MIM Notes ***

MIM Notes 278 · March 15, 2003 · Page 1

MIM Notes

March 15, 2003, Nº 278

The Official Newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)

Free

INSIDE: Prison Poetry * Chomsky, VIdal, etc. * Una Página en Español...

MIM
PO Box 29670
Los Angeles, CA 90029
Return Service Requested

PRESORTED STANDARD

U.S. POSTAGE PAID

PERMIT #56365

BOSTON, MA

On the web: www.etext.info/Politics/MIM

You are not on a mailing list. You will not receive this paper again unless you take action.

Pentagon to

send 3,000

more U.$.

troops to

Philippines

Arroyo regime scuttles
implementation to save face

n agreement between the

Philippine government of

President Gloria Macapagal-

Arroyo and the United $tates to allow

U.$. troops to engage in combat on

Philippine soil fell through on March 1st,

one week after the Pentagon leaked its

plans to send 3,000 troops to the southern

Philippines. Widespread opposition in the

Philippines forced the U.$.-backed

Arroyo regime first to try and renegotiate

the "semantics" of the deal, then to table

it indefinitely.(1)

The Philippine constitution (re-written

after former U.$.-backed dictator

Ferdinand Marcos' ouster) forbids foreign

troops from engaging in combat there.

The U.$.-Arroyo regime justified the

arrival of over 1,000 U.$. troops in

January of 2002 using a technicality: they

were there as part of "training exercises"

and would not participate in combat

"except in self defense."(2)

When the Pentagon's planned "military

operation" became public knowledge,

Philippine Defense Secretary Reyes flew

to Washington--not to change the

substance of the plans but, to haggle over

terminology. According to "a senior

[U.$.] defense official," "There is no gap

[in understanding the mission] between

the two militaries. They knew exactly

what we were going to say and how we

were going to say it.... [Americans] will

be on patrol with them, so they'll have to

be able to operate [in combat]."

All that remained, according to another

talking head, were "some legal niceties

that have to be massaged for public

MIM stumps for Sison,

pushes anti-imperialism

Los Angeles

IM handed out MIM Notes and

collected 26 signatures on our

petition to support Prof. Jose

Maria Sison (1) from demonstrators

calling on the Los Angeles City Council

to pass a resolution against a unilateral

Amerikan war in Iraq. The council passed

the resolution 9-4 on 21 February, and

Mayor Jim Hahn signed it, making L.A.

the largest U.$. city to oppose the Bush-

Cheney-Rumsfeld war plans.(2) In the

same meeting, the council voted

unanimously to ask the Federal

government for more money to prevent

terrorism in the city of L.A.

The crowd was extremely friendly to

Prof. Sison's cause, and most people who

Imperialist

drive in the

Middle East

1991 Continued

If we are to be successful in building

on the opposition to the war on Iraq,

today's anti-war activists need to keep

the larger imperialist picture in mind.

To that end, we reprint the following

excerpt from MIM Notes 48, January

1991. Although the economic balance

between Amerika and its allies is

somewhat different today, after a strong

showing for Amerika in the late 1990s,

the imperialist motivations today are

largely the same as they were last time

around. Amerikan leaders do have

personal motivations and political

styles, but the underlying pattern is as

old as imperialism. Protestors may

chant "Impeach Bush!", but today's

war over the Middle East is not a

product of the decision to give the

presidency to George W. Bush. For the

full text of this issue of MIM Notes,

see http://www.etext.info/Politics/MIM/

mn/mn.php?issue=048.

by MC12 & MC44

nstead of choosing between war and

diplomacy, the United States is

pursuing both with a vengeance.

Consolidating power over allies, creating

puppets and punishing defectors, the

USA is laying the groundwork for a

broader military victory in the war of

expansion in the Middle East. The wide-

MIM reviews

books, films on the

"war on terrorism"

In this issue we review several

popular books on the so-called "war

on terrorism" and the impending war

on Iraq: "Terrorism and War" by

Howard Zinn (page 7), "Perpetual War

for Perpetual Peace: How We Got to

Be So Hated," by Gore Vidal (page

4), and "Blowback: The Costs and

Consequences of American Empire"

by Chalmers Johnson (page 5). We

also review the film, "Power and

Terror: Noam Chomsky in Our Times,"

(page 8).

AGAINST THE WAR

L.A. passes weak

anti-war resolution

stopped to talk

about the

petition had

firm and

p r o g r e s s i v e

opinions on the

wrongheadedness

of the "War on

Terrorism."

Asked to sign a

p e t i t i o n

defending the democratic rights of political

refugees, one bystander quipped "that

depends on the refugee!" S/he was

referring to John Ashcroft's policy of

calling refugees whose persecution the

united snakes funds (like Palestinians),

while turning Iraqi refugees into poster

children for the need to bomb Saddam

Hussein out of office.

Other demonstrators only needed to

hear that Prof. Sison is a revolutionary

political activist smeared as a terrorist by

the Amerikan government, and they were

clamoring for our clipboard. And a couple

were already familiar with Prof. Sison and

his situation. Everyone who got a copy of

MIM Notes was pleased to see us out

there and happy to take a newspaper with

politics much more radical than the

resolution they had turned out to endorse.

In the council meeting, MIM saw the

LAPD "protect and serve" an older

white-haired woman wearing a t-shirt and

buttons with anti-war slogans. She stood

up towards the end of the debate to make

some comment, and before three words

were out of her mouth two pigs grabbed

her arms and started dragging her from

the council chamber. She later told MIM

that she had only been trying to tell the

city council of plans to carpet bomb

Go to page 9...

Go to page 5...

Go to page 6...

MIM Notes 278 · March 15, 2003 · Page 2

What is MIM?

The Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) is the collection of existing or emerging

Maoist internationalist parties in the English-speaking imperialist countries and their English-

speaking internal semi-colonies, as well as the existing or emerging Maoist Internationalist
parties in Belgium, France and Quebec and the existing or emerging Spanish-speaking
Maoist Internationalist parties of Aztlan, Puerto Rico and other territories of the U.$. Empire.

MIM Notes is the newspaper of MIM. Notas Rojas is the newspaper of the Spanish-speaking
parties or emerging parties of MIM. MIM upholds the revolutionary communist ideology
of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and is an internationalist organization that works from the

vantage point of the Third World proletariat. MIM struggles to end the oppression of all
groups over other groups: classes, genders, nations. MIM knows this is only possibly by
building public opinion to seize power through armed struggle. Revolution is a reality for

North America as the military becomes over-extended in the government's attempts to
maintain world hegemony. MIM differs from other communist parties on three main
questions: (1) MIM holds that after the proletariat seizes power in socialist revolution, the

potential exists for capitalist restoration under the leadership of a new bourgeoisie within
the communist party itself. In the case of the USSR, the bourgeoisie seized power after the
death of Stalin in 1953; in China, it was after Mao's death and the overthrow of the "Gang

of Four" in 1976. (2) MIM upholds the Chinese Cultural Revolution as the farthest advance
of communism in humyn history. (3) As Marx, Engels and Lenin formulated and MIM has
reiterated through materialist analysis, imperialism extracts super-profits from the Third

World and in part uses this wealth to buy off whole populations of oppressor nation so-
called workers. These so-called workers bought off by imperialism form a new petty-
bourgeoisie called the labor aristocracy. These classes are not the principal vehicles to

advance Maoism within those countries because their standards of living depend on
imperialism. At this time, imperialist super-profits create this situation in the Canada, Quebec,
the United $tates, England, France, Belgium, Germany, Japan, Italy, Switzerland,

Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Israel, Sweden and Denmark. MIM accepts people as
members who agree on these basic principles and accept democratic centralism, the system
of majority rule, on other questions of party line.

"The theory of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin is universally applicable. We should

regard it not as dogma, but as a guide to action. Studying it is not merely a matter of
learning terms and phrases, but of learning Marxism-Leninism as the science of revolution."

- Mao Zedong, Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 208.

Editor, MC206; Production, MC12

Letters

MIM Notes

The Official Newsletter of The Maoist Internationalist Movement

ISSN 1540-8817

MIM Notes is the bi-weekly newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement. MIM

Notes is the official Party voice; more complete statements are published in our journal,
MIM Theory. Material in MIM Notes is the Party's position unless noted. MIM Notes
accepts submissions and critiques from anyone. The editors reserve the right to edit
submissions unless permission is specifically denied by the author; submissions are
published anonymously unless authors insist on identification (prisoners are never
identified by name). MIM is an underground party that does not publish the names of its
comrades in order to avoid the state surveillance and repression that have historically
been directed at communist parties and anti-imperialist movements. MCs, MIM comrades,
are members of the Party. The Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (RAIL) is an anti-
imperialist mass organization led by MIM (RCs are RAIL Comrades). MIM's ten-point
program is available to anyone who sends in a SASE.

The paper is free to all prisoners, as long as they write to us every 90 days to confirm

their subsciptions. There are no individual subscriptions for people outside prison.

People who want to receive newspapers should become sponsors and distributors.

Sponsors pay for papers, distributors get them onto the streets, and officers do both
distribution and financial support. Annual cost is: 12 copies (Priority Mail), $120; 25
(Priority Mail), $150; 50 (Priority Mail), $280; 100, $380; 200, $750; 900 (Express
Mail), $3,840; 900 (8-10 days), $2,200. To become a sponor or distributor, send
anonymous money orders payable to "MIM." Send to MIM, attn: Camb. branch, PO Box
400559, Cambridge, MA 02140. Or write mim3@mim.org.

Most back issues of MIM Notes are available free on our web site. The web site con-

tains thousands of documents, with ordering information for many more.

MIM grants explicit permission to copy all or part of this newspaper for any reason, as

long as we are credited.

For general correspondence, contact:

MIM

P.O. Box 29670

Los Angeles, CA 90029-0670

eMail: <mim@mim.org>

WWW: <http//www.etext.info/Politics/MIM>

Money in Bush's
pocket

Greetings and respects to one and all.
First, thank you for MIM Notes. I have

finally received it. Second, MIM states in the
January 1 issues (#273, p. 6, "Koreans Step
Up..."): "Bush is meddling in their affairs for
profit."

MIM could not have said it any better. In

fact it seems as if Bush's main concern is
money in his pocket. His, not ours.

For example, Iraq. Now we all know that

Iraq is rich is oil, second to Saudi Arabia from
what I'm told. Okay, do you think that Bush
really cares about the treatment of the Iraqi
civilians when in fact while governor of Texas
his so-called "tough on crime" administration
killed way too many Texas prisoners on Death
Row? At the same time, Texas Department of
Correction officers were very underpaid with
the threat of physical violence and serious
harm surrounding them every day on the job.
TDC during Bush's term in Texas was the most
violent of all other state prisons, from gang
violence to individual violence.

I'm being told one thing, but my eyes see

different. I actually believe that Bush wouldn't
give a rat's ass about Iraqi civilians if I wasn't
for the billions of barrels of oil that Iraq sits
on top of. Nor would he have a care for North
Korean civilians if he didn't see a profit in
arms sales to South Korea. Bush is all about
money in his pocket and forget the rest of us.

P.S. I'm going to pass the MIM Notes down

our line. I'll let you know the responses.

--a Texas prisoner, Feb 2003

MIM replies: Thank you for writing, and

for sharing our MIM Notes with other
prisoners. We agree that Bush's action toward
Iraq and north Korea are self- interested;
however, it's important to see that the
interests he represents is a class interest, that
of the imperialist bourgeoisie, not just his own
personal interest. That means, also, that he's
not just interested in short- term profits, but
in long-term domination of Third World labor
and resources. That's why the U$ is planning
a long-term occupation of Iraq and maintains
a permanent presence in the Middle East and
Asia.

With regard to Texas prisons, we agree

Bush is hypocritical to complain about the
treatment of Iraqis after presiding over the
Texas gulag system with such a heavy hand.
However, we don't agree that Texas prison
guards are overpaid. Like other members of
the labor aristocracy in Amerika, their wages
are subsidized by the exploitation of members
of the oppressed nations in North America
and abroad. These guards are pretty low in
the labor aristocracy hierarchy, of course, and
we don't deny that they have difficult jobs in
some respects. But the solution is not to pay
them more; rather, it's to change the social
relations that make their positions necessary.
They are cogs in the machine of imperialism.
The people of Iraq and north Korea -- and
the prisoners in Texas -- are the victims of
that machine's domination.

"American patriot"
doesn't like MIM

Dear MIM: You people have no idea what

it takes to keep a nation free. You relish the
benifits [sic] of freedom and spit in the face
of those who provide it for you. If the Iraqi
people are so poor then how can their leader
pledge to spend billion$ in trade with germany
over the next year. The greatest threats to the
iraqi people are $addam Hussein and YOU!!!
Sit back, thank God your [sic] an American,
and let the Greatest President we have had in
10 years continue to provide you with the
freedom to protest.....

Thank You,
--Patriot, Veteran, AMERICAN, Feb 2003
MIM responds: These comments reflect the

typical jingoism of Amerikans who ignore
facts in favor of pleasant sound bites from
government-mouthpiece media. Anyone
denying the poverty of the Iraqi people is
living with their heads in the sand as even
government agencies admit the devastating
effects of UN sanctions. Nor can it be true
that current Iraqi misery is solely due to Mr.
Hussein enriching himself, as before 1991 Iraq
had one of the most advanced healthcare
systems in the region.

As RAIL reports on it's "Imperialism Kills"

web page: "A new survey of central and
southern Iraq by the United Nations agency
UNICEF shows that half a million children
under five years old died as a result of the
U.$. war and sanctions from 1991 to 1998. The
UNICEF survey covered the parts of the
country that are not under direct foreign
control. These regions are home to 85% of
the population. It showed that `under-5
mortality more than doubled from 56 deaths
per 1000 live births (1984-1989) to 131 deaths
per 1000 live births (1994-1999). Likewise
infant mortality -- defined as the death of

children in their first year -- increased from
47 per 1000 live births to 108 per 1000 live
births within the same time frame.'" (http://
w w w . e t e x t . o r g / P o l i t i c s / M I M / r a i l /
impkills.html)

We get this kind of hate mail from Amerikan

patriots so often we have a FAQ page on our
web site devoted to it.(1) There we state:

The facts about imprisonment in the United

$tates are that the United $tates has been the
world's leading prison-state per capita for the
last 25 years, with a brief exception during
Boris Yeltsin's declaration of a state of
emergency. That means that while Reagan was
talking about a Soviet "evil empire" he was
the head of a state that imprisoned more
people per capita. In supposedly "hard-line"
Bulgaria of the Soviet bloc of the 1980s, the
imprisonment rate was less than half that of
the United $tates.

To find a comparison with U.$.

imprisonment of Black people, there is no
statistic in any country that compares
including apartheid South Africa of the era
before Mandela was president. The last
situation remotely comparable to the
situation today was under Stalin during war
time. The majority of prisoners are non-violent
offenders and the U.S. Government now holds
about a half million more prisoners than China;
even though China is four times our
population.

The rednecks tell MIM that we live in a

"free country." They live in an Orwellian 1984
situation where freedom is imprisonment.

Notes:
1. http://www.etext.info/Politics/MIM/faq/

freecoun.html.

MIM Notes 278 · March 15, 2003 · Page 3

Regular readers of Under Lock & Key

will already know that after 14 months of

almost complete censorship of MIM in

Attica Correctional Facility we began to

see signs of progress in October 2002.

Thanks to the diligent work of many

RAIL comrades and USW leaders who

took up the battle immediately after being

transferred to the notorious maximum

security prison, we now have word directly

from the Chairman of Media Review that

MIM can send materials to prisoners in

Attica. Of course, Media Review

reserves the right to censor any material

it deems a "threat to security" as it does

throughout the NYS DOCS. However,

this is a substantial victory. Where

previously all letters, MIM Notes and

books were returned, now we can expect

only the occasional rejection of Under

Lock & Key as we see in other NY

prisons.

One prisoner who put a substantial

amount of energy into this campaign

recently met with Chairman Ed O'Mara

who has assured repeatedly and in print

that MIM will receive the same scrutiny

as any other incoming mail.(1) This is

significant because previously the

mailroom staff had returned materials

with notes saying "unauthorized group,"

and the across the board censorship did

not pass through the usual review process

where prisoners have a chance to

counter the decision. These statements

combined with recent reports from

prisoners in Attica receiving MIM Notes,

indicate that the Attica mailroom staff

has begun to follow NYS DOCS policies

again. The comrade mentioned above

wrote:

"It was due to my appealing a denial

to write you to the superintendent of the

facility that prisoners are now permitted

to write directly to you from Attica. I

spoke directly to the Media Review

Chairperson and wrote the

Superintendent in reference to supposed

censorship of MIM publications without

following supreme court dictates as set

forth in ITAL Procunier vs. Martinez

END. They replied to me that this isn't

their policy and that MIM is treated like

any other incoming publication."

Victory Against Censorship in Attica

In one of the recent meetings, Chairman

O'Mara showed the anti-censorship

postcards that we have been sending to

his staff. Over the course of the campaign

we have sent hundreds, if not thousands

of these postcards, which can be

downloaded from MIM's webpage.(1) At

this time we are declaring an end to this

campaign targeted at Attica. We believe

we have demonstrated that we are

watching and that we have support both

inside and outside. And we turn our

attention to other struggles in New York

prisons, such as the use of the "Loaf," as

well as other anti-censorship campaigns

still going on across the country.

Notes: 1. Chairman O'Mara's letters,

NYS DOCS Media Review policies,

examples of the anti-censorship postcards

and other campaign info are available on

RAIL's NYC and Albany webpages:

www.etext.info/Politics/MIM/albany/

campaigns.html.

UNITED

FRONT

Get the new issue of MIM Theory, #14, and read the latest
theory on building the movement to overthrow
imperialism once and for all, in 174 pages. Articles include
MIM congress resolutions, history from the Spanish Civil
War to Puerto Rico, Kenya, and Stalin -- plus international
documents, reviews, and much more. Send $7.50 to the
address on page 2.

In our report on the February 15 anti-

war rally in Los Angeles (1) we wrote

that that even though the governments of

France, Spain and Italy oppose the U.$.

war on Iraq, their populations protested

the war in more force than the

Amerikans. This was incorrect. In fact,

the French government is the only one of

these three opposing the war. Spain's

government has been vocal in trying to

gain UN support for a war in Iraq, and

Italy's leaders also support a possible war.

The countries in the European Union

(EU) are split on the impending war on

Iraq. France and Germany currently

oppose the war, while others support it--

notably Spain, Italy, and several eastern

European countries whose economies are

relatively more dependent on the United

$tates and could use the money Uncle

$am is bound to give them for their

support. France and Germany even dis-

invited several eastern European

countries from a recent EU meeting

where Iraq dominated the agenda. (The

eastern Europeans were originally invited

to attend as a courtesy in advance of their

official induction into the EU.)

This reflects both imperialist geopolitics

as usual and the potential for a future re-

alignment of the imperialist powers. On

the one hand, the United $tates can buy

support for its military adventures or crush

any principled opposition with economic

sanctions. As the U.$. ambassador said

to a country on the security council which

voted against the last Gulf War, "That's

the most expensive vote you ever

cast."(3)

On the other hand, as the United $tates

overstretches its military and economic

power (from Iraq to north Korea to the

Philippines to Afghanistan etc. etc.), other

imperialist and wannabe imperialist

powers will find it possible to stand up to

the United $tates--and be compelled to,

both by direct Amerikan insults and the

need to distance themselves from an

increasingly hated Amerika. Such a loss

of support would further overstretch the

U.$. military and create opportunities for

revolutionary anti-imperialist movements

in the Third World.

Notes:

1. MIM Notes 277, 1 Mar 2003.

2. www.expatica.com/

germanymain.asp?pad=190,230,&item_id=29189

3. "The Hidden Wars of Desert

Storm," video, 2002.

CORRECTION

By RAIL and SLALA comrades.

A new video on the 1987 Mendiola

Massacre in the Philippines headlined a

February 10 forum on the Present Peace

and Human Rights Situation in the

Philippines. The video included testimony

from veteran activists and survivors of

the Mendiola Massacre. There were also

youth performances showing the effects

of landlessness caused by the

government's drive to satisfy big

imperialists by forcibly converting

farmland into cash crops and golf courses.

A speaker introducing the film

explained how the Manila government has

been violently opposing the demands of

Filipinos since the 1970s, when it opened

fire on students protesting dictator

Marcos' changes to the constitution to

extend his stay in power. This was the

first Mendiola massacre. The film showed

how the Manila government once again

spilled Filipino blood near the Mendiola

bridge in 1987 when 30,000 peasants,

students and workers marched to the

Presidential Palace to demand that the

u.$.-Aquino regime implement its

promises for land reform. Hundreds of

police and Philippine marines stopped the

protestors near the Mendiola Bridge and

then fired upon them for more than a

minute. The police and marines shot

many of the demonstrators in the back

or in the head, killing 13 and wounding

105. To this day, victims and survivors

have not received any apology or

restitution for the murders.

The film documents disturbing aspects

of the history of u.$.-backed puppet

regimes in the Philippines that fly in the

face of the tale spun by the u.$., that u.$.-

backed "Corey" Aquino was a step

towards democracy. In reality the 1987

Mendiola Massacre triggered the

cancellation of the peace negotiations and

the 60-day cease-fire between the Manila

government and the National Democratic

Front of the Philippines. Shortly thereafter

the u.$.-Aquino regime dropped any

pretenses at peacemaking and declared

"total war" against the people.

The u.$. imperialists also claim the

current u.$.-Arroyo regime is

"democratic," yet it continues the anti-

people legacy of the Mendiola Massacre.

This is especially true following

Macapagal-Arroyo's complete

collaboration with the u.$.-led "war on

terrorism". Last year under the pretext

of helping her puppet regime fight the Abu

Sayaaf gangsters, Macapagal-Arroyo

approved the landing of U.$. troops in

southern Mindanao to participate in so-

called "military exercises." (2) Recently

Macapagal-Arroyo took her toadying up

a notch and allowed 3000 u.$. troops to

carry out direct combat operations.(3)

Public outcry forced her to renege on this

decision and "renegotiate" terms with the

Pentagon (see story on p. 1).

This incursion coincides with the u.$.-

Arroyo regime's total cancellation of

peace negotiations with the revolutionary

forces in the Philippines. It is very

probable that u.$. troops will participate

Film marks 16th Anniversary of the Mendiola Massacre

Go to page 8...

MIM Notes 278 · March 15, 2003 · Page 4

by Gore Vidal

NY: Thunder's Mouth Press, 2002,

160pp. paperback

reviewed by MC5,

February 2, 2003

Many of the big book review pundits

tried to drag this book into the category

of mediocrity. We at MIM are glad that

an author of Gore Vidal's stature put out

this book. Simply because he wrote it, it

will be available everywhere. The critics

did not like it because it was too raw, but

what Gore Vidal is saying is just what

Amerikkkans need to start confronting.

President G. W. Bush said about the

people conducting terrorism against the

united $tates: "They hate our freedoms,

our freedom of religion, our freedom of

speech, our freedom to vote and

assemble and disagree with each

other."(p. 5) Gore Vidal did not point out

the united $tates is the country with the

highest percentage of people in prison on

the planet; nor could he point to MIM's

archive of documents from censors,

because it did not exist yet when Vidal

wrote the book. Howard Zinn in his book

"Terrorism and War" said, "Sweden is

not worrying about terrorists. Denmark,

Holland, New Zealand." So one could

wonder if Bush meant to say that the

united $tates and its most gung-ho allies

are the only "free" countries.

Gore Vidal did not mention any of that,

but he told the Amerikan public exactly

what it really needed to know--that this

war did not start yesterday and the United

$tates started it, whether the public knew

it or not. It took Vidal 20 pages of tables

to list all the attacks Uncle $am has

carried out since World War II: "In these

several hundred wars against

Communism, terrorism, drugs, or

sometimes nothing much, between Pearl

Harbor and Tuesday, September 11, 2001,

we tended to strike the first blow. But

then we're the good guys, right?

Right."(p. 40)

The problem with the Amerikan public

is that it does not want to pay attention to

politics, but it wants to condemn attacks

on Amerikans when in fact, as Vidal

points out, the situation is usually a

"counter-attack," not an attack. Far from

attacking "freedom," the opponents are

defending themselves, whether in the

Middle East, Africa, Latin America or

Asia.

Yet the people who do not want to know

why attacks have taken place or what

generates them are not serious about

ending them. Simple moral fulminations

devoid of context or understanding have

never solved a problem. If so, the

churches would have succeeded in

bringing Heaven to earth a long time ago.

The naive call us "traitors" for saying so,

and we say we are tired of living under

threat of death from terrorism, war and

the fascism they provoke, because the

apathetic or greedy don't want to address

political problems seriously.

Most of the book actually explores the

Timothy McVeigh saga and how Clinton

was killing civil liberties before Bush and

the "Patriot Act." For many people of

the world, the majority of the book may

seem a trifle boring, because it deals with

the origins of the united $tates and the

theory behind how the public could keep

its government accountable.

Gore Vidal is one of the few people

around who still understands the original

intent and frame of mind of the founding

revolutionaries of the united $tates. They

believed that with everyone armed or

potentially armed equally with the

government, the government officials

would not be inclined to take advantage

of their power. Even if such officials were

totally corrupt and inclined to be despotic

for one reason or another, the power of

an armed citizenry would offset them.

The arming of the citizenry would force

all concerned to work out a solution to

underlying problems instead of victimizing

civil liberties and engaging in war--so

thought the American revolutionaries of

1776. The connection between guns and

political power was so clear in their minds

that they suspected those government

officials who wanted a standing army

wanted it to deprive the citizenship of its

liberties. We can just imagine what the

American Revolutionaries of 1776 would

say about a military so huge that it cost 9

digits a year for decades at a time and

conducts so many attacks that u.$. citizens

cannot even keep track of it all.

When Timothy McVeigh carried out the

bombing of an Oklahoma federal building,

he was taking the "American Revolution"

seriously and waging a "counter-

attack"(p. 100) to offset the killing by the

federal government of 82 religious sect

members at Waco in April 1993. Exactly

two years later, McVeigh killed 168 people

by blowing up the Murrah Federal

Building in Oklahoma. The reason the

public was to have the right to bear arms

was to prevent Waco situations from

developing, so reasoning strictly within

bourgeois Liberal limits, McVeigh

concluded that only a counter-attack

would prevent future attacks on liberties

by the federal government. For that

matter, McVeigh also raised doubts about

his role in the Gulf War attacking innocent

people. He realized that the federal

government was out-of-control globally,

not just nationally. Speaking the federal

government's own language, he called the

suffering of children in the Murrah

Building "collateral damage," a new

phrase he learned from the Pentagon

during the Gulf War.

Instead of concluding the federal

government should back off from the

public, the Los Angeles Times polled and

found 58% willing to sacrifice liberties to

end terrorism.(p. 116) Gore Vidal is one

who understands that the U.$. political

system was not meant to work that way,

and in fact cannot work that way. There

is a big connection amongst war,

government dishonesty and civil liberties.

The politically naive say, "if you have

nothing to hide, why should you fear

giving up your privacy (and other civil

liberties)." What these people do not

understand is that civil liberties protect

against corrupt and dishonest people in

government. It is not a question of hiding

something. It's a matter of preventing

government-sponsored terrorism. It is a

matter of not trusting the government and

giving it unaccountable power. This was

at the core of the racist, white founding

fathers' philosophy having suffered the

oppression of a tyrannic government. And

despite the slavery and genocide against

the First Nations rampant at the time,

MIM would say that that idea is still more

advanced than what we hear today about

the need to sacrifice freedom for safety.

The founding fathers had a "theory" of

how to keep government under control

of the people. We at MIM do not think

that theory is exactly right, but we

recognize and share concern for the

question that drove that theory. Most of

what we hear today on the subject is pure

emotion driven by fascist agitators in the

media and government.

A system of civil liberties cannot

survive when people refuse to look at the

causes of social problems. When social

disunity is not addressed at the root, there

is no hope for real society-wide civil

liberties. People like Gore Vidal say that

we should harken back to Amerikans'

original values. MIM would say no

capitalist system ever created the

conditions for civil liberties. Instead, the

rulers such as Bush use rhetoric about

civil liberties to justify war. That's why

there is a constant cycle alternating

between more freedom and more

fascism--with the Third World getting

most of the fascism. Currently the

pendulum swings toward fascism even

inside the United $tates, because the

public refuses to address underlying

problems.

It goes without saying that if

Amerikkkans cannot understand why they

don't want Uncle $am spying on them,

sending tanks to people's houses or

bombing entire neighborhoods as in the

MOVE bombing in Philadelphia, they will

not understand why people in the Third

World also strike back against

Amerikkka. This may be why Gore Vidal

has latched on to the Timothy McVeigh

case and the related questions of civil

liberties.

Review:

Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace

Militarism is war-mongering or the

advocacy of war or actual carrying out

of war or its preparations.

While true pacifists condemn all

violence as equally repugnant, we

Maoists do not consider self-defense

or the violence of oppressed nations

against imperialism to be militarism.

Militarism is mostly caused by

imperialism at this time. Imperialism

is the highest stage of capitalism--

seen in countries like the United

$tates, England and France.

Under capitalism, capitalists often

profit from war or its preparations.

Yet, it is the proletariat that does the

dying in the wars. The proletariat

wants a system in which people do not

have self-interest on the side of war-

profiteering or war for imperialism.

Militarism is one of the most

important reasons to overthrow

capitalism. It even infects oppressed

nations and causes them to fight each

other.

It is important not to let capitalists

risk our lives in their ideas about war

and peace or the environment. They

have already had two world wars

admitted by themselves in the last 100

years and they are conducting a third

right now against the Third World.

Even a one percent annual chance of

nuclear war destruction caused by

capitalist aggressiveness or "greed" as

the people call it should not be tolerated

by the proletariat. After playing

Russian Roulette (in which the bullet

chamber is different each time and not

related at all to the one that came up in

previous spins) with 100 chambers and

one bullet, the chance of survival is

only 60.5% after 50 turns. In other

words, a seemingly small one percent

annual chance of world war means

eventual doom. After 100 years or turns

of Russian Roulette, the chances of

survival are only 36.6%. After 200

years, survival has only a 13.4%

chance.

What is militarism?

MIM Notes 278 · March 15, 2003 · Page 5

Baghdad. She wanted to stress the

importance of opposing this war to

prevent Amerikan war crimes against the

Iraqi people.(3)

For all this, MIM was surprised to learn

the "anti-war" resolution itself is a half-

assed piece of liberal twaddle and a good

argument against radicals getting involved

in Amerikan electoral battles. The

resolution calls Saddam Hussein "a despot

with aims contrary to peace," expresses

"unquestionable pride in and support for

the men and women of the Armed

Services," supports all "diplomatic

efforts" to avert this war including

ongoing weapons inspections, and

opposes only a unilateral Amerikan

war.(4)

So even forgetting the war-mongering

language in reference to Saddam Hussein

and support for the inspections that have

been shown to serve a dual function as

intelligence-gathering missions for the

Amerikan military, this resolution is hollow.

Unilateral action has been off the table

for months as England and a number of

other European countries support a war.

Resolution-sponsor Eric Garcetti

effectively said that if Colin Powell had

made a stronger case before the UN he

wouldn't have bothered: "we're not

necessarily opposed to any war, but we're

opposed to unilateral war, and we don't

think the case has been made."(5) Still, a

whole network of neighborhood activists

has organized phone trees, letter-writing

and fax campaigns around getting such

resolutions passed in the name of "peace."

L.A. resolution

MIM urges readers who think our

views are correct but too far "out there"

to check out the lobbying that went into

getting this resolution passed, and to think

about the activist-hours invested and the

return our side got out of those hours. If

your goals include peace, appealing to the

broadest Amerikan public opinion does

not matter, putting forth the most forthright

anti-imperialist line with the greatest

energy matters. As we argued in MIM

Notes 276, we do not need to appeal to

the tens of millions who pull levers for

the Democrats and Republicans. If the

200,000 who marched on Washington,

D.C. had been waving Little Red Books,

Bush would be a lot less anxious to rush

into war. From the war mongers'

perspective sending the military overseas

gets a lot less attractive when half a

million Maoists -- a tiny minority in the

u.$. population -- could be strolling into

DC in the meantime. If you really want

to oppose this war, please leave the

empty-resolution-passing work to your

city council members and throw your own

weight behind MIM.

Notes:
1. http://www.etext.info/Politics/MIM/agitation/
philippines/index.html
2. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/
0222-05.htm
3. This happened at the February 18 meeting
when the resolution was first introduced.
4. http://www.neighborsforpeaceandjustice.org/
npj/id6.html
5. www.inq7.net/brk/2003/feb/22/brkafp_8-
1.htm

From page 1...

Blowback: The Costs
and Consequences of
American Empire

by Chalmers Johnson

New York: Henry Holt

2000, 268 pp. pb.

Review by MC206

3 Mar 2003

Chalmers Johnson finished this book

over a year before September 11, which

is when most Amerikans first heard the

term "blowback." In it, he lays out the

reasons why Amerika's chickens were

bound to come home to roost--as indeed

they did. The book is packed full of details

about what Johnson calls "imperial

overstretch," similar to something MIM

talked about in its founding documents

back in 1983. Thus it remains a useful

read today, although Johnson is a bitter

anti-Communist (more specifically: an

anti-Maoist) and Blowback is partly an

(unsuccessful) attempt to replace the

Communist critique of imperialism with a

bourgeois critique.

"Blowback," of course, refers to "the

unintended consequences of policies that

were kept secret from the American

people. What the daily press reports as

the malign acts of `terrorists' or `drug

lords' or `rogue states' often turn out to

be blowback from earlier American

operations."(p.8) To Johnson's credit, he

does not limit his definition of the term to

Amerikans, noting that while Amerikans

have not yet felt the impact of the Asian

economic crisis caused by Amerikan

speculators and IMF meddling,

Indonesians already have.(p. 17)

Obvious cases of blowback include U.$.

support for the Afghan mujahideen who

bombed the World Trade Center in 1993

and then flew two airplanes into it in

2001.(p. 13) Johnson provides a service

by discussing some of the lesser-known

cases of blowback--or potential

blowback.

Okinawa. Johnson starts his chapter

on the U.$. military bases on Okinawa

with a partial list of the daily wrongs

Okinawans suffer at the hands of

Amerikan troops, from the high rape rate

(pp. 34-37, 41-44) to prostitution (p. 35)

to traffic accidents (pp. 42-47) to the

constant interruptions of school lessons

by low-flying jet aircraft.(p. 47) He then

ridicules the reasons the United $tates

gives for basing over 200,000 troops in

Japan--most of them in Okinawa.

"Pentagon theorists ... are like the New

Yorker who spreads elephant bane

around his apartment and then extols its

benefits because he encounters no

elephants. The strategy `works' because

the threat is illusory."(p. 63)

Arms sales. Well, sort of illusory. In fact,

as Johnson outlines in a section on the

immense Amerikan arms industry (pp.

85-94), the "forward deployment" of U.$.

troops or sale of arms to a client state

often proves a self-fulfilling prophecy. For

example, Amerika "expands the NATO

alliance eastward in part in order to sell

Pre-911 book: Amerikans will reap what they sow

arms to the former Soviet block

countries... with certain knowledge that

doing so will... elicit a hostile Russian

reaction. This Russian reaction then

becomes justification for the

expansion."(p. 92) Or the Pentagon sells

advanced missile and submarine

technology to Taiwan, provoking the

Chinese either consciously or

unconsciously, blinded by its desire to

make a buck.(p. 89)

For Johnson, the fact that "mercenary"

Pentagon arms profiteers have turned the

world into a powderkeg is a result of the

erosion of civilian control of the

military.(p. 222) (We Maoists would

simply say that's what happens when you

put profit before basic survival rights.) He

notes that a behemoth military with

controlling economic and political powers

contradicts the thinking of Amerika's

"founding fathers."(1) "George

Washington's Farewell Address now

reads more like a diagnosis than a

warning: he counseled Americans to

`avoid the necessity of those overgrown

military establishments, which under any

form of government are inauspicious to

liberty, and which are to be regarded as

particularly hostile to Republican

Liberty."(p. 71)