I think an opportunity was missed, however, to explain clearly the problem with that approach. The article assumes that readers of the Militant understand why patriotism is a bad thing for the antiwar movement and for the working class.
To a new reader, the article might appear to be sectarian nitpicking, when in fact fundamental principles are at stake that need to be explained.
Mindy Brudno
Wynantskill, New York
Smacks of red-baiting
An antiwar movement has grown out of the imperialist war drive and assault on Iraq, and is alive and well, and exists in the U.S. and in many countries throughout the world. The lies of the capitalist media are being challenged, and the debate currently is not being framed as a dispute among various capitalist politicians, but between the entire U.S. government and "the nay sayers," that is, us, "the protesters" in the antiwar movement. To me that is refreshing.
A national march was called for April 12 demanding, "Stop the War on Iraq--Bring the Troops Home Now." I had hoped that the Militant would have supported this mobilization, but from reading the April 14 issue of the Militant, that doesn’t appear to be the case. The article entitled: "U.S. peace coalitions support ‘our troops’" states: "The ANSWER coalition, which is dominated by the Workers World Party, another Stalinist organization, has called for an April 12 national march on Washington, D.C., under the slogan "Stop the War in Iraq." Demands by this group have become more vague and targeted at President George Bush, rather than Washington, as the demand ‘Bring the Troops Home Now!’ does, for example."
It is most likely that this march will not fulfill its potential because of the red-baiting and sectarianism that I have seen coming from some of the liberals, as was the case for the March 15 demonstration. However, this article in the Militant smacks of the same red-baiting and sectarianism that I have heard coming from the liberals. It is one thing to attack a Stalinist party and its publication, and it is quite another to smear a coalition. I hope that the editors of the Militant will come to see the error in this kind of approach.
John Harris
Boston, Massachusetts
Defeatism
Many in the peace movement have gone beyond saying "support our troops, bring them home" and are now saying that they hope for a speedy "victory" to "end the killing." I think it would be appropriate for the Militant to run one or more articles on why Marxists call for the defeat of "their own" imperialism in a war and why working people should not consider a military victory for the U.S. in Iraq something that will bring safety to "the troops."
Carol Sholin
Castro Valley, California
Iran writers on war
Below is a statement signed by 40 writers and intellectuals of Arab nationality in Khuzistan, Iran, issued on March 28. Khuzistan is the oil-rich province that borders Iraq.
One of the signers is a deputy in the current Majles (parliament), elected from Ahwaz in Khuzistan. The number one signer is Yousef Azizi Bani-Torof, a well-known writer and journalist.
Ma’mud Shirvani
Hazleton, Pennsylvania
March 28 statement on events in Iraq, issued by 40 writers and others of the Arab nationality in Khuzistan, Iran.
We, Arab writers and intellectuals of Khuzistan, condemn the savage assault against the nation of Iraq and the occupation of their land. We salute the heroic resistance of the Iraqi people and under these difficult conditions we declare our solidarity with them.
We view this assault as a violation of international legitimacy and a threat to peace in the region and the world. We ask other Iranian intellectuals and writers to adopt an unambiguous position and condemn this dirty colonial war.
We value the sympathy of the Arab people of Khuzistan and other Iranian nationalities with the people of Iraq, and we ask the authorities in the province to make it possible for the Arab masses in Khuzistan to express their anger and their deep feelings in support of their Iraqi neighbors. This can be done in various ways, such as demonstrations and sending various kinds of aid.
‘Sleeper cell’ trial
The "sleeper cell" trial of the Norman Street 3 began Friday March 28. [These are] frame-up indictments and trials of Yousef Hmimssa, Farouk Ali Haimoud, Ahmad, Hanan, Karim Koubriti, and Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi. They are U.S. permanent residents from Morocco and Algeria, North Africa.
The [September 2001 arrest] warrant was issued because they were renting at the former address of someone who has since been cleared of all charges and of all suspicion, yet Haimoud, Hanan and Koubriti are under indictment based on their collection of audio music tapes, scribbles in a day planner, and videos of Disneyland and Las Vegas that were found by Federal police in their apartment.
Our Moroccan- and Algerian-American friends are the first victims of government roundups and stigmatizing of citizens and immigrants after September 11.
According to the Detroit News/Free Press, old LSG Sky Chef badges were found in Haimoud, Hanan, and Koubriti’s apartment when it was raided. These workers, however, worked in the kitchen. Their badges didn’t even give them access to the ramp. Yet, suspicion has been cast on them.
The indictment against them accuses them of holding views of salafiyya, takfir, and wahabism, wrongly identified in the indictment, and with no proof that they held such views. The indictment makes no connection between the defendants and these philosophical currents except to say that "salafist tapes"--whatever that means: songs, chants of the Quran?--were found in the apartment.
The political views of the framed-up defendants are no different from the democratic views of workers anywhere, and should not be used to stigmatize them.
Denis Hoppe
Ann Arbor, Michigan
The letters column is an open forum for all viewpoints on subjects of interest to working people.
Please keep your letters brief. Where necessary they will be abridged. Please indicate if you prefer that your initials be used rather than your full name.
Front page (for this issue) |
Home |
Text-version home