Brave new world
No sooner had George Bush finished burying the "spectre of Vietnam in the desert sands of the Persian Gulf", than a couple of skeletons fell out of the closet back home and the world discovered that the United States had not only resumed sending weapons to murderers and torturers in El Salvador but was helping to arm the Khmer Rouge, whose genocidal reign in Cambodia made the "rape of Kuwait" look like a Sunday school picnic.
There was a time when the Pentagon would justify sending arms and money to murderers, torturers and drug dealers, by talking about the domino principle and Third World communists serving their Soviet masters, but now when the USSR is begging for US aid and the domino principle has worked in reverse, with the countries of Eastern Europe (and soon, let us hope, the Middle East) becoming democracies, their reasoning seems unclear.
Whose is the "evil empire" now? And why does the country with the largest stockpile of weapons (chemical, biological, nuclear and otherwise) continue to fear the peasants of El Salvador, Cambodia and Vietnam? "Oh, what a brave new world!"
David Munn
South Brighton, SA
El Salvador
Firstly I'd like to congratulate your team on producing an excellent newspaper addressing the reality of the world social, economic and ecological situation and the root causes of that reality.
Having spent 23 years of my life in relatively ignorant bliss in a comfortable middle-class area north-west of London, I had a rude (and violent) awakening when I spent two months in El Salvador. I then spent 6 weeks in the US and after 4 weeks in Australia I have seen nothing but biased, pro-government media.
It was with great relief then when I picked up a copy of Green Left Weekly. I think if you stick to your aims, you will enjoy great success, let's hope for the sake of the world that you do. I think, however, that we need to find a way of getting the paper into the hands of many people whom I'm sure are turned off by the words Green and Left. In England, many people when they see the word "left" see Marxist or Communist and don't give a second thought.
The main reason for this letter is the enclosed copy of a handout given by the Armed Forces stall at an International Trade Fair in San Salvador in November 1990. With Central America Week coming up, I thought it might be a good example of military propaganda bullshit in El Salvador. It reads:
"Welcome! Brother Salvadoran, the Armed Forces are with you to drink to your security and well-being.
"Salvadoran, enjoy with tranquillity this International Fair. For peace and progress of or country, the Armed Forces are always with the people."
Simon Fowler
Sydney
Consensus
Congratulations on a fine weekly. Started somewhat roughly but the newspaper seems to be settling down. What a gain it is for the progressive movement in this country.
I'll keep on reading GLW avidly and I hope it reflects the major problems and debates in many a movement.
One issue worth addressing, I think, is the current fascination with consensus decision making. While I agree that it is with consensus that most human decisions are made it is a rotten way to organise a campaign. It is the rule of the minority and while the minority is making up its mind decisions are held off while we talk it out.
Inevitably, the lowest common denominator position is the one sought. I have been in circumstances where decisions weren't made because no consensus could be attained.
The untold aspect of loyalty to consensus is that it is basically undemocratic. If you intend to run your group by strict consensus then you'll engineer it so that your group will include only those people with whom you think you can reach a consensus.
If others are allowed in it is oftentimes premised that they must be willing to change their position no matter how strongly held it is.
In a crude way if the minority cannot be won over then the minority becomes the problem for the group regardless of the tasks to hand.
Because consensus decision making usually is accompanied by "facilitators" rather than "chairs", rules of debate are rejected or only cursorily followed. Instead of politics we get group psychotherapy where the process is more important than what is attained. If you speak long enough, often enough and loud enough your role in the group is infinitely more important than those who do not speak. The outgoing amongst us dominate the group while the reticent don't even have a final vote to fall back on in many cases.
Consensus decision making is a fashionable sham, undemocratic and rife with excuses for manipulation. If the new trendy democrats remain loyal to it we will all continue to be hamstrung in what can be achieved in the movements we work in.
Denis Olsen
South Rosebud, Vic
Petty nitpicking
Open letter to Peter Murphy, Tribune.
I was disappointed, if not entirely surprised, to hear your comments on the ABC's Daybreak this morning attacking the new Green Left Weekly. However, I hope that you will take this criticism with comradely respect and maturity. I'm making the response public because I believe that the audience guilty of such sentiments is wider than just yourself.
Do you realise that we only have one, possibly two, decades to institute caring and sharing values, ie socialist productive and consumptive systems, on earth or there will be no human race left? If you really understood the contribution that you might make to human history, to the survival of the human race, then you wouldn't engage in petty nitpicking so common between capitalists.
What is a "left" that uses the terminology and self-interested, self-absorbed tactics of the marketplace to advance its cause? "Our broad left weekly will be supplying a much wider market" ... Aren't means ends? How can you fight for solidarity without displaying it?
Why on earth didn't you reply to the interviewer's question that there was plenty of room in our broad and diverse left in Australia today to support two, or even more, left weeklies? The irony is that in defining the Green Left Weekly as sectarian you were, on national public radio, actually voicing a deep sectarianism.
If I were a conservative, a capitalist, I'd be rubbing my hands with glee: "Finally the left are understanding the importance of rivalry and markets — I might even buy their paper. These are values I understand!"
If so-called leftists throughout the world cannot be generous to their own, if they cannot instil socialist values in their own means and ends, if there is no tolerance and diversity within unity, if there is not one left, there will be no-one left.
Here's to transformation of ourselves; then, the revolution come she will.
Anitra Nelson
Chewton, Vic