Greens and front parties
Geoff Ash's letter (GLW 422), responding to my article about David Oldfield's attempts to register front parties, focuses on one small inaccuracy, but fails to address the main issues raised.
Ash correctly points out that the NSW Labor government did not rely on the two Greens parliamentarians' votes in order to pass amendments to state electoral legislation which make it almost impossible for small parties without a lot of money to register and run in state elections.
However, Ash doesn't dispute that the Greens parliamentarians voted for the amendments after negotiating with Premier Bob Carr to make them a little less draconian.
The major big business parties are losing their influence as voters switch their support to alternative right-wing and left-wing parties. This is why the major parties are totally united in wanting to prevent any further erosion of their influence by restricting new parties from registering and standing in elections. By supporting the Carr government's restrictions on new parties, the Greens gave the Carr government left cover in this campaign.
The main danger to the progressive movement in Australia comes from the major parties, rather than the small right-wing front parties. The Howard government is implementing Pauline Hanson's racist agenda against Aborigines and refugees in full and the Labor Party supported the government's anti-refugee laws.
The best way of exposing right-wing front parties is to remove all financial and membership restrictions on the registration of new parties, and give the electoral commission the responsibility to provide all voters an information package which includes statements from all parties and candidates outlining their views and indicating where they will direct their preferences. This information should also be available at polling booths on election day.
In addition, free space on TV, radio and in newspapers should be allocated to all candidates and parties to state their point of view, with restrictions being placed on the amount of paid advertising that parties can use.
These measures, combined with grassroots campaigning by left and progressive parties, are the best method for exposing right-wing front parties.
Sue Boland
Bankstown NSW
Party pooper
I would just like to make a few comments on Kim Bullimore's article on the Olympic Games opening ceremony which appears in GLW #422.
I agree that tinsel and glitter will not end racism. However, I wouldn't call the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people "a few Aboriginal athletes and dancers", as Kim reports.
I also don't agree that it was a sanitised white version of our history. What a bloody party pooper this woman is. I watched the ceremony with two Aboriginal children aged 4 and 7 and their parents (my bestest friends) — I'm white by the way. The kids just loved it as did all of us adults. The 7 year old regards Cathy Freeman as her hero and all of this has made her feel more proud than ever to be Aboriginal.
Symbols are tremendously important and, after Cathy's win in the 400m, the lady who is running the Tent Embassy in Sydney said "there's no going back now" and she's absolutely spot on.
Things are just starting to change for Aboriginal people in this country and it's been a long time coming and I do believe it is real change. Of course we still have a long way to go.
Like your magazine — always buy it.
Christine Casey
Nimbin NSW
Timor trauma
The Daily Telegraph ran a story about soldiers out of East Timor that they were suffering from extreme shock after viewing the corpses left in mass graves after the September 1999 massacres.
It said that up to 40 Oz soldiers were being treated for extreme shock. This means that they were inadequately prepared by the Government and Army for East Timor.
When the Daily Telegraph was asked to tell more about the 40 or so soldiers' cases, they printed an article changing their story. The story was that the soldiers were suffering from "shell shock".
This is a cover-up to hide the fact of the horrific mutilations, rapes and massacres by these barbaric, Indonesian-armed "militias".
It is also a cover-up to protect Howard's government for its bungling in not preparing soldiers for East Timor. (Remember the police taking down horror torture photos in Darwin, reported in Green Left, so that nobody could know what the death squads were doing?)
Following Howard's instructions, the Daily Telegraph has crudely changed their explanation for the traumas of these young soldiers from massacre-shock to "shell shock". There are very few shells or bombs in East Timor. "Shell shock" resulted from subjection to hours, days, months of massed artillery and high explosive shells in France, 1915-1918.
Howard will not tell the truth about these traumas and of course he does not care about the East Timorese.
Denis Kevans
Wentworth Falls NSW
Uncle Sam
Alexander Pushkin, in his novel in verse Eugene Onegin, painted a picture of the hero's uncle who, on his deathbed, became increasingly demanding that his relatives pander for his every need and whim.
This uncle prefigures today's "Uncle Sam" who considers the world's prime concern should be his comfort and prosperity.
Announcing President Clinton's decision to release some oil from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve, US Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said: "The President wants to help the American people get home heating oil".
This consideration seems to take priority over the needs of millions of victims of natural disasters and conflicts in the Third World and over the needs of recalcitrant populations in Eastern Europe and elsewhere and is proof of Uncle Sam's determination that nothing shall disturb his well-being. Perhaps also it helps to explain the true meaning of the term "globalization".
James M Forbes
Toowong Qld