Write on
Peace movement
I was disappointed in Frank Noakes'response (GL14) to my article, "Australian Peace Movement — Moral Queasiness" (GL #9).
Frank's translation of my call for unequivocal support for Iraq in the context of the war into "political support" is no more than a rhetorical trick. What I meant was clear in the context of the article and did not include joining the Arab Ba'ath Socialist Party or campaigning for Saddam Hussein.
He asks, since when the revolutionary movement has given support to so called "reactionary" regimes like Iraq, even when under attack from imperialism. The short answer is, since Marx. Trotsky's support for Abyssinia is one example Frank may recall.
He asserts that my position would have seen socialists giving support to the Stalinist regimes of Russia and Eastern Europe. Under what circumstances Frank? When Russia was attacked by the Nazis? Of course. Had any of those states come under attack from the US — in, for example, the 50's — we should certainly have supported them.
And as far as the Falklands War was concerned, we should indeed have supported Argentina against British imperialism, for exactly the same reasons that should have led us to support Iraq in the recent conflict.
Frank concludes by labelling me "ultra left". Here again his terminology is wrong. To argue support for an emerging nation state (and one which despite its "populist" government is essentially bourgeois in character) in the face of imperialist attack is the contrary of an ultra left position.
My position did not arise out of subjective factors such as disappointment or frustration, as Frank suggests, but out of a commitment to Marxist analysis.
Ian Bolas
Fremantle
QGN and DSP
There is an idea that members of the Democratic Socialist Party (DSP), as affiliates of the Queensland Green Network (QGN), are proposing. It is that an national "Alliance" and not a Green Party is the way to go. The DSP tell people how wonderful the Green Alliance campaign in Brisbane was, and how good the QGN is. But there was discontent amongst green activists in QGN who thought they were being manipulated by the DSP. The DSP's constitution states
-1>"Article 4. Paragraph 2. Members of the party shall have the following obligations: (a) To be loyal to the aims of the party, to reject any conflicting political loyalty, to place all their political activity under the direction of the party, and to engage in the work of the party to the best of their ability."0>
It is hard for me to see how any organisation with this constitution can honestly participate within a grassroots democracy without making a mockery of it for the other people involved. How can non-DSP people expect to use consensus when there is a disciplined block of DSP members arguing one line and unwilling to compromise or change their position for the benefit of the group?
To me participatory democracy is not where some people dominate discussion at the expense of others. It is where all people contribute equally and not only in relation to a timeframe. Contributing equally means not having dogmatic ideas or being bound to decisions made by other organisations but is when each person respects the others ideas. It does mean willingly being able to modify your ideas with respect to what has been said at the meeting. I feel a true grassroots participatory democracy does away with the patriarchal system of individual competitiveness which simple majority voting is associated and replaces it with a system, as the ecofeminists may describe it, of love and caring for the group.
I think the question should be asked now. How can an organisation who has a constitution stating the members must be loyal to the aims of the DSP, reject any conflicting party loyalty and place their political activity under the direction of the DSP be trusted to follow the direction of an "Alliance" if they were elected to parliament? An "Alliance" in the future with the DSP would be pointless because it would not benefit the "Alliance" only the aims of the DSP. Therefore the QGN preferred model of including a proscription clause in the constitution of a national Green Party is a sensible and one which I support.
PS: The May 29 issue in Write On you printed I. Murrell with three others when the signature was clearly L. Murrell. I think in the pursuit of the truth you should print a correction.
Ian Murrell
Arana Hills Qld
[In the pursuit of trying to decipher signatures on a faxed letter, we noticed that the wording of the letter in question was extremely similar to a letter received earlier from Ian Murrell and from the same fax number. We therefore concluded that the ambiguous initial was an "I". We do apologise to both L and I, but request letter writers to print their names clearly as well as signing. — Ed.]
NZ and US
Keith Locke's article (GL June 5) concerning New Zealand Foreign Minister Doug McKinnon's attempts to restore pre-Nuclear Free Zone Legislation relations with the USA and Great Britain highlights some interesting aspects of the dispute.
-2>With the TV1-Heylen poll showing an increased percentage of Kiwis preferring no alliances to nuclear alliances one wonders why both the USA and Great Britain won't accept the will of the New Zealand people to live in a nuclear free environment.0>
The fact that a New Zealand contribution to the allied commitment in the Gulf, and their purchase of ANZAC frigates, has not swayed the USA proves that the Americans are solely concerned with maintaining world hegemony and particularly nuclear weapons dominance.
-2>Mr. McKinnon obviously has little sense of democratic principles if he plans on "persuading" Kiwis to change their minds. He would do well to respect the desire of New Zealanders to remain nuclear free and cease his attempts to cajole two dangerous, arrogant "allies".0>
Harry Spratt
Inala Qld
Religion and environment
As a greenie and an atheist I am naturally more inclined to look at environmental rather than religious reasons for protecting certain areas. However when I hear some Christians rubbishing the Aboriginal traditions it needs to be pointed out those traditions have been around a "hell" of a lot longer than Christianity. These attacks clearly demonstrate how shallow the respect for the Aboriginal culture in this country really is.
Michael Rose-Schwab
Rapid Creek NT
World Environment Day
I might have missed World Environment Day this year, but for the kind reminder on the disposable milk carton I found at work.
It said "Dairy Vale Milk for World Environment Day — 5 June 1991" and gave the useful advice "What you can do about waste: reduce, reuse, recycle — no excuse, let's reduce."
For someone with a twisted sense of humour, there is a delicious irony in a large corporate polluter seeking sanctity by association with the environmental paradigm.
I have an ever decreasing urge to laugh. None of the people with any power really want to do anything about waste-management.
Through a recent campaign here, I was involved in an attempt to persuade our milk suppliers to return to glass bottles. We returned their cartons to them and exchanged words in the press. It is fascinating to learn how much more environmentally friendly and cheaper it is to use timber from overseas and to manufacture the paper for milk cartons overseas, than to use bottles (they only considered one-use disposable bottles for comparison, by the way).
My wife found an outlet that sold milk in bottles. We travelled the extra distance, and paid the extra price, until alleged government health concerns stopped this.
Earlier, as part of a group calling themselves "Resource Regenerators", we made a comprehensive submission on the state government's "proposed recycling strategy for South Australia". Twelve months later, we are still waiting to see any evidence of action occurring on the proposed initiatives — with or without any accommodation of our group's recommendations.
2>Our local council won't be recycling paper in its office. "Not worth it" was the reason given in the press.0>
I am becoming increasingly pissed off.
Pissed off with the gross disinformation about environmental matters by capitalistic manufacturers and providers of services.
1>Pissed off with the lack of genuine government action to aid consumers, or provide an adequate infrastructure to control accelerating environmental disregard and turn it into environmental sustainability.0>
The motto "Power and profit before people and planet" seems apt when talking of our current leaders.
David Lasscock
Brooklyn Park SA