Justice for Palestinians
Kimberly James Roachelle in her letter on Israel (Green Left Weekly #545), sounds like a defender of South Africa during its apartheid years. From my reading, there is no hatred of Israel in the pages of GLW. Kimberly James Roachelle can write about the great society she believes it to be, but it acts in every way as an agent of the US. For all the love of "peace", over a million people are kept under military occupation by Israel, like every demagogue, Sharon wants "peace", but on his own terms.
For the survival of Israel, there must be a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, delivering justice. Israel must cease to be virtually part of the US. America is encouraging settlements and annexation by stealth. Why? Because the longer the occupation lasts, the more vulnerable it is, and the more Israel is dependent on the US. It is, in reality, a trap.
It is time Jews in this country, another settler state, let their consciences speak, as does Uri Avnery, and work for justice for Palestinians.
Stephen Langford
Paddington NSW
Racist drivel
In response to Kimberly James Roachelle (GLW #545), I cannot for the life of me understand why a left paper needs to be so democratic as to print such appallingly racist, anti-Arab, anti-Islamic drivel. Castigating an entire "culture" of a significant section of the world's population as barbaric is surely no more part of "left" debate than would be having a rational debate with the Nazi Party over the merits of Jewish culture.
Leaving aside the amazingly uninformed nonsense about Israel being "democratic" (if this person knows nothing of the real debate that has raged for decades on this I suggest he/she read some back issues of GLW), what is meant by "Israel has been willingly cut in half many times over"? When? Palestine has been cut into bits many times over — 1947, 1948, 1967 and now the current "peace process" advocates that only about half of the remaining 22% be cut into further unlinked pieces and called a "state". Israel has done nothing but expand the borders of its racist state at the expense of the Palestinians.
"Women are respected, children are encouraged to learn about and value other cultures"?. Women and children are daily slaughtered in refugee camps, on the way to hospitals in ambulances, in house evictions and destructions, during land confiscation, when walking to school, when demonstrating in the streets, while sitting on balconies, and in every other Nazi-style action of the Israeli occupation forces — but I suppose none of these victims count as people.
Unfortunately, it seems, the Zionist entity will not be deterred from its goal of slaughtering every Palestinian and driving them into the Jordanian desert, completing the Palestinian holocaust begun in 1947 — though fortunately, I am not so pessimistic about the ability of the combined Palestinian resistance to stop them.
Michael Karadjis
Hanoi Vietnam
Gun control
The editor's response to my letter (GLW #545) continues GLW's tradition of trying to have it both ways on gun control. The editorial it cites makes a series of contradictory claims about the desirability of tighter restrictions on gun ownership, before grudgingly concluding that ownership of semi-automatic weapons is not a right.
In the context of my discussion of political free speech and Cuba, however, the real question is how passages which criticise gun ownership restrictions (on the basis that "the right of revolution against dictatorship is a right we should continue to defend. So we should oppose laws which give the state — which helps the rich rule — more powers to infringe our rights") would stack up before a Cuban-style tribunal on the lookout for disloyalty.
I am more than willing to defend the expression of such views in the Australian media; the DSP ought to be able to defend them in Cuba.
Paul Barnsley
email
Alternative view on Solomons
Of course Australian interests are at stake in the Solomons, but to think that "re-colonising" (GLW #545) these islands is going to be some kind of economic boon for Australia is just not going down the right path. Australia's economic interests, if that were the most likely reason for taking the intervention option, could be better served by some other strategy, e.g. pull all such businesses out of the Solomons and let the people sink.
Villagers are sick and tired at the lack of peace, poor education levels, worse medical attention, failure to gain modest amounts of money, job creation, etc. The biggest difficulty villagers may have with the proposed intervention force is to find enough pigs and flowers to greet the "invasion" forces. After more than 15 years (1987-2003) of poor government services to the people of the nation, any kind of change, even if it were a benign dictatorship, would be welcome compared to the thieving political elite who are milking the economy for their own deep greedy pockets.
Governments over the last 15 years have consistently and continuously failed their people. That, in a nutshell, is why the country wants to get back to a bit of normality. If the Howard government can accomplish that for the vast bulk of Solomonese people, they will be eternally grateful.
However, the real work of re-inventing the Solomons comes once a basic level of peace has been achieved and we begin to climb the hard, long hill of reconstruction. I'm not sure at all we are up to it but with a modicum of peace perhaps we can start again after 25 years of going down the wrong road.
I've been in the Solomons since 1958 working as a Catholic missionary priest, development worker and educationalist. I'm here in Christchurch visiting relatives for a few days but will be back in Honiara to greet the "invading" forces at the end of the month.
John Roughan
New Zealand
[Abridged.]
Cashing in on discontent
In arguing their cases in support of Eminem, Dave Riley (GLW #544) and Ben Standing (GLW #543) attempt to take the mantle of somehow oppressed and silenced Eminem fans. This clouds the debate which is most relevant in the pages of this paper — which is not about aesthetics or musical taste — it is about the politics of the message conveyed in Eminem's work. To criticise this work is not a "blind reaction", as claimed by Standing. It is an attempt to engage with and understand mainstream cultural influences.
Both Riley and Standing also wash over the homophobia and sexism in Eminem's work. This is about much more than his "choice of vocabulary" as stated by Standing. His lyrics are consistently misogynist and advocate extreme violence against women (check them out at <http://www.eminemworld.net/lyrics/>).
There is an anti-establishment theme in the lyrics, which has no doubt been fuelled by conservative opposition and (mild) censorship of his work. This has also helped him sell records and make mega-bucks off the anger and discontent that he claims to represent. There is no doubt the sentiments that he taps are "generated by class" — Mathers is no class warrior. All he offers is a few catchy rhymes and a divisive message of individualism.
Kathy Newnam
Newcastle
[More letters at <http://www.greenleft.org.au>.]
David Hicks
I'm writing to say how enraged I am about the sycophancy of this government towards the United States, and the way we are treating the two Australians incarcerated in Guantanamo bay is symptomatic of our loss of sovereignty.
On the front page of <http://www.active-green.org> is a short article about David Hicks, with some good links — and importantly — an automatic email page with a letter to Daryl Williams, the attorney-general.
Ever since 150-200,000 Brisbanites marched against the war, I have been wondering how all that People-Power could be mobilised. My conclusion is that the only effective way is by mass action using the internet, and we need to somehow build a network that meshes all those people together. Sending out mass emails is one small way to affect change.
Jamie Brown
Logan City, Queensland
Jobs and unemployment
There are 620,000 unemployed people and 62,000 job vacancies! Yet the unemployment rate statistics from the federal government and the job vacancies statistics from the Macquarie Bank come out in terms of percentages and percentage changes from previously reported data!
Conveniently each month, they are released two or more weeks apart! Never at the same time! Why is this so? Please explain! Are these reporting distortions designed to keep the myth of the dole bludger alive just for the political purposes of our identical main political parties?
Jane Wallace
Riverwood NSW
ABC bias
While United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair and the BBC are at loggerheads over alleged anti-government bias in news reports about Iraq, John Howard can have no such complaints about ABC TV over demonising North Korea in preparation for war.
On the evening news bulletin on July 4, it was stated that drugs were found on a North Korean ship, the implication being that North Korea is engaged in a drug-smuggling operation. In fact, no drugs were found on the ship but its crew were arrested on suspicion of drug smuggling.
One can only conjecture, rather sadly, what the reaction of the ABC and every Australian politician would be if it was an Australian ship arrested off the coast of North Korea, searched and nothing found, and its crew incarcerated on suspicion, while, as far as the local media were concerned, they may as well have disappeared off the face of the earth.
Remind me, which one is the police state?
Col Friel
Alawa NT
Faith restored
Thank you so much for writing the article "Howard's misogynist attacks on the Family Court" (GLW #545). I had been thinking that Australian feminist issues had been dumped big-time from left agendas. You have restored my faith.
As a person who is directly affected by the issues you mentioned in the article, it is reassuring to see the silence of years of ongoing abuse through the Family Court finally being broken. Thank you.
Jennifer Smith
Brisbane
Liar and coward
Howard is a liar and a coward. He and his cabinet took our country to war with Iraq on the basis of evidence that he knew lacked credibility. When you embark on something as important as war with another country, that will cost the lives of foreigners and your own nationals, you don't base your decision on evidence that is not credible.
Yet this is what Howard and his cohorts did. Much of the intelligence was obtained from the US and Britain. Our own intelligence experts, as well as those in Britain and the US, were divided over the veracity of the information even before the unprovoked attack commenced.
Australia had the opportunity to say no, to act independently and in our own best interests. But we didn't do that, just as we are not standing up for our own foreign nationals who are being illegally detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. These Australians may end up being executed by Uncle Sam's Kangaroo Court.
Howard is an absolute disgrace. He has demonstrated a total disregard for what is decent and honourable. His actions have caused the deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Our troops are still in Iraq and continuing to deny the Iraqi people the opportunity of deciding their own future. When Howard became Prime Minister he promised to uphold the interests of this country. Not only has he failed to do so, but his actions have made us a target for those groups around the world who are opposed to US world domination.
Howard has to go! If Australians are ever to hold their heads up overseas we must have knew leadership. Those who gave an oath to uphold the interests of this country have betrayed us.
Adam Bonner
Meroo Meadow NSW
Mutual obligation
Last month, Peter Costello spoke about tolerance. However, his latest speech (at the Sydney Institute, July 16) advocates a less tolerant approach towards many social security recipients. Mutual obligation should be "heightened".
Mr Costello appeals to the alleged benefits of social engagement. But most people can organise purposeful social activities without directives and threats from a government department.
The Treasurer reflects favourably on networks not established or controlled by government. "They are voluntary. That is their strength."
Nevertheless, increased state coercion is espoused for many Centrelink clients — although not for anybody else. Businesses are not to be compelled to increase hiring.
If employment is inherently good for people, as Mr Costello maintains, jobless social security recipients are psychologically, as well as financially, deprived. Justice, then, requires a major increase in welfare expenditure to compensate.
Surprise, surprise, this thought did not appear in the Treasurer's oration — and neither did the inconvenient observation that the extent to which social security recipients can participate in community activities is limited by their unduly low relative incomes.
Only the gullible believe that there would be a significant difference between Costello as PM and Howard as PM.
Brent Howard
Rydalmere NSW
Union support required to stop anti-education budget
On May 13, Treasurer Peter Costello delivered the 2003 federal budget. It contained major "reforms" and funding changes to tertiary education. These were the outcome of the Higher Education Crossroads Review in 2002, which was really a political stunt by the federal education minister, Brendan Nelson, to rationalise the devastating attacks on public education. Nelson is hoping to dismantle what remains of public education, by introducing a deregulated and privatised "user-pays" university system.
This budget is a direct attack on the future of many Australian children. Every working parent wants to see his or her children have a fair chance at a better life, and so do most students. This budget will mean the end of that chance for millions of working class children. Parents and students should not kid themselves it will affect you! If this trend is allowed to continue, in a few short years students may have no choice in life but a miserable minimum wage job.
The reforms that the Nelson Review supports includes:
- The deregulation of student fees: university fees will now be free to set additional fees of up to 30% on top of HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme). Elite universities such as Melbourne University and Sydney University are almost certain to introduce a 30% increase. These increases in itself may make someone think twice before deciding to go to university. It can also put students in financial hardship after university.
- An increase in the maximum number of up front fee paying domestic students from 25% to 50%: those who cannot afford to pay fees straight away will lose out. Universities now want their money right away, thus denying those who cannot afford to pay full fees up front for a university place. They will instead be slashed, ensuring that our public higher education system becomes education based on wealth, instead of achievement.
- Introduction of a new loans scheme: the new loans scheme ironically called HELP (Higher Education Loans Program) will make available offers to full fee paying students. This includes loans of up to $50,000 with interest charged each year at 3.5% plus inflation.
- Removal of student representation from university councils and boards: university councils, already extensively privatised over the last fifteen years, are to be further "streamlined" to a maximum of eighteen places, squeezing out student and staff participation. The majority of those places will have to be filled by people outside the university.
- Tying extra government funding to individual employment contracts: after starving the education sector for six years, the federal government is attempting to reduce wages and conditions of university staff. These wage cuts are uncalled for, and will ensure a harder working environment for university staff.
- Limiting HECS funded places to a maximum of 5 years: if a student takes any longer than 5 years to complete their degree (taking off time or failing a subject), they have to pay full fees for the remaining subjects.
These changes are a blatant attempt to reward the rich, and degrade our public education system further, creating an American-style education system, which encourages privatisation. Nothing is being done about this, though. It is up to the unions, political parties, and other community groups to push for and help support a strike, involving workers and students alike, to be held as soon as possible — but giving enough time to allow gathering of community support and campaigning.
Those at the Trades Hall must not be intimidated by the Australian Labor Party, and they in turn by corporations. The future of Australia must not be decided in a political game, but via strong community opposition to the federal budget.
Dimitrov Kyriakov
Melbourne
From Green Left Weekly, July 23, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.