Write on: letters to the editor

Solidarity? Traditionally, progressive activists from all the social movements use election campaigns as an opportunity to raise the profile of the issues we're concerned with and strengthen our various campaigns and organisations. They also often present more opportunities for cooperation and joint activity between activists. Instead, the election campaigning of some of the so-called progressive organisations in Sydney this year revealed a degree of sectarianism which should not go uncriticised. I am referring to the practice of the International Socialist Organisation, Socialist Alternative and the No Aircraft Noise party who, desperate to get the ALP (in the case of the first two) or themselves elected, covered over large numbers of posters advertising the International Women's Day activities on March 9. IWD is one of the most important events for the women's movement each year, and the women in the IWD collective and their supporters put a lot of energy and activists' money into producing and distributing the posters as the main means of publicising the march and rally to as many people as possible. For the ISO and Socialist Alternative (even given their dismissal of feminism as "bourgeois"), and for NAN, whose candidate for Sydney made much of her feminist credentials during their campaign, to sabotage IWD is inexcusable. This sort of sectarianism (whether censoring feminist or any other progressive activities) not only reflects badly on the people and organisations involved, it damages the collective strength of the progressive movement as a whole. It must stop.
Sarah Peart
IWD Collective Sydney No answers During the recent election period I read the views of the International Socialist Organisation on "Why we need a different sort of party" in the Socialist Worker Election Special. Unfortunately, I found the article's headline disingenuous. Nowhere is there an explanation of why the working class needs a revolutionary party. Nor does the article propose the need to build one. Instead the article significantly understates a series of tasks before revolutionary socialists. Three points stand out. 1. Capitalist economic and state power is strong against a radical parliamentary majority but "far, far weaker when faced with the power of millions of people organised together demonstrating or striking". But such actions, although vital forms of mass mobilisation, have always been stopped short of revolution by capitalist power — for example, the 1926 General Strike in Britain and May-June 1968 in France — unless the movement has assumed the character of a struggle to destroy the power of capital (under the leadership of a revolutionary party). 2. "To really change society means fighting to extend democracy into every sphere of life." For the working class to win the power to make the decisions about the development of society, however, requires not the extension of democracy (even to "full democracy"), but a change in the character of democracy and control over society so that the working class can, through its own organs of power — including political bodies — determine and enact the course it wants. This is the lesson of the Paris Commune and the Russian Revolution. 3. "What is needed is to forge a current of socialists ... an organised current", and "supporters of Socialist Worker are trying to build and strengthen the network of socialists". A current or network, in the face of the capitalists' efforts to divide the working class, will be unable to agree on a common plan of attack or recognise a unified leadership accountable to it. Every historical experience of the working class in revolution has shown that for success in the struggle against capital it needs a revolutionary political leadership — a mass revolutionary party.
Jonathan Strauss
Sydney
[Edited for length.] Stalinism It is sadly disappointing to read John Percy's attack on the CPA — "How Stalinism etc" in the October 18, 1995 issue. Arguing the ideological correctness or otherwise during this 75th anniversary of the CPA demeans the standing of all those thousands of selfless comrades in and out of political parties, during years of struggle. No doubt John would not wish to do that. As the triumphant forces of capitalism world wide sweep away the hard won gains won over years, is not the passing of the USSR a disaster for all the left progressives? Is it not time for all people with hope and courage to unite in a new people's movement to secure the future for all mankind?
Robert Dampf
Fairlight NSW Greens Re: Lisa Macdonald's review of The Greens in Cultural Dissent (GLW #221). Such a strong ideological line on social/political/economic change in society seem to me to mean that the DSP, rather than the Australian Greens are the ones who live in "fairyland". It may have escaped Lisa's notice but the various progressive groups and organisations that could (and should) be called "Left" are not all in agreement as to the way forward. A strict ideological line (such as the one the DSP has for Bolshevism) is never going to win over (i.e. represent) the "Left" or the wage earning class in general. Lisa Macdonald's review smacks of elitism.
Michael Unger
Kurralta Park SA Star wars in Cuba When Mr Teller designed President Reagan's great Star Wars dream, he did not realise that the game could be used by any other nation on this planet. And Fidel Castro did just that. Like Israel cheerfully adopting Nazi Germany's "iron fist" tactics. Like English war planes shooting down German bombers in the '40s. Furthermore, before any plane anywhere in the world takes to the air, permission from some air authority is needed. Now which authority in the US gave permission for planes to invade Cuba's territory? Likewise some years ago who gave permission to KAL 007 to fly over Soviet territory? It is true CIA officials were seen in the neighbourhood of Seoul airport then.
H. Hout
Sydney