Ten Years After Berlin: Imperialist Rivalry Sharpening, U.S. 'World Order' Crumbling
Principal's Warning To 'Slow Down' Speeds Up Struggle At Bklyn Hs
Slam The Classroom Doors On Fascism
Anti-Klan Fighter Exposes Uft Leaders As Workers' Enemy
The Theory Of Evolution: Dialectical Materialist Science
Real Reason For War In Colombia: Europe's Bosses Moving In On U.S. Imperialists
Unam Militancy Needs Communist Ideas To Win Class War
300 Protest Police Murder Of Demetrius Dubose
Music Review: Battle Of Los Angeles Full Of Powerful Rage But Still Not Enough
Blue Streak: An Apology For Racist Cops
Payton's Place In Bosses' Hearts: All Is 'Sweetness,' Without A Fight
Ex-Marine Angered By Bosses' Kkkops
Spreads Red Ideas Inside Neighborhood 'Crime Watch' Groups
Hs Students Vote 80% For Communism
Politics More Important Than Economics
"Make trouble, fail, make trouble again, fail again...till their doom; that is the logic of the imperialists...the world over...and they will never go against this logic. This is a Marxist law...Fight, fail, fight again, fail again, fight again...till their victory; that is the logic of the [working class], and they too will never go against this logic. This is another Marxist law." (Mao Zedong, "Cast Away Illusions, Prepare for Struggle", Selected Works, vol. 4, p. 428)
This week, U.S. rulers are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the "fall of the Berlin Wall." This was followed by the collapse of the capitalist Soviet Union, and the emergence of the U.S. as the "world's only super power." But the victory of U.S. imperialism has been shallow, at best. It may also not be long-lived.
The collapse of the "evil empire" was supposed to usher in a period of peace and prosperity. Instead, wars and civil wars have engulfed much of the world, taking a terrible toll on millions of workers. Over the last ten years, U.S. imperialism has launched 90 armed interventions around the world, from Iraq to Yugoslavia, from Somalia to Haiti. In every case, the outcome has only sharpened the contradictions facing US imperialism. US troops were run out of Somalia; Saddam and Milosevic are still in power, their armies intact, and the cracks in NATO are deepening. Some "super power." What's more, the victory of the "free market" brought about the collapse of the Asian and Russian economies, leading to massive poverty, corruption, unemployment, homelessness and all the trappings of capitalism. Racist and fascist parties are flourishing in Europe and Russia. The official unemployment rate in the former East Germany is 20%, and "there is a certain nostalgia for the old days when everyone had a job..." (NY Times, 11/9) In a recent poll at a "Fall-of-the-Wall" celebration, 50% said conditions were better in East Berlin before the Fall.
In the U.S., "victory" has meant the loss of millions of industrial jobs, wage-cuts, and strike-breaking. Each attack has boosted the stock market higher and higher. Millions were cut from the welfare rolls, hospitals have been closed and /or downsized and millions have no health insurance. These cuts have been enforced with racist police terror, which has swelled the prison population to more than two million, with more than 25% of young black men in the "justice" system. We can't stand many more victories like this!
U.S. rulers sit atop an increasingly unstable, chaotic war-torn world, a world of their making. As they grow more and more isolated internationally, and as we build a mass PLP of workers, soldiers and youth across all borders, it is the world in which they will perish. Workers have nothing to gain from backing any of these mass murderers. Our future lies in the long fight for communist revolution.
Clinton & Co. got away with murder in Yugoslavia. They bombed cities, factories and water supplies, destroyed the economy and killed thousands of workers. Many more will die from war-related diseases. Challenge exposed the truth about how this war was a dogfight over oil pipelines. Forced to fight from the air-because they can't trust their soldiers on the ground and have no popular support for body bags-the results reveal a series of strategic setbacks for the U.S.
This was probably NATO's last war. The "allies" disagreed on military strategy, political objectives and diplomatic tactics. The main conflicts arose between U.S. bosses and German/French-led European rulers. European and U.S. imperialists have conflicting long-range interests. The Kosovo war was the beginning of a divorce. It may take time to materialize, but the direction is clear.
The main lesson the European ruling classes drew from Kosovo was the need to create their own military. "For the European governments, the spectacle of American power unleashed in their corner of the map was frightening...That experience has caused a surge of interest among European governments in creating a European security and defence identity." (The Economist, Oct. 23) The Germans and French have signed a deal to integrate their militaries, and others will follow suit. "The Economist"(Oct. 23) predicts that the process will take some time, but "15 years is not such a long time in world politics. And it may even be less." Conflict between U.S. and European rulers is growing on a number of fronts. Differences over Iran, Iraq, China, Russia, admitting Turkey into the European Union, the future of the Balkans and doing business in Latin America are just a few of these sharpening contradictions.
The war in Yugoslavia also deepened the conflict between U.S. and Russian bosses. Clinton needed the Russians to force Milosevic to accept the deal that stopped the bombing in June. Then, the Russian military seized Kosovo's Pristina Airport in defiance of the U.S. and British.
This reflects a far deeper process. "Russia's flirtation with Western-style capitalism has collapsed," writes the Stratfor Intelligence Service (Nov. 2). Events are proving that Russia is neither a reliable business partner nor a safe investment for U.S. billionaires. Most threatening from the U.S. rulers' viewpoint is the rise of current Prime Minister Putin, who sees the need for Western credits and technology in the short run, but views the U.S. as Russia's main strategic enemy (a view shared by the Rockefeller forces here). Russia's current wars in the Caucasus suggest that the next time U.S. rulers try an adventure in Russia's back yard, it won't be the cakewalk they enjoyed in Yugoslavia.
Despite business deals that have brought windfall profits to some U.S. and Chinese bosses, the U.S. and China are strategic rivals in East Asia. (Remember the CIA's "accidental" bombing of the Chinese embassy during the Yugoslavia war? It was being used as a conduit for Yugoslav military intelligence whose normal operations had been bombed out.) China's rulers are basically rising as a world power. U.S. bosses are divided over how to deal with this reality, as they "prepare for the day when China's claims might come into conflict with the U.S.'s in East Asia." "'Is there room enough in Asia for China and the United States?' has become the defining...question of relations [between the two]." (Le Monde Diplomatique, Oct. 1999). Although the Chinese aren't planning to go to war with the U.S. any time soon, after the Kosovo war they decided to step up the modernization of their military. Most significantly, at the end of August Yeltsin and Jiang signed a deal for a "co-operative, strategic relationship" between Russia and China. They will probably conclude an agreement soon on mutual aid for missile development. This is essentially a blueprint for a long-term anti-U.S. coalition. With Taiwan at the eye of a possible storm, U.S. bosses have tightened military links with Japan, the Philippines and Singapore. Early this year, Clinton announced plans to deploy Theater Ballistic Defense Systems in Japan, South Korea and perhaps Taiwan.
None of these conflicts will come to a head in the near future. The European, Chinese and Russian capitalists are still too weak to mount a frontal Challenge to U.S. imperialism. But the general direction of future events is becoming clearer. More war lies in store for the Balkans, and U.S. imperialism will soon launch another oil war in the Middle East, probably against Iraq. All the rivalries described above will sharpen in its wake.
The profit system breeds terror and war, if there is one "super power" or many. The bosses want us to believe that communism came crashing down with the Berlin Wall, and that this is as good as it gets. Sure, just about!
PLP is on the long road to communist revolution. It wasn't communism that failed, but the lack of it. And despite it all, the rulers still can't win the majority of workers who had a taste of it, to reject it. The other thing capitalism breeds are its gravediggers. Join PLP. We have plenty of shovels to go around.
BROOKLYN, NY, Nov. 9 - At Boys and Girls High School here, one of our Party UFT (United Federation of Teachers) delegates is under attack by the UFT building leader and the school administration of the school. The Party delegate has called union meetings when the union leader hasn't, and has fought to bring the Party's ideas on education under fascism to those meetings. She distributed a report about the monthly Delegate Assemblies (DA) which includes the Party's analysis of the issues, calls for revolution and attacks and criticizes the union leadership as class enemies. The UFT leader has illegally stripped the delegate of her position as chair of the committee matching new teachers and their experienced teacher mentors. He asserted that only the UFT leader can call meetings and condemned reports to the members that aren't "objective."
Early Friday morning the delegate gave out notices to the entire staff, calling on them to fight these attacks, especially at the afternoon's union meetings, and to struggle against the fear which keeps us all silent. She also invited them to attend the November 13 Communist Schools Conference.
The turnout for the meetings was modest-but many teachers came and fought the UFT leader, who by this time was attacking the delegate for putting out "unobjective" reports-ones containing her opinion. The other workers argued with him on that, too. The UFT leader has been the front guy for our school bosses.
Meanwhile, the principal has Challenged distribution of Party materials. He wouldn't allow the delegate to hand out Communist Schools Conference brochures along with the Friday notices, and told the delegate yesterday that he must approve all mailbox materials.
The delegate has continued to respond to these attacks by struggling with co-workers to attend the Conference-struggling against their fear of attack-and has continued to put out DA reports-opinionated and political. Additionally, she has put out a statement entitled, "What are they afraid of?" including these explanations of the attack:
So why is the administration attempting to muzzle this PLP member?
BRONX, NY, Nov. 9 - On November 3, 33 teachers at Roosevelt High School here received a memo from the head of guidance announcing that "the staff from the adolescent psychiatric center at Columbia Presbyterian Hospital will be visiting selected classes," to explain their program and distribute consent forms for a "teen screen" survey.
Since I was aware of the history of racist research at Columbia Presbyterian Psychiatric Center/Psychiatric Institute (which used black and Latin teenagers in the Violence Initiative program in the early '90s), I immediately contacted those teachers I knew on the list. I told them we should be very suspicious of this teen-screen service because I had information that a child psychiatric center was still involved in several studies on drug trials on children. Many children were being recruited indirectly through a network of clinics in Washington Heights community clinics set up by this hospital. Teachers were upset and appalled to hear how Columbia Presbyterian and the psychiatric studies are hurting our children.
They were angry that the administration had not provided any information about the content and purpose of these surveys. The group was eager to go ask for an explanation from the head of guidance and to express their outrage. The administration agreed to a meeting, where the teachers, joined by the school psychologist, spoke strongly. They often interrupted the boss of guidance, who was defending the Columbia Presbyterian program as a good, free health service to our kids.
The teachers were not fooled. They openly told the administration they would not allow these people into their classroom to speak to students. They refused to play the role of nazi teachers by being passive witnesses to a survey that could potentially damage our students' lives.
Apparently some of the school bosses were not informed about the nature of Presbyterian's research. The teachers requested that the visit be postponed to allow them time to formulate questions and gather necessary information; the administration agreed to postpone the visit.
Yesterday, a memo from the head of guidance said the Teen Screen Program would not begin on November 8. Instead, a "general information meeting" would be held on November 12. This action by a small group of emboldened teachers made the administration nervous. The Board of Education has been exposed in the past for referring students from special education programs throughout the Bronx to a drug experimental project at Queens College.
Many of these students were given the harmful drug, Fenfluramine (NY Daily News, 4/20/98) to measure serotonin levels in their brain. Although this particular type of study has been stopped, the Board still continues to approve the distribution of surveys which put students at risk of being recruited into racist and damaging research projects. The screening and the service to be provided for Roosevelt students are being financed by a wealthy family. Columbia Presbyterian refuses to disclose the name of this family to anyone, including the school administration.
More teachers, students and parents need to be informed of these research projects and their link to current fascistic social policies. Slave-styled Workfare programs, nazi-styled research, unchecked and increased police brutality and wholesale incarceration of youth are obvious indications that U.S. capitalism already practices fascism. Teachers must be won to fighting fascism in the schools. We must slam the door on fascism when it knocks on our classroom door!
Only by joining the Progressive Labor Party and fighting for a communist society can this racist, anti-working class atrocity against our children be stopped.
NEW YORK CITY, Nov. 3 - PLP's politics dominated November's monthly United Federation of Teachers (UFT) Delegate Assembly (DA). The UFT leadership attempted to stifle the Party forces by stripping the credentials of-and refusing to admit-the Party delegate who had attacked the Klan the week before. This delegate had been transferred to another school because of political activity, and so was "officially" no longer a delegate. UFT president Randi Weingarten finally admitted the delegate to avoid a public fight but insisted he sit in the rear instead of in his usual position up front.
Throughout the meeting, we tried to ensure that the comrade spoke-loudly demanding the floor when the president tried to avoid calling on us. Four of the comrade's co-workers came to support him and demand he be allowed to speak. Our activities in the delegate assembly the last few years also contributed to forcing the union leadership to give the comrade the floor. Even amongst members of the leadership's caucus, which dominates the DA, our comrade has garnered support and respect.
After the comrade spoke, members raised several motions supporting him in his fight to restore trade programs to the public schools and commending him for his anti-Klan action. Both motions received many votes, although not the two-thirds needed to win. Interestingly enough, while Weingarten argued that "of course we all oppose the Klan," she refused to allow any discussion of why the delegate was bringing the motion. If discussion had been allowed, we would have condemned the leadership of this 100,000-member union for not having organized workers to attack the Klan.
Other Party delegates were also active in arguing against the unequal dues scale for newer teachers and against the introduction of peer review (a procedure where teachers evaluate other teachers-including calling for dismissal of co-workers). Weingarten finally called a vote without a quorum in order to adopt the report calling for peer review, and refused to allow further discussion.
The delegate assembly clearly illustrated who are our enemies. When comrades brought working-class politics to the floor, the leadership banned discussion. But the same leadership supports the "union" of our bosses-the principals-in their contract negotiations! The UFT leaders are not just bad leaders, they are the class enemies of the teachers they claim to represent. Despite a certain amount of inevitable anti-communism, other teachers have become involved in the class struggle around the issue of the trades in schools.
Next month's plan will correct some of the mistakes we made. We will be more forceful about raising communist politics explicitly rather than just pro-working class politics. We must capitalize on this month's victory: we successfully fought the leadership's attempt to remove us from the assembly; we brought out our friends and supporters; we were bold and forceful in the defense of the working class and the attack on the racist Klan.
(Challenge will be publishing articles periodically on the political, scientific, and philosophic importance of the theory of evolution.)
One wing of the ruling class is attacking the teaching of evolution in the schools. They've concluded that evolutionary teachings may get in the way of the fundamentalist-religious brainwashing necessary for building a mass religious-fascist political movement. The Rockefeller wing, including politicians like Bill Bradley and many scientists, defend the teaching of evolution and oppose the anti-science policies of the religious conservatives. Gore waffled on this at first, attempting to pander to religious conservatives, until his advisors concluded that anything less than a full defense of evolution and science would undermine his main base of support. The bosses recognize that science is essential to capitalist industrial and military dominance. Moreover, they need a working class with some scientific and technical training.
None of the bosses will ever emphasize that evolution was a truly revolutionary theory that illustrates and enriches the more general scientific principles of dialectical materialism.
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was a materialist theory. Darwin himself may have delayed publication of his theory because he recognized its underlying philosophical materialism-the idea that matter is the stuff of all existence and that all mental and "spiritual" phenomena are its by-products. In fact, materialist beliefs were persecuted in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Lectures were banned, publication hampered, professorships denied. Adherents of materialism were subject to fierce criticism and ridicule in the press.
The revolutionary communists Karl Marx and Frederick Engels appreciated the importance of Darwin's work. They acknowledged that Darwin's evolutionary writings contained "the basis in natural history for our view." Marx apparently offered to dedicate Volume 2 of "Capital" to Darwin, but Darwin declined.
The core of evolution is the theory of natural selection, which can be summarized as follows:
Darwin conceived of natural selection as a creative force. It didn't just execute the "unfit," but in essence created the "fit."
The process of evolution by natural selection is dialectical because it embodies the constant interaction of two contradictory processes within organisms: those of heredity and variation.
Heredity is the faithful (exact) replication of parts. ("Replication" here refers to the repeated construction of something.) Scientists have learned much about the biology of heredity, including the workings of the genetic code embodied in DNA. The characteristics of dog-what makes a dog different from a worm or a butterfly-are reproduced in a puppy, the offspring of a male and female dog. Heredity is thus "conservative," preserving what already exists.
The other aspect of this contradiction is variation, the unfaithful (inexact) replication of parts. We now know that mutations-physical-chemical alterations of the genetic code-occur frequently and are the biologic basis of variation. Variation can be said to be "radical," replacing the old with the new.
Without the continued interplay of these two opposing tendencies, heredity and variation, natural selection could not occur. (And therefore new species, including the human species, could not have developed.) If all replications were exact, there would be no variation, no new forms, to be selected by interaction with the environment. On the other hand, if there were only variation and no faithful replication, new forms could not be preserved beyond the new generation in which they occurred. And, just as there is change in living things over time, and the creation of new species, we know there is also the preservation of species-worms have been around for a long time (as have people and dogs, for that matter).
So an essential feature of evolution-the change in living things over time and the rise and fall of species-is the dialectical contradiction between heredity and variation.
This is just one example of dialectical materialism in evolutionary theory. There are many others. Future articles will discuss these. Learning evolution is an important aspect of learning how to think scientifically-and dialectically-about the world. It's our Party's responsibility to ensure that workers have the opportunity to develop a dialectical approach to reality.
"The whole northwest quadrant of South America is becoming the new Central America. The Middle East Gulf is explosive, but this area is catching up because of the oil connection, the Panama Canal and drug trafficking. We are dealing with the future of democracy." This is from Donald Schulz, associate professor of national security affairs at the US Army War College. (The Petroleum Economist, 9/30/99, "Colombia: Foreign Investment Suffers," p. 18).
"The future of democracy" is a euphemism for what is really happening: the European bosses are challenging US imperialism's almost two-century-old hegemony over Latin America. At stake are the cheap labor, natural resources and markets of a vast continent that has helped make US imperialism the richest empire in history. Presently this inter-imperialist rivalry is centered in oil-rich Colombia, bordering the strategically important countries of Panama, Ecuador, Peru and Brazil.
Colombia, mired in a deep political crisis, is on the verge of economic collapse. To make matters worse, the government is under siege from a strong insurgent movement. Despite all the US aid, the Colombian army is losing the war. By itself, this would not necessarily be a big deal, but the guerrillas are influenced by Fidel Castro and German imperialism. This reflects the fact that sectors of the Colombian ruling class want to break with the US bosses and align themselves with their European competitors, hoping to get a better deal. US bosses must stop this development. Swatting down these upstarts would also send a direct message to Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and other bosses in Brazil, Argentina and Mexico who are pursuing the same goal. It will also serve as a stern warning to the European bosses.
To accomplish this, the US rulers have decided on military action. On this they are united, as shown by Colombia President Pastrana's statement: "We have the full support of the White House, and bipartisan support in Congress. Senate majority leader Trent Lott...sent a letter to President Clinton urging him to support Colombia. Fifteen days later, House Minority leader Richard Gephardt did exactly the same." (LA Times, Nov. 7).
What they haven't decided is under what pretenses to wage it. Some think the best cover is the campaign of the "war on drugs." Others argue for openly proclaiming it as a war to defend the vital interests of the US. Rockefeller's New York Times supports this latter position:
"[The Administration]...has proclaimed a central goal in Colombia-curtailing the drug trade-that will likely mislead Americans about what it hopes to achieve there....It is hardly disputed that the US has other significant interests in Colombia, from oil fields to radar stations....No one in the White House now believes Colombia's government is in any immediate danger of falling to the rebels. [But the consensus that should be adopted is that the government is about to fall.] That consensus....could be the basis for an approach to Colombia's problem that might be sustained even when the flow of drugs fails to miraculously end." (Oct. 10)
That's why it appears that the Clinton White House has no clear-cut policy on Latin America. On the one hand, a high-ranking member of the Administration, the US Southern Command commander, says "... The Colombian rebels are endangering regional stability and the Pentagon could intervene unilaterally, particularly in Panama..." (The Petroleum Economist, 9/30/99, p.20) On the other hand, new Latin America chief on the US National Security Council, Arturo Valenzuela, has ruled out any direct US intervention.
Nevertheless, Clinton and the bosses he represents are relentlessly pursuing the war path. At present the Clinton Administration is considering $1.6 billion of emergency assistance for Andean nations in the "counter-narcotics campaign," most of which will go to Colombia. Some 5,000 elite Colombian troops have already been trained by US military personnel. US Navy Seals are training Colombian and Ecuadorian troops in river warfare. Leslie Alexander, US ambassador to Ecuador, recently "advised the Ecuadorian government to increase, rather than cut, the military spending after the settlement of the border dispute with Peru, because Colombia now poses the real risk to the country." (Petroleum Economist, 9/30/99) All this is to try to create a regional army from Peru, Ecuador, Argentina and Brazil to intervene in Colombia. Brazil rejects any such intervention and so does Venezuela.
But US bosses have few illusions about a regional army being able to accomplish their goal. "If the present security situation continues, US troops will be on the ground in Colombia within two years....Either that or we lose Colombia," says Riordan Roett, head of the Western Hemispheric Program at John Hopkins University, Washington, DC. He says they should go in under an OAS (Organization of American States) mandate. (Petroleum Economist, 9/30/99, p. 22)
Similarly, even though they don't publicly condemn the Colombian government's peace talks with the guerrillas, US bosses know that a peace agreement that gives the European bosses a major voice in Colombia is totally unacceptable.
US troops are already on the ground in Colombia. When they will be there en masse is only a question of time. The inter-imperialist rivalry is sharpening constantly. This contradiction is eventually resolved by war. No peace talks can reverse this development. These butchers will continue to slaughter workers as long as we let them. We must prepare to organize the working class to turn the inevitable imperialist blood bath into a civil war for communism.
MEXICO CITY,-More than 40,000 striking UNAM students marched from the TV station to the Presidential Palace chanting, "Democracy...ha..ha..ha...PRI, PAN, PRD-the same B.S." They defied the authorities and thousands of police mobilized to keep them off the most important freeway in the city. The march was against the PRD's repression of the strikers, for the firing of UNAM President Barnes, and for their demands. This march shows that the government has failed to control the marches in Mexico City.
The PRD was forced to allow the march, because the students were determined, and because of the support shown to them by the population. Thousands applauded the march and served as a shield to keep the students from being attacked.
A few years ago, Rosario Rosales, head of the government of Mexico City, and other PRD leaders, were student leaders who marched and blocked streets. Now they are on the other side, commanding the police and attacking the students. How did this happen? It happened because they never joined the revolutionary struggle for communism. They limited their struggle to fighting for reforms inside the system. If striking students and faculty don't join the long-term fight for communism, they will end up doing the same thing. Our job is to rebuild the international communist movement, and build a mass base for PLP among the UNAM strikers.
So far, the authorities have failed in their attempts to violently break the strike. A police command unit disguised as anti-strike students took over the schools of Acatlan and Preparatory School (High School) #9. Using pistols and firebombs, they temporarily seized these two schools, which are on strike. In less than two hours the students reorganized, took back the schools, and forced the fascists to flee. The authorities announced more repression. The students should reach out to the workers, and not fall into acts of desperation.
The federal government and the government of Mexico City, the PRI and the PRD respectively, are accusing each other of failing to end the UNAM strike. The strikers have not let themselves be conquered-either by the government repression, or by the PRD liberal politicians who are working inside the strike to sell it out. The students are learning that liberals and fascists are two sides of the same capitalist coin.
The demands of the strike are not revolutionary, nor do they try to be. They simply oppose the cutbacks of thousands of students, teachers, and workers from the university. Cutting services, reducing costs and subjecting students and workers to their war for markets, is vital for capitalism in its crisis of overproduction.
Many students understand that they don't have a future under capitalism. Even if they finish school, they face unemployment and the whole capitalist crisis. But disenchantment with capitalism will not lead to correct conclusions. Not being manipulated by the PRD-liberals is good. But students need to fight for a communist society, and build a revolutionary communist party whose goal is the destruction of capitalism. That way, whether the strike wins or loses, we turn this capitalist crisis, with its wars and fascism, into a fight for power for the working class. In order to advance in this direction, we must rely on the workers, and win them not just to supporting the strike, but to assume their vanguard role in the fight against capitalism.
SAN FRANCISCO - "MUNI drivers are in a danger zone. We are walking through a lion's den with pork-chop-shorts on, created by the laws of capitalist economics. The "economic boom" is the result of robbing the working class. Big Business is not going to put that 'boom' back into our contracts; not when they are fighting for survival against other capitalists in the global economy." So said a PLP member in a strategy meeting about the upcoming TWU Local 250a Union elections.
"I don't think many drivers understand what's facing us. Under the MUNI reorganization passed in Proposition E, it's a whole new ballgame when it comes to contract negotiations. We can't run to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors with management violations," added a union activist who had been in on previous contract negotiations and understands the old losing strategy of relying on elected Democrats.
"The downtown businesses are beating on us with Prop E," said another driver. "Chevron, Bank of America, Bechtel, the Gap, the West Coast Stock Exchange-all the members of the Committee on Jobs-look at MUNI as their transit system. Their agenda is set by their economic needs as the 'Gateway to the East.' The Gap exports jobs to Asian sweatshops to cut costs, but they can't export MUNI jobs. Instead they have a long-range campaign to destroy our wages and working conditions, and our ability to strike."
Proposition E calls for "efficient and economical work rules," and a heavy dose of discipline for MUNI workers. This means rush-hour service and new routes in commercial areas, with fare increases and service cuts in poor residential communities. It means cutting labor costs in our new contract by extending wage progression and more part-time runs.
Since our last contract in '96, new drivers start at 70% of the regular salary and have a 31-month wage progression. This steals $22,000 from each new full-time driver and about $13,000 from new part-timers over three years. New General Manager Burns wanted an eight-year wage progression when he was at Philadelphia Transit. This and other take-aways provoked a 40-day strike by TWU Local 234 in '97. Washington, DC Metro has an eight-year wage progression and new drivers start at 55% of regular wage. All the money stolen from the new workers, based on federal cuts in mass transit, has helped to pay for the 90 military actions carried out by the bosses in the last 10 years. War, racist cutbacks and fascist terror are what capitalism has to offer.
This election must develop working-class consciousness and prepare us to organize the 2000 contract fight. A class conscious MUNI workforce will fight to end the racist wage progression and part-timing that condemn young black workers to half a life. A class conscious Muni workforce will not accept a racist two-tier pension system that condemns young black workers to poverty on retirement. Most of all, this election can expand and consolidate a base for PLP among younger black workers and lead to more recruitment to the Party.
A veteran driver in PLP declared, "I know that capitalism does not work. I started work at 15 and I'm nearing retirement, and I'm only a few paychecks away from losing everything. Slowly but surely, the door to communist revolution is opening. I want to be part of the process that develops a party to fight for a system where we produce for the needs of our class, not the profits of the rulers. That's why I'm a communist." That's why we're running in this election.
SAN DIEGO, CA, Nov. 5 - Demetrious DuBose, a former Notre Dame and NFL football player, was shot to death by two San Diego cops on a sidewalk in Mission Beach, July 24, 1999. He was unarmed, shot 12 times, five times in the back. Police had received a report of a loud argument from owners of an apartment adjoining DuBose's friend's residence, where DuBose had fallen asleep. When the owner returned DuBose apologized for his behavior and left. The owner called the cops, but DuBose and his roommate had worked it out with him by the time the cops arrived.
Dubose cooperated with the police until they wanted to handcuff him because he admitted having been arrested before for drugs. He was maced by the cops, and they attacked him repeatedly with nunchakus (a Kung-fu chain weapon), but he threw off both cops and took both nunchakus. He faced the cops and said "Come on." Then the cops fired. This a summary of witnesses' statements to police. On November 1, the San Diego DA found this murder "justified." DA Pfingst said the cops were justified in handcuffing DuBose since they thought he was on PCP. (He wasn't, but had small amounts of alcohol and cocaine in his blood.) Pfingst said the cops were also justified in killing DuBose because he was holding the cops' nunchakus, a "deadly weapon." Obviously it's OK for the cops to use a deadly weapon on someone they haven't even arrested, but if they can't beat him up, they can kill him in "self defense."
Since early August a group of 20 to 80 activists have been holding weekly pickets at the Hall of Injustice to demand that the cops be put on trial for murder. After the DA refused, the Coalition of Afro-American Organizations called a demonstration, widely publicized in the press. It was held on a Friday at 1:00, when most students and workers could not participate. About 300 attended but heard no program for future action. One speaker said the City Council should change police policies. A Farrakhan spokesman said people should register to vote. Two preachers condemned violence in general, but specifically refused to say that killing DuBose was wrong.
The best speeches were by two parents whose children had been previously shot by cops. It was obvious that the organizers saw this rally mainly as a way of blowing off steam as mildly as possible. The cops are now "investigating" whether to discipline the two cops, but the Chief has already said that what they did was OK. Many people who were active in protesting this racist murder want to continue to fight it.
But even if demonstrations restrain the cops a little, killing people is a natural extension of the cops' role of harassing and intimidating workers, especially black and Latin workers. In the last ten years in San Diego County, a black person has been 3.6 times as likely to be killed by cops as a white person. The figure is 2.9 times for Latins, not counting those killed by the Border Patrol.
The only way to be safe from racist killer cops is get rid of the bosses that hire them and let them get away with murder.
For several years now the loudest noise in rock has been coming from four LA guys called Rage Against the Machine. They made a name for themselves by mixing heavy metal, rap, innovative guitar sounds and a dose of anger-driven political messages. Notoriety also came to them for their open support of Mumia Abu-Jamal, the Russian, Chinese and Cuban socialist revolutions and the Zapatista movement in Mexico.
The Battle of Los Angeles is Rage's third release and continues with giant guitar riffs that fuel songs similar to their second album, EvilEmpire.However, where RATM's message in the past might've been abstract, now they have become distinctively sharper. The albums opening track, "Testify", is an open condemnation of the rulers' drive to kill millions to protect oil interest in the MidEast: "I'm empty please fill me/ mister anchor assure me/ That Baghad is burning . . . I need you my witness/To dress this up so bloodless." And then later, "Mass graves for the pump and the price is set."
In "Guerrilla Radio" the futile political system and liberals who lead the way is in question: "They hold the reins and stole your eyes/The Fistagons bullets and bombs/Who stuff the banks/Who staff the party ranks/More for Gore or a son of a Drug Lord/None of the above fuck it cut the cord."
Several songs, "Sleep Now In the Fire, Born of Broken Man and Born as Ghost" on the album condemn religion and the adherence to how it controls workers minds.
"Ashes in the Fall" is about impending fascism and the connections between increased police terror, jails and loss of jobs is evident: "Listen to the fascist sing/ 'Take hope here/War is elsewhere/You were chosen/This is God's land/Soon we'll be free . . .'" Then reminding us that this has happened before: "This is the new sound/ Just like the old sound/Just like the noose wound/Over the new ground/ Ain't it funny how the factory doors close/Round the time that the school doors close/round the time that the jail cells/open up to greet you like the reaper."
Somehow in the resurgence of Pop candy music that floods the radio, RATM have found a platform to launch their political message. The great strength of Rage Against the Machine is that they're introducing millions of young people to a political view of the world that calls for their audience to take action by fighting passivity(in their CD booklet they list several mass organizations to get involved in like UNITE, Amnesty International, Rock for Choice etc).
Also, by combining the forms of rap and heavy metal/rock they have broadened their audience to reach a multiracial audience. They also toured with Wu Tang Klan two years ago. To paraphrase T. Morello, the Rage guitarists, "we seduce people into the type of music we play but try a radical message."
This said, however, RATM's message can also build illusions about the system of capitalism. Like other liberal and revisionists, their answer to the imprisonment of Mumia Abu Jamal is that he should receive a fair trial because he was railroaded in the trial that sent him to death row for shooting a cop. This line is not only incorrect, it is dangerous because it calls for workers to fight for reform demands. No worker can receive a fair trial under capitalism. The bosses set up their legal system to serve their own interests, not those of workers.
RATM's support of the Zapaptista movement has been to bolster the struggle for the freedom of the indigenous workers of Chiapas to represent themselves in a democratic government--ultimately not seeing that the war, sparked five years ago, in Chiapas is interimperialist rivalry between the U.S. and European rulers. The bosses democracy can no more serve the interests of workers than their legal system."War within a Breath" is an example of the RATM take on the war in Chiapas: "Everything can change on a new year's day/As everything changed on a new year's day/War within a breath/It's land or death."
Compared with the other stuff that's out their, The Battle of Los Angeles is an excellent album because it provokes political debate about what workers and students need to do to smash the system of capitalism. Even though Rage Against the Machine's message isn't one that will inspire many to fight for communism it will lead to many questions about imperialism, racism, the death penalty and religion. And these are debates that we should welcome to put forward our communist view of the world.
Our PLP youth club decided to go to the movies to have fun. Afterwards we realized the movie, was trying to deceive people, so we decided to write an article to Challenge Capitalism is bad; all movies under capitalism are controlled by the bosses. We chose to see Blue Streak, an action comedy about police and crime starring the popular comedian Martin Lawrence. This movie was definitely made for capitalism. They want us to think the police are "good", but they're not. They're just playing with our minds. The capitalists use their movies to train us to follow them. We pay to see the movie, and they get richer. They chose Martin for the main character because he's a hero. He works for capitalism.
In the movie, Martin and his friends try to steal a million-dollar diamond. Everything was going well until his "friend" decided to be selfish and tried to take the diamond for himself. When the cops were chasing Martin, he hid the diamond in an air duct of a building under construction. Two years later, when he gets out of jail to retrieve the diamond, he finds that the finished building is a new police station and the diamond is inside. So he pretends to be a police officer to get inside and find the diamond.
The first section of the movie shows the police as being stupid when they promote Martin to lead detective of the burglary unit. Martin quickly becomes a supercop, who breaks all the rules to solve crimes. The "gimmick of the movie is that someone is a good cop because they are "criminal minded." Not surprising since we know that cops are the real criminals anyway. Martin was getting the job done as a cop because he wanted to get the diamond in the police station. He didn't care about helping people. All he cared about was the million-dollar diamond.
For example, he went to the ladies bathroom to try to find the diamond. A woman officer caught him and screamed. Before she could tell on him an escaping criminal ran in. Martin, trying to escape himself, opened the bathroom stall and accidentally knocked the criminal out. The police treated Martin like a hero when all he was doing was getting the diamond for himself. The movie-and capitalism-thus promotes selfishness and the seeking of money. Under communism, if we have something we will share it, to help people, and we would eliminate money.
The police let Martin go knowing he was a criminal. In real life, the racist cops would never let a black criminal go. They'd jail him right away. The police abuse black and Latin people. Sometimes they let criminals go when the criminals pay them off with money or drugs.
This raises another serious issue: who are the real criminals? We must help our fellow workers to see that it is capitalism and the bosses that are criminal. All bosses steal the vast majority of what workers produce and call it profit. When Martin decides to steal the diamond he is identifying with the bosses' values. The bosses are not only thieves; they are cold blooded murderers as well. A clear example is the murder of our fellow worker Amadou Diallo and thousands of other workers murdered by police all the time.
Most people watch movies for fun, since they are tired from working for capitalism all day. But we realized that what is happening in the movie is harmful to the working class. We want people to think about these movies made by capitalists. We, the working class, can do something so capitalism doesn't gain more power. We can inform the world about what the movies are implying. We want to convince the world to join PLP and protest capitalism. We want the entire working class to have state power. Writing this review is helping us understand capitalism and communism better.
There they were. All these racist politicians and businessmen-people who have made hundreds of millions exploiting workers, people who command the racist police who brutalize our youth every day and night. And what were they doing? Honoring Walter Payton, the talented running back for the Chicago Bears who recently died. Payton was called "Sweetness" because he supposedly had a sweet personality. Maybe he did; maybe he was nice to individual people. Maybe he did give some time and money to charity-who knows? He did have millions and millions of dollars, and when you have that much money it's easy to give some away. And since he didn't perform enough labor to actually produce that much wealth, most of his wealth was given to him by the big racist capitalists from profits they exploited from the working class.
As for "Sweetness"-should we be "sweet" towards the Chicago bosses when their cops are shooting down black and Latino youth? Isn't that one of the reasons why they honor Payton? Because he told black and other youth, by his example, that they should not fight back. Instead the bosses use "role models" like Payton to win young workers to individualism. The bosses don't want us workers to think of ourselves as a class. They want us to think that inequality is based on merit rather than exploitation and murder. But the main point to understand isn't whether Payton was a nice guy, but rather what we can learn from the ways the capitalists use events like Payton's death.
Payton never rocked the boat or Challenged the racist, capitalist system. Yet there are examples of workers or pro-working class figures who were "successful" by capitalist standards yet still spoke out against the system. Both Paul Robeson and Muhammad Ali stood up for their political beliefs. Both paid the price for challenging the bosses' ideas. They both engaged in class struggle, Robeson far more than even Ali. Although the bosses' ideas are surround us, there is always the opportunity to choose sides. Walter Payton chose to serve the bosses rather than serve his class. The media is emphasizing how Payton never complained and faced his future with courage. Recently, I needed to have some repairs done on the floor of my house. When the guy was finishing up, I asked him if the chemicals he was working with were safe. He said: "No. I'm probably gonna get cancer. It happens to a lot of guys in this business when you use these chemicals, but I gotta make a living. Who knows."
Every year in the U.S. alone, 100,000 workers die from injuries and illnesses caused by their jobs. Workers risk illness and death in order to make sure that others who depend on us will have food and shelter. The capitalist bosses create role models to divert us, especially youth, from challenging the system. Yet working-class people perform far greater acts of heroism than the superstars. The lie that we can't compare to the superstars is one of the main falsehoods capitalism uses to keep us passive. The working class creates everything, from the buttons on our clothes to the bridges we drive across. And we will create a communist world, free from exploitation and free from the culture that tells us that some of us are worth less than others.
To a Red Soldier
I am a college student at a university in Lubbock, Texas. It was one of my professors that first gave me a Challenge paper. Although I do stand more on a socialist viewpoint, I took the paper with enthusiasm. I must admit that I read it from cover to cover. The last two issues I read dealt with the Klan protest and how black and white people can unite and fight.
I say fuck those capitalist pigs and KKKops who fill us with lies. I am originally from Houston and the KKKops down there are just as bad as the NYPD. Not too long ago an innocent Mexican man was shot 16 times in the back by the Houston Police Department. The final outcome was the dismissal of one of the officers. This type of oppression must end and right now. I did not spend four years as a Marine saving my money to go to school to be pushed around by KKKops and big business. To work my ass off serving a country that wants to serve the interestss of the rich man.
What about me? I work hard, make good grades and try to be a dutiful citizen. My father worked 30 years for an oil company that gave him a cheap watch and a partial pension when the price of oil went down. Thirty years of service pushed away because the bosses did not want to lose their precious oil. If it is at all possible, could someone reply to my e-mail and give some feedback. It would be greatly appreciated.
Ex-Marine Reader
The October issues of Challenge contained a series of letters and responses dealing with participation in rallies organized by nationalist/racist organizations, such as the Nation Of Islam (NOI). I agree we should not be opportunist and "pander" to these groups. However, we should be at their events, struggling for the leadership of the working class. It would be a grievous sectarian error for us to only hold our own "communist" rallies. We would be abandoning the honest workers and students who attend the many mass rallies which the ruling class organizes through a myriad of misleaders-including the police.
Until four months ago, I would never have seriously considered marching with the Chicago police. However, a series of events led me to go to a Kick Out Crime March in my neighborhood on October 16. The target was a local drug house, which the cops say they are trying to shut down. The march was planned in August, during the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS) monthly meeting for Beat #2212, where I live.
I don't plan to concentrate my Party building efforts at my local Beat meetings, but a lot of workers attend these meetings to complain about some problem on their block. This presents a contradiction because the CAPS main purpose is to polish the police department's image, not solve workers' problems. Sharpening some of these contradictions has, in turn, presented opportunities for building the Party.
I became involved through my membership in Unity in Diversity. This is a small anti-racist organization based mainly in the sections of Chicago known as Mt. Greenwood (mostly white) and the adjacent inter-racial Beverly-Morgan Park where I live. In July, another member of Unity in Diversity asked me to come to her Beat meeting in Mt. Greenwood where she planned to raise the issue of hate crimes. Following Benjamin Smith's racist rampage over the 4th of July weekend someone spray-painted racist graffiti on two garages, a house and a tombstone in Mt. Greenwood.
I was surprised at the contradictions evident in the meeting. Even though there is a community representative elected annually, that person does not chair the meetings. One or more officers sit up front while others lounge around the edges of the meeting room. Many of these cops are actually neighborhood residents. The Mt. Greenwood-Beverly-Morgan Park area is a favored place of residence for city workers, who must live within the city limits. Not surprisingly, this area of the city contains one of the highest percentages of Democratic Party voters. However, it also has the highest number of reported hate crimes of any comparable area in Chicago.
Most importantly, not all of the meeting participants were there to "support their local sheriff." One long-time resident reported a traffic problem on his block and then complained that he had never seen his alderman "and wouldn't know her if I did see her." A young woman complained bitterly about a group of teenagers on her block whose driving habits endangered her children. When her husband tried to talk to these young men, one of them a cop's son, tried to provoke him into a fight. Most of the complaints got "see-us-after-the-meeting, we'll-look-into-it" responses.
Finally, my friend got tired of waiting for the District #22 commander to report on the recent string of racist vandalism, so she stood up and questioned him. His only answer was that he had evidence that the same people were responsible for all of the spray-painting and that the investigation was continuing.
Two weeks later at my own beat meeting, I asked for an update on the spray painting investigation and got the standard "we'll-look-into-it" reply. But another man reported on a similar incident around the corner from his house. He also reported seeing two youths in Klan sheets outside a nearby cemetery. After more blank looks from the cops and their excuse that the cemetery was the county's responsibility, they finally promised to notify the county sheriff.
After the meeting, I introduced myself to this man. We have since become friends. He is now attending Unity in Diversity meetings, and he publicized our October meeting to the block clubs in his neighborhood. He is the main reason I went to the Kick Out Crime March. The march was cancelled due to the poor turnout, but I passed out our October meeting flyers to the 11 people (not the 15 cops) who did show up and met two more interested neighbors.
In case your wondering, I am known in Unity in Diversity as a PLP member, I bring our literature to the meetings, and two members are now regular Challenge readers. Self-critically, I have felt pretty intimidated about playing an active role in the beat meetings. However, I do plan to do much more socializing and discussing of Challenge with my new friends outside of the various meetings.
It is becoming clear that the meetings the ruling class organizes can be rich in opportunities to build the Party.
Chicago Comrade
Recently in Global class, while learning about the Industrial Revolution, our teacher asked, "What system do you think is best, communism, socialism or capitalism?" Being slick as he can be, the teacher took himself out of the question by saying, "Everybody believes in
what they want to." As communist students of the class, being as slick as we could be, we told and convinced the class that communism is the best system. One communist student said that under capitalism there are classes. Under communism, he said there will be no classes, but there will be equality. This helped convince the other students (80%) to vote for communism. The teacher responded to our analysis of capitalism by saying, "That's your opinion." We see he teaches the way the system wants him to. We spoke about facts.
Eveready Erasmus Communist Students
In Challenge (11/3) Ancient Red is correct in saying that "any country fighting its way to communism today would see vast improvement in quality of life for the lower part of the working class" but he is incorrect when he continues, saying "but less luxuries for high-paid workers." There would be no higher or lower paid workers nor money or wages if workers were able to win communism.
I believe that most of the working class that was strong enough politically to fight for and win communism would be happy to forego a few luxuries in return for the overwhelming benefits of being free from capitalism's wage slavery, class society, racism and imperialist wars to name just a few.
Ancient Red is also incorrect in saying that China's return to capitalism was due to a material basis rather than a political one. The basis for China's military victory, its ability to win over the vast majority of workers, its communist development of society (communes, construction brigades, social organizations) were all political in character and created the mass wealth that has been stolen from the working class by the capitalist-roaders. Most of China's workers and youth began to see and struggle against the destructive capitalist policies created by Mao's "New Democracy" (socialism). However, those comrades were unable to fight for communist revolution because of their respect for Mao which blurred their vision and caused their defeat.
In some ways the U.S. communist party's support of Roosevelt's "New Deal during the depression of the 1930's is not unlike what happened in China. But make no mistake: those events were political in nature and the result of communists who failed put communist politics in command.
A Comrade
"What are some ways that we can combat the WTO?" was the question asked by the 'teacher' of Activism 101, one of the classes offered at a teach-in on the World Trade Organization. The class was filled with all types of people, including a teamster and a few students that I knew from a mass organization. They all gave the liberal suggestions. Walk out of class (or work) to go to the demonstration, write letters to a bunch of people, "inform" the community, back up the unions who were against the WTO, etc. I, of course, had different ideas, and I couldn't seem to hold them in.
I raised my hand and informed the class of the impossibility of completely getting rid of global monoliths like the WTO while capitalism exists. I pointed out that even the union leaders that were (supposedly) "anti-WTO" had their own agendas. John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, wants a "place at the table" and even signed a letter of support for Bill Clinton to welcome the WTO to Seattle. Even the group leading the demonstration is not what it seems. They are financed by Ford Foundation, whose founder was an old friend of Hitler's. When I told this to the people in the class they seemed shocked (especially the teamster) but interested, so I decided to keep going.
I continued to expose the system for what it is, mentioning how a student had spoken earlier about how she had to call a lawyer to get her principal to let her pass out flyers in her school. I concluded by saying that the only way to truly get rid of the WTO and all the imperialist powers that are coming to the meeting is to get rid of the system that breeds them. The 'teacher' asked if I was talking about the education system. I clarified that I was talking about capitalism and a schoolteacher in the back row yelled out, "She's talking about revolution!" I got out a few Challenges in that class, including to the people from the mass organization, which was something I was slightly unsure of doing earlier.
Most of the people there seemed to like what I had to say, but had not yet put their trust in the working class and weren't sure if a revolution is possible. I hope to shake that pessimism out of many people during this anti-WTO push, and hopefully win a few of these fighters to the Party.
Red Student Ready for the WTO