces responsible for the frenzied arms race. But whenever someone else raised militant slogans they were greeted by the masses. Thus, along the parade route, slogans against nuclear weapons rebounded off the skyscrapers. There were placards, many of them homemade, denouncing Reagan's arms buildup. There were banners spread across the streets, condemning U.S. aggression and the all-round war preparations of U.S. imperialism. "Israeli Invasion of Lebanon -- Made in the USA" read one banner. "No to the draft!" and "U.S. out of El Salvador!" shouted protesters. Viet Nam veterans carried a banner saying "We won't be fooled again." And throughout the day the chant was heard, "No nukes! No nukes!"

In San Francisco 50,000 people also protested against the nuclear arms buildup. Another 15,000 people came out to a joint American-Canadian sponsored rally at the Peace Arch Park on the U.S.-Canada border at Douglas, B.C. As well, smaller actions were held in other cities such as in Augusta, Maine.

The Marxist-Leninist Party took an active part in these mass actions. In New York, San Francisco, and at the Peace Arch Park, the Party organized militant contingents. The New York Metro Branch carried big banners reading "To Fight Nuclear Weapons, Fight Imperialism!," and "No to the U.S. Imperialist Nuclear Program!" The Caribbean Progressive Study Group (New York) and the Union of Anti-Imperialist Students (Buffalo) joined this contingent, with the UAIS carrying a big banner that appealed, "Down With the Imperialist Superpowers -- U.S. and Soviet!"

In San Francisco the Party contingent carried banners reading "U.S. Imperialism, Get Out of El Salvador!," "Fight All U.S. Imperialist War Preparations!," "No to the Draft!", as well as the call "To Fight Nuclear Weapons, Fight Imperialism." The Party also put out a special bulletin of The Workers' Advocate for the demonstrations. On June 12 alone, over 75,000 of these bulletins were distributed to the protesters in New York, San Francisco, the Peace Arch Park and elsewhere.

The anti-imperialist agitation of the Party struck a chord among the militant activists of the movement and appealed to many of the new forces who were attending their first demonstration. Many joined the Party's contingents. A whole slew of anti-imperialist picket signs were taken by demonstrators who carried them throughout the marches in other contingents. As well, large numbers of people joined in with the Party to shout anti-imperialist slogans and to sing songs against U.S. imperialist aggression and warmongering.

The massive outpouring in these demonstrations and the enthusiasm for the anti-imperialist literature and slogans show that the masses want to wage a serious fight against the nuclear warmongering of the U.S. government. However, the organizers of the actions are actually opposed to such a fight and are trying to subordinate the mass movement to a campaign for a bilateral "nuclear freeze." The freeze proposal means that instead of fighting the imperialist warmongers the masses should trust their fate to the negotiations between the wardogs, Reagan and Brezhnev. And then, even if the freeze succeeds, not a single nuclear warhead will be dismantled, but instead, more money will be freed up to pay for warships and tanks, rapid deployment forces and the rest of U.S. imperialism's "conventional" arsenal. The "nuclear freeze" campaign is simply an attempt to take the heart out of the anti-imperialist movement, to deprive it of all militancy and make it a tail of the Democratic Party and the rest of the imperialist warmongers.

Yet the organizers of the June 12 actions argued that the entire movement against imperialist war preparations should be subordinated to the "nuclear freeze" because this is a "realistic" step which will unite a broad "cross-section" of the people of this country. The truth behind this snow job is that they want to bring the imperialist warmongers themselves into the movement. This was made graphically clear at the Central Park rally. Randall Forsberg, one of the initiators and leading lights of the "nuclear freeze" campaign, spoke from the platform saying, "Last week, the Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted down the Kennedy- Hatfield freeze resolution. We will remember that vote in November." Thus, don't fight the arms buildup. Rather, we should vote for Kennedy and Hatfield, even though Kennedy voted for Reagan's enormous military budgets, and both of them have made it clear that their "freeze" resolution has no higher aim than diverting money into the buildup of the "conventional" weapons arsenal.

But if this isn't bad enough, the "freeze" champions are even trying to prettify Reagan. The keynote speaker at the New York rally was actor-producer Orson Welles. He proclaimed that Reagan is being converted into a man of peace, due to the freeze campaign, and Welles went on to say "Not only our praise, but all our gratitude goes out to a president who listened.... He is part of us." This is disgusting, true. But it is exactly what the "nuclear freeze" campaign leads to, praise and gratitude for the chief bloodsoaked warmonger of U.S. imperialism.

In their efforts to deliver the anti-militarist movement into the arms of the generals and imperialist politicians, the champions of the "nuke freeze" are working overtime to try to dispel the specter of the 1960's. From the rostrum on June 12, as well as in their literature and TV interviews, they are repeating over and over again that a "new movement" is being born which is not "divisive" and "confrontational" like the movement against U.S. aggression in Viet Nam. But despite their best efforts, the "Viet Nam syndrome" has become part and parcel of the consciousness of the working people. On June 12, the protesters were heard to say time and again "This is just like the 60's."

Indeed it is. Now, just as then, the people are gaining experience and training themselves through mass action. In 1964 there were many who campaigned for the election of the Democratic Party "peace" candidate, Lyndon Johnson. But within the next few years they came out to demonstrate against him when his actions exposed that the Democrats were actually escalating the aggression against the Vietnamese. And by 1968 they were waging pitched battles with the police at the Democratic Party convention. Through their struggles, broad sections of the masses came to see that the Democrats are warmongers just like the Republicans, and that to fight against war it is necessary to fight imperialism.

Today too, the masses come into the movement with illusions. But through struggle valuable lessons are learned and the truth steels the masses and makes them strong. The enthusiasm for the MLP's anti-imperialist work on June 12; the broad opposition exhibited not only against nuclear weapons, but also against U.S. aggression and all of the imperialist war preparations; these things show that the working masses have learned something from the struggles of the 60's and that through struggle the working people taking part in the "nuclear freeze" campaign will break free of the confines being imposed on them and march forward onto the road of fighting imperialism.

[Photo: 50,000 marched on June 12 in San Francisco.]

[Photo: 15,000 Americans and Canadians protested the nuclear weapons buildup at the Peace Arch Park in Douglas, British Columbia on the U.S.-Canada border.]

[Photo: A scene from the June 12 demonstration in New York City. Banners carried by the MLP contingent read: "To fight nuclear weapons, fight imperialism" and "No to the U.S. imperialist nuclear program!"]

[Back to Top]

To fight nuclear weapons, fight imperialism!

(The following article is reprinted from the Special Bulletin of The Workers' Advocate issued for the June 12 demonstrations.)

June 12,1982 will be a day to be remembered. On this day in New York, San Francisco and other cities, hundreds of thousands of people will pour into the streets in the biggest protests ever held in the U.S. against the Pentagon's nuclear arms buildup. These demonstrations are part of a worldwide movement of protest which is mounting like a powerful wave across Western Europe, Japan, Canada, the U.S. and elsewhere. In cities all over the globe, millions upon millions are demonstrating the will of the working and progressive people to fight the fiendish nuclear war plans of the imperialist warmongers.

Ronald Reagan is a nuclear madman. Jimmy Carter launched, and Reagan is now pursuing, a military and nuclear buildup the likes of which have never been seen before. Over the next five years, Reagan plans to pour $180 billion into this buildup which includes a whole new generation of weapon systems -- MX, cruise, Trident and Pershing missiles, neutron bombs, etc., etc.

What possible purpose could there be in building all these devices of nuclear devastation? As a new "defense guidance" document drawn up by the Defense Department puts it, these monstrous weapons are necessary because in case of a "protracted" nuclear conflagration, the U.S. forces "must prevail" after the fallout and ashes settle; the "termination of hostilities" must come "on terms favorable to the United States." (New York Times, June 4,1982) Such is the "thinkable" and "winnable" nuclear war that Reagan, Weinberger and Haig are so coolly contemplating.

Imperialism Is the Source of the Nuclear Danger

What then is the source of this threat of nuclear extermination which is being held over the heads of the world's people? It is true that nuclear weaponry is an extraordinarily fearsome technology. It is also true that Reagan and company are extraordinarily fiendish personalities. However, the fundamental source of the nuclear arsenals and the nuclear danger is the very social-economic system under which we live -- the system of monopoly capitalism, or imperialism.

U.S. imperialism is like a snake with two heads: one head feeds off of the exploitation and oppression of the working people at home, and the other head feeds off of the enslavement and robbery of the oppressed peoples abroad. At home, Reagan is heading up the capitalist offensive of layoffs, wage cuts, hunger, racism, and police- state measures. Meanwhile overseas, U.S. imperialism is on the road of unrestrained aggression to defend its world empire, and to safeguard its "vital interests" -- the super-profits of the Wall Street banks and multinational corporations. Today we are witnessing the ferocity of the U.S. imperialist wolves who are not only arming the British colonialists in the senseless slaughter in the South Atlantic, who are not only backing the Israeli Zionists in their criminal invasion of Lebanon, but who are also carrying out their own Viet Nam-style intervention to drown in blood the liberation struggles of the workers and peasants of El Salvador and Guatemala.

The other superpower, the revisionist Soviet Union, despite its "socialist" signboard, is equally an imperialist-capitalist monster. These two nuclear superpowers, along with all the other imperialist states, are engaged in the highly profitable business of a feverish military buildup. They are arming to the teeth against the revolts of the people (e.g., Central American and Afghanistan) and against their rivals in imperialist robbery. And today Reagan and Brezhnev are locked in an unrestrained nuclear arms race, preparing to incinerate hundreds of millions in a war to decide a new division of global "spheres of influence," a war to see which imperialist marauder gets how much of the world's oil fields and other loot.

Step Up the Fight Against the U.S. Imperialist Warmongers!

The nuclear buildup and war preparations have aroused burning indignation and an intense concern among all working people. It is time for the American people to step up the fight against the war preparations. All progressive people should take part in the demonstrations and other mass actions. The mass actions are creating tremendous enthusiasm throughout the country. At the mass actions, as well, the people can get together and discuss the path forward.

Direct these protests and mass actions squarely at U.S. imperialism! It is this which the warmongers fear. They are willing to quibble about this or that and smile behind their sleeve at the solemn debates over which is best -- MX or Trident, an aircraft carrier or two dozen missile-carrying frigates -- but they sweat when the masses denounce their imperialist system. Oppose their plans to plunder other peoples. Oppose the U.S. "sphere of influence" and U.S. dictate around the world.

Merge our struggle with the struggles of the peoples all over the world. The internationalist unity of the world's people defeats the imperialist plans to set the working people fighting each other. Demand that U.S. imperialism get out of El Salvador and Guatemala and keep its hands off Nicaragua! Defend the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples fighting heroically against Israeli aggression! No to racist apartheid in South Africa! Hail the mass protests against U.S./NATO missiles in Europe! Support the struggle against the other imperialists as well; down with Soviet aggression in Afghanistan!

Rely on the working people, youth and other progressive people in the U.S. No to handshakes with the generals and militarists. Keep the lines clear and sharp between the warmongers and the masses. The anti-militarist struggle is a component part of the class struggle between the workers and the exploiters. Build organizations at the work places, schools and communities to provide a firm base for the anti-militarist struggle.

Oppose the warmongering parties, the Democrats and Republicans. They talk of their desire for "peace" -- while voting for one war budget after another. The Democrats do their best to present themselves as the "friend of labor and the minorities," the party of peace. But we haven't forgotten Carter -- and his Rapid Deployment Force, his Presidential Directive 59, his arms buildup. Nor can the people forget that Reagan's military budgets have passed with Democratic Party votes. No, don't rely on the Democrats, but build the independent movement of the working class.

Study revolutionary literature that tells the truth about imperialism. Help build networks to distribute newspapers, leaflets, and pamphlets. The Marxist-Leninist teachings on the struggle against war remain the clearest and most scientific time- tested tactics. Read The Workers' Advocate -- voice of the Marxist-Leninist Party of the USA.

And think over the question of the ultimate cause of war -- the search for profit by a handful of exploiters, by the huge multinational corporations, by the rich. It is socialism that eliminates the warmongers once and for all by expropriating the handful of the rich who profit from war and plunder. The socialist revolution is the ultimate goal of struggle against militarism and imperialism. Rally to the revolutionary working class movement.

Today's demonstrations show the broad character of the mass outrage against the warmongering course of the Reagan government. Their tremendous size will be pondered by millions. But we must also know that the movement will not grow in a straight line, just by the demonstrations getting bigger and bigger. The numbers at demonstrations will go up and down. What is important today is that the movement should also grow in depth. Today's demonstrations will prove of lasting value if they inspire the participants to organize in their local area, to read and ponder revolutionary literature, to take part in building up a powerful movement independent of the capitalist parties. It is up to the people to upset the plans of the militarists!

[Back to Top]

Why we reject the nuclear freeze

The fight against nuclear weapons can't be left to the good will of Reagan, Brezhnev, or the generals

(The following article is reprinted from the Special Bulletin of The Workers' Advocate issued for the June 12 demonstrations.)

In recent years, the militarists in Washington have wildly stepped up their warmongering. The workers, youth and all progressive people have been justly outraged at this, and a powerful anti-war movement has emerged from one corner of the country to the other.

One of the signs of the mass disgust with the U.S. government's war drive is the fact that hundreds upon hundreds of thousands are signing petitions and voting for referendums which they believe to be against war preparations. These referendums are based on the proposal for a nuclear freeze. Unfortunately, the orchestrators of the freeze campaign are carrying out a big fraud by leading the people to believe that the nuclear freeze plan is opposed to war preparations and will lesson the danger of war.

This is not the case at all. The freeze proposal merely consists of the polite suggestion that a message be sent to Reagan asking the good man to start negotiations with Brezhnev for a freeze on the further production of nuclear weapons.

But what is this but, at best, a pious wish that the capitalist warmongers reform themselves? For decades now, the chieftains of the two imperialist superpowers have carried out endless talks and signed many treaties in the name of "nuclear disarmament." But all they have come up with is worthless scraps of paper, while the superpowers continue to stockpile more and ever more fiendish weapons of mass slaughter.

The most recent of these treaties was SALT II. Although SALT hasn't been ratified by the Senate, both the U.S. and Soviet governments have admitted that they are presently abiding by its basic provisions. But has this stopped their arming one bit? Not at all. In fact, SALT II explicitly allows the superpowers to increase their total strategic warheads by 3-4,000 each by 1985. The very fact that Reagan can admit to abiding by this treaty and, in the same breath, still defend his plans for the biggest military buildup in history shows the utterly fraudulent nature of SALT II.

And the nuclear freeze plan is essentially no different than SALT. Indeed, all the schemes for negotiations between the warmongering superpowers are simply examples of imperialist pacifism in action -- peace talks for show, while the arsenals keep on being expanded.

But even if the superpowers could come to an agreement for a freeze, this wouldn't stop war preparations or lessen the threat of war. In fact, the freeze plan explicitly upholds the Pentagon's monstrous arsenal. IT DOES NOT CALL FOR THE DISMANTLING OF A SINGLE BOMB. Moreover, according to all the big-time politicians backing the freeze, a nuclear freeze would merely adjust some of the details where the military buildup takes place. These worthy ladies and gentlemen think that a few less bombs are tolerable so long as you can free up more funds for rapid deployment forces, warships, tanks, the marines and the rest of U.S. imperialism's "conventional" forces.

Thus, when Kennedy declared his support for the freeze he clearly stated that "We offer this proposal because we believe that it is in the national security interests of the U.S.... I have no hesitancy whatsoever to say that we have to increase our conventional force." This exposes the fraud promoted by certain leaders of the freeze campaign that money saved on the plan would somehow go towards jobs, social benefits and other "human needs." However, the fact remains, nuclear or conventional, it's all part of the same war machine that's being beefed up for unjust imperialist wars.

The organizers of the freeze campaign make a big deal out of the fact that this plan is allegedly most "realistic." What this "realism" means is that the plan allows the warmongers themselves to support one or another version of a freeze.

Thus even Chief Warmonger Reagan has been able to join the freeze bandwagon. He supports the Jackson-Warner bill in Congress which calls for a freeze, but on the basis of "equality" and "arms reductions." Thus, with talk of "reductions," Reagan seems to go even further than the Kennedyites. But of course the Reaganites are quick to explain that before the "reductions" and a freeze can come, there must be "equality" between the superpowers. And this requires the U.S. to massively step up its arming today! What a farce! But Reagan's "peacemongering" is very instructive -- it reveals the essential hypocrisy of the freeze plan, which allows even the most rabid warmongers to drape themselves in the mantle of "peace."

This is no accident. The organizers of the freeze campaign quite consciously designed their plan to be acceptable to the likes of Reagan. Listen to what a strategy paper of the National Nuclear Freeze Campaign said in May 1981, soon after some of Reagan's first hypocritical words of "peace": "A U.S.-Soviet freeze on nuclear weapons would be a first step towards the President's promised 'real reductions' in nuclear weapons. Widespread public support for the freeze would challenge and encourage President Reagan to honor this commitment....as pressure mounts to realize tax cuts and balance the budget at the same time, the Administration may be obliged to seek a politically popular means of cutting the military budget." (Strategy for Stopping the Nuclear Arms Race, May 1981, p. 7)

Imagine that! The leaders of the freeze campaign seem to be among the few that actually believe Reagan's lies about "peace." So much so that they even sought to offer a hand to Mr. Warmonger himself to become "politically popular" by using the platform of the freeze campaign.

Better to trust in the stars than expect Reagan, Brezhnev or the other militarists to beat swords into plowshares. The nuclear arsenals are not the result of mistaken calculations by otherwise reasonable men. Rather, they are the product of the imperialist system. Hence a real fight against nuclear weapons and militarism requires an unrelenting struggle against imperialism.

Instead of begging the Reagans and Brezhnevs to become doves, we should develop the mass struggle against the militarists. Instead of seeking to ally with the champions of Kennedyite MAD (mutually-assured destruction) against the Reaganite NUTs (nuclear-use theorists), the masses of the workers and oppressed should get organized. Instead of abandoning the fight against the draft or U.S. aggression in Central America or the other "divisive" and "confrontational" issues, we should link up all these concerns into one powerful current against U.S. imperialism. This is the way forward for the fight against nuclear weapons.

[Back to Top]

Fight the GE Capitalists' Productivity War!

At the beginning of July a sellout national contract was imposed on the General Electric workers by the union bureaucrats. The Boston Branch of the MLP fought against this sellout. It put out several leaflets explaining the issues facing the workers which were circulated widely at the GE complex in Lynn, Massachusetts, and it mobilized the workers to campaign for a no vote against the contract. Even though the sellout deal has been put into place, the campaign against the contract has helped to prepare the workers for the future struggles that are bound to develop against GE's productivity drive. The article below is reprinted from Boston Worker, newspaper of the Boston Branch of the MLP, USA, July 5, 1982.

GE Workers:

For the past week, we have been bombarded with propaganda from GE and the IUE chiefs that their offer will mean big wage increases and great job security. What nonsense! The truth is they are trying to shove a sellout contract down our throats!

Even with COLA, the "decompression adjustment" and all the other nickel and dime gimmicks thrown in, the contract will not make up for the 884 per hour that we lost to inflation over the life of the last contract. In fact, three years from now we will be much further behind inflation. What is true about wages is also true about pensions. But the biggest giveback comes on job security. At a time when GE is going on a productivity war by eliminating thousands of jobs through farm-out, speedup, robots and NC (numerically controlled) machinery, the so-called job security clause will not save a single job! Instead, it puts in writing GE's "right" to farm out, to close plants and put in robots and NC's with no limit as long as it gives the union proper notice. The severance pay and rate retention clauses have so many loopholes that GE will be able to avoid any payment in most cases. This contract should be rejected!

In order to show the sellout nature of this contract, we will go into some of its provisions and the union and company propaganda below.

Wages

In order to make the wage "offer" look better, the GE and union papers have calculated the wage charts on the basis of a 6% rate of inflation. At this rate, wages would keep current with inflation. But a 6% rate of inflation is an Alice in Wonderland fairy tale told by Ronald Reagan and other professional liars. Over the last contract, inflation averaged 11% per year. With Reagan's massive war preparations and $100 billion deficit, inflation is bound to take off like a skyrocket soon.

However, even if we assume that inflation will be the same as over the last contract, even if we add in the "staggering" 124 per hour "decompression adjustment," COLA and the 4.34 per hour reduction in,pension contribution, the typical R19 dayworker will never make up the 884 per hour robbed from him by inflation over the last contract. He is supposed to swallow the loss. Not only that, each year his standard of living will be cut even more by inflation. By 1985, the average GE worker will be making $1.14 less than he needs just to maintain his 1979 standard of living. Our loss is GE's gain. No wonder GE says the wage package is "attractive."

The Job Insecurity Clauses

The issue of job security is very important to the workers today. Over the last few years, GE has increased its profits during the capitalist economic crisis through a program of layoffs and job-eliminating speedup and automation drives. Next year, GE plans to eliminate 10% of the work force at Lynn's aircraft division while, at the same time, increasing production by 10%, especially with NC machinery. What will the so-called "job security" clauses do to stop this? Nothing! The contract does not restrict the company in the slightest from laying off workers and replacing them with robots and automated machinery. (See the Article XXII section.) All the company has to do is give the union 60 days notice before installing the machinery. Then it can lay off as many workers as it wants.

The so-called rate retention clause for workers displaced by automated machinery applies only to workers whose jobs are "directly" eliminated, not to anyone on down the bumping chain. The last workers bumped wind up on the street with no rate at all.

Previous contracts have not defined whether or not GE could farm out ongoing work. This made it legally easier to organize strikes to stop farm-out as the workers recently did in Schenectady. But the new contract and the letter of understanding states that the company can transfer ongoing work. All it has to do is give the union six months notice. It is nice to know these things in advance. But without even a single word restricting farm-out, this clause simply hands the company a legal weapon to use against any struggle that workers in the plants might launch to stop the farming out of their jobs.

The contract is even worse on plant closings. It explicitly states that the company can close any plant it wants so long as it gives six months notice. Not only that, but if the workers put up any fight to the plant closing they can lose their severance pay. (Article XXII, Sections 2 and 8)

Not only do the job security clauses help GE eliminate jobs, but the benefits for those laid off are so minimal and have so many exclusions, they are a joke. Take for example, the severance pay or Retraining Assistance clauses. These only apply in cases where a plant is completely closed down. The thousands of workers who lose their jobs due to automation, job combination or farm-out will never get a penny. Not only that, but there are so many loopholes that even when GE closes a plant, they can avoid paying benefits to most of the workers. For example, all they have to do is keep one small department open for a few years after the main plant is shut down and the vast majority of workers won't be able to collect a single "plant closing benefit."

If IUE President Fitzmaurice and the other top bureaucrats were serious about job security, they would fight for a no-layoff clause. They would help us organize to fight speedup, job combination, farm-out and robotization. But instead they help GE railroad a contract that will facilitate elimination of thousands of jobs.

What Happened to Our Demand "Abolish the ARB"?

The Absence Review Board is an important part of GE's productivity drive. It is designed to create an atmosphere of intimidation and submissiveness. Already the ARB has led to the death of Dave Roberts. We have demanded that the ARB be abolished but the local IUE chiefs have sat on the issue for over six months. Two weeks ago, in a sudden pose of militancy, they said they were going to fight for the abolition of the ARB during the contract fight. Now they say, "Ratify the contract first, then we'll negotiate that issue locally." This is the old sweep it under the rug trick. They are basically telling GE the ARB is OK with them, just like this contract is OK with them.

Mass Struggle Is the Only Way!

Workers, GE is dead serious about its offensive against us. As the economic offensive gets worse, they will surely step up their efforts to save their profits at our expense. GE hopes to use this contract as a jumping off point for a real productivity war. All the business journals have been talking about this. We can count on GE using the provision for six months notice for plant closing or farm-out as a method of blackmailing more concessions out of one local at a time. The GE negotiator, W. Angell, already threatened during negotiations to come back in the middle of the contract to demand concessions. Remember the recent threat against the workers in T700 area of Building 74 to speed up or the work would be farmed out.

The only way to defend ourselves against this offensive is by a militant mass struggle. What better time to launch a struggle than over this national contract? It is a time when workers all across the country can strike to force GE to grant a real wage increase and to restrict its farm-out, robotization and harassment. But our union leaders are against such a struggle. These gentlemen who were talking so militantly only two weeks ago are now telling us that GE is too big, that a strike won't do any good, that we have no choice but to accept whatever they dictate. This is not true.

The coal miners organized their strikes by taking matters into their own hands. They fight in spite of and against the will of their soldout top leaders. It is this path of militant mass action that we must take at GE too.

Today, let us work hard to organize for as big a rejection vote as possible. This will be a big help to organizing a militant strike. However, even if the union officials manage to railroad the contract through, a big rejection vote will put us in a better position to fight GE's productivity war, Absence Review Board and concession demands during the coming years.

[Back to Top]

Seven-Month Strike at American Standard in Pittsburgh

Struggle Is the Answer to the Capitalists' Takeback Demands!

On May 24th, 3,700 workers at two American Standard plants near Pittsburgh ended their 205-day strike against the arrogant concession demands of the capitalists. The workers defeated some of the major concession demands of the American Standard capitalists. In addition, the workers made some headway in the economic portion of the contract, in keeping up with the rising cost of living. However, with the connivance of the trade union leaders of the United Electrical Worker? Union, American Standard was able to impose on the workers some of their demands having to do with productivity and the workers' right to strike on certain issues. This strike shews the importance of taking a determined stand against concessions.

The Issues Behind the Strike

When negotiations on a new labor contract began last fall, the American Standard capitalists presented an outrageous list of 52 takeback demands to the workers. These were eventually reduced to tin major demands. Chief among these were the demand for a general wage freeze plus direct wage cuts for pieceworkers (75% of the workers are on piecework); elimination of the right to strike over piecework rates and some grievances; productivity measures including the installation of a dab reporting system to "keep inventor" and "keep track of work flow"; the right to change piecework and line quotas; and the right to make productivity, not seniority, the basis for layoffs and job bids.

The American Standard workers gave fitting reply to these outrageous concession demands. They rejected the takebacks and put up their own demand^ for a wage increase, uncapped cost-if-living allowance and improvement in their benefits. They voted overwhelmingly for a strike and on November 1 walked off the job. In late December the workers organized a mass picket which stopped supervisors from entering the plant to run production. To suppress the workers' militant actions, the company fired a number of workers and obtained court injunctions against mass pickets. The workers, however, continued their strike and continued to gain ever wider support among other workers. On February 23 the workers held a mass rally attended by 2,000 workers. Workers all over the Pittsburgh area, conscious that the American Standard workers were fighting the concessions drive currently faced by all workers, attended the rally in support of the strikers. Particularly inspiring was a delegation from an American Standard plant in Ontario, Canada where workers had just finished a four-month strike.

After this rally the American Standard workers continued to gain support from other workers. The strikers continuously visited other plants, spoke to other workers and took up gate collections for their strike fund. The workers also continued their militant picket lines action to keep the plants completely shut down. In retaliation, the company continued its attacks on militant workers, firing seven more and bringing criminal charges against some of them. But the workers continued to stand firm. Thus at the beginning of May the company was forced o back down on some of its concessions demands and to agree to some of the economic demands put forward by the workers. A tentative agreement on the original issues in the strike was reached May 3.

Workers Continue the Strike to Win Complete Amnesty

The workers still refused to end their strike, however, until the issue of amnesty had been solved. By May 3 the company had fired 22 strikers, suspended one other, and had criminal charges pending against a number of workers. The millionaire owners of American Standard were whining that militant workers had done $150,000 worth of damage to their precious property -- for example, wiping out a company guard shack -- and they were demanding restitution. The 3,700 workers at American Standard, however, were determined that their class brothers would be reinstated into their bid jobs without recrimination. This was made clear at a mass meeting of the workers on May 9. There, 2,000 workers voted overwhelmingly in favor of continuing the strike despite the fact that the basic economic issues had been resolved. The stand of the workers was to continue the strike until full reinstatement of all the workers had been won. One worker said after the meeting, "3,700 of us went out, and 3,700 of us will go back in."

Despite the workers' clear sentiment for absolute amnesty, the labor bureaucrats of the United Electrical Workers Union were working behind the scenes to sabotage this demand. Instead of stepping up the organization and struggle of the workers to press this important demand, the UE bureaucrats began cooking up various deals with the American Standard capitalists. Instead of putting forth the workers' demand for reinstatement of the fired workers, the labor bureaucrats demanded that the company "clarify its plans for arbitration". of the cases -- in other words, the trade union leaders worked to take this issue out of the hands of the workers and tie it up in the hands of "neutral" government mediators. Furthermore, as revealed by the bureaucrats after the strike, they offered to bribe the capitalists with the workers' wages. To cover American Standard's alleged $150,000 damages, the labor bureaucrats offered to pay the capitalists $1,000,000, to be deducted from all of the workers' wages. The deal they eventually cooked up was this: American Standard dropped criminal charges against individual workers who paid, out of their own pocket, for the damages they had allegedly caused; and the cases of fired workers were taken through the normal grievance and arbitration procedure. The labor hacks of Local 610 made a big noise about their "great victory" in winning a "fair hearing" for the fired workers, and in this way they were able to convince workers to end their strike on May 24. But at last report 15 of the 22 workers had been suspended for eight to 30 days without pay, while the seven remaining cases were still tied up in arbitration.

Further Treachery of the Labor Bureaucrats

Further treachery of the labor bureaucrats becomes apparent as more details of the new contract become known. When the strike ended, leaders of UE Local 610 promoted that they had won a "great victory" and had not given in to any of American Standard's demands for takebacks. And in the basic economic package of the contract, it was clear that the determined struggle of the workers had succeeded in blocking American Standard's concessions drive. The company's demand for a wage freeze was defeated; workers won wage raises of 85¢ per hour over three years, plus a provision for uncapped cost-of-living raises. In addition, workers won improvements in other benefits: life insurance, pensions, medical and dental plans, etc. Though the wage raise fell somewhat short of the workers' original demand, the workers were satisfied that they had blocked American Standard's concessions drive.

But while workers had been fighting hard to win higher wages and benefits, the labor bureaucrats had been working overtime to sabotage the struggle against the capitalists' productivity drives. From the beginning of negotiations, American Standard had been whining that they needed concessions from the workers on the front of productivity in order to "remain competitive." An important part of the American Standard workers' strike struggle was to defeat the company's plans to eliminate seniority, to arbitrarily shift workers from one job to another, to arbitrarily impose quotas and piecework rates, and to use computers to track the workers' every move, all day long. But for months the labor bureaucrats had been working to sneak productivity measures in through the back door. The January 11 issue of Business Week reported the president of Local 610 as saying that "the union will not agree to changes in the contract language, although he says the local will work informally to help raise productivity."

In the final contract agreement, however, the labor bureaucrats went well beyond the bounds of "informal agreements." They formally conceded to American Standard the right to install its new data reporting system, which aims to speed the workers up by tracking the workers' every move, all day long. Workers had opposed this system on the basis of protecting their piecework earnings; with this computerized system the company can very easily isolate higher-paying jobs and run time studies. To sell this to the workers, the UE hacks brought with them a "promise" from the company that the data-reporting system would not be used against the workers in these ways. But what good is such a promise? If the capitalists have this information right at their fingertips, what is to stop them from using it? The American Standard workers will have to remain vigilant against the capitalists' use of this system. As another part of their collaboration with the capitalist productivity drives, the UE labor bureaucrats also agreed to new quotas which will increase the pressure on piecework workers. Incentive employees will now have to meet certain quotas before their earnings are guaranteed. And the UE leaders also conceded to the company some erosion of the workers' right to strike over new piecework rates and some grievances. In their seven-month strike, the American Standard workers militantly defended their right to struggle over these issues. But according to the new contract, before workers can go on strike, they must first submit the issues to mediation, and even then, if federal mediators do not resolve the issue, the union must give the company 10 days' notice of intention to strike.

The American Standard workers defeated the company's bid to eliminate seniority as the basis for layoffs and job bids. But on the issues of right to strike, new quotas, and the data- reporting system, the labor hacks of Local 610 allowed some erosion of the workers' right to struggle against productivity. After the workers had voted to return to work, the union officials bragged that they had "established contract language that will aid in improving productivity and help make it [the company] more competitive." (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, May 25, 1982) This shows that throughout the strike the labor bureaucrats had been working to sabotage the workers' struggle against the capitalists' productivity drives.

This strike of the American Standard workers has important lessons for the entire working class. First, this strike shows that the concessions drive of the capitalists can be blocked. Throughout the most severe winter of recent years, the American Standard workers waged a continuous and determined struggle, and by so doing forced the capitalists to back down on most of their outrageous concession demands. This shows the importance of the workers' mass struggle. The capitalist thirst for greater and greater concessions cannot be quenched by giving in to them on any issue. The only way workers can defend their basic interests is by waging militant mass struggle against the capitalists' arrogant concession demands. The second lesson of the American Standard workers' strike is the need to constantly guard against treachery by the trade union bureaucrats. The workers must organize independently of the trade union bigwigs to fight the capitalists and must remain vigilant against any attempts on the part of the labor hacks to sell out their struggles.

[Back to Top]

Brown & Sharpe Strike Enters Tenth Month

1,500 Workers Stand Firm Against Concessions

The 1,500 workers at Brown & Sharpe Mfg. Co. in North Kingston, Rhode Island, have been engaged in a bitter, hard-fought strike since last October 9. When the workers' old contract with Brown & Sharpe expired last fall, the company tried to use the current economic crisis as a club against the workers, to force concessions from them. Workers refused to submit to this blackmail, however, and went out on strike. The workers have persisted in their strike for nine months, walking picket throughout a severely cold winter, and battling the company's scabs, goon squads and police. Today the strike is continuing, as the Brown & Sharpe workers are determined to resist the company's takeback demands.

Brown & Sharpe is a manufacturer of machine tools and industrial instruments and is one of the largest industrial employers in Rhode Island. In negotiations last fall, the company demanded changes in work rules, pleading that such changes were necessary to "increase plant productivity in the face of growing foreign competition." (Wall Street Journal, June 23, 1982) Specifically, what the company demanded was the right to shift workers from job to job and from machine to machine. Under the old contract, workers had the right to refuse such transfers. Workers recognize that giving the company the right to shift workers around would undermine the seniority system, to which is tied workers' wages, benefits, layoff and recall rights. They see that the company is trying to use the hard times to force this concession from the workers, but they are determined not to let the company have its own way on this issue.

Brown and Sharpe Hires Strikebreakers

Unable to wear down the striking workers through a hard winter, Brown & Sharpe hired scabs to try and break the strike. The company hired hundreds of "replacement workers" and declared that they were "permanent" -- that is, that at least some of the striking workers would be permanently replaced by these scabs. In response, the workers stepped up their picket line actions to keep the scabs out. On March 22, the workers organized a mass sit-down in the plant driveway to keep the scabs from entering the plant. Eight hundred of the strikers -- a force of over half of the Brown & Sharpe work force -- massed in the driveway to stop the scabs. To disperse them, the company called out the local police, who sprayed the protesters with pepper gas, an eye and skin irritant. In the weeks following this incident, the level of violence on the picket line escalated, as workers struggled to keep the scabs out. Over 30 strikers were arrested, and one picketer was wounded by a gun fired from a mysterious "passing car." Today the workers are continuing their militant picket line actions, and the company is able to bring in its scabs only because of a massive force of security guards and police. To reach the plant each morning, the scabs must pass through a gauntlet of dozens of angry, jeering strikers. The scabs are driven into the plant inside of buses, the windows of which are covered with wire mesh and cardboard; the bus drivers themselves wear riot helmets with face shields. The buses are escorted by local and state police, while company police patrol the grounds with guard dogs.

Despite the reactionary attacks on their picket line, the Brown & Sharpe workers are continuing their mass struggle. This mass struggle contributed to slashing Brown & Sharpe's first-quarter profits -- down from earnings of $2.3 million in 1981 to a loss of $3.5 million in 1982. At this time Brown & Sharpe is refusing to negotiate with the striking workers and has issued some threats about moving out of state, but this has not intimidated the strikers. As one worker said, "If we go down the river, somehow we are going to take Brown & Sharpe with us." It is this defiant attitude of the Brown & Sharpe workers which will win them increasing support from wide sections of the working masses.

[Photo: Workers at Brown and Sharpe denouncing scabs brought in to break their strike.]

[Back to Top]

Brooklyn, N.Y.

Nursing home workers strike for higher wages

(The following article is reprinted from The West Indian Voice, newspaper of the Caribbean Progressive Study Group, July-August, 1982.)

On April 25th, 130 workers at Sheepshead Nursing Home launched a militant strike. For ten weeks the workers manned their picket lines, raising slogans voicing their just demands and denouncing the nursing home owners. The nursing home workers, who have been without a contract for a year, were demanding a new contract and a wage increase of $41 a week. The capitalist crooks at Sheepshead arrogantly demanded that the workers continue working without a contract at wages set several years' time and several years of inflation ago. But the workers rejected this demand that they slave and starve in silence. (This $41 a week would put them at the minimum rate earned by workers at other private nursing homes.)

The Sheepshead Nursing Home owners and operators tried to break the strike. They set up cameras outside the nursing home to spy on the picket lines and intimidate the workers, they brought in scabs, police and private security guards, and they had a militant worker arrested on trumped- up charges.

The workers refused to be cowed by the tactics of the nursing home capitalists. They persisted in their strike and on May 9 held a militant rally joined by workers from other nursing homes and other people from the community.

After a ten-week-long strike the workers were sent back to work for a $26 increase by the bureaucrats of Local 144, with a vague promise that the other $15 would somehow be negotiated. These bureaucrats are the very ones responsible for the fact that the workers have worked for a year without a contract. They scarcely lifted a finger during the ten weeks of the strike, and now they are calling off the strike for a settlement which keeps the workers below industry standards.

Strikes and other mass actions, such as the militant strike by the Sheepshead Nursing Home workers are the best answer to the capitalists' savage offensive of wage cutting, productivity drives, layoffs, etc. The workers at Sheepshead, who are overwhelmingly West Indian women, point the path for the community -- active participation in the class struggle of the American working class against the capitalist rulers.

[Back to Top]

Denver transit workers strike against wage cuts

(The following article is excerpted from a leaflet issued by the Denver Branch of the Marxist-Leninist Party, USA on July 13, 1982.)

One thousand three hundred and seventy-five RTD bus drivers, mechanics, and clerks have taken a stand against the wage-cutting concessions drive of the rich and have walked out on strike against the Denver Regional Transportation District.

The bus company demanded that the workers accept a wage freeze, a cut in their Cost of Living Adjustment, plus the use of part-time workers and the contracting out of some maintenance work. This also raises the possibility of job eliminations and layoffs. The contract offers from the RTD company are only a recipe for the impoverishment of the transportation workers and they deserved the resounding rejection they received.

The RTD has tried to justify their attack on the workers by crying about "hard times" due to recent revenue problems with federal monies and state sales tax revenue. "Hard times" is the same cry of all the capitalist class as they try to force the working class to carry the burden of the economic crises of capitalism. It is the workers who have hard times from the wage cutting, layoffs, and plant closures the rich are using to protect their profits. The economic crises are caused by the capitalists and their greed, speculation and anarchic dog-eat-dog production. It is the capitalists who should pay for their own economic problems and not the workers.

The idea of wage cutting is not a recent one on the part of the RTD. For some years the RTD board has been scheming to cut the workers' wages (after all they need a lot of money for the multi-million dollar mall project and their Light Rail System proposal). In fact, during the 1973 contract fight, before RTD took over the bus company, Mr. John Simpson, RTD Board Director, pushed for the City and County of Denver to demand an end to the COLA and the use of more part-time employees. This is the same "gentleman" who has been on the television insulting and slandering the workers' "educational and skill levels." In 1973 it was only the workers' own strength in a one-week strike that defeated that wage-cutting scheme. Quite rightfully the workers have chosen that same path of active resistance again.

How to fight the offensive of the rich against the workers' livelihood is a burning question for the whole working class. The purpose of the wage cutting and sacrifices being imposed on the workers is not to save the workers' jobs but to save the capitalists' big profits. For example, GM workers now face more layoffs and speedups as well as the cuts in wages and benefits imposed on them. The GM billionaires plan to use the money they have saved from the wage cutting to "update" their plants, bringing in robots and machinery to displace more workers and increase the pace of production. At Gates Rubber Co. in Denver, workers with 14 years seniority have recently been laid off while the company is using the money "saved" by wage and benefit concessions ta expand operations in Europe.

The lesson to be learned is that there are no common interests between the workers and the billionaire capitalists. Every step of the national offensive against the workers must be met with firm resistance.

The strike of the RTD workers is of importance to all the workers because it stands up against the wage-cutting concession drive that is being pushed against the entire working class.

Support the striking RTD workers!

No concessions, get organized to fight!

[Back to Top]

From its "original vision" to the invasion of Lebanon

Zionism Is Racism

The whole world is witness to the terror which zionist Israel has unleashed in Lebanon. The indiscriminate massacre of civilians which has left more than 10,000 dead, the wanton destruction which has created 600,000 homeless refugees, and the ongoing siege of west Beirut -- these atrocities are being condemned from the four corners of the globe.

Even among those who have been misled by the lies of the zionist propaganda, there is widespread disgust and outrage. Even many who supported the originally stated goal of a "surgical" incursion 25 miles across the border cannot stomach and cannot justify the carnage which is now taking place in Lebanon. Right in Tel Aviv, for example, the Peace Now group called a demonstration 50 to 100 thousand strong which demanded the withdrawal of the Israeli troops and branded Prime Minister Begin as "the butcher of Lebanon."

In the U.S. too, from within various liberal circles of supporters of zionist Israel, voices are being raised against the militarist policies of Begin and his defense minister, Ariel Sharon. Last month a group of 67 Jewish scholars, writers, and others took out an ad in the New York Times and other papers in support of the Israeli Peace Now movement. The ad expressed "grave misgivings" about the invasion of Lebanon, and it called for a compromise permitting "national self-determination for the Palestinians." The ad posed the question:

"Is it not time for us supporters of Israel to speak out critically about those Israeli policies we know to be mistaken, self-defeating, and contrary to the original zionist vision?"

These voices are avoiding what cannot be avoided. They are refusing to see what the Israeli atrocities are helping to further reveal to the whole world. The policies of Begin and Sharon, typified by the explosion of cluster bombs among civilians in Lebanon and the machine gunning of school children on the West Bank, are not "contrary to the original zionist vision" in the slightest.

What is taking place today is simply the latest in an unbroken string of zionist-perpetrated massacres, invasions, and wars. Indeed, the entire history of the zionist movement and the state of Israel has shown that zionism means first and foremost, the terrorist extermination of the Palestinians and expansionist wars against the Arab peoples. This is at the heart of understanding what is taking place in Lebanon today.

Let's briefly examine this history of zionist Israel, beginning with the "zionist vision" on which it was founded.

The Zionist Vision

In 1897, the first zionist congress was held in Basle, Switzerland, under the chairmanship of Theodor Herzl. This congress passed a resolution stating that the objective of the zionist movement is the establishment of a "national home" for the Jews in Palestine. As we shall see, the vision behind this zionist plan was reactionary and enslaving from the very beginning.

In the first place, zionism borrowed its starting premise from the Jew-hating demagogues. Taking their cue from the anti-Semites, the Zionists argued that those who practiced the Jewish religion were "aliens" in Europe or America and could not live among people of other religions. Therefore, the Zionists contended, the Jews must separate themselves from the peoples of which they had been a component part for centuries and shut themselves off in the shell of a theocratic, exclusively Jewish state. As the Jews lived in Russia, Hungary, America, and dozens of other countries, such a state could only be created through a program of wholesale immigration and the colonization of another people's land.

Seeking support for his zionist plan, Herzl approached the biggest hangmen of European reaction. Her^l held talks with the Interior Minister of tsarist Russia, whose hands were dripping with the blood of the dreadful pogroms he had been conducting against Russian Jews. Herzl also sought the support of the Sultan of Turkey, and he appealed to the German Kaiser Wilhelm II. Herzl also requested and got the ardent backing of the British colonialist Cecil Rhodes who was a notorious racist and the founder of the former colonial settler state of Rhodesia. That this architect of the zionist movement sought the support of the biggest pogromists, racists and colonialists of all Europe, is a telling commentary on the anti-Semitic and colonialist nature of zionism.

Right from its birth, one of Zionism's greatest problems has been forcing itself on the masses of Jews. Zionism has never been synonymous with Judaism, as the Zionists want the world to believe. In fact, zionism did not even exist prior to the latter part of the 19th century. This was a time when the ruling capitalists and lords of Europe were unleashing a wave of anti-Semitic terror. It was also a time when large numbers of Jewish workers and intellectuals were taking their place in the progressive movements of the day. In particular, a great many Jews were gravitating to the ranks of the working class and Marxist movement as they recognized that their emancipation was possible only with the emancipation of the working class as a whole. The sight of the Jewish workers locking arms with their class brothers in the common struggle a- against the capitalist oppressors caused nightmares for the Zionists.

When Herzl held talks with the tsarist minister Von Pleve, he explained that it was in the Tsar's best interest to support the zionist plan of Jewish separatism as this would rid Russia of her "Jewish problem." After all, Herzl contended, since so many Jews were involved in the growing Marxist movement, it would be of particular benefit to the tsarist autocracy to pack them all off to Palestine.

Herzl's appeal to this tsarist "minister of pogroms" is but one of countless examples of collusion between zionism and the darkest forces of anti-Semitism. The Zionists knew full well that anti-Semitic hatred and pogroms were its closest ally, because without them their cause of Jewish separatism was lost. To accomplish their aims and to realize Jewish immigration to Palestine, the Zionists were even willing to collaborate with the worst exterminators of the Jewish people -- the nazi fascists. The commonness of interests between fascism and zionism was expressed in a slogan put forward by one of Herzl's disciples, Jabotinsky -- "Germany for Hitler, Italy for Mussolini, and Palestine for us." (Incidentally, the Lebanese Christian Phalange -- an avowedly fascist movement that was set up in 1936 and that to this day upholds Hitler's Nazism and Mussolini's fascism as its model -- is presently the Israeli Zionists' close ally in its invasion of Lebanon.)

One of the first questions that the early Zionists had to resolve was where to locate their future "national home." For Herzl and many others the location was of little consequence; Palestine or Argentina were both acceptable. Herzl was also eager to accept a British offer of territory in Uganda. Eventually the Zionists decided on Palestine even though at that time only a handful of Jews were living there. To justify this scheme, the Zionists dug up biblical references to the Hebrew tribes that had lived in Palestine 3,000 years before.

But how was this zionist plan to be realized when Palestine was already the national homeland of the Palestinian Arabs? How was a Jewish state going to be created there when at that time the Palestinians, an ancient people who had uninterruptedly inhabited Palestine from well before the biblical era, made up more than 92% of the population? The Zionists answered this fundamental obstacle to their plan with arguments of racial superiority typical of enslaving colonialists.

The Palestinians are a valiant people with a rich and developed culture, and with progressive traditions and ideals. Nevertheless, the zionist propaganda systematically denigrates the Palestinians as some type of uncivilized savages, as godless heathens, as mere "native germs" as Israeli military officers are known to refer to them. At the same time, the allegedly civilized and superior race, the Jews, are exalted by the zionist lies as "the chosen people" and as the very "children of God."

Guided by these visions of racial superiority, the Zionists set themselves the task of building a Jewish state in Palestine on the foundations of the forcible expulsion, extermination and enslavement of the Palestinian people.

A Tool of Anglo-American Imperialism

From its earliest days, the zionist movement also envisaged playing the role of a spearhead in the service of the big colonialist and imperialist powers. Herzl doggedly lobbied the British government for support for his project, promising the lords of the British empire that it would "serve the British imperial interests." (The Diaries of Theodor Herzl, p. 105) In 1914, Chaim Weizmann, the future first president of Israel, argued that the creation of their "national homeland" would "form a very effective guard for the Suez Canal." (Alan Taylor, Prelude to Israel, p. 6) British imperialism eagerly threw its weight behind the zionist project, recognizing its value as a colonial outpost to stand guard over British colonial interests in the Middle East and the route to India and other prized possessions in Asia.

In 1917, the British foreign secretary, Lord Balfour, sent a letter of endorsement for the Zionists' plans. This letter, which came to be known as the Balfour Declaration, proclaimed that: "His Majesty's Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object...."

At the time Palestine was still under Turkish rule. It wasn't until 1922 that the imperialist League of Nations made Britain the mandate authority over Palestine. It was under the British Mandate (1922-1947) that the foundations were laid for the future zionist state. The Mandate authorities backed the zionist-organized immigration, raising the weight of the Jewish population in Palestine from 71/2% in 1922 to 33% by 1947. The British forces also groomed the paramilitary zionist gangs as the building blocks of what was to become the state of Israel.

The Palestinian inhabitants waged continual resistance to these encroachments of zionism, which were being carried out under the shield of imperialist Britain. This resistance reached a high point in the six-month general strike during the rebellion of 1936-39. During the years of the British Mandate, many thousands were interned in prisons and camps and 50,000 Palestinians were killed by the combined terror of the British troops and the zionist gangs.

After 1948 and the declaration of the state of Israel, zionism remained as much as ever a tool in the hands of imperialism. Only now it was primarily U.S. imperialism which took zionism under its wing, armed it to the hilt, and propped it up as an aggressive guard dog of U.S. imperialism's enslaving interests in the oil-rich and strategic Middle East. Even such a pro-zionist mouthpiece as the New York Times will aptly refer to zionist Israel as a "client state" of the United States.

Zionist Terror and the Expulsion of the Palestinians

There could be no talk of establishing a zionist state in Palestine without first uprooting and driving out the Palestinians and subjugating those who remained. The Zionists set about this task with a vengeance. In the 1930's and 1940's there were three main zionist terror bands devoted to this objective: the Irgun (led by Zionism's most infamous terrorist, Menachem Begin); the Haganah (Ariel Sharon, the architect of the invasion of Lebanon, a man who is known for his extreme brutality and his ambitions to become ruler of Israel, was a member of this terrorist band); and the Stern Gang. With the complicity and support of the British authorities, these gangs waged systematic terror against the unarmed Palestinian inhabitants.

At the same time, the Zionists were pushing to rig up their own zionist state. They had their own ambitions which led them to go beyond what the British imperialists wished. They looked to Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany for support. The zionist terror bands eventually also attacked the British forces who had armed and trained them in the first place. Among the countless acts of terror perpetrated by these gangs was the bombing of the Mandatory Government Headquarters in Jerusalem's King David Hotel, claiming 101 victims.

On November 29, 1947, under the intense coercion applied by the Truman administration, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Palestinian Arab states. This partition was a flagrant violation of the rights of the Palestinians. Among other things the Jewish state was allocated 57% of the territory of Palestine even though the Jews were only a minority of the population and owned less than 6% of the land. The Palestinians were to be uprooted from their lands and robbed of their national right to self-determination.

In the spring of 1948, just prior to the British withdrawal and the implementation of the UN partition plan, the zionist gangs unleashed a reign of terror on the Palestinian population. The Irgun, the Stern Gang, and the Haganah occupied a great number of Palestinian cities and villages, massacring or expelling their inhabitants. On April 4, Menachem Begin's Irgun attacked the village of Deir Yasin, near Jerusalem, slaughtering in cold blood 254 men, women and children. The people of Ein El'Zeitoun, Saad Eddin, Ledda and many other villages were similarly massacred.

The Zionists accompanied this terror with an intense propaganda campaign to generate panic among the Palestinian population. The idea was to force out the Palestinians under the threat that, if they did not flee with their lives, then they too would be massacred. This is why we find in his book, The Revolt: Story of the Irgun, Menachem Begin cynically boasting of how "the Arabs began to flee in panic shouting 'Deir Yasin!' " (p. 165)

Out of this bloodbath, the state of Israel was proclaimed on May 15, 1948. That same day, upon being handed the arms of the withdrawing British troops, the zionist forces launched war against the neighboring Arab countries. The net result of this aggression was that the Zionists seized 78% of the territory of Palestine, while the Palestinian West Bank was annexed by Jordan, and the Gaza strip was put under Egyptian administration. Seven hundred and fifty thousand Palestinians were driven from their homeland by the zionist terror. Most of these refugees to this day live in squalid camps in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and elsewhere.

The Racist State of Israel and the Enslavement of the Palestinians

Since 1948, Israeli-occupied Palestine has been turned into a big convict prison for the Palestinian Arabs in their own land. Thousands upon thousands of Palestinians have continued to be uprooted and expelled as whole Palestinian villages have been leveled to the ground and as the Palestinian farmers have been systematically stripped of their lands. As well, every effort has been made to wipe out the Palestinian culture.

A system of racial discrimination comparable to South African apartheid has been clamped down on the Palestinians, depriving them of even the most elemental rights such as the freedom of movement, residence or employment. Under the theocratic and racist laws of Israel, the potential Jewish immigrant from Chicago, as an automatic citizen of Israel, has ten times the rights and privileges of a Palestinian who is treated like a pariah in his own land. This racist oppression is directed in the first place against the Palestinians. But racism is so all-pervasive in Israeli society that the darker-skinned Jewish immigrants from North Africa and Asia, now the majority of the Jews in Israel, are also victims of this racial oppression.

Those Palestinians who struggle for their rights face expulsion, prison, torture and execution. The best sons and daughters of Palestine are rotting in Israeli prisons. The more than one million Palestinians under military occupation on the West Bank and in Gaza face particularly cruel repression. Every manifestation of protest, even demonstrations of school children, is greeted with tear gas and bullets. Borrowing from the techniques of the Nazi Gestapo, the Israeli authorities apply a system of "collective punishment." Under this system, homes and even whole villages are blown up and bulldozed under in "retribution" for harboring suspected "troublemakers."

It cannot be said that this racism against the Palestinians is simply due to the Begin/Sharon policies of extremism and fanaticism. On the contrary, all the Israeli chieftains firmly adhere to the zionist premise that the Palestinians are racial inferiors -- that they are insignificant nonpersons undeserving of elementary rights. The social-democrats of the Israeli Labor Party, and its predecessors who held power from the 50's to the early 70's, are no less extreme in this regard than Begin and Sharon. As the late Labor Party leader and Israeli prime minister, Golda Meir, put it, "There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed." Such is the rabid racism and denial of Palestinian rights upon which zionist Israel has been firmly rooted.

Expansionist Wars

The zionist terror against the Arab people has not been confined to Palestine, but it has repeatedly spilled into expansionist aggression against the neighboring Arab peoples. From the days of Herzl, the architects of zionism recognized that their designs for a "national home" could not fit within the borders of Palestine alone. They saw that their plan for a colonialist settler state could not succeed without room for expansion, without the conquest and seizure of not only Palestine but also of the land and resources of the neighboring nations as well.

The land that was stolen from the Palestinians in the 1948 war did not begin to satisfy the hunger of the zionist chieftains. David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli prime minister, gave voice to the zionist vision of unlimited expansion: "The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill -- from the Nile to the Euphrates." (David Ben Gurion, The Rebirth and Destiny of Israel, pp. 206- 207) A vast Israeli empire built on the territories of Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, and big portions of Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian Peninsula -- such was the fanatical vision of this "founding father" of Israel.

Over the short span of 34 years, Israel has now waged five major wars against the Arab peoples.

1) On May 15, 1948, zionist Israel launched its first war against the Arabs. An armistice was concluded between Israel and the Arab states (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan) in early 1949.

2) On July 26,1956, Israeli forces invaded the Egyptian Sinai. This invasion was launched in conjunction with the British and French imperialist forces with the aim of seizing the strategic Suez Canal which had just been nationalized by the Egyptian government. Israel occupied the Sinai for almost a year.

3) On June 5, 1967, after years of careful preparation, the Israeli military machine launched an all-out surprise attack upon Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. In this Six-Day War, Israel grabbed up the rest of Palestine (the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) creating another 500,000 refugees, and placing over a million Palestinians under a military occupation which has lasted to this day. Israel also seized Syria's Golan Heights, which earlier this year was annexed to Israel by the Israeli parliament. And the Zionists again seized Egypt's Sinai and occupied it for 15 years.

4) On October 6, 1973, another major war broke out between the Israeli annexationists and Egypt, Syria, and Palestinian guerillas, which were demanding the liberation of the occupied territories. The October War concluded in a stalemate.

5) On June 6, 1982, 65,000 Israeli troops launched a blitzkrieg into Lebanon. The main Israeli objectives in this invasion are: the suppression of the Palestinian resistance movement; the setting up of a fascist Phalangist puppet government in Lebanon; and tie realization of the Zionists' long-standing plans to annex the south of Lebanon including the Litani River.

Between these major wars, Israeli forces have kept up a constant stream of raids and incursions into the territory of its Arab neighbors. Ariel Sharon gained notoriety in the early 1950's as the leader of one of the many commando raids into Jordan in which many hundreds of villagers were massacred. Over the last decade, the Israelis have launched repeated raids deep into Lebanon, and they have murdered thousands in "punitive" bombing and shelling of refugee camps and the neighborhoods of Beirut.

The zionist thirst for conquest is insatiable. As Moshe Dayan, then the Israeli "defense" minister put it, the territories conquered in the Six-Day War are only the beginning. "Our fathers had reached the frontiers which were recognized in the partition plan," Dayan explained. "Our generation reached the frontiers of 1949. Now the Six-Day Generation has managed to reach Suez, Jordan and the Golan Heights. This is not the end. After the present cease-fire lines, there will be new ones. They will extend beyond Jordan, perhaps to Lebanon, and perhaps to central Syria as well." (London Times, June 25,1969)

What compels Israel in expansionist wars to push back the ease-fire lines? What compels Israel to wage repeated wars of aggression against its Arab neighbors?

The zionist state was imposed by the force of arms upon the native Arab peoples, who have never reconciled themselves to this racist and colonialist outpost of foreign imperialism This has meant a perpetual state of war under which the zionist war machine has launched its preemptive strikes aid retaliatory invasions, conquering ever more Arab territories. It has meant that, armed to the teeth with billions of dollars of weapons supplied by the Pentagon, zionist Israel has became the most militarized country on Earth. War and militarism run through every vein of Israeli society; it is the lifeblood of the racist tyranny of the zionist state. At the same time, the Israeli jackal of war is nourished by U.S. imperialism, which wields zionist aggression as a knife at the throat of the Arab peoples.

For a Democratic Palestine

This outline of the history of zionist Israel shows that there can be no such thing as a state based on "the original vision of zionism" that is not committed to massacres and war. It shows that the Begin/Sharon policies are not the exception, but tee rule. Zionism means militarism aid expansionist wars. It means theocracy, religious intolerance, and brutal racism. And zionism means genocidal terror against the Palestinians. This history shows that the present zionist regime must be overthrown through revolution and that a democratic Palestine must be built in its place.

A democratic Palestine is the goal of the Palestinian liberation movement and the universal aspiration of the four million Palestinians. A democratic Palestine means the restoration of Palestinian national rights. It means the liberation of the Palestinian being crushed under the military jackboot of the Israeli occupiers and the return of the refugees created by zionist terror to their homelands. It means a secular Palestine where every inhabitant, without regard to race or religion, whether Arab or Jew, enjoys equal rights. It means a Palestine which can no longer be used as a weapon in the hands of U.S. imperialism or any other aggressive power against the Arab peoples. The creation of a democratic Palestine means putting a stop once and for all to the zionist war machine of death and destruction.

[Photo: Victory to the Palestinian people!]

[Map.]

[Back to Top]

What are Begin's aims in butchering Lebanon?

According to Prime Minister Begin, Israel's June 6 blitzkrieg into Lebanon was a simple act of "self-defense." Its alleged objective was the silencing of the PLO rockets aimed at the Israeli villages in Galilee. "Peace in Galilee" was the name Begin gave to the invasion. It did not matter to Mr. Begin that the PLO was observing the Israeli-PLO ceasefire, and for a full eleven months prior to the Israeli attack, not a single PLO rocket had been fired across the Israeli border. Despite this fact, Israeli troops and armored divisions were massed for an invasion as early as last winter. The zionist storm troopers were chomping at the bit for an invasion. Any pretext would do. Begin announced that an attack on a single Jew anywhere in the world would be answered with an invasion of Lebanon.

Begin and the Zionists do not feel secure as long as the Palestinians exist as a people and the other Arab peoples are not trampled into the dust. Hence, for the Zionists, the fact of the ceasefire is irrelevant to their plea of "self-defense." They reason that if the Arab is not fighting the Zionists today, he will be tomorrow. From this, they do not conclude that there is something wrong, something monstrous about rigging up a zionist theocratic state that is in complete antagonism to the Palestinians and the overwhelming majority of the people of the Middle East, but that it is legitimate for the Zionists to attack any Arab at any time and to violate borders at will. Thus all Begin looks for is a pretext, no matter how hollow.

On June 3, in London an assassination attempt was made on Shlomo Argov, the Israeli ambassador to Britain. The PLO categorically denied any responsibility. This is generally accepted, even by the British government and other imperialists. Indeed, this attempt had all the trappings of a provocation carried out by Israeli secret agents. Nevertheless, the zionist chieftains took the wounding of Shlomo Argov as all the pretext that they needed to justify trampling on the entire population of Lebanon.

Just as the German Nazis would massacre civilians in "retribution" for an attack on a Nazi officer or official, on June 4, massive Israeli bombing raids were carried out against the neighborhoods of Beirut. A hundred Palestinian civilians were killed in "retribution" for the London attack on the Israeli ambassador. In reply, PLO rockets were fired across the border for the first time in almost a year. The only casualty from these rockets was a single heart attack victim.

On June 6th, 80,000 Israeli troops crashed into Lebanon. Over 10,000 civilians have already been murdered by Israeli bombs and shells. Southern Lebanon has been pounded into rubble. And now the Israeli forces have clamped a brutal siege on the half million inhabitants of west Beirut.

"Self-defense" was simply Begin's big lie. It was simply a hoax to justify the nazi-style massacres and destruction which Begin has unleashed a- against the Palestinian and Lebanese people.

The truth is that the Israeli invasion of Lebanon was a calculated act of unprovoked aggression. The zionist chieftains, together with their masters in Washington, had set in motion the preparations for this invasion years beforehand.

Genocide Against the Palestinians

The primary objective of the backed Israeli invasion is to crush with violence and terror the Palestinian resistance movement. Begin, as well as the architect of the Israeli blitzkrieg "Defense" Minister Ariel Sharon, declared their aim of "annihilating" to a man the PLO freedom fighters in Lebanon. And the world has seen the ruthless methods that the zionist storm troopers are using, towards this aim. However, the target of this terror is not just the PLO guerillas, but the entire Palestinian population in Lebanon.

More than half a million Palestinian refugees live in Lebanon, driven there from their homeland by zionist terror. Every one of these refugees has a burning desire to return to his land and village in Palestine. Along with the millions of other Palestinian refugees, they provide a powerful base of support for the Palestinian resistance movement. Begin and Sharon want to destroy this base through the indiscriminate slaughter of the civilian population. This is why the Israeli invaders are dropping anti-personnel cluster bombs and napalm and phosphorus bombs on refugee camps and densely populated neighborhoods. This is why they're blockading medical supplies for the tens of thousands of wounded children and other victims of the Israeli bombs and shells. All of these atrocities are part of the zionist strategy to break the will of the Palestinian population. This is nothing but a strategy of fascist genocide.

The Lebanese people have also been made a target of this strategy. They too have been made victims of this bloodbath. The Israeli invaders want to smash the close solidarity between the Palestinians and the majority of the Lebanese people. And they want to crush the Lebanese progressive, anti-imperialist and anti-zionist forces.

By unleashing terror in Lebanon, the zionist chieftains also hope to "teach a lesson" to the other Palestinian refugees and especially to the one million Palestinians under Israeli military occupation on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Ariel Sharon spelled out these aims of the Israeli invasion: "The bigger the blow," Sharon explained, "the more the Arabs in [the West Bank] and Gaza will be ready to negotiate with us.... I am convinced that the echo of this campaign is reaching into the house of every Arab family in [the West Bank] and Gaza." (Time, June 21, 1982) In other words, in the calculations of this sadistic killer, if enough Palestinian blood is spilled in Lebanon, this will also snuff out the flames of Palestinian revolt on the West Bank.

But Sharon and Begin have gravely miscalculated. Yes, as the Zionists are demonstrating, they are capable of killing and maiming several tens of thousands of Palestinian women, children and old people. Yes, as the Zionists are showing, they can round up all the Palestinian males over the age of 14 from the villages of Southern Lebanon and throw thousands of them into concentration camps to be tortured and executed. But they cannot exterminate the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people are five million strong and their resolve to fight for their liberation cannot be wiped out by massacres and terror.

The echo of Sharon's campaign in Lebanon has indeed reached the West Bank and Gaza, where the Palestinian youth are again clashing with the Israeli troops in powerful protest against the Israeli invasion.

The Subjugation of Lebanon

While the spearhead of the Israeli invasion is directed at the Palestinians, the zionist chieftains aim to subjugate all of Lebanon. Their plan is to rig up a fascist puppet government and to colonize and eventually annex the south of Lebanon.

This plan is not something that Begin and Sharon dreamt up after their armored divisions poured into Lebanon. Rather it is a plan which had been in the making for nearly three decades, well before there was a PLO and before there were any Palestinian guerillas in Lebanon. This further exposes Begin's lies about invading Lebanon out of "self-defense" from Palestinian guerillas.

These zionist plans for subjugating Lebanon were first spelled out by David Ben-Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel, as far back as 1954. In letters he wrote to his foreign minister, Moshe Sharett, Ben-Gurion said that the time was ripe to rig up a Christian state, a task that required Israeli "initiative and effective assistance." He added that this was the "principal task, or at least one of the principal tasks of our foreign policy." (The Nation, June 6, 1982, cited from Moshe Sharett's memoirs that were published in the zionist newspaper Davor in 1971)

In 1955, Moshe Dayan, then Israeli chief of staff, outlined the means to accomplish Ben-Gurion's objective. Sharett's diary records that Dayan told him, "The only thing that's necessary is to find a Lebanese officer, even a major will do. We will win his heart or buy him with money to get him to agree to declare himself the savior of the Maronite population.... [Then] the Israeli army will enter Lebanon, occupy the necessary territory and create a Christian regime that will ally itself with Israel. The territory of the Litani southward will be totally annexed to Israel."

As it turned out, Dayan's plans for Lebanon were postponed by the Israeli invasion of the Sinai in 1956 and other important business consuming the zionist aggressors. But the Israeli chieftains never abandoned their expansionist designs on Lebanon. And with the 1975-76 Lebanese civil war the immediate preparations for the present invasion got under way.

During the civil war between the Lebanese left and the Palestinians on the one side, and the right-wing Christian forces on the other, the Israelis bought themselves the puppets they had been looking for -- the fascist Phalange.

The paramilitary Phalange was created in 1936, inspired by the ideals of Hitler's Nazis and Mussolini's Fascists Its founder, Pierre Gemayel, organized it after his return from a 1936 visit to Italy and Germany. In an interview given last November, Pierre Gemayel explained that "I wanted to create an organization in Lebanon that could instill the same kind of civilization and moral courage I saw the Italians and Germans developing in their youngsters." (The Nation, June 6, 1982) Indeed the ideals of Nazi fascism are most suitable to this gang of warlords, feudal chiefs and wealthy speculators in the pay of foreign imperialism.

That the Phalangist leaders are self-proclaimed admirers of Adolph Hitler, rabid fascists and anti-Semites, proved to be little obstacle to the sordid zionist-Phalangist alliance. On the contrary. The Israeli chieftains had found just the right puppets who they could prop up as the "saviors of the Maronite population" under the hoax of "liberating" the Christian minority from the alleged oppression of the Moslem majority. Of course, this was not a question of religious strife, as the Zionists and their U.S. backers try to portray it, but of the Zionists and the U.S. imperialists trying to impose a right-wing fascist dictatorship on the freedom-loving people of Lebanon. The Phalange are the warlords defending the interests of the rich capitalist and feudalist section of the Maronites. This strata has been historically the dominant part of the rich ruling class in Lebanon and the Zionists are lecturing this strata that they should hide their reactionary, bloodsucking aims under the pretext of Christianity just as the Zionists use the pretext of Judaism.

From the time of the Lebanese civil war, Phalangist officers were brought to Israel for training; the Zionists also began to arm the Phalange to the teeth. Israel funneled over $100 million of mainly U.S. arms to the Phalangist forces in 1980 alone. With Israeli military assistance and with the help of repeated Israeli raids into Lebanon, the Phalange again started grabbing up territory. Through bribery and promises, the leaders of the Phalange came to accept more and more the Zionists' plan for a "Christian state" to be dubbed "Free Lebanon." And to make the Phalangist gangs of torturers and cutthroats more legitimate in the eyes of world opinion, they decided to call themselves the "Lebanese Forces."

The plans for a Phalangist dictatorship also got the okay from the chieftains of U.S. imperialism. Last fall, Bachir Gemayel, the son of Pierre and the chief of the Lebanese Forces, came to Washington for personal talks with Secretary of State Haig. Then in early April, none other than the prince of the liberal Democrats, Ted Kennedy, sent a Phalangist conference a personal message of support.

Everything was in place. According to the plan, the only thing that was lacking was the Israeli blitzkrieg into Lebanon to put the Phalange into power. But whether or not those Hitler-worshipping scum can hold power is another matter.

Presently, the Israeli troops have set the rabid dogs of the Phalange loose to assist in the butchery of the Palestinian and Lebanese people. But if and when the Israeli tanks are pulled out, the Zionists' scheme to "create a Christian (Phalangist) regime that will ally itself with Israel" is simply a delusion. A section of the rich Christian Maronites are undoubtedly eager for such a thing. But two-thirds of the Lebanese population isn't Christian, and the vast majority of the poor and downtrodden Lebanese, Muslim, Maronite Christian, or other, will never accept this bastard offspring of zionist aggression. The Lebanese people have fought for decades against being subjugated by the Phalangist and right-wing gangs. And it is certain that the Lebanese people will never reconcile to a Phalangist "Christian state" allied to zionism, whether it rules all of Lebanon or over a partitioned territory.

Annexation of Southern Lebanon

Finally, the Israeli chieftains hope to realize out of the bloodbath which they have unleashed, the eventual annexation of southern Lebanon. Begin's recent denials to the contrary, the Israeli expansionists have had their eyes on the Litani River and the south of Lebanon for some time. Through repeated incursions into southern Lebanon over the last dozen years, the Zionists have been working to drive out the local population, and to bring in Phalangist elements to help pave the way for future Israeli annexation. Now, after reducing the south of Lebanon to rubble, thousands of Israeli officials, technicians, engineers, construction workers, etc., are arriving to "rebuild" the area. And Begin is demanding that U.S. troops be brought in to secure a "buffer zone" 25 miles north of the Israeli border behind which the Zionists hope to go about the business of colonizing southern Lebanon.

This is how Begin and Sharon want to realize the plans to subjugate Lebanon and annex its southern part that were spelled out by Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan nearly three decades ago.

[Cartoon.]

[Back to Top]

Arab reaction stabs the Palestinians in the back

It is a striking fact that the U.S.- backed zionist invasion in Lebanon has been met with little or no response from the Arab governments. As PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat has put it, "No one has responded or reacted," adding that "We have thus far not heard of one demonstration taking place anywhere in the Arab world, from the Atlantic to the Gulf, except those demonstrations taking place in our occupied homeland."

This silence is particularly deafening after all the rhetoric emanating from the Arab capitals in recent years about the possible use of "the oil weapon" and similar "stern warnings" against zionist aggression. This silence also comes after repeated condemnations by these same governments of the Israeli-Egyptian Camp David accords. But now that the imperialist-zionist aggression is at hand, it is being clearly demonstrated that among the other reactionary Arab governments the Camp David spirit of collaboration with the aggressor has also taken its toll.

The Carter-Sadat-Begin Camp David accords were supposed to secure peace. But they have only fueled the fire of zionist aggression. They have only secured more billions of dollars of U.S. weapons for the Israeli war machine; they have only secured Israel's southern flank so that it can better wage war in Lebanon.

Today we find Egyptian President Mubarak shedding crocodile tears over the fate of his "dear Palestinian brothers." Meanwhile, a week after the Israeli blitzkrieg, Mubarak sent his foreign minister to Washington in order to assure Al Haig that the Egyptian government's views on the crisis in Lebanon "are nearly identical" to those of the U.S. State Department and to again swear allegiance to the Camp David process of collaboration with the zionist butchers.

Other reactionary Arab governments are also engaged in treachery against the Palestinian and Arab peoples. On the diplomatic level the two most active Arab governments have been the pro-U.S. and ultra-right-wing Saudi monarchy and the allegedly radical Syrian regime of Hafez Assad which has a treaty of "friendship and cooperation" with Soviet social- imperialism. On July 20, Syrian Foreign Minister Abdel Halim Khadam and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal held talks with Reagan at the White House on a joint Saudi-Syrian proposal on the conflict in Lebanon. The starting point of this proposal was in full accord with Reagan's position that the most essential and urgent matter is to evict the Palestinian liberation forces from Beirut. Reportedly what Prince Saud, Mr. Khadam and Mr. Reagan discussed was the question of how many billions of U.S. and Saudi dollars it would take to convince one of the Arab governments to accept the evicted Palestinian guerillas.

It should be remembered that the Syrians have played a dirty role in Lebanon for a long time. During the 1975-76 Lebanese civil war, Assad dispatched tens of thousands of Syrian troops to Lebanon who fought on the side of the right-wing Phalangist forces against the Palestinians and the Lebanese left. In recent years the Lebanese fascist Phalange, zionist Israel's close ally, has been bolstered by the Syrian presence, and it has been bankrolled in part by Saudi Arabia. The Syrian rescue mission for this fifth column of zionist aggression was a key link in the chain of events leading up to the Israeli invasion.

The Syrian forces that had been brought in at the time of the civil war were still in place at the time of the Israeli invasion. But despite having forces in position to confront the zionist invaders, Assfid came to an undeclared agreement, accepting Begin's offer that the Israeli forces would not strike at the Syrian positions in the Bekaa Valley and elsewhere in Lebanon, if the Syrian troops did not attempt to challenge the zionist invasion. Assad went out of his way to oblige, ordering his 60,000 troops to clear out of the path of the Israeli columns. Not surprisingly, despite all of Begin's public promises, the Israelis struck heavily against the Syrian armor and anti-aircraft batteries in the Bekaa Valley and the Syrian positions on the Beirut-Damascus Highway. The Syrians fought back only enough to cover their retreat, to come to new truce terms, and to finally disengage from the battle against the invaders altogether. In a word, the Syrian regime, the regime which boasts most loudly of being the guardian of the Palestinian revolution, stabbed the Palestinians in the back.

Incidentally, this Syrian treachery also cast light on the dirty role played by another self-styled ally of the Palestinian people, the Soviet social-imperialists. Defending the actions of the Assad regime, Moscow's close client, the Soviet revisionist mouthpiece New Times wrote that "It should be borne in mind that the Syrian forces in Lebanon were placed there with the aim, which still remains, of maintaining peace within Lebanon, and not of waging full-scale war." (New Times #25, June 1982) In other words, maintaining the peace means suppressing the Palestinians and trampling on the people of Lebanon. But to resist the zionist storm troopers, horrors of horrors, that's not maintaining peace -- it's waging war!

Indeed, the Soviet arms merchants do not supply such reactionary governments as those of Syria, Jordan, or Iran with billions of rubles of weapons in order to assist the Arab resistance against zionist aggression. No, these weapons are not to be raised against the oppressors of the Arab people. On the contrary. Moscow supplies these weapons for use against the progressive Arab masses in their struggle against these reactionary regimes and for use to check the Palestinian resistance movement. It supplies these weapons in order to sink the claws of Soviet social-imperialism deeper into the flesh of the Arab people. This is part of its strategy to turn the Palestinian and Arab peoples into bargaining chips at the negotiating table with U.S. imperialism where these two superpowers can carve up the oil-rich Middle East between themselves.

The Israeli invasion of Lebanon is again exposing the treachery of Arab reaction. It is again underscoring the truth that the reactionary Arab governments are motivated by the selfish interests of the rich exploiting classes and that they are linked in a thousand ways with imperialism and social- imperialism. It is for this reason that, while a number of these governments have strong contradictions with zionist Israel, these contradictions are often not so powerful as their deep fear of the progressive force of the Palestinian liberation movement.

Arafat did not mention it, but there have been reports of a number of attempts on the part of the Arab people to demonstrate against the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. At the same time these attempts have been brutally suppressed by the reactionary regimes. It is no wonder that the Arab governments are refusing to grant asylum for the Palestinian revolutionaries: the Palestinians carry with them a great danger to these governments, the danger of fanning the flames of the anti-zionist, anti-imperialist and progressive movement of the Arab peoples.

According to reports, Palestinian refugees in Jordan also attempted to hold protests against the zionist aggression. The troops of Jordan's King Hussein are reported to have opened fire on the demonstrators, killing a number. It was these same troops that perpetrated the September, 1970 massacre of thousands of Palestinians and PLO guerillas. King Hussein and the entire Arab reaction haven't changed their nature one bit since that notorious "Black September."

[Photo: Atop a captured zionist tank, Palestinian liberation fighters remain defiant.]

[Back to Top]

A new wave of struggle against apartheid racism

The last few weeks have seen a big upsurge in the mass struggle in South Africa. Once again the myth of the stability of this racist paradise is being shaken to its core. In the last week of June, thousands of people turned out to commemorate the sixth anniversary of the Soweto Rebellion of 1976 and fought against the frenzied attempts of the regime to disperse their mass meeting. Then in July mass strikes broke out among the African miners and auto workers.

The determination of the masses to commemorate the Soweto uprising shows the rising spirit of revolt among the masses. Six years ago, on June 16, 1976, a major rebellion had broken out in Soweto, a black working class suburb of Johannesburg. This rebellion began as a protest against the government's attempt to make Afrikaans, the language of the white minority, the sole language taught in the schools of South Africa. This forced use of Afrikaans was another humiliation and oppression of the black majority. As the movement developed, the black African people brought forward many other grievances against the apartheid regime. The protest movement developed into a rebellion in which the South African police and army murdered 600 people. Since then, Soweto has become a rallying cry for the struggle against the racist and fascist oppression in South Africa. For the racist minority regime, on the other hand, Soweto has become a fearsome symbol of what is in store for them.

This is why the black working masses in South Africa were determined to commemorate the Soweto Rebellion of 1976 and the 600 martyrs who gave their lives for the cause of freedom. Despite the fact that mass meetings have been banned in Soweto since 1976, the people there were determined to honor the memory of the martyrs by holding a memorial service. Ten thousand people attended this mass memorial meeting on June 26. When the fascist police attacked the memorial service with tear gas, the youth revived the "spirit of Soweto" by attacking the police, taking the mass struggle to the streets of Soweto.

This mass struggle was followed soon after by the strike of the black African mine workers in the first week of July. The 400,000 black workers in the gold, platinum and coal mines of South Africa are among the most savagely oppressed and exploited workers in the world. African mine workers are denied by law any trade union rights whatsoever and from getting skilled jobs in the mines. They have no political rights at all, as they are regarded as "temporary immigrants" from the bantustans -- in fact, workers are not allowed to live with their families, who must remain in the "homelands." Workers are bused to the mines, where they live in barracks while working there. While forced into the dirtiest and most dangerous jobs, the black workers are paid only one-sixth of the average white workers' pay.

In recent years a movement for higher wages and against the wage differential has arisen among the black workers. Yet at the beginning of July, when the white mine workers negotiated a new labor contract which awarded them a 12% wage increase, the mining companies only offered approximately the same percentage raise to the black workers. This meant offering a far smaller increase and increasing the gap. The black workers rebelled. They insisted on getting a higher percentage raise, so that they can begin to close the outrageous gap between the white and black wage scales.

Hence in the first week of July, at least 10,000 black miners went out on strike at various mines in the area around Johannesburg. True to its fascist nature, the South African government responded to the strikes with tear gas and bullets. The striking workers defended themselves vigorously. In the next week thousands of mine workers rioted, took over mines, etc. In many cases the workers used their mining tools to attack the buildings and equipment of the mining capitalists. At one mine, 100 workers barricaded themselves one mile below the surface inside the mine.

The South African regime struck out right and left to suppress the strike. Besides shooting down the strikers and killing at least eight of them, the government hurriedly bused 1,300 of the workers back to their "homeland." Hundreds of workers were fired from their jobs and then arrested. As well, thousands were detained in hastily assembled concentration camps.

But no sooner was this strike suppressed, than another broke out. The massive strike of the mine workers was followed on July 16 by a well-coordinated strike of the auto workers in South Africa. Fifteen thousand workers -- the entire black work force at the South African plants of GM, Ford, and VW -- walked out of the auto plants in a similar struggle for higher wages. At last report, the auto workers' struggle is still continuing.

These strikes show the stubborn struggle that the black proletariat is waging. Despite the worst conditions of fascist repression, they are uniting in struggle against their oppressors. In recent years, the black proletariat, kept out of the white unions and forbidden all rights by the racist regime, has organized in illegal unions and forced agreements upon the employers. This shows the tremendous strength latent in their struggle and is a development of first-class significance for the black people's struggle.

Frightened by this development, the South African regime felt something had to be done. They were afraid of the unions of black workers that sprung up despite their prohibition and outside the official labor code and its system of registration. Combining repression with a feeble mask of "liberalization," in 1979, for the first time, the regime passed a law allowing black workers to organize registered trade unions in certain industries (but not in the crucial mining industry). Yet many black unions refused to register with the government for fear of coming under its control and racist regulations.

A fierce struggle is developing among the black workers. According to the official National Manpower Commission of the racist regime, at the end of 1981 twenty-three black unions representing some 162,000 workers had registered. As well, it said that there were unregistered unions with an estimated membership of 100,000. But the leaders of the unregistered unions say that their membership is far larger than the 100,000 admitted by the government. Adding together the registered and unregistered unions, it can be seen that the black proletariat has added a powerful new weapon to the struggle of the black people.

Since the Soweto Rebellion of 1976, the regime has responded to the growing struggle of the black African people with two methods. On one hand, it has stepped, up its suppression of the masses in South Africa and hastened its preparations for all-out war on the masses. In particular, the South African regime always shows special concern for the constant strengthening of its armed forces to suppress the black people at home and invade the neighboring African nations.

On the other hand, the South African racist regime and its ruling National Party have made some feeble attempts to present themselves as "liberalizing" the system in order to disarm the masses and buy some time. In 1979 they passed the law allowing some black workers to establish registered trade unions, as we have mentioned above. Of course, this law was designed to concede to the black workers only what they had already obtained and to forge yet more tools to sabotage the new unions by bringing them under the racist labor code. Also, this year Prime Minister Botha presented a bill to Parliament calling for the right to vote for "Asians" and "coloreds" (people of mixed race or mulattoes), but not for the blacks, who constitute about three-quarters of the population. The "Asians" and "coloreds" will get some type of vote -- but not for the real Parliament, but for separate "Asian" and "colored" parliaments. This is to say nothing of the fact that any delegate to these bodies who says anything regarded as dangerous by the regime can be thrown into jail. Nevertheless, these "liberalizations" have led to the ludicrous charade of a conservative "split" from the National Party, with the leaders of the new Conservative Party foaming at the mouth about Prime Minister Botha having become "soft" and "liberal."

As the masses in South Africa know from bitter experience, however, Botha and his National Party are hardened racists and fascists. The National Party has ruled South Africa for decades and implemented one measure of racist apartheid after another. The racist South African government has been a stronghold of world reaction.

Besides suppressing the masses in South Africa, it also functions internationally as a fascist gendarme. Within the past year South Africa has invaded Angola once again and attempted a coup d'etat in the Seychelle Islands. The South African government has close ties to the racist and expansionist state of Israel and is cooperating with the Zionists in developing nuclear weapons. South Africa is continuing its illegal occupation of Namibia (Southwest Africa), and presently it has 80,000 troops there to suppress the Namibian liberation struggle. As well, South Africa is organizing reactionary armed bands inside Mozambique that aim to overthrow the FRELIMO government through terror and disruption. In recent messages to the South African Parliament, the defense minister has called for long-term occupation of Namibia and all-out war against the neighboring states of Angola, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Zambia.

Meanwhile, to deal with the rising struggle of the people inside South Africa, the South African Parliament is presently preparing to pass a series of measures to further suppress the working masses. One of these, the "Intimidation Bill," provides a penalty of ten years imprisonment for the verbal threat of assault used in order to influence a person's opinion; this bill is aimed in particular against strikes and boycotts. Another new bill prohibits demonstrations anywhere near court buildings; the government's aim is to stop the solidarity demonstrations for defendants. A new "Protection of Information Bill" provides ten years imprisonment for disclosing any information relating to the "combating of terrorism."

Thus it can be seen that the racist South African government is in no way being "liberalized," but in fact is preparing even greater outrages against the black Africans and progressive people of all races as well as against the neighboring countries. The South African police are not even waiting for the new legislation, but are going right ahead with the brutal bloodletting and repression for which it is notorious around the world. Recently it became known that last February the South African police had tortured to death a well-known trade union leader, Dr. Neil Aggett, a white who was a leader of a black trade union, while in June the police arrested 250 people for the "crime" of attending the funeral of another trade union leader. Meanwhile the racist regime is also going ahead with its policy of denationalizing the black Africans, declaring that they are citizens of their "homelands" (bantustans) and therefore complete nonentities in South Africa as a whole.

Yet despite all of its laws, armed forces and police, despite all its infamous savagery and brutality, and despite all its backing from Reagan and the rest of international reaction, the racist South African regime is headed for disaster. The recent upsurge in the mass struggle shows that the black Africans are persisting in their courageous struggle. The ferment is eating away at the stability of the system and showing that this giant has feet of clay. The frenzied new fascist laws and the uneasy playing at the "liberalization" fraud show that the regime itself is uneasy and weighed down by the problems confronting it. The day is coming when the black Africans and all other oppressed and progressive people in South Africa will rise up and smash the racist regime to bits.

[Photo: June 1980: The Azanian people rose up on the fourth anniversary of the Soweto uprising of June 1976.]

[Back to Top]

1,300 arrested at Livermore Labs

No to Nuclear Weapons Research!

(The following article is based on leaflets issued by the San Francisco Bay Area Branch of the MLP, USA in late June and July, 1982.)

On June 21, over 4,000 people organized a demonstration and blockade against the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories at the University of California at Berkeley. This action came in the wake of the June 12 demonstrations around the country and was an expression of the sentiment of thousands of activists to seek ways to step up the fight against the Pentagon's war preparations.

The U.S. government recognizes the developing movement against imperialist war preparations as a sharp thorn in its side; thus the authorities broke up the mass action at Livermore Labs with over 1,300 arrests and jailings of up to three days. Many demonstrators were brutally attacked by the police. But as life itself has taught many times over, the sentiment of the working people and youth to fight militarism and war cannot be wiped out with police repression. The fight against the Livermore Labs and all of U.S. imperialism's war preparations will go forward!

The Livermore Labs -- A Vital Part of the Pentagon's War Machine

The June 21 action is the latest event in a continuing struggle against this facility. It has been the site of many demonstrations and pickets, and the demand has been raised over and over again to shut this fiendish institution down. During the upsurge of the 60's it was a focus of struggle. On February 10, 1971, thousands of Berkeley students marched against the Livermore Labs, an action which drew the connection between the Pentagon's military research at home and the U.S. aggression in Indochina. On May 5, 1979, a thousand people protested against the facility.

Why is the Livermore Labs such a target of the masses? Because it plays a vital role in the research and development of nuclear and conventional weapons by the Pentagon. Established in 1952, the facility is nurtured by the highest organs of the U.S. government, such as the Departments of Defense and Energy and the Atomic Energy Commission. It has met every whim of the warmongers for ever more sophisticated weapons of mass destruction and nuclear blackmail. It has contributed to the development of the warheads for the MX system, the cruise and Pershing missiles, and it has given birth to such deadly breakthroughs as the MIRV (multiple warhead) missile and the neutron bomb.

Considering that this is the sort of role the Livermore Labs plays in the Pentagon's war preparations, it is also quite easy to see why the authorities came down with massive force against the June 21 blockade.

The Struggle of June 21

The blockade of the Livermore Labs began very early in the morning of June 21. Hundreds gathered at each of the four gates and access roads with the aim of shutting down the facility for that day. The protesters arrived at the labs after a mass march from the assembly site. Slogans were shouted against the nuclear program, against the draft, calling for the U.S. to get out of El Salvador, etc. Coming at a time when the U.S. imperialists are backing the Israeli Zionists in a genocidal war against the Palestinian people, the protest also heard voices raised against this aggression and expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian people. These stands of the protesters made clear their desire to fight against the entire scope of U.S. imperialism's war preparations and aggression.

During the blockade itself the demonstrators showed a great deal of initiative. They concentrated forces at the gates with the heaviest traffic and provided reinforcements whenever a gate was open. Efforts were also made to avoid arrest and stay effective as long as possible using flexible blockades. The protest stalled traffic in and out of the lab until noon.

Only a short while after the blockade began, the police moved in to break it up. The authorities had brought out about 1,000 police from eight San Francisco Bay Area forces, the California Highway Patrol and several hundred National Guardsmen. They were armed to the teeth with long batons, nightsticks, pistols, helmets, boots and face shields. And for what? A confrontation with activists who were wearing T-shirts and the like. Clearly, such a massive and armed force had been assembled only for the purpose of intimidating the masses and smashing up their protest.

And indeed, the police were not there just to show off their gear..In their eagerness to disperse the demonstration, the police engaged in knocking down protesters, beating some with night sticks, dragging a few by their ears and wantonly running down one with a motorcycle. Altogether, over 1,300 were arrested, including two supporters of the MLP,USA.

After their initial sweep, the police remained on the offensive in an attempt to thwart discussion and summation by the activists and prevent them from planning their tactics further. Thus, at the end of the action, the police launched a special sweep to clear the nearby park which was being used as a staging/recovery area for the demonstration. Even inside the jails, the government used the prison guards to initiate disruptive provocations to break up a meeting planning court tactics.

The police attack on the demonstration shows that the U.S. militarists will use whatever means are at their disposal to protect the hated Livermore Labs. The U.S. government wants nothing to interfere with its plans for world domination. This ruthless determination is daily seen in the unfolding of such events as the invasion of Lebanon, the intervention in El Salvador, and so forth. The U.S. government is not a democratic government as it pretends to be, but is synonymous with reaction all down the line. It is a government of the big monopolies and the banks. It is preparing for war to defend its spheres of influence against the revolutionary struggles of the world's peoples as well as to fight with Soviet social-imperialism to see which robber will get the lion's share of the loot plundered from the people of the world.

Flunkeys of the Democratic Party Whitewash the Police Repression

The confrontation between the people and the government was plain for everyone to see at the Livermore Labs action: the activists went there to fight war preparations and the police arrested them. But the capitalist media as well as political apologists for imperialism inside the movement have been working overtime to cover this up.

Various unofficial flunkeys of the Democratic Party inside the movement have joined with the press to deny that the state attacked the demonstration. They promote the absurd hoax that the protesters went there to get arrested rather than to fight war preparations. While this may be a revealing admission of the intentions of some of the pacifist organizers of the blockade, this cannot be said to express the sentiment of the hundreds of activists who came with the aim of stopping business as usual at the lab in order to fight militarism.

"We are not against the police," the flunkeys of the Democrats say. They claim that in fact the police oppose war preparations too and are "only doing their job" when they suppress the demonstration! These apologists for the police even go so far as to say that if the police wield their clubs it must be because they were "provoked" by the demonstrators!

These stands are aimed at justifying the fascist role of the police and covering over the fact that the "job" of the police is to repress the people by force and protect the capitalists' interests at all costs. The police, jails and courts in fact exist to stop the struggle of the people against hunger, war and growing fascism. To hide the role of the police is to disarm the masses in the face of increasing use of force by the government. The apologists of the police don't want the anti-militarist activists to draw these objective conclusions from their own experience in the mass actions.

Smuggling Pro-Militarist Politics Into the Anti-War Struggle

Hiding the role of the police is only one thrust of the attempts to keep the anti-militarist movement in bounds acceptable to the warmongers. Efforts are also being made to justify the war preparations themselves.

The official spokesmen of the monopoly capitalists, such as Reagan and Kennedy, are working to line up the masses behind U.S. aggression and militarism with talk of "peace through strength," "peace through deterrence," "peace" through parity and stability between the two superpowers, etc. All this means nothing more than excuses to beef up the war machine.

These very same politics in slightly altered form are being brought into the mass movement by the above- mentioned apologists for the police who are mainly Democratic Party hacks and their social-democratic hangers-on, including so-called enlightened government and ex-government officials. One example is the "nuclear freeze" campaign. Although many ordinary people are signing petitions and so forth calling for a nuclear freeze, thinking that these are against war preparations, the freeze proposal itself is not aimed at hindering the Pentagon's war machine in the slightest. It doesn't even call for the dismantling of a single bomb. Rather, it is aimed at freezing the mass movement with illusions about peace being achievable through relying on negotiations between the warmongers Reagan and Brezhnev.

Both superpowers use the framework of "mutual disarmament" to justify their own furious arming by laying the blame for the war buildup at the door of their rival. For instance, the Democratic Party hacks say that if the Soviet Union doesn't come to a "disarmament" agreement on terms favorable to the U.S., then the only "realistic" alternative is to blame them as intransigents and protect our "national security" by arming all the more furiously.

Thus, according to these worthies, the movement should not fight against war preparations at all, but instead we should fight for "legitimate national security" or "adequate defense." What this means is made clear, for example, by Congressman Ron Dellums, one of the chief spokesmen for Democratic Party politics in the movement. He writes, "I support a military budget sufficient to ensure our proper and morally legitimate foreign policy objectives." The "sufficient" budget favored by Dellums turns out to be a war budget of $200 billion which provides for an increase in the current size of the armed forces through pay increases, as well as for the diad nuclear weapons system, i.e., the land and sea-based nuclear weapons arsenal. (See Representative Ronald V. Dellums, "What constitutes 'adequate' defense?," Report to the 8th District, Spring 1981, p. 2)

Thus the "adequate defense" which the two-faced "left"-wing hacks of the Democratic Party promote is nothing less than a call to preserve a huge military machine in the hands of the most blood-soaked capitalist ruling class the world has ever known so that it can defend its sacred profits and expand its empire.

It Is Up to the Masses to Upset the Plans of the Warmongers

The efforts of the warmongers, whether open or concealed, to block the development of the anti-war movement will not succeed. Neither the attacks of the police nor the lying demagogy of the Democrats can stifle the struggle. The American people have not forgotten Viet Nam, and their blood boils at the thought of sending their young people to die in wars of aggression for the rich. The powerful lessons of the 1960's have not been forgotten. The strength of the movement lies in fighting imperialism, in the mass struggle, in the organization of millions of working and oppressed people into a strong fighting force.

[Photo: Demonstrators marching on the Lawrence Livermore Labs as part of the June 21 blockade organized against this Pentagon nuclear research facility.]

[Back to Top]

Condemn the Racist Murder of Willie Turks!

In the early morning hours of June 22, in the Sheepshead Bay-Gravesend section of Brooklyn, New York, a racist gang of some 15 to 20 young people brutally attacked three black transit workers who were on their way home from work. Two of the workers escaped, Dennis Dixon with a deep cut in his head which required 25 stitches. But the third transit worker, Willie Turks, was beaten to death.

This savage murder has aroused anger of the working and oppressed people throughout New York City. The NYC transit workers were particularly outraged. Likewise, the residents of Gravesend condemned the murder and led the police to arrest some of the racist thugs responsible. On June 27th, 200 people marched down Avenue X, where the murder took place, protesting against the racist attack. Again on June 29, a rally of 350people protested the murder.

With the workers of NYC, the NY Metro Branch of the MLP condemned this racist murder. It issued a statement on June 28 which pointed out that the blame for this atrocity must be laid at the doorstep of Ronald Reagan who is heading up a racist offensive for the monopoly capitalist class. And it emphasized that working and oppressed people can only rely on themselves and organize mass struggle to fight the racist gangs and the monopoly capitalist government which stands behind them. Below we reprint excerpts taken from the statements of the NY Metro Branch and the Caribbean Progressive Study Group.

No Isolated Incident

The capitalist news media, the police and numerous politicians, from New York Mayor Koch on down, are- trying to paint this racist murder as just some "isolated incident." But a brief look at the facts shows that this racist attack is far from a one shot affair. Sheepshead Bay residents have pointed out that racist attacks are commonplace and that they had complained for months about the racist thugs on Avenue X, but the police refused to lift a finger.

As long ago as May 3, 1981 a black off-duty housing cop was attacked by a racist gang on the same block where Turks was killed. In the same month a gang of racists attacked black students at nearby James Madison high school. On April 17 of this year, Frank Tyrrel was beaten into a coma and partially paralyzed at the same location where Turks was attacked. And just five days before the killing of Turks a white person, mistaken for a Puerto Rican, was beaten with bats by a racist gang just half a mile away in Coney Island. Clearly these racists are becoming increasingly emboldened and are acting with brazenness.

The City Government's Empty Promises of Justice

Adding insult to injury, the well-known racist, Mayor Koch and the racist NYC Police Department are putting on a hypocritical display of concern and remorse. Koch visited Dixon in his hospital bed and vowed to "punish the perpetrators." The Police Dept, set up a special ten-man task force to investigate the crime. This is a strange concern coming from these well-known racists.

The fact is that the escalating racist attacks in Gravesend take place in the wake of a wave of notorious racist murders committed by the police themselves! And far from "punishing the perpetrators," in every case the racist police-murderers went free and their actions were declared "legal procedures." It is these actions of the police, backed up by the courts and by Mayor Koch's racist and bigoted pronouncements which have encouraged the racist gangs to action.

The hypocritical concern of these dyed-in-the-wool racists is designed to stave off any rebellions and mass struggle by the black people against racist attacks. Deputy Police Chief Colangela admitted as much by saying he hoped for a "quick solution" because "we don't want any hostilities lingering in the area." The police and Koch want the masses to rely on them for justice and not to take matters into their own hands. But racist murders are standard procedure for the police.

Already the police are softening the charges against this racist gang. Out of 20 racists involved in this brutal murder only five have been charged or even sought. And out of five charged only two have been charged with murder, the rest being charged only with assault! This is a complete reversal from the usual police practice of charging everyone involved in a crime with murder if someone is killed.

Who Is to Blame for the Racist Attacks

The police, the politicians and the news media are also causing confusion over who is to blame for these racist attacks. Everything from "drugs and beer," "wild youth," and "inborn racial hatred" are being blamed. These theories are put forward to cover up the role of the capitalist class and their government and to blame instead the "ordinary white working class." But the racist thugs were widely hated in the community and at least one of them was far from an "ordinary worker"; he was a known criminal arrested twice in the last year.

These theories can't hide that this attack is part and parcel of the brutal racist offensive being waged by the monopoly capitalist class across the U.S. This offensive has included racist police murders from Miami to Denver to New York. And every time the police are either acquitted or slapped on the wrist. It has included the activation of the Ku Klux Klan and nazi gangs who have carried out murders and terroristic attacks in Greensboro, Chattanooga, New York and elsewhere. In Greensboro it was shown that police and FBI agents worked closely with the KKK and nazis in carrying out the brutal murders of anti-Klan demonstrators. And in Greensboro, as elsewhere, the racist scum have been let free by the government courts. In effect the government has declared racist atrocities to be "legal procedure."

Heading up the entire racist offensive is the White House itself, led by the chief racist Ronald Reagan. The White House has become a center for open racist and fascist propaganda. And Reagan is leading a legislative push to drive the black people back to the worst Jim Crow segregation. It is no wonder that the barbaric practice of lynching is making a comeback! Meanwhile the courts' repeated declarations that such attacks will go unpunished have emboldened the racist elements everywhere.

It is the rich and their government who are to blame for racist attacks. It is the rich, the government and all the racist and fascist gangs activated by them which must be the target of the masses' struggle. At no time can the masses rely on the rich or their police and courts for justice. No. It is only the vigorous mass struggle of the masses themselves which can fight the racist offensive of the monopoly capitalist class.

[Back to Top]

Provisions of the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill

Down with the attacks on the immigrants!

The Simpson-Mazzoli Bill, also called the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1982, is presently being debated in Congress. This piece of ultra-Reaganite legislation is sponsored by congressmen from both big parties of the rich, the Democrats and the Republicans. It has received backing from such flunkeys of the liberal politicians as the NAACP.

This bill embodies the Reaganite anti-immigrant program of slave labor and mass deportations. It severely restricts legal immigration, while, under the guise of "amnesty," creating a special category for slave labor for a section of the undocumented workers. This bill contains measures for repression against all workers and shows that slavery for the immigrants sooner or later means slavery for the whole society.

Following are the major provisions of the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill.

Severe Restrictions on Legal Immigration

* The Simpson-Mazzoli Bill establishes an annual limit of 425,000 on immigration. This is substantially less than the actual level of immigration. This bill condemns large numbers of immigrants to illegality, to marginal existence under conditions of extreme exploitation, under constant threat of deportation, etc.

* It further narrows the qualifications for immigration. While plenty of room is left for the rich who are bringing money, and for the likes of the Shah of Iran, Eric Gairy of Grenada, etc., the present fifth preference category is to be abolished. This is the category under which the adult sons and daughters of permanent residents, and the brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens are permitted to enter the country. Thus, families will be permanently split up.

* It changes the procedures for refugees seeking asylum. Asylum applications which have been denied will no longer be subject to review by the courts, but only to "administrative review," conducted under conditions of "no delay or expense to government." Moreover, the bill repeals a provision of the current law which forbids the deportation of an applicant for asylum to a country where his life may be in danger. Thus, it will become more difficult for refugees to obtain asylum. The few flimsy legal obstacles which somewhat hinder the way, for example, to a mass deportation of Haitian refugees to torture and death at the hands of the Duvalier regime would be lifted.

Slave Labor in the Name of "Amnesty"

* The bill provides "amnesty" for immigrants who can prove that they have lived in the U.S. continuously since January 1, 1978, and for the wave of Haitian and Cuban refugees who came in 1980 before October 10. However, only those with legal status and who can prove continuous residence prior to January 1, 1978 can apply for permanent residency. All others can -- at best, since it is almost impossible for an undocumented worker to prove continuous residency -- receive permanent residency only after a two year period of temporary status, with a four year period required for the Haitian and Cuban refugees. Under this status, immigrants cannot travel abroad and cannot bring their families to join them. They will be prohibited from receiving benefits from government programs, even from those to which they have contributed, such as unemployment and social security. They will have no political rights. The "amnesty" program, in short, is a program establishing a status for slave labor for a section of the undocumented workers and refugees, and mass deportations for the rest.

* While legal immigration is being sharply curbed, the procedures for the existing H-2 Temporary Worker Program (the Bracero program for slave labor in agriculture) are being simplified. It will become easier for agribusiness and rich farmers to recruit immigrant workers to work under conditions of slavery as bad or worse than those outlined above, as is being done today with agricultural laborers from Mexico and Jamaica.

Repression Against All Workers

* The bill requires employers to keep records on the identity of workers, and imposes sanctions on employers for hiring undocumented workers. This means that employers will be spurred to further discriminate against job applicants who even "look like" immigrants. It means that immigrant workers, and workers of various oppressed nationalities will be even more severely segregated in the most marginal and backbreaking industries.

* It revives the plan for a national identification card program. The bill provides that the government has three years to develop a "universal worker's identification card" which all workers would have to show in order to be employed. Of course, once such a system is in place, it would establish the basis for a national tracking system to facilitate the repression of immigrants, militant workers, progressive and revolutionary activists, etc.

(The above article is reprinted from The West Indian Voice, newspaper of the Caribbean Progressive Study Group, July-August, 1982.)

[Back to Top]

Caribbean Progressive Study Group Enters Its Fifth Year

June 3, 1982 marked the fourth anniversary of the founding of the Caribbean Progressive Study Group.

CPSG was founded by revolutionary activists who participated in mass struggles in both the U.S. and the West Indies. They had been influenced by diverse mass struggles: the mass movements against the Shearer regime in Jamaica, the mass struggles of the black people in the U.S., the 1970 rebellion in Trinidad and Tobago, etc. By the same token, they were witness to the bankruptcy and betrayal of opportunism: of the tailing after the People's National Party in Jamaica, of cultural nationalism in the U.S., of the "black power" slogan in Trinidad and Tobago. Finally, they were inspired by Marxism-Leninism, which had won growing prestige among activists in the West Indies and which was developing into a force in the U.S. with the building of the Marxist- Leninist Party.

This experience gave rise to the conclusion that a consistent revolutionary path was the only way forward against imperialist domination of the countries of the West Indies and against the oppression faced by the West Indian community in the U.S.; and that organization was needed to go forward. Thus CPSG was founded in line with the best traditions of the West Indian community.

Since its birth, the CPSG has been an active participant in struggle on many fronts: in solidarity with the struggles in the West Indies, in the mass struggle against racial discrimination, in the fight against the persecution of immigrants, and on the most burning questions facing the working people in the U.S.

The CPSG has distinguished itself by its partisanship, aligning itself always with the revolutionary forces, taking its stand always with the working class. This partisanship has meant a rupture with the bankrupt politics of tailing the parties and politics of the rich, whether the Democratic Party in the U.S., one of the two big parties of imperialist exploiters, or the PNP of Jamaica, the People's National Movement of Trinidad and the other parties of neo-colonialism in the West Indies.

The most important achievement of CPSG has been the building of The West Indian Voice as the revolutionary newspaper of the West Indian community. The West Indian Voice tells the truth about the situation in the West Indies and the U.S. It provides revolutionary analysis on the burning issues facing the community. The West Indian Voice is a powerful tool for organizing the West Indian community on a revolutionary basis.

Today, the working people in the U.S. and the West Indies are confronted with the growing reaction of the imperialist exploiters.

In the U.S. the rich exploiters have brought Reagan to office and have launched a devastating offensive against the working people. Millions are being thrown out of work while unemployment benefits, food stamps and other social services are being slashed. At the same time the capitalists are pouring billions of dollars into an unprecedented buildup for war. And they are pushing through piece after piece of repressive legislation aimed against the workers and against progressive people.

Working people in their millions are stirring against this offensive. The CPSG stands with the working class in the fight against Reaganite reaction. Down with Reagan, chieftain of capitalist reaction! No to the capitalist offensive of hunger, fascism, and war!

An integral part of Reaganite reaction is its virulent racism. Reagan has come out foursquare for segregation in the schools and workplaces. Racist gangs, many of them spawned by the government apparatus, are being emboldened by the flow of racist propaganda from the White House. Sweeping campaigns have been launched against immigrants, and new anti-immigrant legislation's pending. All these deeply affect the West Indian community.

The CPSG stands for active mass struggle against all attacks on the immigrants and oppressed nationalities. Actively resist racist attacks! No to Reagan 's segregationist drive! No to the persecution of immigrants!

In the West Indies the economic crisis is taking a heavy toll on the working masses. The Reaganite "Caribbean Basin Initiative" means pushing forward militarization and reaction in the region. It means more hunger and repression in the name of a "stable climate for investments."

For working people in the West Indies, the only way forward is struggle against imperialism. CPSG stands for opposition to all the imperialists (the Soviet social-imperialists included), and in the first place the U.S. imperialists, the dominant power in the West Indies. This struggle must be linked to a fight against the local exploiters, who are the mainstay of imperialist domination of the West Indies. U.S. imperialism, get out of the Caribbean! Support the struggles for national liberation in the West Indies!

While opposing the imperialists in the West Indies and right here in the U.S., the CPSG supports people throughout the world who are fighting for their liberation against imperialism. Today in El Salvador we see a striking example of the downtrodden workers and peasants rising up in courageous struggle against the brutal local oligarchy and against U.S. imperialism. U.S. imperialism, get out of El Salvador! Victory to the Salvadorian people!

The CPSG enters its fifth year filled with determination for the struggles ahead.

Hail the fourth anniversary of CPSG!

Read The West Indian Voice!

[Back to Top]

Maoists, Khrushchovites and Trotskyites Side With the Junta

Opportunists Sacrifice the Argentine Workers to the Generals

The recent war over the Falkland/Malvinas Islands was an unjust and reactionary war on both sides. The Argentine fascist generals launched their military adventure with the aim of diverting the anti-fascist struggle of the working masses towards a bogus "liberation" struggle. On the other hand, the reactionary Thatcher government went to war in order to defend British imperialism's colonial occupation over these islands. Our Party has made detailed analysis of this war elsewhere, while in this article we wish to deal with the stand of the revisionists and trotskyites on the war. (For our Party's analysis of the war, see the May 24 issue of The Workers' Advocate, as well as the other article on this page.)

The workers of both Britain and Argentina had no stake in supporting their governments in this unjust war. Rather, their interests lay in persisting in the struggle against their "own" exploiters, their "own" governments. Likewise, the interests of the workers and progressive people in the U.S., as elsewhere in the world, did not lie in choosing sides in this reactionary conflict, but in continued solidarity with the struggle of the working masses of both Britain and Argentina.

But there were many counsels urging the opposite course. This did not just come from the bourgeoisie of different countries who lined up on one side or the other, but also from the opportunists. Indeed, opportunism of different shades generally showed a marked tendency to choose sides in this reactionary war.

Thus, social-democracy in the imperialist countries openly took the side of British imperialism and colonialism. (For exposure of the treacherous role of British social-democracy in this war, see The Workers' Advocate of May 24 and June 5.) Meanwhile, the Maoists, pro-Soviet revisionists and trotskyites generally came forward urging the workers and progressive people to line up behind the Argentine fascists. They embellished the generals' phony claims of waging an "anti-colonial" and "anti-imperialist" war, painting this bloodstained regime, which is heavily dependent on imperialism, in flaming liberation colors. This stand is nothing but treachery against the struggle of the Argentine workers; it means sacrificing the Argentine workers at the altar of the fascist executioners. No matter how much such a stand is cloaked behind a mask of "anti-imperialism," in reality, support for the Argentine regime is support for a linchpin of imperialism and reaction.

In the next several sections, we examine how the different opportunist trends come to the defense of the Argentine fascists. We begin with the Maoist "three worlders."

The Maoist "Three Worlds" Theory in Service to the Fascist Generals

Not surprisingly, when it comes to painting the Argentine fascists in liberation colors, no one else can come close to matching the Maoist "three worlders." After all, it was Mao Zedong and the Chinese revisionists who elaborated the notorious theory of "three worlds" which is precisely tailored for prettifying the worst butcher regimes of the oppressed countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Let us briefly recall how this is done.

One of the fundamental tenets of the theory of "three worlds" is opposition to the revolutionary struggle of the masses in the dependent and neo-colonial countries. It replaces the revolution as the basic force against imperialism and for social progress with the idea that it is the "third world" governments which are "the main force moving world history forward." This idea is completely anti-Marxist and cries out in the face of reality.

First, it blurs the internal class contradictions in these countries by refusing to distinguish between the masses and the regimes. But the fact of the matter is that in these countries it is not the toiling masses who are in power, but the domestic bourgeoisie, either directly or sometimes in alliance with feudalists. In the overwhelming majority of these countries, the class contradictions have long begun to express themselves and the solution of the problem of foreign imperialist domination is closely linked to the solution of various internal democratic and social questions. The revolution is essential to solve the numerous problems faced by the masses in these countries. But because these countries are in various stages of social, economic and political development, the character of the revolution is not the same everywhere. In many of them, it is the anti-imperialist democratic revolution which is on the order of the day, while in others which are relatively more developed, the democratic and socialist revolutionary tasks are closely intertwined. And in some of them, it is the socialist revolution itself which is on the agenda and which solves the remaining democratic and anti-imperialist questions. The Maoist "three worlders" not only wipe out the democratic revolution but they universally negate any perspective of the socialist revolution whatsoever.

Second, the "three worlds" theory refuses to make any differentiation between the governments of the dependent and neo-colonial countries. While it is true that the working class and peasantry are the backbone of the anti-imperialist struggle in these countries, the Marxist-Leninists nevertheless do not tar all the regimes of these countries with the same brush. Some of these governments are nothing but outright puppet regimes, made up of altogether collaborationist cliques, which are simply creatures of imperialism. They are backed up by the military and economic support of imperialism. Examples of such regimes include the present-day fascist regime in El Salvador, the South Korean puppets, and so forth. Then there are different kinds of bourgeois national governments which are tied to varying degrees with foreign imperialism. It differs considerably from country to country as to what extent these regimes are aligned with foreign imperialism and to what degree the masses have various democratic rights. They range from avowedly pro-imperialist governments to others which take a reformist attitude towards the imperialists. Some of these reformist regimes have come to power through armed struggle, but the more thorough victory of the revolution gives rise to either revolutionary democratic or socialist regimes. The revolutionary democratic regimes have a great liberating significance. But even here, unless the proletariat in alliance with the other toiling masses, establishes its hegemony and embarks on the road to socialism, these governments will sooner or later fall into dependence on imperialism and become bourgeois national regimes. Only a socialist government can do away with imperialist domination altogether. Today, because of revisionist betrayal, in the world there is only one such country, the People's Socialist Republic of Albania.

Far from making any differentiation between these various types of regimes, the Maoist "three worlders" go so far as to prettify the worst among them -- either the outright puppet governments or the most reactionary of the bourgeois national regimes -- as allegedly great fighters against imperialism. Thus, over the years, "three worlds- ism" has guided the Chinese revisionists and their followers to prettify and support such utterly reactionary governments as the Shah of Iran, the brutal military dictatorship of Pakistan, the CIA-installed Mobutu regime in the Congo- Kinshasa (Zaire), the Pinochet regime in Chile, and so on. Far from having anything to do with anti-imperialism, support for such linchpins of imperialism is complete betrayal of the struggle against imperialism.

It is this phenomenon we see again with respect to Argentina. Today in the U.S., the Maoist "Communist Workers Party" provides an excellent example of the application of the "three worlds" theory to the Argentine government. The CWP does not recognize the revolution as the force against imperialism in Latin America. Instead they speculate on the dependent regimes themselves breaking off from imperialism.

For example, in praising the Argentine regime, the CWP writes: "While Britain may succeed in capturing the Falklands, this will not solve Britain's -- or imperialism's -- problem of keeping third world countries in line. In fact, the result is just the opposite; Argentina's anti-British, anti-U.S. back has stiffened while western imperialism shows more signs of entanglement. Argentina will be lost to the U.S. imperialists, while much of the third world may follow." (Workers Viewpoint, May 12 - May 18, 1982, p. 2) Far from being lost to U.S. imperialism, the Argentine generals, having lost the war, have once again sworn their loyalty to Washington.

Now, if there is any doubt that the CWP is here talking of the Argentine regime and not the people, that is easily dispelled by the following remark in which they appear mesmerized by the vision of all the Latin American governments freeing themselves from imperialism. They write: "But once they supported Britain, the imperialists faced a new host of problems: retaliation by the third world. Latin America is in the U.S.' backyard and has always been considered by U.S. imperialism to be its exclusive domain.... Argentina used to be the most pro-U.S. government in Latin America, but now circumstances are forcing her to pull away. The Latin American countries are learning they cannot trust imperialism. After years of backing the U.S., they are abandoned -- these countries feel used," (Workers Viewpoint, June 3-June 9,1982, p. 2)

It is completely ridiculous to suggest that the regimes of the reactionary oligarchies of Latin America can break free of imperialism. The CWP totally abandons the revolution. In their,eyes, there is no popular movement in these countries, no issue of building the forces of the proletariat and other toilers. Everything is staked on the regimes.

After blurring the distinction between the masses and reaction, the CWP tries to cover up its support for the fascist junta with the most outrageous platitudes. Listen to the way they deal with the hesitation that people have in supporting the junta. Workers Viewpoint writes: "There is some confusion over this issue, because the Argentine junta is an anti-semitic fascist junta. Some people think that by supporting Argentina's claim to the Falklands against the British, they are supporting fascism. This leads them to some vague middle position or outright support for the British. This betrays lack of faith in the masses and an ignorance of the law that the people make history." (May 27 - June 2,1982, p. 10)

What an incredible argument! Of course, the people make history, but it is precisely so that the masses can carry out their historic revolutionary tasks that the Marxist-Leninists continually keep to the forefront the distinction between the revolution and reaction, between the exploited and the exploiters. To blur that distinction and call for supporting reaction, and then turn around and say, "what's the worry, don't the people make history?" is the lowest form of double talk and trickery. In fact, in carrying out their deception of the masses, the CWP has no qualms in concocting the most outrageous lies. Thus, when everyone knows that the junta initiated the Falklands seizure to divert the masses from the anti-junta struggle, the CWP makes the fantastic claim that: "The Argentine masses forced the junta to seize the Falklands, and it is the masses who have fought the hardest to keep them and keep their government from backing down." (Ibid.) This, then, is what the CWP's conception of "the people make history" turns out to be!

In looking at the arguments being offered today by the opportunists in support of the Argentine fascist regime, one is immediately struck by the similarity with the views that justified support for the fascist Shah of Iran during the 70's. As we shall see, then as now, there are two basic variations of the stand of supporting a bulwark of imperialist reaction in the "third world" in the name of "anti-imperialism."

On one hand, there were the "three worlders" like the Chinese leadership and the, October League in the U.S. (later the "Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist)") who openly negated the internal struggle inside Iran and promoted the Shah as the basic force against imperialism. A similar position is today being taken by the CWP and others, some of whom do not even mention the fact that Argentina is ruled by a savage military dictatorship!

On the other hand, there were "three worlders" like the "Revolutionary Communist Party" who made a facade of criticizing the October League's support for the Shah, but nevertheless still took the position that the Shah deserved the support of the international proletariat because he did fight imperialism to a certain extent (i.e., the Iranian royal family got a higher price for the Iranian people's oil). At that time, the RCP wrote: "But for the U.S. proletariat to support, for instance, the Shah of Iran to the extent that, as a member of OPEC, Iran struggles against imperialist plunder, does not mean putting such support above support for the revolutionary struggles of the Iranian people to defeat imperialism and overthrow the Shah." (Revolution, July 1977, p. 18, col. 2) The RCP's position was that you overthrow the Shah and support him simultaneously. Today, although the RCP has avoided coming to the defense of the Argentine junta, they still remain supporters of the "three worlds" theory. But there are those like the trotskyite Workers World Party which argue with respect to the Argentine generals like the RCP did for the Shah. This position remains as untenable as ever. In fact the WWP ends up showing that its talk of support for the overthrow of the regime is simply so much hot air.

We shall see in the next several sections that these "three worldist"-type views are not just a monopoly of the Maoists but can be seen among the followers of Soviet revisionism and Trotskyism as well.

Soviet Revisionism -- Long-Standing Apologists for Neo-Colonialism

The Soviet revisionists and their followers worldwide, including the "Communist" Party of the USA, have also come forward to support the Argentine regime. This is not surprising because they are long-standing apologists and defenders of the imperialist domination of the dependent countries. Indeed, with the overthrow of socialism in the Soviet Union in the 1950's, the Khrushchovites developed elaborate theories to justify abandoning the revolutionary liberation struggles and to prettify neo-colonialism. These theories generally denied the replacement of old-style colonialism with neo-colonialism and painted the neo-colonial and dependent countries as "free" and "independent" countries where the revolution was no longer on the agenda but replaced by the tasks of achieving "economic development" through various reforms. These theories are closely related to the Chinese revisionist "three worlds" theory and still guide the Soviet revisionists in their attitude towards the oppressed countries. Moreover, these theories of embellishing the dependent and neo-colonial regimes have also proved to be useful to the Soviet Union in its social-imperialist penetration of various countries by allowing it to cozy up to the ruling cliques.

The "Communist" Party of the USA wrote in support of the Argentine junta, "However, the turn of events in this crisis is making the Argentinian military emerge as staunch defenders of Latin American sovereignty and self-determination, a posture which is bringing warm support from developing and non-aligned nations. This will surely enhance the prestige of the military in Argentina, as long as it can keep an independent course from Washington and accepts its responsibility to solve crucial economic problems and return the country to democratic rule." (Daily World, May 29,1982, p. 7)

This position typifies the "C"PUSA's lack of any revolutionary perspective whatsoever. Not only do they prettify the Argentine military as a force for sovereignty and self- determination but they even offer further advice on how to enhance the prestige of this fascist force! Moreover, the furthest that the "C"PUSA can see is a spineless reformist perspective for the future of Argentina. Clearly showing that they have no support for the people's struggle to overthrow the junta, the "C"PUSA merely calls on this regime of hangmen to "return the country to democratic rule" and "solve crucial economic problems."

Meanwhile, the Cuban revisionist party, along with other revisionist parties in Latin America, went wild in its applause for the generals and the support they were getting from the other reactionary governments of Latin America. Thus, on May 1, Cuba released a communique stating: "Cuba reiterates its solidarity with the Argentine people who are fighting for their sovereignty.... The countries of Latin America have the duty to support Argentina with all means necessary. Cuba is ready, together with the people of Latin America, to fulfill this duty."

This is a striking exposure of the Castro regime's "internationalism." Reportedly, it even included the offer of military aid. (Militant, May 21, 1982, p. 3) This of course is right up Castro's alley, to offer military support to fascist regimes, as he has done in Ethiopia, etc.

Meanwhile, the Soviet propaganda organs also championed the cause of the Argentine generals. Like the other opportunists, they too lauded the "mounting demonstration of political unity on the part of the Latin American countries." In this regard, Moscow even singled out for special praise the stand of such fascist dictatorships as those of Bolivia and Brazil.

The Soviet revisionists' support for Argentina is of course dictated by their own social-imperialist motives. Their support for the junta's war is not surprising at all, considering the fact that Moscow has cultivated warm relations with the regime since the generals seized power in 1976. The Soviet revisionists refuse to utter even a single word of condemnation of this ruthless government. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union has become Argentina's principal trading partner, buying grain and beef to deal with the deficiencies caused by its own severe agricultural crisis.

The support for the Argentine fascists by the followers of Soviet revisionism exposes the emptiness and hypocritical nature of the big noise they make about the fascist terror of the Pinochet regime in Chile. The tears they shed about Pinochet must no doubt look pretty false to those suffering under the boots of the generals in neighboring Argentina.

The Trotskyites Reveal Their Ugly Rightist Essence Once Again

The "three worlders" and others often justify their shameless stands in support of "third world" reaction on the pretext of allegedly avoiding falling into Trotskyism. They equate Trotskyism with "leftism," with raising the class questions above the anti-imperialist struggle, and so forth. But the fact is, the "three worlders," the pro-Soviet revisionists, etc., are hand in hand with the trotskyites on the question of cheering on the Argentine generals.

To be sure, the trotskyites are masters in "left" phrasemongering against progressive national liberation struggles. And there are some trotskyite sects which revel in this activity. But trotskyite opposition to the national liberation struggle also includes tailing behind all sorts of reactionaries covering themselves with nationalist phraseology. Indeed, a number of trotskyite groups have become infamous for being public relations outfits for such bloodthirsty despotic regimes as the Khomeini-IRP regime in Iran, the fascist Mengistu regime in Ethiopia, etc. This shows the affinity between "three worldist" ideology and contemporary Trotskyism.

Let us begin with the Socialist Workers Party, one of the chief standard-bearers of Trotskyism in the U.S. This group has taken the most active stand in pushing support for the Argentine regime among the workers and progressive people in the U.S.

The SWP's basic argument is that the issue in this war is a conflict between a big imperialist country and an oppressed country. So one must support the latter. Hang everything else. Thus the Militant argues: "But the regime's motives and intentions are not at issue. A conflict is underway between imperialism and a country oppressed by imperialism. In this conflict the workers have a decisive interest." (April 30,1982, p. 4) Elsewhere they go on to say that not just the motives and intentions of the regime but even its class character must be altogether ignored.

But by closing their eyes to the character of the regime, the SWP absolutely refuses to distinguish between the hangman of the revolution and the popular movement in Argentina. They argue just like the "three worlders" and paint the actions of the fascist regime in liberation colors.

In such a war, where both sides are reactionary, unless there is a revolution the working class loses no matter which side wins. But incredibly enough, in glorifying the war the SWP argues that it is precisely a victory for the junta which would put the "working people...in a better position to carry forward the fight against the military dictatorship and imperialism." (Ibid.) This is nonsense. The junta launched its war in the first place to strengthen its hand against the masses.

But the SWP did not just limit itself to taking sides in this conflict. They went much further and lavished all sorts of praise on the fascist butchers. They were especially enthralled by the presence of the Argentine foreign minister, Costa Mendez, at the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Nations in Havana in early June, and also by Fidel Castro's warm embraces for the Argentine junta.

Swept away by the posturing of the Argentine fascists, the Militant wrote, "Costa Mendez made a stirring appeal to the anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist struggles that are the common cause of the peoples of the non-aligned countries." (June 18, 1982, p. 2) They even praised some words he threw in about support for the Palestinian people. What rot! All that Costa Mendez' fancy words showed was that he is a crafty politician who can mouth "anti-imperialist" rhetoric just like certain other reactionary bigwigs of the non- aligned movement, like the butcher Idi Amin of Uganda, used to do. As to how much his words are worth, it is useful to recall that prior to the Falklands crisis the Argentine junta was planning to leave the non-aligned movement on the grounds that its members were not "of the white race, Western, or Christian." And, for example, no matter what Costa Mendez said in Havana, the junta's real stand on Israeli zionism can be amply judged from the perfectly amiable relations the two regimes have with one another. Israel is a big supplier of weapons for the Argentine generals and this pipeline remained in operation even during the recent war.

If the SWP took first place in lining up behind the Argentine generals, the trotskyite Workers World Party tried very hard for second place. However, they also tried to cover their tracks a little bit.

Thus, in the early days of the confrontation between Britain and Argentina, Workers World ran prominent lead articles in support of the cause of the generals, while in the inside pages it carried long-winded pseudo-theorizing from its chairman, Sam Marcy, who tried to show how one could sit on two stools at the same time. In a three-part series under the pretentious title, "Argentina: Strategy and tactics in the new phase of anti-imperialist struggle," Marcy tried to show how one could simultaneously support both the junta's fight against the British troops and the people's struggle against the junta.

From these articles the less than careful reader might get the impression that Marcy was advocating that the Argentine workers refuse to support the generals and concentrate their struggle against them. Thus, for example, in arguing that the workers use the war crisis in a revolutionary way, Marcy observes, "The recovery of the Malvinas may be in the interests of sovereignty and territorial integrity, but it fades into utter insignificance when measured against the historically urgent and imperative needs of the masses to overthrow the fascist regime." (Workers World, April 9, 1982, p. 7) Elsewhere, he even appears to denounce social-chauvinism in Argentina. He writes, "let those who are willing to abandon the struggle against the fascist junta jump on the camarilla's bandwagon in the name of defense of the homeland. In reality they will merely be defending the usurping junta's continuation of domination and suppression of the masses." (Workers World, April 16,1982, p. 9)

But wait, what is Marcy's final conclusion? He declares, "The tactics of the proletariat must be to employ revolutionary defensism in the struggle against imperialist aggression and revolutionary defeatism in the struggle against the junta." (Ibid.) Revolutionary defensism means supporting the war against the British forces, while revolutionary defeatism means opposing the war to the end. It appears that Marcy wants to simultaneously support and oppose the junta's war. This position is strikingly reminiscent of the RCP's stand on the Shah of Iran. Marcy thus ends up slapping himself in the face about his earlier statements on the secondary significance of the Malvinas question. He seeks to sit on two stools at once while preparing to kick one away so that he can firmly position himself on the other.

Indeed, no sooner had full-scale hostilities broken out than the WWP placed itself unequivocally behind the regime. Of course, now the anti-junta struggle had to be jettisoned. Hence, Marcy denounced any opposition to the junta on the grounds that "The struggle against the fascist junta is a matter for the working class and peasants in Argentina." (Workers World, May 7,1982, p. 11) Of course, it is the workers and other toilers of Argentina who must settle accounts with the junta, but the real purpose of Marcy's lecturing is to preach to the workers around the world that the internal struggle in Argentina was none of their concern and instead they should simply back the generals.

Meanwhile, Marcy too proceeded to lavish heavy praise on the support the regime was receiving from other governments. He bombastically declared, "...the aggression against Argentina has enormously strengthened genuine anti-imperialist resistance not only in Argentina but in Latin America as a whole. Witness the OAS vote." (Ibid.) True, he adds a qualifier that this vote came from regimes which are mostly "U.S. and British clients"; nevertheless it did not phase him in the least to provide this vote as an example of "genuine anti-imperialist resistance" in Latin America. Just like the Maoists and pro-Soviet revisionists, Marcy has forgotten the distinction between revolution and reaction in Argentina as well as the rest of Latin America. It is the height of shamelessness to prettify the reactionary regimes of Latin America as having anything to do with anti-imperialism.

Why, Marcy is so mesmerized by the support for the Argentine regime from the various bourgeois regimes and the revisionist countries, like the Soviet Union, China and Cuba, that he proclaims: "...what is emerging is a virtual united front of all the oppressed peoples and the socialist countries against what at least initially seemed to be a united front of all the imperialist powers." (Ibid.) My, my, what a creative imagination! But it is typical of Marcy and the WWP to see the harbingers of all sorts of wonderful things in the conflict and squabbles among the imperialists, revisionists and bourgeois cliques. Why, in the same article, Marcy even finds the European Common Market vote for sanctions against Argentina to be no less than "an attempt at European sovereignty and, even more, an expression against U.S. domination." This conclusion was drawn simply from the fact that this was a stand contrary to the U.S. government's official stand of "neutrality" at that time. This may seen fanciful considering that the U.S. bourgeoisie was really supporting Britain. But it is no more fanciful than seeing the Argentine and other fascist dictatorships in Latin America as the new anti-imperialist warriors.

With a few exceptions, the other avowed trotskyite groups also lined up behind the Argentine generals. This shows the affinity between contemporary Trotskyism and "three worlds-ism." As well, such positions are based on tailoring their stands to the policy of the revisionist countries which they prettify as socialist. Today, when the Soviet Union is no longer a socialist country, the trotskyites have stopped attacking it and instead work as little helpers of the revisionist bourgeoisie. This is why the SWP is so love- struck by Castro's embrace of the Argentine hangmen. After all, they have declared the Cuban revisionists to be a vital part of the new, "objectively trotskyist" international that is allegedly coming into being. And this is also why Sam Marcy wildly speculates about a "united front of the oppressed peoples and socialist countries" by which he means the revisionist countries and repressive governments in the oppressed countries.

The raucous chorus of opportunist voices cheering on the Argentine fascist regime underscores the need to fight opportunism to the end. This experience shows that imperialism not only enslaves the masses of the dependent countries but also sets into motion the opportunists to apologize for the dependent and reactionary ruling cliques of these countries. The fight against the imperialist enslavement of the oppressed peoples requires carrying forward the struggle against revisionism and opportunism. It calls for extending our support and solidarity to the popular and revolutionary struggles of the toiling masses, instead of volunteering our services as advisers to the reactionary regimes.

[Cartoon.]

[Back to Top]

What does Leninism teach us about the Falklands War?

On the question of the war over the Falkland/Malvinas Islands, the opportunists abandoned the interests of the proletarian revolution and allied themselves with the British or Argentine bourgeoisie. This was a flagrant betrayal of the long-established teachings of Marxism-Leninism on the attitude of socialism towards war, teachings which remain the only reliable compass for determining a revolutionary policy towards war. Hence, it is instructive to review the essentials of what Lenin taught about determining a revolutionary stand towards such a war as was recently waged in the South Atlantic.

Socialism fights against militarism and opposes the bourgeoisie setting the workers to slaughter one another. It recognizes that the source of war is in the exploitation of man by man, in capitalism and imperialism. Hence it believes that only the elimination of exploitation and the victory of socialism on a world scale can bring a final end to war and a just and lasting peace. Recognizing that the overthrow of capitalism and imperialism are impossible without force, the Marxist-Leninists therefore distinguish between liberating wars that bring the world closer to socialism and reactionary wars that cause senseless mayhem or strengthen the rule of the exploiters. Thus socialism recognizes such wars as proletarian civil wars against the bourgeoisie and national revolutionary wars of the oppressed peoples against imperialism as just and revolutionary while it condemns unjust wars like wars of imperialism against the oppressed peoples or wars among the imperialists and capitalists for reactionary aims.

Therefore Marxism-Leninism recognizes the need for a historical study of each war. It demands that each war be judged, not simply from the declarations of the combatant powers, but according to the politics that preceded the war, taking into consideration the class character of the forces involved, their motives in the war and so forth. Showing how to distinguish between reactionary imperialist wars and wars of national liberation, which are one form of liberating war, Lenin wrote:

"How, then, can we disclose and define the 'substance' of a war? War is the continuation of policy. Consequently, we must examine the policy pursued prior to the war, the policy that led to and brought about the war. If it was an imperialist policy, i. e., one designed to safeguard the interests of finance capital and rob and oppress colonies and foreign countries, then the war stemming from that policy is imperialist. If it was a national liberation policy, i.e., one expressive of the mass movement against national oppression, then the war stemming from that policy is a war of national liberation.

"The philistine does not realize that war is 'the continuation of policy,' and consequently limits himself to the formula that 'the enemy has attacked us, ''the enemy has invaded my country,' without stopping to think what issues are at stake in the war, which classes are waging it, and with what political objects." (Lenin, "A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism," Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 33, emphasis as in the original.)

Applying this idea to the Falklands war, the fundamental question a revolutionary must ask is -- what politics was this war a continuation of?

Undoubtedly, the politics of British imperialism towards the Falklands and Argentina are imperialist politics. The occupation of the islands, thousands of miles from Britain's shores, is nothing but a colonial occupation. Moreover, British imperialism's appetite for waging this war over the Falklands was whetted by the smell of oil, which was recently discovered between the islands and the Argentine mainland.

The British bourgeoisie painted this robbers' war as allegedly being a war of democracy versus fascism. This was just lying propaganda to hoodwink the masses. The British bourgeoisie is not an upholder of democracy but a bastion of imperialist reaction. Just look at its brutal terrorist occupation of Northern Ireland. Besides, where was their dislike for the Argentine fascists before this recent conflict arose? Then they were busy arming and financing them, just as they do numerous other bloodstained regimes. After all, the Argentine generals, being loyal defenders of imperialism, have faithfully defended the British bourgeoisie's substantial economic interests in Argentina, and they continue to do so today.

But just because the war on Britain's part is colonial aggression, it does not therefore follow that the Buenos Aires regime was waging an anti-colonial liberation war. A revolutionary must look at the historical background over the last several decades and see which are the forces for liberation and freedom in Argentina and where the regime in power has stood in relation to those forces. One must consider the policies pursued by all the classes prior to the war and see which policy is being continued in this war.

In Argentina there is a struggle against the country's dependence on foreign imperialism. But what is the character of that struggle? The fact of the matter is that for decades upon decades, that struggle has been expressed through the struggle of the toiling masses against the regime in Argentina. The country is ruled by its own capitalist oligarchy of industrialists and landowners and is fairly developed capitalistically. The proletariat is the most numerous section of the working population. As well, almost twice as many people work in manufacturing than in agriculture. Under such conditions, the proletarian revolution is on the agenda. The struggle against foreign imperialism and against the military dictatorship is closely bound up with the struggle for socialism.

Yes, it is true that the Falkland/Malvinas Islands rightfully belong to Argentina, but this is a secondary issue in the Argentine people's struggle against imperialism. Among other things, these islands are a tiny part of Argentina's territory and do not even have an Argentine population. The colonial occupation of the Malvinas is not the cause of Argentina's dependency on imperialism.

While the proletariat and other toilers are the backbone of the fight against imperialism, the Argentine ruling bourgeoisie has no role in freeing the country from the yoke of foreign imperialism. For a long time, it has faithfully collaborated in the plunder of the country by the big imperialist powers, such as the U.S., Britain and Germany. It has been an active participant in the imperialist offensive against the Latin American revolution, whether in the form of ruthlessly suppressing Argentina's internal progressive opposition, or organizing coups and putsches all over the continent, or arming counter-revolution in Central America.

It is to be noted that while the Argentine oligarchy's continent-wide counter-revolutionary activity is coordinated with the general imperialist offensive against the revolution, it also involves its own strivings to enslave other peoples. The Argentine bourgeoisie's political and economic tentacles have long extended beyond its borders; it has often proclaimed its dreams of becoming the dominant power in the continent.

The Falklands war is not the first time that the Argentine bourgeoisie has wrapped itself in the mantle of a mock "anti-imperialist" nationalism. Indeed, chauvinism has been used for some time to divert the class struggle inside the country. In particular, Peronist ideology, in which reactionary nationalism is an important component, has been a special spearhead against the struggle of the toiling masses.

It is this historical background which set the stage for the recent events in the South Atlantic. The regime, fresh from the slaughter of tens of thousands of revolutionaries and progressives over the last period, was being confronted with a rising wave of popular struggle demanding its overthrow. Only three days prior to the seizure of the Falklands, Buenos Aires was the scene of a militant anti-fascist demonstration which the fascist junta ruthlessly suppressed. The government was caught in a grave political and economic crisis and, unless something was done, it could not continue ruling in the same form as before. The generals therefore sought to divert the popular struggle into a campaign of "national unity" against the foreign enemy. Hence the order to seize the islands. And it was mainly because of the nationalism of the Peronist leaders of the political and trade union opposition that the struggle against the regime was called off in the name of uniting to "defend the fatherland." The temporary success of such a campaign does not however manage to turn the adventure of the generals into a popular struggle against imperialism.

Thus the war of the Argentine government too was reactionary in its aims. It was a war to preserve the rule of the oligarchy in the form of the present fascist regime. Lenin's teachings on what stand the workers should take towards such a war are quite clear. He wrote:

"If war is waged by the exploiting class the object of strengthening its rule as a class, such a war is a criminal war and 'defensism' in such a war is a base betrayal of socialism." (Lenin, "'Left-Wing' Childishness and the Petty-Bourgeois Mentality,"Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 332, emphasis as in the original.)

To sum up, it is precisely to defend the struggle for the liberation of the Argentine people that we must oppose the fascist junta. It is necessary to distinguish between a genuine popular struggle against imperialism and some reactionary adventure of the generals which is couched in "anti-imperialist" rhetoric. Lenin shed light on this matter when he said:

"All national oppression calls forth the resistance of the broad masses of the people; and the resistance of a nationally oppressed population always tends to national revolt. Not infrequently (notably in Austria and Russia) we find the bourgeoisie of the oppressed nations talking of national revolt, while in practice it enters into reactionary compacts with the bourgeoisie of the oppressor nation behind the backs of and against, its own people. In such cases the criticism of the revolutionary Marxists should be directed not against the national movement, but against its degradation, vulgarization, against the tendency to reduce it to a petty squabble. Incidentally, very many Austrian and Russian Social-Democrats overlook this and in their legitimate hatred of the petty, vulgar and sordid national squabbles -- disputes and scuffles over the question, for instance, of which language shall have precedence in two-language street signs -- refuse to support the national struggle. We shall not 'support ' a republican farce in, say, the principality of Monaco, or the 'republican' adventurism of 'generals' in the small states of South America or some Pacific island. But that does not mean that it would be permissibleto abandon the republican slogan for serious democratic and socialist movements. We should, and do, ridicule the sordid national squabbles and haggling in Russia and Austria. But that does not mean that it would be permissible to deny support to a national uprising or a serious popular struggle against national oppression." (Lenin, "A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism," Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 61, emphasis as in the original.)

The Argentine bourgeoisie has long entered into a compact with foreign imperialism. Its adventure in the Falklands was meant to preserve the military junta, which is the representative of domestic reaction as well as the executor of imperialist plunder and domination. Hence, the most important thing for imperialism, no matter what the outcome of the war, was to preserve the regime. Therefore the junta's war over the islands could not be supported by the revolutionaries. After all, if the issue of the Malvinas justifies this war, then any reactionary war over territory can be justified, such as the innumerable invasions and counter-invasions that go on in Latin America and elsewhere.

The disclosure of the reactionary aims of both sides in the Falklands war shows that the only revolutionary stand is to denounce both sides. And in the U.S., a country whose rulers were the main backers of the British imperialists in the war, there is as well the special task of denouncing our "own" imperialists' criminal involvement. Our support cannot go towards either of the belligerent sides, but to the proletariat and other toilers and the courageous internationalist elements of both countries who do not get swept up by nationalism but who, despite the wartime difficulties, do their best to enlighten the masses and direct the struggle against their "own" bourgeois regimes. This is the stand of our Party.

Only such a stand is truly internationalist. It gives support to the real interests of the workers of both Britain and Argentina. It is dictated by the interests of the revolutionary struggle worldwide.

[Back to Top]

Communist Party (Reconstructed) of Portugal:

An Unjust War

The following article is reprinted from Bandeira Vermelha, Central Organ of the Communist Party (Reconstructed) of Portugal, May 20, 1982. Translation by The Workers' Advocate staff.)

The latest scribbler writing in O Diario [newspaper of the revisionist "Communist" Party of Portugal -- ed.] of May 12, justified the support of the USSR for the Argentine dictatorship in an editorial, saying: "In the presence of British aggression, neutrality is not compatible with the principles which we believe in and fight for."

According to the principles of Marxism-Leninism (we will assume that they are speaking of these principles), the proletariat is not neutral in any war or confrontation between nations. However, it must distinguish between unjust wars and just wars. Just wars are those that directly involve the interests of the proletariat or that in some way or other would signify a development or an advance for the cause of the proletariat and the people in their struggle against exploitation and imperialist oppression. Unjust wars are those which involve two or more bandits fighting for narrow interests and for interests opposed to progress, peace, and socialism. In the first case, we have the example of the Viet Nam war. In the second case, the First World War.

Bandits in Confrontation

The armed confrontation around the Malvinas is not unimportant for the proletariat, but it is not a just war. It puts two bandits face to face: English colonialism and the Argentine military dictators. One is resolved to safeguard its interests of a great power in the region, to affirm the inviolability of the areas directly controlled by imperialism and NATO. The other is interested in turning the attention of the Argentine people away from what is happening in their own country, that is to say, away from starvation, poverty, unemployment, and crimes against the basic freedoms. In short, it is resolved to maintain itself in its already unstable power for a while longer.

Lackeys of Imperialism

Further on, the scribbler asserts: "the dictatorship of General Leopoldo Galtieri is odious. But criticism of this liberty-destroying system which oppresses the great Republic of Silver [Argentina -- ed.] does not imply generalized condemnation of the Argentine military." And he adds: "The Argentine Armed Forces are becoming popular and drawing closer to the people during the just struggle against British aggression."

So here we have the old fable of the good military men and the bad military men. The dictatorship of Galtieri is "odious," but this does not prevent the USSR from signing very lucrative pacts of economic cooperation. For example, there is the case of uranium. Nevertheless, there are good military men. Which ones? No one knows. The scribbler knows (the revisionists always know everything that others do not know...). Moreover, he knows that the Argentine armed forces (which ones, the good or the bad?) will adhere to democracy after they have completely set up this ruse of chauvinistic demagogy in order to delude the people and sustain the regime. Oh misery of miseries.

In the factories (since the scribbler writes for the workers) it is necessary to raise the question: what principles are those that wipe the slate clean of the popular struggle against the fascist Argentine regime and discover democratic military men in a haven of fascists, all of them compromised with imperialism? Aren't these the same principles which have led the USSR to recruit the pro-Russian armed forces in Afghanistan and Ethioipia, eliminating the pro-Americans in order to afterwards declare the so-called revolution? This is very revealing for the workers who ask about revisionism -- they look at the USSR hand in hand with the Argentine fascist military men, the same ones who do not hide their hands which are stained with the blood of the communists and democrats assassinated in recent years. The workers behold how the revisionists pigeonhole their principles when contending for spheres of influence with their American rival. That is revisionism.

[Back to Top]

Enver Hoxha's new book sheds light on recent revelations in the bourgeois press

U.S. Government Organized Nazi Collaborators to Attack People's Albania

The bourgeois press in the U.S. has recently run a series of exposures about how the U.S. government brought nazi collaborators into the U.S. after World War II and integrated them into the U.S. intelligence apparatus for special missions and terrorist activities against the victors of the anti-fascist war. In May the TV news program "60 Minutes" did an expose on how the American intelligence agencies smuggled Byelorussion nazi collaborators into the U.S. and then used them for agitation and terrorist missions against Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. On June 20, the New York Times ran a similar story about fascist collaborators in Albania and how these traitors had been brought to the U.S. after the war in order to use them to undermine and overthrow the anti-fascist people's government established in Albania. These rather belated revelations corroborate what the Albanian people and their socialist government have been saying and documenting for years -- that the self-styled "democratic" governments of Britain and the United States have been shielding fascist war criminals and uniting with them in evil acts against the Albanian people.

Extensive information about the role of U.S. and British imperialism in propping up the Albanian reactionaries is given in Comrade Enver Hoxha's new book The Anglo-American Threat to Albania. This book, the latest in a series of memoirs by Enver Hoxha, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Party of Labor of Albania, deals with the period of the National Liberation War of the Albanian people during World War II. Comrade Enver was General Secretary of the Party and Commander-in-Chief of the National Liberation Army during the war. Enver shows that the U.S. and British imperialists not only tried to organize the Albanian fascists after the war, but also tried to work with them during World War II as well. Anglo-American agents contacted the main groups of nazi collaborators in Albania and encouraged them to oppose the popular forces led by the National Liberation Front. Enver's book also shows why the plots of the U.S. and British imperialists failed and how a vigilant people is invincible, subjects the bourgeois press stays as far away from as possible.

Enver's book begins by briefly outlining some history of Albania and the historical setting for World War II. It points out that the British and French bourgeoisie wished to use the nazis as stormtroopers against the then-socialist Soviet Union and to drown the revolution in blood. But this sweet dream of the Allied millionaires came to naught, and Hitler bit the hand that appeased him. Soon British imperialism and then U.S. imperialism were forced by military necessity to conclude an alliance with the Soviet Union and the other progressive peoples facing the fascist Axis.

But this did not mean that the U.S. and British imperialists had become anti-fascist saints. The bulk of Enver's book is a fascinating account of how, right in the middle of the fierce fighting of the Albanian people against the fascist occupiers, the British military mission and the Allied high command stabbed the Albanian people in the back and conspired to restore reaction in Albania. They sought out the worst collaborators with German nazism and Italian fascism and sought to integrate them in the U.S.-British schemes to keep Albania enslaved. Things went so far that General Davies, head of the British military mission, preferred to confer with the collaborationists and later to surrender to the nazis than to stay with the anti-fascist fighters in the liberated zones of Albania; he refused all attempts by the partisans to gain his freedom by exchanging prisoners with the nazis. After the British dragged their feet on giving aid to the partisan fighters and instead flirted with the collaborationists, they then sought to occupy Albania when the nazis were on the verge of defeat by the National Liberation Army. Only the vigilance of the Albanian communists and people frustrated this vile plan for a new military occupation of Albania.

Thus Enver's book shows that only by maintaining a vigilant attitude towards the enslaving plans of the Allied imperialists were the Albanian people able to reap the fruits of their heroic struggle against the fascist Axis. Reading this book, one immediately recalls the tragedies that took place in Greece, in the Philippines and elsewhere where illusions existed concerning the intentions of the Anglo-American imperialists. As well, this book is of great interest to progressive people here, for it exposes the machinations of our "own" bourgeoisie and of the British bourgeoisie, one of our "own" bourgeoisie's closest allies.

Enver's book also provides good material to expose the trotskyite fiends who opposed the anti-fascist struggle in World War II. The trotskyites argued that to fight fascism and the Axis meant to capitulate to the Allied bourgeoisie, and under this pretext they collaborated with the fascists. But Enver's account showed it was quite possible to maintain a firm, principled stand against all imperialism while participating in the great anti-fascist alliance of World War II. History has completely justified this revolutionary Marxist-Leninist stand, for the anti-fascist victory in World War II gave rise to a huge upsurge in revolution all over the world. It was U.S. imperialism, British imperialism and other dregs of humanity who had to scurry around resurrecting the nazis and doing their best to reverse the results of the truly liberating national liberation wars of World War II.

U.S. Imperialism Embraces the Nazi Collaborators

Today a small part of this story of U.S. imperialism's love for the nazi collaborators in Europe is coming out in the bourgeois press. We call these articles and stories "revelations," but actually they are revelations only in the U.S., where the mass media is as strictly controlled by the reactionary bourgeoisie as if a government censor went through every page. These facts, now appearing over three and one-half decades after the fact in the American bourgeois press, were known to progressive people in the U.S. and all over the world since the late 1940's. By presenting a few of these facts, the bourgeois press likes to pose as neutral and objective -- but this same press will, if it has its way, wait another 35 years (if no revolution intervenes) before releasing a little bit of the truth about the terrorist activities, the assassinations, bombings, germ warfare and bribery, that the U.S. intelligence agencies are doing today. But the official press feels that it is safe to admit something of what was done several decades ago.

Nonetheless, there are valuable lessons to be drawn about these revelations from history. They are another example of the well-known American government policy of bringing the most case-hardened fascists and anti-people elements to this country to save them from the wrath of their own people. Recent examples have included the Somoza family of Nicaragua, the Shah of Iran, and the bloodstained generals from South Viet Nam. What is notable about the East European reactionaries dealt with in the recent exposures is that they had collaborated with the fascist governments of Italy and Germany, which were enemies of the U.S. during World War II. Thus these reactionaries were active not just in staining their hands with the blood of their own people, but with collaborating with fascist powers which were waging war on the U.S. and Britain. The fascists were at that time thoroughly hated and exposed by all the world's people, pursued as war criminals, and even prohibited by law from entering the U.S.

Thus, the fact that the U.S. government brought such people to this country and groomed them as trusted and valued agents is quite an exposure of the reactionary character of U.S. imperialism. It shows that the U.S. imperialists pursued their own interests even during the antifascist war and, after the war ended, took the mantle of the nazis onto themselves. It is important to note that these pro-fascist elements did not sneak into the U.S. disguised as ordinary wartime refugees; they were specifically brought in by the government, which issued them special dispensation from the official rules regarding fascist collaborators.

The U.S. government brought scores of such pro-nazi scum to this country right after World War II. The New York Times of June 20 mentions four in particular: Midhat Frasheri, leader of the Balli Kombetar (National Front); Hasan Dosti, minister of justice during the Italian occupation of Albania; Xhafer Deva, minister of the interior during the German-Nazi occupation of Albania; and Abas Kupi, leader of the Legaliteti (the monarchist group favoring the reactionary King Ahmet Zog). The New York Times can find nothing good to say about Xhafer Deva; they admit that he openly collaborated with the Gestapo in massacring the Albanian people. But the New York Times tries to paint the others as "wartime leaders" who "fought the Germans." This is because these reactionaries not only collaborated with the Italian fascists and the German nazis, but also collaborated with the U.S. and British imperialists -- they went whichever way the wind blew and would play ball with any imperialist. So what's a little blood among buddies in the anti-communist crusade of U.S. imperialism anyway?

Enver's book explains the sordid history and role of this ragtag collection of fascist collaborators. He shows that the Balli Kombetar was a reactionary organization from the beginning, whose only purpose was to oppose the genuine National Liberation Councils and the armed anti-fascist struggle. He describes the Balli Kombetar as a basket of crabs, a weird conglomeration of reactionaries whose only point of unity was to oppose the revolutionary-democratic aspirations of the Albanian people. The Balli Kombetar never fired a shot against the German nazis, but instead collaborated with the nazis to oppose the partisans.

Enver also deals extensively with the role of Abas Kupi, who at one time posed as a patriotic Albanian and on that basis was elected to the General Council of the National Liberation Front. Kupi quickly became exposed before the masses, however, as he steadfastly refused to carry out armed actions against the occupiers. Instead of fighting the fascists, Kupi worked to sabotage the national liberation war and prepare the way for the return of King Zog, the hated oppressor of the Albanian people prior to World War II.

The American bourgeois press prefers to sweep these and other unfortunate facts under the rug. Therefore it concentrates instead on how the U.S. organized these fascist sympathizers in the postwar period. The U.S. government set up a so-called "National Committee for a Free Albania" in Washington, DC and made Hasan Dosti, the pro-fascist quisling, president of it. The "democratic" U.S. government also went so far as to give some recognition to Ahmet Zog's son as "King Zog II." At this time the Albanian government was trying to have the quislings and collaborators extradited to Albania to stand trial for war crimes. But the U.S. government shielded the war criminals and used them as intelligence agents, saboteurs, spies and murderers. Throughout the late 1940's and early 1950's these agents were sent into Albania, mainly by parachute, to carry out sabotage and to foment revolts against the Albanian government.

The exact use the U.S. imperialists made of these agents can be seen by examining the American press of the 1940's. In 1948 The U.S. News and World Report cheerfully reported on the notorious Project X. It summed it up in these words:

"Under this plan, strong-arm squads would be formed under American guidance. Assassination of key Communists would be encouraged, American agents, parachuted into Eastern Europe...would be used to co-ordinate anti-Communist action."

And this is the same American bourgeoisie that rants and raves about the "terrorism" of the progressive people and revolutionaries! If Reagan really wanted to fight "international terrorism," he should put himself, the Pentagon and the whole U.S. intelligence outfit on trial for high crimes against humanity.

But let us return to our story about Albania. The plans of the U.S. imperialists were one thing, and the reality was another. The American press is especially upset about the recruitment of fascist sympathizers because it was unsuccessful. Both in Byelorussia and in Albania the parachuted agents were all caught, put on trial, and given a just sentence. Enver describes the "famous radio game" of the Albanian people. He states:

"Blinded by their hostility towards our country, and having no accurate knowledge of the Albanian reality, the imperialists soon found themselves in great difficulties....We forced the captured agents to make radio contact with their espionage centers in Italy and elsewhere, hence to play our game, totally deceiving these centres, which showed themselves to be completely incompetent and short-sighted. Things went so far that they dropped us whatever we dictated to their agents who had fallen into the trap. The bands of the criminals who were dropped in by parachute or infiltrated across the border at our request, came like lambs to the slaughter, while the armaments and other materials which they dropped or brought with them went to our account. In a word, they came and we were waiting for them. We put them on trial and after all their filthy deeds had been exposed, we gave them the punishment they deserved. The espionage centers which sent these bands became alarmed and tried to alter their methods of action against the new Albania and its glorious leadership -- the Party of Labor. But up till now, events have proved that everything they have attempted against us has run into a granite rock and been smashed to smithereens. History has the same fate in store for them in the future, too."

The Revolution and the Communist Party Are the Keys to Victory

The most important part of this story is why the Albanian people had the strength to resist and defeat the plots of U.S. and British imperialism as well as the fascist occupation. It is this part of the story that disappears entirely from the account in the American press. The official press simply displays frustration. The New York Times quotes Michael Burke, a CBS corporate executive and one-time president of the New York Yankees: "...I was asked by the C.I.A. if I would try to create a revolution in Albania. ...Actually, it was to be a clinical case for the United States Government and the question was: Is it possible in peacetime to bring down a Communist Government without overt military intervention? It was a trial case and I worked at it about a year and a half and concluded in the end it was not possible....You couldn't do it with just locals." Of course, it makes perfect sense that a man who could talk with "clinical" detachment about overthrowing the popular governments of other peoples through terror and subversion should have, as his co-workers, fascist war criminals.

But why did these plans fail? The American official press is silent about the real causes. The New York Times closes its eyes and diverts the issues by blaming everything on the supposed doings of the British-Soviet double agent Kim Philby. But the truth is closer to Burke's cry of anguish: "you couldn't do it with just locals." The basic problem for the U.S. and British imperialists was that the "locals" -- the Albanian people -- had been roused in revolution and were marching on the path of their own independent action. They were enthusiastically united around the National Liberation Councils and then the People's Government and around the proletarian political party, the Communist Party of Albania (now called the Party of Labor of Albania). The: Communist Party, founded and consolidated in the flames of the anti-fascist war, taught the Albanian people to differentiate between friends and enemies and how to discern the plots of the concealed enemies.

The Albanian people have had centuries of experience in heroically fighting against oppression and foreign occupiers, but it was only with the founding of the Communist Party that the Albanian people gave rise to a leadership wise enough and strong enough to carry through the revolution 'til victory. This experience of the Albanian people is not some strange special feature of Albania. It is a general feature of the revolutionary movement. It is the aroused working class and people who have the strength to defeat the imperialists and the internal reaction. To mobilize this strength, they must give rise to a proletarian political party, the genuine communist party. This is the path that the American working class too must take. This is why they have founded the Marxist-Leninist Party, USA, the true successor of the proletarian revolutionary party that the CPUS A once was before it was corroded by revisionism into an impotent tail of the Democratic Party. The working class must rally around and strengthen its Marxist-Leninist Party, and stand up in class struggle. And then it will be on the road to defeating the American bourgeoisie, the huge network of police and intelligence agencies, and the deceptive maneuvers of the reactionaries and carrying out a successful socialist revolution.

Enver's book shows the marvels accomplished by the Albanian people during the National Liberation War. He shows how, during the anti-fascist war, the Communist Party of Albania not only led the fight against the fascist occupation troops, but also vigilantly opposed the plots of the Albanian feudalists, the monarcho-fascists, the reactionary bourgeois nationalists and all the internal reaction. The CPA showed that the basis of the national liberation war must be the' oppressed masses themselves -- the workers and peasants and other toiling masses -- as well as progressive elements from other strata. The CPA taught the people to differentiate between word and deed, to differentiate between those who called themselves "patriots" (like Balli Kombetar and Legaliteti) and those who actually fought the fascist occupiers. In this way, the CPA linked the struggle for national liberation with the struggle against the domestic exploiters -- the landowners and reactionary bourgeoisie. As well, the CPA led the people in maintaining a correct stand towards the anti-fascist coalition of World War II, of doing their duty in this great struggle, but maintaining a differentiated stand towards the various allies and staying wary of the plots of the Anglo- American imperialists. Because of this correct policy, the CPA was able to not just arouse the Albanian masses, but to lead them to victory. In the postwar years, the Albanian people upheld this glorious heritage from the National Liberation War. Under the leadership of the CPA and then the Party of Labor of Albania, they continued the revolutionary struggle and, in the face of difficult conditions, constructed a solid socialist state.

It is this story of the strength of a people who have risen up in revolution and of the crucial role played by the genuine communist party and the Marxist-Leninist ideology that the American bourgeois press wants to hide. And it is this story that is related in a lively and moving way in Enver's new book. It is a welcome addition to the literature on the anti-fascist struggle in World War II.

[Photo: A scene from the national liberation war in Albania.]

[Back to Top]

GET ORGANIZED!

The imperialist warmongers cannot be fought be each individual just taking a decision for himself or washing his own hands of the matter. No matter how self-sacrificing such individual actions are, they do not and cannot shake imperialism. What is needed is the mass actions of the workers, youth, students and all oppressed masses. The working and oppressed people must be organized in the course of the mass struggle against imperialism and put upon the powerful path of mass revolutionary struggle.

Now is the time to organize mass actions against the reintroduction of registration and the draft! Draw the masses of youth into the anti-imperialist struggle! Put the issue of imperialism at the center of the agitation against militarism and the draft and rally the working masses against the capitalist imperialists!

In the struggle against militarism and imperialism the revolutionary activists should utilize the burning indignation against the draft and the imperialist war preparations in order to organize the masses. Revolutionary groups should be organized everywhere. Anti-imperialist and Marxist-Leninist literature should be studied and distributed. The Democratic and Republican Parties should be denounced, their political hacks treated with the contempt they deserve! The movement should be oriented onto the path of the independent class politics of the proletariat, onto the path of conscious struggle and of building up the party of revolutionary struggle and socialism, the Marxist-Leninist Party.

The working class must take its rightful place at the center of the anti-imperialist struggle. The anti-imperialist struggle is part of the class struggle. It is the working class that is the only consistently revolutionary class. And it is the masses of the youth of the working class and of the oppressed nationalities, the large majority of whom are also workers, who are being press-ganged as cannon fodder to kill their class brothers for the sake of the profits of the big multinational corporations. The workers must stand up against this crime and reply to it with the class war.

On Registration, Draft Resistance and Struggle in the Military

Today Carter's registration order sets before the anti-imperialist movement the tasks of organizing the mass actions against the reintroduction of the draft and of directing the anti-militarist sentiment onto the path of conscious struggle. But as part of the struggle, the question also arises of whether to register or not. Those revolted by militarism are taking up several different methods of struggle against the registration.

There are some who will refuse to register, or if they register, refuse to be drafted. Given the present post office registration, which is loose and to a certain extent for propaganda with the stricter registration scheduled for next year, this number may well be quite substantial. And many others will wait till the last minute. By resisting the draft and the registration, this section manifests its revulsion for militarism and imperialism and inspires other acts of resistance.

We firmly support those who resist registration or the draft, but we do not issue the general call or slogan to refuse registration or the draft. That is because the idea must not be created that refusal to register, if only enough take part, can stop imperialist war. This has never happened. Instead the draft resistance is a form of struggle whose value is that it draws certain sections of the masses into more conscious forms of struggle and manifests burning indignation against imperialism. The draft resisters cannot simply leave their struggle at just refusing to register or be drafted, but must go on to take part in the mass actions and the organized movement against imperialism. Their courageous stand has value as part of this movement and not as a panacea in itself.

As well, there are those who will register with the intention of fighting against militarism and imperialism from within the armed forces. This section fights against the recruiting campaigns and the draft, but it goes into the army when this is compulsory in order to fight from the inside. This is a daring and courageous stand. At present, this section is quite small. But these activists deserve the utmost support, for the struggle inside the armed forces is ultimately one of the decisive fronts of struggle against imperialist war. And these activists will find their forces multiplied many times by those who come to greater consciousness or resolve to fight imperialism while already in the armed forces or in the clutches of the draft machinery.

Those who will accept being drafted in order to fight from within the armed forces in the meantime take an active part in the anti-imperialist movement outside the armed forces and in the fight against the draft. And only in this way can these activists acquire valuable revolutionary experience needed for the struggle inside the armed forces, a struggle under harsh conditions of fascist military discipline.

Furthermore, there are large masses of working youth who are revolted by the draft and militarism, but who find no alternative to registering. With the draft, the state machine puts its full weight down upon each person individually, one by one, in forcing them into the army. Thus, especially as the registration system becomes more established, this section inevitably comes to constitute a big majority. Our Party stays close to these masses. This section has not avoided struggle by registering, but instead finds itself involved in a fierce and dangerous situation inside the armed forces. It is necessary to help this section to gain consciousness, to organize and to take part in this struggle. Large masses from this section take part in the numerous actions against the draft and in the anti-imperialist movement. In this way they must both fight militarism now and gain experience for the struggle inside the armed forces.

As well, there are those working class youth who have already found themselves ensnared in the present "volunteer" army. The army is not a whole, but is split into parts. There is the fascist, privileged upper ranks, officers and "lifers," and the mass of cannon fodder at the bottom. The majority of the GI's are youth from the working masses and are receptive to the anti-imperialist agitation. The anti-imperialist movement must always pay close attention to any opportunities to influence the mass of downtrodden youth herded into the army to be slaughtered for the profits and glory of the fat billionaires.

The experience of the 1960's and of the anti-imperialist movement against U.S. aggression in Indochina shows that all the different methods of resistance to militarism require courage and determination and all can be utilized to advance the mass struggle. This experience shows that the struggle against the draft is a powerful one that brings out the broad masses of youth a- against imperialism. And it shows that it is both possible and necessary to organize the soldiers themselves against the imperialists. The anti-militarist struggle is a powerful stimulus to the revolutionary movement and to the development of the independent political activity of the working class.

It is necessary to fight every step of the warmongers. This struggle requires determination and sacrifice, and it will be protracted. This fight must be placed onto the correct road and utilized to organize the working masses. It is only the mass revolutionary struggle that can stay the hands of the warmongers from this or that act, and it is only the socialist revolution that will destroy U.S. imperialism once and for all. Step up the mass struggle against the warmongers, manifest utter contempt for the imperialist system, and use the mass anti-imperialist movement to organize the working masses for the revolution!

(Excerpted from The Workers' Advocate, July 21, 1980, Vol. 10, No. 5.)

[Back to Top]

Social-Democracy, Instrument of Capitalism

Below we print the second half of an article by Joao Amazonas, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Brazil, which appeared in the Brazilian journal Principios No.2, June 1981. The first half of the article was printed in the June 5, 1982 issue The Workers' Advocate. The article has been translated by The Workers' Advocate staff.

Social-Democracy in Brazil

Until a while back, social-democracy did not manage to succeed in Brazil. In a certain sense the objective conditions for that did not exist. Capitalist development was weak. The social struggle had not managed to reach a much elevated level, in spite of the existence of the Communist Party since 1922. That type of struggle, even in the beginning, would suffer violent repression. The trade unions existed under persecution, and were prohibited from the operation of workers' parties or parties connected to the working class. For various reasons, the ideas of social struggle, and Marxist books had limited circulation. The political movement of greater expression, by virtue of the particular conditions of the dependent and backward country, was of a democratic or national liberation character.

After 1930, the social struggle acquired a new impetus. But, a good part of the proletariat was guided by reformism. Vargas [dictator of Brazil from 1930-1945 and president from 1950-1954 -- ed.] was the stimulator of that tendency. He managed to decree the participation of a class row of seats, elected through the reformist trade unions, to complete the Constituent National Assembly of 1934. In its turn, the social struggle considerably increased the influence of the Communist Party which led powerful strikes and organized the revolutionary movement of the National Liberation Alliance.

Until the immediate post-war period (1945), social-democracy, as a definite political current, did not succeed in taking an organized form. The Brazilian Labor Party (BLP), which emerged in 1945 and was created, as its founder Getulio Vargas declared, in order to prevent the proletariat from adhering en masse to the CP of Brazil, did not succeed in being social-democratic, strictly speaking. It was furthermore a reformist, populist and nationalist party, with landlords and bourgeois in its leadership. The first manifestations of the social-democratic current appeared with what was called the Socialist Party, which existed until 1964. However, that party did not manage to penetrate into the working class and was limited to the less significant strata of the petty bourgeoisie.

----------

...there emerged a stratum of better-paid workers which, on account of their conditions of life and mentality, constituted what can be called the labor aristocracy. Objectively, the conditions were created for the formation of social-democratic parties.

---------

Furthermore, there was an attempt that occurred at the end of the 50's, with the abandonment by the [Communist] Party, led by Luiz Carlos Prestes, of the revolutionary positions of Marxism-Leninism and with its acceptance of the revisionist theses of the CPSU. That party transformed itself, objectively and subjectively, into an organization of a social-democratic type. But with the establishment of the dictatorship in 1964, which abolished and indiscriminately persecuted the political movements in the country, it was not possible for it to openly carry forward the social-democratic preachings that it had been carrying out among the workers. It disintegrated to a large extent during the terroristic period of the dictatorship. Moreover, the Communist Party of Brazil was reorganized in 1962, carrying out the intense ideological struggle of unmasking revisionism, and alerting the working class and the masses of the people to the opportunist deviation which was manifesting itself in the rank and file of Prestes-ism.

Meanwhile, in the last fifteen to twenty years, Brazil passed through a relative capitalist development, although of a dependent character. The forces of the working class increased considerably, and the social contradictions became even more accentuated. Simultaneously, along with the quantitative growth of the proletariat, there emerged a stratum of better-paid workers which, on account of their conditions of life and mentality, constituted what can be called the labor aristocracy. Objectively, the conditions were created for the formation of social-democratic parties.

Because of this, when the dictatorship began to evolve into a less harsh regime, initiatives of that nature appeared. Brizola, who was abroad, was looking into German social- democracy and began discussions in that area. The experienced deceivers of the working class of West Germany thought that the ex-governor of the Rio Grande of the South with his workerism and the prestige he had enjoyed among the masses until 1964, could be the perfect man to accomplish that task. And it was by raising the banner of German social-democracy that he realized political contacts with his associates in Europe and returned from exile. But the former BLP (afterwards the Democratic Labor Party, DLP), a travesty of social-democracy, did not grip the working masses. The popular prestige of its leader is declining due to the denial of its past positions and due to its unmistakable approach to the military government. The DLP, ex-BLP, is not succeeding in being even the populist and nationalist party that it had been before.

As well the revisionists, who are now divided into two wings, both social-democratic, one (represented by Prestes) more tied to the Soviet Union and the other to the Eurocommunists, and also in cordial contact with the traitors of the Kremlin, strive diligently to strengthen themselves in the country. However, they are quite eroded and discredited in view of the failure of their politics in the period of Goulart [protege of Vargas, president of Brazil, 1961-1964 -- ed.]. They depend on old-time political henchmen among the workers. The Eurocommunist wing which controls the BCP defends a shameful politics of conciliation, of smoothing out the road for the Figueiredo government [the current government -- ed.], of praise for the reactionary armed forces, and of moderation of the struggles of the people. All that does not give them much chance to make headway, in spite of the support that they.receive from the bourgeoisie in all fields.

Nowadays, a major hope of social-democracy in Brazil resides in the Workers' Party (WP) led by the metallurgist Luiz Inacio da Silva [Lula].

A Falsely Proletarian Party

A party can not be considered a workers' party simply on account of its social composition or of the proletarian origin of some, or even all, of its leaders. No party is so densely constituted of workers as the British Labor Party. Even so, it is only a bourgeois party. What socially characterizes any party is, above all, its ideology and, as well, its close ties with the class which it represents, along with the prevalence of elements of that class in its ranks.

But the Workers' Party does not adopt the ideology of the proletariat; on the contrary, it repudiates it. The ideas defended by its principal leader, although expressed in a worker's language, have nothing to do with the basic interests of the working class. In essence the WP is a typically social-democratic party.

With the reorganization of parties fostered by the dictatorship, which prohibits in a categorical way the legalization of the Communist Party of Brazil and of the other forces of the left, a party of the social-democratic type was permitted and created. The fact that in that period there were "capitalists and people of the government willing to create a party of workers" is significant.

Its antecedents are found in the powerful strike of Sao Bernardo which mobilized broad masses of workers of the automobile industries and had wide repercussions in the whole country. Luiz Inacio da Silva successfully led that strike. Suddenly he distinguished himself on the national stage, in particular, in Sao Paulo.

Curiously he was flattered by governors and the bourgeoisie. Delfim Netto said that "Lula was the most marvelous thing that happened in recent times." Petronio Portela, articulator of the supposed sincerity of Figueiredo, welcomed him and afterwards declared that "henceforth I will begin to defend some of the theses that you brought me." Immediately after that, he earned the "endorsement of Dilermando," commanding general of the 2nd Army. Ruy Mesquita, proprietor of the Estadao and of the Jornal da Tarde, organs of the conservative press, spoke of the "ideological purity of Lula" and asserted that "for the first time in the history of Brazilian trade unionism there arose a union leader in a condition of purity."

Until March 1978, Luiz Inacio insisted on emphasizing what is apolitical and preferred "preparing the working class to know how to make a choice." However, he did not greatly delay defining it himself through the organization of a political party called the Workers' Party.

What are the ideas which characterize the physiognomy of the WP?

They are found fragmented in a series of declarations of its founder. Contradictory and harebrained declarations, however, with a real sense of what that trade union leader thinks and means. They go from sterile economism to the praise (in general) of the armed forces and to the admiration of the disposition, strength and dedication of Hitler.

-----------

The Party, according to Luiz Inacio, should not define its ideological shape in advance.

-----------

Although he declares the proposal of the WP to be "practically socialist" (strange socialist proposal!), he defends "free enterprise in the economic field" which he considers "the essence of democracy." According to him, "there should be the right to produce and to profit" and also the right of "the workers to demand their share in part of those profits," two rights quite ill-matched, since one is that of exploiting and the other that of being exploited (only with better pay). He defends the "equilibrium between capital and labor" as an indispensable requirement "for social peace." He wishes that the national entrepreneurs "would understand that the workers do not only have to survive, but also to eat well in order to continue producing and for them to be able to yield even more profits for the enterprises." (italics added -- J.A.) Such ideas do not go beyond bourgeois liberalism. This is because the interest of the proletariat is to put an end to wage slavery and not only to demand better living conditions. The "essence of democracy," especially in the period of the monopolies, is not free enterprise but in the class character of the ruling regime. As for social peace in the capitalist system, it is nothing else but class collaboration. The bourgeoisie and the proletariat are in a kind of permanent war: one, seeking to augment the surplus value, making the profit always larger, and the other resisting the exploitation. A middle ground does not exist.

The Party, according to Luiz Inacio, should not define its ideological shape in advance. But the masses would define it through their own experience.... After putting forward a generic program, he wishes that the masses themselves reveal "whether or not they are socialist or communist." And according to him, the type of society to be constructed will have to be spontaneously delineated by the workers. What a strange party! A party without a general direction, which drifts at the mercy of events. An opportunist, tailist party. In a workers' party, the ideological definition and the plan of the society to be built are products of a socialist consciousness which does not arise in a spontaneous manner from the relationship between employers and workers. Without socialist consciousness, the working class does not have the prerequisites to formulate its plan of social liberation. The party is the conscious factor of the workers' movement. As an inseparable part of the working masses and based on revolutionary theory, the party elaborates the essential questions of the class struggle and establishes the goals to be achieved, the most important being the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of socialism under the leadership of the proletariat.

With respect to action, Luiz Inacio gives priority to the economic struggle of the workers against the capitalists and the government. He puts in second place political action, on which the solution of the problems which afflict the workers depends to a large extent. "Some people," he affirms, "imagine that there should be a redemocratization in order to have trade union freedom or a modification in the Brazilian trade union structure." And he asks: "Who says that first they do not have to have a fight of labor for the modification of the trade union structure, in order to have democratization?" "For us," he emphasizes, "democracy is trade union freedom and from this...we will attain a complete democracy." He comes to the point of considering that the end of the AI/5 [a Brazilian law -- ed.] "is of no interest to the working class." As can be seen, these are precisely the opinions of the "economists," which express the Proudhonist stubbornness of those that do not comprehend, or do not wish to understand, the fundamental role of the class struggle, precisely in the political field, where the various forces of society, including the key problem of power, are confronted. Trade union freedom in Brazil, which must be fought for, is inseparable from the conquest of political freedom, without which the proletariat will not be able to truly free their mass organizations from the straitjacket of governmental and police control.

On his return to the country after a propaganda trip through Europe and the United States, in the course of which he met with those who are most reactionary, anticommunist and opportunist, including the German social- democrats, Luiz Inacio revealed clearly the political and ideological tendencies with which he maintains links. His ideal is social-democracy. "To me," he says, "German and Swedish trade unionism are the ones which approximate those that I would like to exist here." (A yellow reformist trade unionism of class collaboration...) The infamous Italian Communist Party, of the revisionism of Berlinguer, equally earned extravagant praises from him as "a democratic party of the masses, numbering millions of affiliated people." He is also fascinated by the Social-Democratic Party of Sweden. "In general, I acquired the impression from all that I knew, that the line of the Swedish Social- Democratic Party is the most correct." He exalted in the same way the social-democratic Socialist Workers Party of Spain and its leader Felipe Gonzales, "I consider that Gonzales will be, along with the SWP, the great symbol of the unity of the Spanish working class." In the interview which he granted in Italy to Pino Cimo, he declared himself a sympathizer of "Scandinavian socialism which, I think, is called social-democratic."

----------

...demonstrates that the Workers' Party is...a reformist party, a party of social peace....

----------

Everything that he said demonstrates that the WP, which strives to become implanted in the working class, is a reformist party, a party of social peace, a social-democratic party, still fearful of openly assuming its true ideological affiliation. Its principal objective, like, that of social-democracy everywhere, is to divert the proletariat from the revolutionary struggle and the struggle for scientific socialism, to prevent its unity and to impede the progress of the formation of its class consciousness. He tries to hide the CP of Brazil whose authenticity is denied by the leaders of this supposedly proletarian grouping.

It is probable that Luiz Inacio, a neophyte in politics, would not have a clear idea of the aims pursued by the organization that he founded. Even if he does not have a clear idea, the same can not be said of the trotskyites, the diehard anti-communists of the church, and the renegades from Marxism-Leninism who form his entourage, they are his advisors and his comrades in the leadership of the Party. They understand very well what they want: to prevent the proletariat from organizing itself with the aim of fulfilling its historic mission.

And there is no doubt that the WP marvelously serves this purpose. Precisely for this, Luiz Inacio himself made a point of meeting all who, through reformism and anticommunism, oppose the true ideas of the working class, which as historical experience confirms, are only realizable under the leadership of a Marxist-Leninist Party.

Certainly, the WP and its leader also suffer persecution like the patriots and democrats in general, since we still live under a despotic regime. However this does not negate the character of that political organization, its conciliatory aims, and its diversionist intentions in the-class struggle. The criticism that is made of it is a principled criticism, directed especially towards the enlightenment of the working masses who seek the path of emancipation.

* * *

The attempts to create a social-democratic base in the country are not an accidental phenomenon. They are indications that the objective and subjective conditions favorable for revolution are maturing, conditions which manifest themselves in the deepening and aggravation of the social contradictions, in the rapid growth of the ranks of the working class, in the increasing subordination of the country to foreign capital, and in the existence of the Communist Party of Brazil, which broke with opportunism, has the experience of struggle, and is guided by the theory of Marxism-Leninism. Precisely because of this, the more enlightened elements of the bourgeoisie and its agents (conscious or not) strive to create and develop supposedly socialist organizations which speak in a proletarian language and present themselves as a force of social transformation. They aim to benumb the consciousness of the masses and to forestall the political awakening of the workers, inasmuch as the workers, intuitively, as Lenin denotes, "tends toward consciousness as the plant tends toward light." In the final analysis, these elements recognize the existence of the real possibilities of the masses following the path of liberation. For that reason, they are zealous in seeking to turn back the liberating march of the masses by means of diversions.

Nevertheless, it is not fated that social-democracy will really be able to become successfully established in Brazil. Grasping the social-democratic banner, the Brazilian Communist Party [Prestes' revisionist party -- ed.] suffered grave political defeat in 1964, changing from a relatively large party into a small organization. Raising the banner of German social-democracy, the party of Brizola saw its potential of influence among the masses waning. The WP, despite having mobilized some trade union leaderships, has thus far not been able to put forth roots in the proletariat, and it has its major penetration among the students and the middle class in general. All this indicates that social-democracy is not able to easily penetrate into the country.

Nevertheless, it will be incorrect to underestimate it. The damage that it will be able to cause to the workers' movement is not small. It is necessary to combat it, clarifying its true intentions, tactical ruses, and false proletarian character. It is necessary to uproot the reformist tendencies among the workers and propagate the revolutionary ideas of scientific socialism.

All the passages quoted with relation to the Workers' Party, that are cited in this article, were taken from the book Lula -- Interviews and Speeches and the interview of Luiz Inacio da Silva, published in the journal En Tempo, March 12-24,1981.

[Photo: A mass demonstration in Brazil demanding democratic liberties and freedom for political prisoners in the late 1970's.]

[Back to Top]

New Victories of the Salvadorian People

In recent weeks, the revolution in El Salvador has once again shown its great strength. With massive military aid from U.S. imperialism, the Salvadorian military dictatorship has launched its biggest military offensive yet against the liberation forces. But the revolutionary fighters are turning this offensive into a big fiasco and a terrible defeat for U.S. imperialism and its lackeys.

The Military Regime Has Taken on a New Face

Today the generals who rule El Salvador have taken on a new face. Previously it was the administration of the Christian Democrat Duarte which provided the military with the mask of a "moderate" and "civilian" rule. Now Duarte has been replaced with a new government which is dominated by open fascists. Nevertheless, the new administration still includes a few elements from the Christian Democratic Party, whose role as a flimsy fig leaf for the military and fascist death squads is clearer than ever. For many years one of the major reformist parties in the country, the Christian Democrats, have shown that with the advance of the revolutionary struggle reformism ends up as simply another reactionary force justifying the slaughter of the masses.

This government came to power following the U.S.-organized elections farce of March 28. At that time, a Constituent Assembly was formed composed of representatives of several reactionary and ultra-right-wing parties. The most prominent parties are Duarte's Christian Democrats, the fascist ARENA (Nationalist Republican Alliance), and the PCN (National Conciliation Party), which was the main party of the oligarchy and the military from 1961-1979. The character of this Assembly can quite easily be judged from the fact that it elected as its president the notorious ex-Major Roberto D'Aubuisson, leader of ARENA and the White Warriors Union death squad, who fancies himself as the Supreme Dictator-to-be of the country.

The Assembly appointed Alvaro Magana, an alleged "independent," to the post of president of El Salvador. This "independent" is nothing but another mouthpiece for the oligarchy, the generals and the U.S. government. In fact, it was precisely the deals cooked up between the U.S. embassy and the military that put him into the presidency. He is very well qualified to defend the interests of the imperialists and local exploiters since he was a founding member of the PCN and is one of the richest capitalists in the country. As head of the Salvadorian Mortgage Bank, he has bankrolled the armed forces for 17 years.

The deals cooked up between the U.S. embassy, the military and the various parties also established a new cabinet to replace Duarte's old one. In this, General Garcia, who is the chieftain of the military and the real power in the Salvadorian government, was naturally reappointed to the key post of minister of defense. The other cabinet posts were divided among other reactionaries and ultra-rightists. ARENA won control of several important posts giving them control of the economy. These included the agricultural ministry through which they can supervise the plunder of the peasantry and the murder of the democratic elements among them. Meanwhile, the Christian Democrats were relegated to several meaningless, ceremonial ministries, such as labor and education, through which they can provide some flimsy "reform" window dressing for the avowed fascists. They were also given the foreign relations post from where they can function as "moderate" public relations men for the regime. The Magana/D'Aubuisson government has shown clearer than ever that it is the U.S.-backed oligarchy, military and death squads who rule El Salvador.

The present government is continuing the savage repression of the people by the Duarte regime. Prior to the elections, a spokesman for ARENA, Mario Redelli, expressed their attitude towards the masses. He said: "Civilians will be killed, war has always been that way. When the Germans bombed London, they didn't tell the civilians to get out of their way." This is an open declaration that he regards the Salvadorian workers and peasants as a foreign enemy to be slaughtered by the methods taught by Hitler.

And it is precisely this policy that the current regime is putting into practice. The military forces and the death squads are carrying out wholesale murder of the working masses, hoping to intimidate them into giving up their support for the revolution. The mass execution of 48 peasants in the small town of Barrios on April 18 and the killing in May of 600 peasants hear the Lempa river during a "search and destroy" mission by the army are typical examples of the government's monstrous crimes. Thus in a few short months the new regime has added hundreds of victims to the 16,000 killed during the last year of Duarte's junta.

The reactionaries cannot even resolve their internal squabbles without wide-scale terror. In order to force ARENA to accept Magana as president, the U.S. had to order the Salvadorian military forces to threaten a coup. Then on May 12, twelve officials of the Christian Democratic Party, including four mayors, were found dead, murdered by the military according to Duarte himself.

While the new regime is carrying out the same program of terror against the masses, it has however stretched the "land reform" mask of Duarte transparently thin. Duarte falsely made promises of giving land to the peasants, but under the cover of these false promises, the government actually established a broad military occupation of the countryside. Now, Magana and D'Aubuisson are rapidly scrapping the "land reform" program altogether. By doing away with even the talk of "land reform," the government is expressing its firm subservience to the entrenched interests of the oligarchy. It is expressing its complete loyalty to the principle of ruthless exploitation of the rural toilers and to "keeping them in their place."

U.S. Imperialism Steps Up Its War Against the People's Struggle

The Salvadorian government has proclaimed its fascist nature to the world. But according to the Reagan administration's ambassador to El Salvador, Deane Hinton, the rise to power of these hitlerites means "democracy is at work"! The main "proof" of the alleged democracy according to the U.S. government is that the new rulers were voted into office in the March 28 elections. Of course the election of the right-wing parties was a foregone conclusion. The masses were threatened with severe reprisals if they didn't vote, and only the reactionary parties could participate in the elections. Anyone voicing opposition to the junta couldn't participate in the elections since a large number of oppositional figures were placed on a "hit list" by the military dictatorship. In truth, all the hoopla over the elections and "democracy" has no higher purpose than to justify massive U.S. aid to the fascist butchers.

U.S. imperialism is pumping in aid in order to crush the revolutionary movement. This year alone Reagan has sent $80 million in military aid. In the last month alone, $21 million worth of warplanes were shipped to the Salvadorian generals. Meanwhile, Congress is getting ready to approve tens of millions more for next year.

The Revolutionary Fighters Are Smashing the U.S.-Backed Military Offensive

Meanwhile, things are getting worse for the generals on the battlefield. Having failed in their previous attempts to halt the revolution, Washington and its lackeys are therefore resorting to ever more drastic measures. Sixteen hundred Salvadorian troops, having just completed training in the U.S., have been thrown against the liberation fighters. The U.S. has mobilized the Honduran reactionaries to escalate their aggression against the Salvadorian people. Over 1,500 Honduran troops are now fighting alongside the Salvadorian troops. U.S. military personnel are being further activated too. The CBS television network has recently shown films of U.S. military "advisers" going into combat zones with M-16 rifles. Meanwhile, the U.S. military mission in El Salvador is clamoring for more U.S. "advisers" to form 12-man "mobile training teams" throughout the country.

Bolstered by the U.S., the Salvadorian armed forces are conducting large-scale campaigns against the liberation fighters. At the end of May, three U.S.-trained battalions participated in "search and destroy" sweeps through Chalatenango Province. The government has sent nearly 8,000 troops into Morazan Province, including a large number fresh from training at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina and 1,500 Honduran troops. At the end of June a thousand Salvadorian troops with air support from U.S. A-37 fighter-bombers began operations against rebel positions on Guazapa volcano, 15 miles north of San Salvador. In short, U.S. imperialism and its puppets are in an all-out offensive to annihilate the revolution.

But the government's "grand" offensive has been a miserable failure. With the support and assistance of the broad masses of workers and peasants, the liberation fighters have gained strength throughout the country. They have been able to frustrate the government's encirclement maneuvers. When the government forces concentrate their troops in one area, the revolutionary forces open up new fronts, forcing the government to extend their troops and making them vulnerable for counterattacks. And more and more the rebel forces are capable of emerging victorious over the fascists in big, sustained battles. In recent clashes the liberation forces have smashed the vaunted offensive of the regime inflicting a total of over 500 casualties and forcing the fascists to retreat to lick their wounds.

During May, the liberation army intensified its activity in Chalatenango Province. In response the government sent a large force into the province, but to no avail. Soon the revolutionary forces opened up a counteroffensive in Morazan, weakening the government's drive in Chalatenango.

In Morazan Province the revolutionaries have scored great successes. In early June they captured the city of Perquin, overrunning the 100-man garrison there. The government sent its top U.S.-trained battalions to retake the city. But each step toward Perquin was met by the fierce resistance of the liberation forces, and the "crack" troops were routed. In this battle alone the revolutionary fighters wiped out 76 enemy soldiers, wounded over 100 and took 31 prisoners. Despite throwing nearly 8,000 troops into Morazan, the fascist army is still being soundly beaten and the generals themselves are admitting their troops have suffered heavy casualties. The revolutionaries have, even captured Deputy Defense Minister Adolfo Castillo, shooting down his helicopter during the combat in Morazan Province.

Elsewhere the liberation army is also taking bold actions against the fascists. In the face of the government offensive on Guazapa volcano, the anti-fascist forces responded by attacking the city of Suchitoto on June 28. And in the last week of June, the armed revolutionaries cut power lines, blacking out four provinces east of the Lempa River and crippling industry in the city of San Miguel.

The victories of the liberation fighters show the invincible strength of the Salvadorian people's struggle. The so-called mighty offensive of U.S. imperialism and the Magana/D'Aubuisson regime has fallen flat on its face. These defeats for the fascists will inevitably inspire the people to press on with their valiant struggle with even greater intensity. Following the revolutionary path, the Salvadorian people will certainly rid themselves of U.S. domination and the fascist oligarchy.

Victory to the Salvadorian People!

[Photo: Salvadorian liberation fighters dig in in Chalatenango Province, one of several areas where they have routed the government's military offensive.]

[Map.]

[Back to Top]

How the Democrats 'Oppose' Reagan's Aggression in El Salvador

Today U.S. imperialism is organizing its biggest military offensive yet against the Salvadorian people's liberation struggle. This savage aggression is not merely the policy of Reagan. In his efforts to prop up the fascist regime in El Salvador and their genocidal war against the people, Reagan is getting utmost assistance from the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party liberals claim to oppose Reagan's policies in El Salvador. But this "opposition" is just so much hot air. In fact, the bogus nature of this alleged opposition has again been demonstrated since the Reagan administration held the March 28 elections fraud.

First of all, it is worth recalling that a big section of the Democrats, including Tip O'Neill and the AFL-CIO leaders, supported Reagan's March 28 elections fraud. And as the "elections" came and went, the imperialist politicians in Congress, both Republican and Democrat, have returned to the business of approving the sending of huge amounts of military aid.

But even as the military aid flows smoothly through the pipeline with bipartisan approval, the Democratic Party politicians are still trying to hypocritically posture as alleged opponents of Reagan's policy. Let us see how the Democrats are today pulling off their magician's trick of passing off support for Reaganite aggression as "opposition" to Reaganism.

Take, for instance, the passage this May by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of $66 million in military aid for the fiscal year 1983. The liberal Democrats, including the so-called anti-Reagan dove, Senator Dodd of Connecticut, are claiming that this aid package is really the product of their "opposition" to Reagan. How? Because Reagan had asked for $166 million! Naturally they "forget" to mention that their own proposal for $66 million is at least as high as any annual allocation ever made for the Salvadorian generals. Indeed, if Reagan requested $10 billion for the fascists, the Democrats would "only" grant $4 billion and then boast about fouling Reagan's plans! What tricksters!

The Democratic Party liberals are also bragging about having made the aid package conditional on the continuation of the so-called "land reform" program begun under Duarte.

But this is no opposition to Reagan's policies either. After all, the Reagan government too constantly swears by the "land reform" program. And even though the Magana/D'Aubuisson regime has all but eliminated the "land reform" proposals, the Reagan administration is assuring everyone that it is working on the fascists to continue with Duarte's "reforms."

Moreover, the Democrats have already in the past made "reforms" a condition for the continuation of aid, and this never stopped a single cent of military aid for the generals. Last year, this so-called "anti-Reagan" measure required that Reagan formally certify that the Salvadorian government was making progress in "reforms" and "human rights." And despite the massive evidence of the massacres by the regime, Reagan came through with such a certification without batting an eyelash. The aid went through. In the next few days, Reagan will once again make such a declaration, and this will again expose this requirement as a completely empty gesture.

The reason the Reaganites and Democrats can both give lip service to the "land reform" program is that this program was never aimed at solving the serious problems faced by the severely exploited peasantry and rural laborers -- it was never intended to give land to the peasants. It was never intended to hurt the entrenched interests of the rich landowners who live off of the exploitation of the toilers. In reality, the "land reform" program was intended to hoodwink the peasants into supporting the government under the guise of "reforms." Under the cover of pretending to give land to the peasants, the government implemented a Viet Nam-style rural pacification program to systematically execute anyone who refused to completely cow down before the landlords and the military. The counter-revolutionary intentions of the Democrats' calls for "land reform" were again recently spelled out by Senator Dodd: "Land reform is the linchpin. If the people sympathize or join the guerillas, there isn't any amount of money that could save El Salvador." In other words, the Democrats seek to save the fascists from being defeated by the people's revolution. They are quite eager to provide the fascists with aid if only the people are slaughtered in the name of "reform."

It is noteworthy that the amendment making "land reform" a condition for the $66 million allocation was coauthored by Dodd and the Republican Senator Nancy Kassebaum. Kassebaum was one of the members of the U.S. observer team handpicked by Reagan to "observe" the March 28 elections farce. She helped put the formal stamp of "democratic, free and fair" on the elections farce. The fact that such an open apologist for Reagan as Kassebaum could co-author Dodd's resolution exposes that there is nothing "anti-Reagan" about his measure at all.

There were also some resolutions offered by more "radical" opponents of Reagan's El Salvador policy which were defeated by the congressional committees. It is useful to look at these too to get a complete picture of the Democratic "opposition."

Take, for example, Representative Studds of Massachusetts, who has been promoted for several years as allegedly one of the firmest opponents of the Salvadorian junta. This great liberal warrior recommended giving the Salvadorian military "only" $25 million in military aid this year! Finally, the most "extreme" proposal that the Democrats put together came from Representative Rosenthal of New York. Did even this proposal call for ending all support for the military regime? Not in the least. His proposal was that aid should be cut off for a time "until the provisional government backs its pledge (to continue Duarte's reforms) with actions." (Washington Post, May 9, 1982) Thus, the most drastic proposal was simply a more demagogic call to slap a Duarte-style "reform" mask on the new regime.

The support of the Democratic liberals for the Magana/D'Aubuisson government shows what shameless imperialists they are. They simply chatter about reforms in order to provide a screen behind which the butchers merrily carry on their murderous war against the people. Thus, when Duarte was in power, the Democrats required Reagan to falsely certify that the junta was controlling the death squads. Now that the party of the death squads with D'Aubuisson at the head has entered the government, the liberals are claiming that their aid schemes will somehow turn the death squads into flower children! What even more fantastic lie will come next!

The impotent Democratic "opposition" is crawling on its belly in front of the Reaganite warmongers. But the social-democrats and revisionists are trying to portray the Democratic Party liberals as veritable knights in shining armor. Take, for example, the revisionist Guardian weekly. Despite the mountains of facts showing the contrary, this newspaper writes, "A new anti-war surge is taking place in both houses of Congress" which is making "a major effort to cut off military assistance to El Salvador." (May 19, 1982, p. 5) They are especially ecstatic about Dodd's proposal of giving $66 million to the military dictatorship and approvingly wrote that "according to a Washington Post account, (this) was the Reagan administration's 'biggest foreign aid defeat' to date." (June 9, 1982, p. 13) What liars!

The purpose of this outrageous prettification of the Democrats is to divert the movement in solidarity with the Salvadorian people away from the path of mass struggle towards reliance on the impotent "anti-Reagan" opposition in Congress. But the facts prove daily that it is not the Democrats who are opposed to U.S. imperialist aggression in El Salvador. The real force against U.S. aggression is the masses of workers and progressive people.

Step up the mass struggle against U.S. imperialism!

[Back to Top]

More on the March 28 elections farce

The U.S. imperialists are continuing to send massive aid to the fascist regime in El Salvador under the hoax that it is making progress in "democracy" and "human rights." The centerpiece of this propaganda in the recent period has been the elections fraud of March 28. Washington and the Salvadorian government claimed that virtually all the eligible voters came out to the polls. On this basis, Reagan himself crowed, "Now they really showed that there is a real desire for democracy there."

But this election was a complete fraud. It has been exposed many times over. Now still further evidence has come to light verifying that even the official figures for the total number of votes are utter fantasy. They were simply made up the public relations men of the regime in order to make the military dictatorship look good.

The Salvadorian authorities claimed that over 1.5 million people voted. But according to a study released in June by a liberal magazine, Central American Studies, published by the Jesuit- run Central American University in San Salvador, the actual vote was most likely close to about 772,000, or about half the official figure. This figure was arrived at through calculations based on the number of polling stations in the country, the hours the polls were open, and the average time it took to vote. The study considered that it took an average of 2 1/2 minutes to vote, which is quite reasonable.

Official claims of the average time needed to vote were generally outrageous, such as one estimate of 30 seconds! But some official estimates conceded it could have been as much as 2 minutes. While the university used a 2 1/2 minute figure, it diplomatically based its calculations on a greater number of polling places than the official tally. Even when these figures of the authorities are substituted, the number of voters would equal 907,000, nearly 600,000 less than the official tally!

Thus, the maximum number of voters that the polling stations had the physical capacity to accommodate may have been 50-60% of the total number of eligible voters. However, even according to the official elections commission, about 12% of the ballots cast were nullified or left blank as a protest against the elections. Now, since the total number of votes was arbitrarily multiplied by two or three, how can you trust this 12% figure given the regime's vote manipulations? And it should not be forgotten that the total number of eligible voters does not include several hundred thousand more adults who have no ID and are thus completely excluded from voting.

Confronted with the skepticism about the election turnout figures, Dr. Jorge Bustamante, the head of El Salvador's Central Elections Council, admitted that "there might have been a 10% error" in the vote totals. Of course, this was like asking the fox how many chickens were still left in the coop he had just raided, but even Bustamante could not deny the charges altogether.

There are many ways by which the vote totals may have been manufactured. For instance, one method of accomplishing this was the infamous "night voting" where vote tabulations are dramatically increased in a short period of time. This was widely used during the 1972 elections fraud in that country. But while in 1972 it was the National Guard who stuffed the ballot boxes, this time it was the Elections Council's brand new U.S.-supplied computer. For example, after twenty four hours of counting votes, at 6:30 p.m. on March 29, the Elections Council reported a total of 376,814 votes. But in the next IIV2 hours, between dusk and dawn, the total had gone up to 747,256 votes. That is, in half the time, the vote count had doubled! The extent of this fraud can be seen further from the fact that it took more than the next 30 hours to come up with the next 370,000.

Another method of vote fraud involved making up votes with new computer tabulations if votes on the original printout proved unsatisfactory. For example, an April 13 printout, over 2 weeks after the election, showed no voting in nine villages in Chaletenango province, a stronghold of the revolutionary forces where it is widely conceded no polling took place at all. But the next day, a new printout showed voting in all nine villages. Oh, the marvels of American computer technology!

Furthermore, the conditions under which the elections fraud took place should not be forgotten. The government, which has murdered 32,000 people in 1980 and 1981, required all voters to vote by law. Defense Minister General Garcia stated two weeks before the election that failure to vote would be considered 'an act of treason." Moreover, the government made sure that it could identify those who didn't vote by stamping voters' ID cards and using numbered ballots which were matched to a numbered voting list. Employees of the government and the private sector had to show proof of voting to collect their pay. Moreover, only fascist and reactionary candidates were allowed to run. A large number of oppositional figures were placed on a government "hit list" which declared that the armed forces would "relentlessly pursue" their opponents "so that they can account" for the crime of speaking against the fascist regime.

Such are some of the features of the "free and fair" elections held by the Reagan administration in El Salvador. With the myth of "democratic" elections, the U.S. government is justifying its support for the fascist military dictatorship. But the elections merely confirm that the U.S. imperialists will make up any lie to back up their regime of coldblooded murderers. The vote fraud also exposes the Democratic Party liberals such as Senator Dodd who said he was "delighted" that people "risked their lives" (!!) to vote.

[Back to Top]