Counterproductive violence
My activity at the AIDEX protest was rendered inadequate by an ulcer flare up. This was the result of internal conflict.
The conflict was caused by a minority of fellow protesters who did not seem to understand that it is a contradiction in terms to act violently when making a public demand for non violence. The progressive forces are supposed to demonstrate that the capitalist system is illogical, not themselves.
Let me be clear on what I mean by violence. It is the counter productive use of force, whether in words or in acts. This definition does not exclude any words or any acts. It merely requires that words and acts be appropriate to the circumstances.
There are doctrinaire types who demand that every chance be seized to show the oppressive nature of capitalism, and that one way of doing this is to provoke police violence. They claim that this provides an object lesson for the majority. That is total nonsense in any non revolutionary situation. Instead of bringing forward the revolution it invariably delays it, by alienating all but a very small minority who can not come to terms with their own aggressions.
Then there are the macho types who believe in the Marx-given right to defend themselves physically against any individual act of police brutality, and that the best form of defence is attack. They often appear in the dock with three broken arms, four broken legs and fifty broken ribs. They receive severe sentences for Assault Police, instead of lighter ones for Resist Arrest. If the magistrate enquires about the physical damage to the defendant, (s)he is likely to accept the old, old story: "They fell down at the police station — five times — your Honour".
Self made martyrs have only themselves to blame. Unfortunately and selfishly, they also create many involuntary ones. Peaceful protesters often get unnecessarily mauled on general principles. Some police are just as prone to generalise about all protesters at all times, as some protesters are to generalise about all police at all times.
Meanwhile, the doctrinaire and the macho types ensure that news editors have a ten second grab of something gory, out of three camera reels consisting mainly of protesters singing, dancing, getting married and beautifully decorating fences. These latter acts are just as illegal and news worthy in the circumstances as biting ears off police officers. If peaceful events are the only camera subjects, they will gain much sympathy for our cause from the general public, rather than alienating it as ear biting does.
My message to the comrade camera hogs is: Please stay away until the revolution is actually upon us. Otherwise there's not a hope that it will happen in your life time.
Also, we will then be sure at future protests that the only violent people our side of the fence are agents provocateurs, to be dealt with appropriately violently.
This will also do my ulcers a power of good, thus rendering me more useful to the cause.
Ron Guignard
Stepney SA
[Edited for length.]
Too kind
Gorbachev has been too kind to the soviet people unlike Stalin.
Gorbachev is now seeing the once greatest country on earth fall apart into chunks. Perestroika and Glasnost have failed. Capitalism has arrived.
Russia's future depends too much on the personalities of only its leaders as to the directions it takes and the value system it adopts. Hence it lacks real credibility within the world. New leaders mean new everything.
Russia is the world's most confused state. Capitalism and christianity could destroy it economically and socially beyond belief and redemption.
The old Soviet Union could end up a second Africa. Hungry and broke. Or it could get even worse and become a second USA and ecologically bankrupt the world of all its environmental resources.
Will a new communism emerge in the USSR?
Athena Tsonis
Castle Hill NSW