On `Spouses of Steel'
I found the article and box on the Kaiser workers in
Washington State very interesting. Gave me a glimpse of the
beginnings of organization on another level after all these
months of the strike and lockout. The formation of the
"Spouses of Steel" is quite a step forward! I remember talking
to strikers at the Tacoma, Washington plant last fall who said
they had no women in the plant anymore - and yet the most
popular button at their rally that day was "Women of Steel."
Someone had brought some down from Spokane and everyone was proudly wearing them. I work in a mill that only has five women (out of about 150). So the question of the role the spouses can play in strengthening the struggle (or weakening it if just left to the bosses' pressure) is something we will have to think about as we also fight to get more women hired.
But I did not think the picture that went with the article was useful. "Up yours, Hurwitz!" is an expression not worthy of the coverage. I believe another choice of picture would have helped illustrate the coverage better - or no picture at all if that was the choice.
Jacquie Henderson
Houston, Texas
Why `national socialist?'
In Chris Remple's article on the support given by the union
leaders at Weirton Steel for Buchanan's campaign, the
following sentence appeared: " ` The globalists in Washington
who believe that all Americans are riding a wave of Wall
Street prosperity don't like to talk about the Weirtons of
America,' said Buchanan, in comments typical of his
increasingly anticapitalist and national socialist rhetoric."
I think it would be more accurate to refer to Buchanan's rhetoric as nationalist and populist, and avoid use of the term "national socialist," when referring to Buchanan's present rhetoric or demagogy.
The expression "national socialist" recalls the name of the movement adopted by the Hitlerites in Germany in the 1920s. "National socialism" was just the right label for Hitler and his cronies at the time.
But Buchanan has not adopted this label, nor is he likely to do so in the foreseeable future. There are other fascist forces in the U.S. who call themselves "national socialist:" the various self-proclaimed Nazis and skinhead types. They are less politically farsighted than Buchanan, and don't mind being identified fully with Hitlerism.
Buchanan has a different strategy. He uses populist rhetoric but avoids specifically "socialist" rhetoric. He avoids openly identifying himself with Hitler. He's careful about what he says so that he can pose as a conservative Republican.
Meanwhile, he uses his campaign as a tool to try to bring together some fascist-minded forces.
I don't think it would be wrong to say that Buchanan seeks to build a "national socialist" kind of movement. That is indeed what he's trying to do. But it would be misleading to say that he is using "national socialist" rhetoric now.
Jim Miller
Seattle, Washington