WORKERS 'ANGUARD 25¢No. 240 ~- ....... "....... II !l:23 28 September 1979

Kennedy, Carter:

1

Kennedy as CarterRunning for president in 1960 during

a period of economic stagnation. JohnF. Kennedy promised to "get thiscountry moving again." But today hisyounger brother is promising nothing.absolutely nothing. Here in a nutshell isTed Kennedy's current economic wis-

continued on page 9

I

Wymao/Sygma

war which divides the capitalist politi­cians; they have an amazing amount ofagreement even on small issues andparticularly on the economy. Not onlydoes Teddy have the same economicprograms as Carter. he also has the sameprogram of moral uplift, although thestyle is more secular. slicker. efficient.The only question is who will deliver thesermons and in what regional accents.

Kennedy has come not only to buryCarter, and to save the Democraticparty. but to do a job for the entirecapitalist class. The ruling class needs aman for one economic season: austerity.And they want a president who can"inspire." that is. enforce. austerityupon the working people. AnotherKennedy will tell Americans "what they'can do for their country": eat less. takehorne less wages. pay more, drive less,sacrifice more-not in the name of godperhaps. but in the name ofcountry andsome hyped-up Madison Avenue"frontier."

UPI

for "a loss of faith."The problems of American capitalism

are real. serious. and in the long runterminal. But the bourgeoisie portraysthe problem as a crisis of confidence.School child ren are taught that the"Great Depression" was caused by sucha crisis of confidence. that money has"value" because people believe in it. andmore such wisdom suited to the realm of01. The elaborate theatricality of U.S.bourgeois electoral politics is staged toobscure the fact that the real issues inAmerica are class issues. But Carter's·sermons have backfired. The Americanpublic has no confidence in Jimmy.They do not believe in his baloney thatAmericans have no confidence inthemselves. Carter's religious act hasnot worked and he has been given thehook as a more seasoned performerheads for the oval stage.

The style of modern Americanbourgeois politics is conditioned by theabsence of an organized mass politicalexpression of the working class. If. asthe saying goes. "the business ofAmerica is business." the style ofAmerican politics is style. That is whatTeddy has to offer capitalism in its timeof need. Matters of style are even moreaccentuated because there has rarelybeen such consensus within bourgeoispolitics. There is no great issue ofimperialist strategy like the Vietnam

ereneel

colossal unpopularity is due not merelyto his political stupidities. sermonettesolutions and general ineffectiveness.Carter is also a self-made symbol of apunishing economy with its uncontrol­lable inflation. mass layoffs. shortagesamid plenty-grinding a new generationof blacks and Hispanics into desperatepoverty: driving workers onto gas linesand unemployment lines. and panickingsections of the middle class. Much of thedismay and anger is focused on JimmyCarter who blames the American people

01 a01 ui

From about the time of RobertKennedy's death in 1961'\. it has beenwidely assumed that the presidency ofthe United States would pass to the nextand last in line of the Kennedy brothers."Teddy." It was only a matter of time­and political timing. ;\low is the time.with the polls counting Carter's popu­larity even below ;\lixon's when he wasforced to resign. So after a prolongedperiod of teasing. hinting. primping andpusing. Kennedy has at last satisfied hisadmirers. coyly letting it be know thathe had finally secured hlS mother'spermission to go all the way.

Among those admirers who make upthe "draft Kennedy" committees acrossthe nation are many of the laborbureaucrats and black misleaders whosold Carter as a "friend of labor" and"man of the people" in the last election.(hese Democratic loyalists and classbetrayers will do it again for their party.but they would rather have a fresh face.particularly the face ofa Kennedy to sellfor the capitalists. Revolutionists warnas we did with Carter: the Democratsand Republicans are the parties ofcapital. Kennedy is not fundamentallydifferent from Carter.

Before Jimmy Carter became thepollsters' most unpopular president in

"U.S. history. Teddy and the Camelotgang seemed to be looking to thepresidential campaign of 191'\4. After all.why should they want to challenge asitting president. causing a nasty split intheir party and making a Republicanvictory all the more likely? But withCarter totalled. Kennedy can ride in likethe Ajax cleanser white knight to savethe Democrats from nearly certaindefeat.

It is not only the Democratic Partypresidency at stake. however. Carter's

·SWf» 'Bowsto Khol11eini, RU'ns fr(),mSparta~lstLeague;. . f~:::: ::<:,:, >,,' -, '~~ _ . c , ' , ~- ' - ':: '-,'- :. _ .-': ", :"_":.',:; ~/;,

~lArea: Daniel Ellsberg,~1 BOlle Honor SL Picket

Mullah Lovers' Exclusion Backfires

WORKERSVANOIJARDMarxist Working-Class Biweeklyof the Spartacist League of the u.s.EDITOR Jan Norden

ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Charles Burroughs

PRODUCTION: Darlene Kamiura (Manager)Noah Wilner

CIRCULATION MANAGER: Karen Wyatt

EDITORIAL BOARD: Jon Brule, GeorgeFoster, Liz Gordon, James Robertson, JosephSeymour, MarJorie Stamberg

Workers Vanguard (USPS 098-770) publishedbiweekly, skipping an issue in August and aweek in December, by the Spartacist IPublishing Co., 260 West Broadway, NewYork, NY 10013. Telephone: 966-6841(Editorial), 925-5665 (Business). Address allcorrespondence to: Box 1377, G.P.O., NewYork, NY 10001. Domestic subscriptions:$3.00/24 issues. Second-class postage paid atNew York, NY.

Opinions expressed in signed articles orletters do not necessarily express theeditorial viewpoint.

SAN FRANCISCO-The SocialistWorkers Party is in political hot water.It is unable to answer the SpartacistLeague's exposure of its criminal tailingof Islamic reaction in Iran. Instead, ithas opted for the cowardly, reformistexpedients of slander and exclusion.Thus all around the country the SWP isdesperately trying to keep the SL fromattending demonstrations and ralliescalled to defend the lives of 14 impris­oned members of the Iranian HKS(Socialist Workers Party of Iran).

The only justification the SWP hasever given for this policy is that the SLdemand, "Down with Khomeini-ForWorkers Revolution in Iran!" is "pro­vocative" and a "disruption." This isgetting to be a hard proposition todefend now that Khomeini's execution­ers prepare to butcher the jailedHKSers. And the SWP's criminal policyof excluding the SL, the one tendencythat refused to swear fealty to thereactionary "Islamic Revolution," isbackfiring. Even the SWP's liberalfriends and favorite trade-union bu­reaucrats are beginning to object to itsblatantly anti-democratic exclusions.

On September 14 the SWP barrednine trade-union militants and SLsupporters from attending a rally here tofree the imprisoned HKSers. Amongthose denied entry by the SWP goonsquad stationed outside the RetailClerks Union (RCU) Local 1100 hall,the meeting site, were executive boardmembers of ILWU Locals 6 and 10,several stewards from San FranciscoLocal 9410 of the CommunicationsWorkers of America (CWA) and mili­tants from the UAWand InternationalTypographers Union. When it becameclear that the SWP would admit no onewho didn't lick the slippers of Khomei­ni, the ILWU members told the SWPthat they intended to lodge a protestwith RCU Local 1100 president WalterJohnson. SWPer Lou Jones sneered,"You do that. See if I care."

At this point, an SL spokesman toldJones that the meeting was public, thatthe S L had the right to attend, that~ones and his gang did not constitute aserious physical obstacle to attendance,but that the SL chose instead to protestthe SWp's provocative exclusion bysetting up a picket line. Several dozenadditional 5L supporters who had beenwaiting in anticipation of just such an

Scab Presidential Candidate S~ks in Detroit

SWP: "No Black Trotskyists Allowed"

cannot defend its suicidal line on Iranand its usual tactic of race-baitingdoes not work so well against blackTrotskyists. When asked at theSeptember 9 forum why SLers werebeing excluded, the SWP spokesmanreplied: "Not everyone is beingexcluded-just you, you, you andyou," pointing to every black sup­porter of the Spartacist League. continued on page I I

called around the slogans "Free theimprisoned H KS and Fedayeen Sup­porters!" and "Stop Khomeini's Gov­ernment's Attacks on the NationalMinorities and Women of Iran!" Todate the Bay Area SW P has yet to hold asingle demonstration in solidarity withany of Khomeini's victims, including theHKS,

SWPjHKS/USec: You flinch in theface of the Spartacist League's accusa­tions and charge us with blind "factionalhatred." In fact. all militant workersshould feel revolutionary hatred foryour policies in Iran! You told theworkers of Iran that Khomeini was a"progressive," that he was "anti­imperialist." Now the HKS pays theprice.

Today Khomeini guns down Arabs.Kurds, and other national minorities,Yet you still refuse to take a forthrightstand for the right of these nationalminorities to self-determination, To­day Khomeini orchestrates a campaignof white terror: unions are attacked;workers parties are outlawed, theirmembers jailed, beaten and executed,Women, especially. and the populace asa whole suffer under the hideous code offeudal morality of the mullahs, Yet youstill refuse to call for the overthrow ofKhomeini's regime, but instead beseechthese clerical reactionaries to adoptyour parliamentary-cretinist "Bill ofRights for Working Peop\e."

In March the SWPers sneered when acontinued on page 8

while the SWP tailed after themullahs who were reimposing the veilon Iranian women. This "disruption'"was the SWP's excuse for the anti­democratic, anti-communist, racistexclusion. But for authenticTrotskyists-unlike the apologists forKhomeini, who help get their owncomrades of the Iranian HKS killed­fighting the veil is not "off the topic."

The real point is that the SWP

"You, you, you and you'"

The Militant Lies (Again)

-Caught out, the SWP is squealing likea stuck pig (but rather more slanderous­ly). The Militant article by one BobCapistrano claims that "more than 30mem bers of the Spartacist League ...tried to march into the rally." Indeed wedid not-though this would have been aperfectly principled response to politicalexclusion from a publicly advertisedforum! It would serve the SWP right fora large group of working-class militantsto thus enforce workers democracy.

The Militant article's main theme isthat "The Spartacists placed theirfactional hatred for the SWP above thelives of the imprisoned socialists." Thisis the height o{ hypocrisy coming fromthe people who have used physicalforceto keep the SL out of meetings anddemonstrations to defend the H KS! Infact, the SL was demanding a vigorousdefense.of the HKS and other victims ofKhomeini's white terror while the SWPwas still shrinking from publicizing theHKS case which exposes so nakedly thereactionary nature of Khomeini's re­gime. On June 22. for instance, the BayArea SWP boycotted a Spartacist­initiated united-front demonstration

Militant whined about how the SLprotest ~II but ruined the SWP'smeeting-and then the Spartacists hadthe nerve to applaud Boyle and ElIsbergfor refusing to cross a picket line toaddress a politically exclusionist "publicmeeting."

DETROIT- Twenty SpartacistLeague supporters picketed theSocialist Workers Party (SWP) officehere September 9 with signs reading,"SWP Excludes Black Trotskyists,""Laid-Off Chrysler Workers Excludedby SWP for Fighting for Sit-DownStrikes" and "Defend WorkersDemocracy." Inside the hall, thefeatured speaker was SWP presiden­tial candidate Andrew Pulley. Havingadmittedly scabbed on the railwayclerks strike in Chicago last year,Pul1ey was well-prepared to cross theSL picket line.

The picket of Pulley's forum wasthrown up to protest the SWP's racistexclusion of black members of theSpartacist League from its so-called"public events," a practice begun afterthe Detroit SWP's film showingjdiscussion on Malcolm X lastFebruary. Since then SL pickets haveembarrassed the SWP before thesocialist public in Detroit to the pointthat it felt compelled to issue an"Open Letter" in July to justify theexclusions. The "Open Letter" accusesthe SLers of "disruption" for notbeing willing to "abide by forumdiscussion policy."

Everyone present at the February11 forum knows it was actually theSWPers who disrupted-by shoutingdown black SL spokesman TopazKnight. Knight pointed out thatMalcolm X was beginning to see theimportance of the woman question,

So far, this anti-communist exclusionwas just business as usual for the SWPsocial democrats. So the SWP was stungwhen two of its featured speakers fromAmnesty International, Kay Boyle andDaniel Ellsberg, refused to cross the SLpicket line, Kay Boyle discussed theexclusion at length with both the SWPand excluded ILWU executive boardmembers Stan Gow and Bob Mandel.She ended up shaking Mandel's hand infront of the SWPers, then turned tothem and demanded that she be takenhome, Daniel Ellsberg drove up, saw thepicket line protesting the exclusion, andleft.

The 28 September issue of the SWP's

Kay Boyle, Ellsberg Refuse toCross Picket Line

exclusion were summoned and a picketline was established,

Among the placards carried by thespirited marchers were: "USec/SWPLine Kills Arabs, Kurds, Leftists!""SWP Criminal Tailism in Iran: HistoryTakes its Vengeance", and "USecRevisionists Have Blood of IranianWorkers on their Hands!"

The chants included: "SWP: YouCheered for Khomeini, But You're NotCheering Now!" "Not USec Tailism,But an Iranian Trotskyist Party," "LastAutumn You Said Khomeini's Fine, It'sKind of Late to Change Your Line!""Not Cultural Autonomy but KurdishSelf-Determination," and "SWP: If theBoot Fits, Lick It!"

28 September 1979No. 240

2 WORKERS VANGUARD

Dodge Main workers rally on June 2 against Chrysler's mass layoffs and threatened plant closure.

No to the Auto Sellout!WV Photo

DETROIT-Two and a half hoursbefore the midnight, September 14contract deadline, General Motorshad what it wanted: a sweetheartcontract agreed to by the leaders ofthe United Auto Workers (UAW)without a strike. UAW presidentDoug Fraser and vice president IrvingBluestone made the announcement tothe press. "An excellent settlement,"they said, "momentous" and"historic." Grinning and backslappingfor the cameras, the union leaderspraised GM's "affirmative attitude." Itwas the first time since 1964 that theUA W settled without even a tokenwalkout against its "target" company.

But it was GM that had reason tobe smiling. Exploiting the unionbureaucracy's obvious unwillingnessto strike, the corporation got acontract which will give it a free handto eliminate thousands of idditionaljobs while drastically worsening theconditions for those who remain inthe plants. The demand for a shorterworkweek was abandoned andmanagement's existing rights toschedule virtually unlimited overtimewere left unchallenged. The unionagreed to a substantial pay differentialfor new hires, while the company wasgiven the green light to implement atough, new absentee policy with theUAW's blessing. For auto workersthis will add up to even more joboverloading, speedup and companyharassment.

In our last issue we warned that ifthe Fraser bureaucracy had its way,auto workers would "have to accept achicken-feed settlement only to behanded their pink slips after thecontract is ratified." But the com­panies aren't even waiting for ratifica­tion. With the ink barely dry on theGM pact, on Friday, September 21Chrysler laid off indefinitely a wholeshill at the Lynch Road assembly plantin Detroit. This is what's in store for allauto workers if this sweetheart deal goesd()wn~

But the UAW ranks don't have totake this kick in the guts lying down.G M workers must throw this se!loutdeal back in the faces of the autobosses and their flunkeys in SolidarityHouse. UAW militants must mobililethe membership to fight for anindustrywide strike throughout NorthAmerica, combined with sitdownstrikes in plants hit by mass layoffs.

Even Less Than 76Not only is there no new money in

,the tentative agreement-there is even

28 SEPTEMBER 1979....' "

~

less than before. The estimatedaggregate increase of, 33 percent issmaller than that won in 1973although inflation is much highernow-14 percent annually. The settle­ment is also less than those approvedby the Carter government forTeamsters and rubber workers. Thetraditional (since 1948!) "annual im­provement factor" of 3 percent hasbeen retained and the cost-of-livingformula will remain unchanged untilSeptember 1982. COLA on pensions,which Fraser touted as the union's toppriority in 1979, was junked when'GM claimed it was "too costly andunpredictable." Instead, retirees willreceive meager three-times-yearlybenefit adjustments-to be paid for bydeducting an eventual total of 14cents an hour from the COLA ofemployed auto workers!

But GM fully expects to cover eventhese modest pay and benefit increasesthrough a massive new productivitydrive. Fraser handed the bosses amajor weapon to divide youngerworkers from high-seniorityemployees by agreeing to pay nites fornew hires 60 cents below base wage.The recovery provision which former­ly allowed new hires to regain most ofthat money once off probation hasbeen abolished.

Solidarity House also committeditself to helping GM police the plantsfor absenteeism. The UAW willparticipate with management on anewly established "National Com­mittee on Attendance." Ominously,the International circulated letters toGM locals urging them to work outwith management new programs todeal with "unwarranted absences"­thereby allowing auto workers to b€picked off plant by plant!

Thus GM is readying itself for amajor new speed-up drive. Olderworkers who cannot take the grueling

~

pace or will not accept companyinfringements of union standards willbe threatened with replacement bylower-paid new hires who have nounion protection. At its Fremont,California plant, GM's already­launched productivity campaign hasforced over 400 workers to seekmedical leaves-of-absence.

New Layoffs AheadThere is already considerable dis­

gruntlement in the plants over theproposed settlement. To sell thisrotten deal, the UAW bureaucracy isbanking on the hope that themembership will be reluctant to strikeduring an economic downturn. With80,000 auto workers already on thestreets and more layoffs projected, thefight for jobs is a central issue in thiscontract. Fraser says that the fewmore paid personal holidays (PPH)granted under the contract are a stepto a four-day week. This is pure bunk.Auto workers, who are forced towork grueling overtime, do not evenhave a five-day week! And PPH,based on perfect attendance, isnothing but a disguised absenteecontrol plan. It has nothing to dowith fighting layoffs.

The contract at Ford undoubtedlywill closely parallel GM's tentativeagreement, but the worst is yet tocome for the Chrysler workers. Fraserhas already promised "special con­sideration" for the failing No. 3 automaker. And Lee lacocca, Chrysler'snewly installed chief executive, clearlygot the news. Employees at the LynchRoad assembly plant in Detroit gotan early taste of the fiscal "respon­sibility" which the government hasrequired of the union in order forChrysler to qualify for a governmenthandout. Just one week after thesigning of the "historic" agreementwith GM, 2,000 Lynch Road workers

Fraser onSeptember14: sellouttime at GMheadquarters.

oo.<:a..>~

showed up at the plant only to be toldthat their jobs no longer existed.Detroit pofice were summoned as theenraged workers initially refused todisperse. In the days prior to thecutback, rumors of a layoff spreadthrough the plant and, with no hopeof support from the cowards in theInternational, workers reportedlyresorted to widespread sabotage.

With 27,000 already laid-off hourlyworkers at Chrysler, a pink slip meansalmost immediate destitution, sincethe Supplementary Unemployment.Benefits· (SUJ,\) {umia._~.peadw_.~,__

exhausted. Chrysler workers mustrespond to the wholesale liquidationof their jobs with militant sitdowns. Ifmanagement pleads bankruptcy theworkers must seize company assets!Not a dime for the stockholders andcoupon clippers who have milked thecorporation dry-every penny mustgo to the workers who have sweatedout their lives in these pits. Such amilitant defiance of the bosses' sacredprivate property rights could spark areal industrywide strike for a shorterworkweek, with a big pay boost andfull COLA protection for active andretired UAW members. This is theonly way to provide auto workerswith the jobs, decent wages, benefitsand working conditions that theyneed.

Fraser's the One!With their backs against the wall.

the UAW ranks have no choice but tofight to protect their jobs and livingstandards. But nothing excepttreachery can be expected from Fraserand his cohorts. Fraser is the "leader"who criticized Chrysler for giving into militants who seized an electricalpower station in August 1973 at theJefferson Avenue plant in Detroit andthrew the switch in protest over theabuses of a racist foreman. It was hewho personally mobilized a I.OOO-mangoon squad later that month to crusha sit-down strike a few miles away atthe Mack Avenue stamping plant. Onthe eve of his accession to the UAWpresidency, then-Chrysler Departmenthead Fraser broke the back of amilitant l2-day wildcat by In­dianapolis Chrysler workers in March1977 following a foreman's assault ona union steward. And, as Inter­national president, Fraser abandoneda bitter nine-month strike by mostlywomen workers in Elwood, Indianawho struggled valiantly against armed

continued on page JJ

3

Tamils Under the Gun

Down with State of Emergencyin Sri Lanka!

\\ hich surrorted and rarlicipated in therorular-front gO\ ernments of the bour­geoIs Sri I.anka heedom Party (SI.FP).\\hlch rredominated in the period 1964­77. Dunng these \cars the I.SSP and CPl'nahled "\lrs. H" (as torrner Prime\linistcr Sirima\o Handaranaike IS\\ idch calleJ) to hreak strikes. dri\eJO\\" the li\ Ing standards of the\\Orking reor1e. foment \indent anti­I amil Chall\lnlSm and massacre thou­sands of young leftists who participatedin the 1971 rebellion.

\'0 wonder the reformists' cynicalexhortations for mass opposition to thegovernment cuts in food subsidies todaylargely fall on deaf ears. Routed in thegeneral elections of July 1977 that sweptthe U\' P into office in a landslide vote.the CP and LSS P two years later are stillwidely despised. It was not sheercynicism that led J.R. Jayewardene toattend the recent funeral of LSSP leader\'. M. Perera (who had been a topminister in the Bandaranaike coalitiongO\ernment) and eulogize this veteranreformist with the farewell. "Well done.thou true and faithful servant. welldone" (enlon Dai/r Vews,:lO August).

But a '\lew Left that has emergedaround the Janatha Vimukthi Peramu­na (./VP-People\ Liberation Front)does pose more of a threat to the U '\i P.As a result of its 197/ uprising againstthe Handaranaike fJofJular (ronl. theJ V P is seen by many-especia\\y theyouth. women and even some Tamils inurban centers-as the only repository ofmilitancy on the the island. Its politics.however. arc really nothing more than a"new left" version of Stalinist popularfro n tis m. a kin d 0 f c Iass ­colla borat ionism-with-a-gu n remi nis­cent of the Chilean M IR.

Thus today no less than under theI.SSPj CPj SLFP coalition.intransigent proletarian opposition topopular frontism remains the touch­stone of a revolutionary perspective onSri Lanka. Support, however "criticaL"to any component of the popular front isa roadblock to winning over on aprincipled basis subjectively revolution­ary youth from the layer of militantsthat coalesced around the New LeftStalinist JVP.

Skimpy Carrot, Big Stick

The emergency powers give the UN Pregime a ready weapon to use againstthe working class and Sinhalese pettybourgeoisie in the event the govern­ment's economic policies provoke resis­tance. Jayewardene is committed todrastically reducing state food subsi­dies, since the International MonetaryFund and other imperialist agenciesmade such cutbacks a condition fortheir aid to the UNP government. Formore than 30 years the government hassubsidized basic foodstuffs and pro­vided free medical services and educa­tion. It could do so in large measure onthe basis of the superexploitation theBritish extracted from the Tamil planta­tion laborers. Now the UNP and itsimperialist patrons can no longer affordto expend over $200 million annuallywhile the economy is ever mores4ueezed between soaring market pricesinternationally and stagnationdomestically.

After the rice ration was eliminatedfor better-paid workers in February of1971L the UNr now has dumped theentire food subsidy system, offering in

.>-.,,~""...

ExclusivePhotos ofAnti-TamilTerror

about every other legal right of thedefendant are denied in cases prosecut­ed under this act.

Initially, the act also empowered thepolice to seize and dispose of corpses inany way without a coroner's inquiry todetermine the cause of death. However.this sanction was withdrawn after theTamils living in the area where thepolice murdered the two youths on July14 closed their shops and businesses inprotest. Yet under the emergency acteven this protest could be deemedterroristic and punishable with sen­tences of up to 20 years.

So far the communalist drumbeatersof the U\,P have been successful. It hasnot been challenged by militant actionof the working class, even though thecuts in consumer subsidies and therepressive powers sanctioned by theemergency act threaten Sinhalese work­ing people as well. The bourgeois HongKong-published Far Eastern EconumicReI'iell', commenting in its 10 Augustissue on the cuts in the rice rationalready introduced by the UNP, notedwith evident surprise: "The politicalbacklash from the most affected urbanworking class was nowhere near as badas it might have been."

But this is a testimony not so much tomass support for the UN P as to the massdisaffection with the traditional refor­mist workers parties-the Lanka SarnaSamaja Party (LSS P) and the pro­Moscow Communist Party (CP)-

•r (;;~"

t· " ....."\ "f •

.J.t'l"l,~

Tamil youthsarrested July 14and found deadby side of roadthe same day.Bodies weremutilated toremove bullets.

July 13, was assaulted by the police andsuccumbed to his injuries while underdetention in the Jaffna prison.

Meanwhile, the whereabouts of anumber of Tamils arrested by the policeis unknown, as is the fate of othersremanded to Jaffna Prison on ordersfrom magistrates. Under the emergencyregulations, the armed forces are em­powered to enter any premises and toarrest without obtaining a warrant.rhey may also detain prisoners for up to15 days anywhere the inspector generalof police decides. Trial by jury and just

Asiaweek

Government troops attack Tamit demonstrators in Jaffna in 1977.

During the last two months on theIsland of Cevlon. the United \'ationalParty (l:\'P) government headed hyPresident J. R. Jayewardene has im­rosed a regime o!poliee-state rerressionon the orrressed Tamil-sreaking mi­lH1rit\. l.sing as a rretext allegedincidents of Tamil terrorism. the eahineton .July II declared a state of emergencyin Janna. in the northern districtrorulated rredomll1antly hy the Indian­derived Hindu Tamils. rhe following

I week the U\' P rushed through parlia­ment sweeping draconian legislationca lied the "Prevention of Terrorism(Icmporary Provisions) Act."

Under this act the armed forces androlicc are free to terrorize and evenmurder with impunity, while the gov­ernment has at hand a mailed fist ofreactionary sanctions that could he usedat any time to smash political opposi­tion. In particular. they will be used tosuppress opposition to the economicausterity measures recently imposed bythe openly capitalist Jayewardene re­gime. which is no less BuddhistjSinhalachauvinist than the precedingHandaranaikej LSSPjCP popularfront. The anti-working-c1ass measuresinclude drastic cuts in the food subsidieson which millions depend for their dailyex istence.

When the emergency was declared,Jayewardene gave the following march­ing orders under presidential seal toBrigadier Tissa Weeratunga, his neph­ew. who had heen appointed chief ofstaff of the Sri Lanka army shortly afterthe U \I P took office two years ago: "Itwill be your duty to eliminate inaccordance with the laws of the land themenace of terrorism in all its forms fromthe island, and especially from theJanna district." And acting accordingly,the military jpolice forces have madetheir terrorism the law of the land inJaffna District.

Although the government hasclamped strict censorship on all cover­age of the emergency, the authoritieshave not been able to completelysuppress news of the terror unleashedagainst the Tamils. It has becomeknown that three days after the imposi­tion of the emergency two Tamil youthwere taken from their homes by thepolice. Later the same day they werefound dead by the side of a public road,killed by blasts of gunfire and badlymutilated (see exclusive photos of thisatrocity above). It is also known that athird youth, who had been arrested on

4 WORKERS VANGUARD

Militant

JVP SUSpects rounded up during 1971 revolt-12,OOO were murdered by thepopular front.

ka the coalition government itselfcarried out the bloody repression of theinsurgent masses.

But the reformist working-classparties of the popular front reaped thebitter fruits of their betrayal. Along withMrs. B's resounding defeat in the /977elections (the SLFP lost 72 01'81 MPs!),the LSSP and CP lost every single oneof their parliamentary seats, includ ingsome they had held continuously for 40years! Today the LSSP is a stinkingcorpse. After the debacle at the polls in1977, a section of its cadres scurried likerats from the sinking ship, launching the"LSSP (New Leadership)." The latter'smain difference with the N.M. Perera/Leslie Goonewardena/Colvin De Silvaold guard is that the LSSP should haveplayed a more "independent, militant"role in the coalition. Such after-the-factexcuses are the stock in trade ofreformist betrayers, from the survivingleaders of the Indonesian CP decimatedin 1965 to the Chilean Stalinists after thefall of Allende.

Today the LSSP is rightly hated bythe masses who identify it with racism,mass murder and economic impoverish­ment. Its apparatus is moribund, itsColombo office closed, its unions left todrift, and the largest public meeting thatthe LSSP has recently been able tomuster was the funeral for N.M. Perera.Even the miserable Communist Partywas able to mobilize more supportersthan the LSSP at its last May Day rally.But it is the JVP, which at its May Daydemonstration attracted some 60,000,that now appears to the masses as theonly militant opposition. Thus inCevlon, where for decades ostensibleTr~tskyism has been the historic leftwing, the total bankruptcy of the LSSPhas allowed a new generation ofStalinists to gain the ascendancy. Thetask of an authentic Trotskyist nucleuson the island is abo.ve all to break thishold of the popular-frontists-with-a­gun by posing itself as the only consis­tent opponent of class collaboration inall its forms.

Sri Lanka today is anything butpolitically stable, Not without ~easondoes the UN P fear a mass protest

(OontinlWO on pag' 11

Front creates favorable conditions forthe victory of fascism. The policy ofcoalition with the bourgeoisie must bepaid for by the proletariat with years ofnew torment and sacrifice, if not bydecades of fascist terror."

,,;' -"The New RevolutionaryUpsurge and the Tasks of theFourth International"

In most cases, unleashing the expecta­tions of the working class, politicallydisarmed by illusions that the popularfront is "their" government, provokes inshort order brutal right-wing militaryrepression, as occurred in Spain in the1930s and more recently in Chile. But adifferent variant was played out in SriLanka. The traditional workers partieswere able to discipline the workingmasses so thoroughly that the popularfront could run itself into the groundarld openly reveal its bourgeois, coun­terrevolutionary character. In Sri Lan-

F.E.E.R. Simon/Katherine Young

Sirimavo Bandaranaike

than a thousand years ago, wereallowed to retain their representation inparliament even after the "IndianTamils" were disenfranchised.

Bandaranaike's coalition governmentfell after only eight months, broughtdown by the principled opposition oftwo Members of Parliament from theleft wing of the LSSP, Edmund Sama­rakkody and Meryl Fernando, whorefused to vote approval for the work ofthe bourgeois popular front. Six yearslater Sri Lanka was again under ,)coalition government, this time of theSLFP/LSSPjCP, and "Sinhala Only"became the official government policyin every field. Thus the "Ceylon Tamil"intelligentsia, who had enjoyed en­hanced access to positions in the Britishcolonial bureaucracy, by fiat becameilliterate in the official language of theircountry. Buddhism was made the state

J.R. Jayewardene

religion. And the "Indian Tamils" on theplantations bore the brunt of pervasiveeconomic discrimination. Sinhalesechauvinism on the key issues of lan­guage rights, university admissions,land colonization and employment wasmore intense under the coalition thanearlier under the former UN P regime, sothat even the bourgeois Tamil leaders ofthe TU LF felt compelled to adopt thedemand for "Eelam."

Life for the Ceylonese working classgrew ever more grim with each passingyear of the popular front. What limitedstate control and nationalization of theeconomy was imposed by the govern­ment served only to stifle the motor ofcapitalism, producing stagnation, un­employment and parasitic bureaucra­

"'tism. And when in 1971 the petty-bourgeois radical JVP launched anill-prepared insurrection by un- andunder-employed Sinhala ex-students,including many young women, the"socialist" coalition imposed a draconi­an state of emergency and unleashed themilitary and police to hound, murder,mutilate and maraud through theinsurgent-held areas.

After seven years of popular-frontgovernment, which brought nothing butfalse promises and privation, the massesenthusiastically returned to office anakedly Tory party in a country whereeven the Buddhist monks speak ofsocialism. Popular frontism, as LeonTrotsky wrote, is together with fascismthe last defense of the bourgeoisieagainst proletarian revolution. Butwhile collaboration in the capitalistgovernment with the parties of the classenemy by the reformist misleaders maydeflect the workers' struggle, the popu­lar front cannot provide the bourgeoisiewith a stable political solution. InaJuly1936 article Trotsky forcefully arguedthis point in respect to the Spanishpopular front:

"Incapable of solving a single one of thetasks posed by the revolution-since allthese tasks boil down to one, namely,the crushing of the bourgeoisie-thePeople's Front renders the existence ofthe bourgeois regime impossible andthereby provokes the fascist coup d'etat,By lullin~ the workers and peasantswith parliamentary illusions, by para­lyzing their will to struggle, the People's

Popular Front Paved the Way

Today the opposition parties thatformed the last popular-frontgovernment-Bandaranaike's bour­geois SLFP, the LSSP and the CP­issue polite denunciations of the cuts infood subsidies and criticisms of UNPpolicy in handling the Tamils. Thesehypocritical protestations carry littlecredibility, however, coming from thosewho have long since become identifiedwith viciously racialist Sinhala chauvin­ism. The LSSP once championed therights of the Tamil minority, demandingfull citizenship rights for the plantationworkers and equal status for the Tamillanguage. But with the overwhelmingvictory of the first S LFP government in1956 on the basis of "Sinhala Only"communalism and calls for "Buddhistsocialism" (against the Hindu Tamils),the LSSP's tendency toward narrownational-centeredness and preoccupa­tion with parliamentarism began toblossom into full-scale class-collaborationism and Sinhalachauvinism.

.The LSSP's slide into unprinCipledcoalitionism had already reached thestage of definitive capitulation whenafter the 1960 elections, which returnedthe SLFP to office, it announced apolicy of "general support of thegovernment." This culminated in 1964with the formation of an SLFP/ LSSPcoalition government. One of the mostnotorious acts of this short-livedpopular-front regime was the Sirima­Shastri Pact legalizing the forcibledeportation of tens of thousands ofTamil plantation workers to India.

The latter, generally referred to onthe island as the "Indian Tamils," werelargely landless "low caste" peasantsbrought from southern India by theBritish to work the upland coffee (latert~a) plantations in the middle of the lastcentury and have been denied allcitizenship rights since independence. Incontrast, the "Ceylon Tamils" of thenorth and the eastern coast, whoseancestors inhabited the island more

have been prepared by the reactionarycommunalist policies that the UNP haspursued since coming to power in 1977.Last year hundreds of Tamils werekilled or injured, and many more wereforced to flee north, when mobs ofSinhalese chauvinists ran amok inpogroms that were encouraged, if notfomented, by the UN P. At the same timethe government has called for negotia­tions with the bourgeoi.s politicians ofthe Tamil United Liberation Front(TU LF), who did not even protest thedeclaration of the state of emergency orthe police/army rule in Jaffna. Here thecarrot is the offer to discuss"devolution"-an autonomy ploy thatwould give TU LF leaders a rationaliza­tion for shelving the demand for"Eelam" (a separate Tamil state), whichthey adopted reluctantly and reactively,and resume their role as respectable"statesmen" who since the 1977 elec­tions command the largest oppositionbloc in parliament.

\

its place food and fuel stamps forworkers earning less than $65 a month(see Nell' York Times, II September).Even with the stamps most workers willnot be able to maintain their meagerstandard of living, given the runawayinflation and chronic shortages of basicneces.iities. If the trade unions oropposition parties mount any seriousstruggle against the government poli­cies, the UN P is already prepared foremergency action. Jayewardene has a"strong state" now: an increasinglybonapartist regime that is closely linkedto the military high ccmmand, throughboth political and familial ties.

With the declarati:m of emergency inthe north and the enactment of suchsweeping repressive legislation Jayewar­dene, while claiming to protect parlia­mentary democracy in Sri Lanka, hasactually taken significant steps to makethe central executive power more andmore independent of legislative con­trols. After the UN P came to power,Prime Minister Jayewardene createdthe office of president so that he and hiscabinet could wield more power thantraditionally held by the prime minister.In~ddition, the UNP regime revised theelection laws such that a candidate mustpoll a certain percentage of the vote castin his constituency in order to beelected-an anti-democratic systemclearly intended to keep leftist parties,like the JVP out of office.

With the enactment of the"Prevention of Terrorism Act" th~:minister of justice has been givertextraordinary powers combined withsignificant autonomy from the controlof parliament and the courts. Forexample, the minister can arbitrarilydecide that a given person is "connectedwith or concerned in unlawful activity"under the emergency regulations anddetain him for three months, althoughthe detention could be extended up to 18months. Likewise the minister couldprohibit any person from addressingpublic meetings or from engaging inpolitical activities under threat ofimprisonment for up to five years. Inneither case could the minister's actionbe appealed in court.

Armed with an arsenal of emergencypowers, the Jayewardene regime intendsto bring the Tamils in the north to heeland to impose its economic policiesthrough the classic carrot-and-stickapproach. Imposition of martial law inJaffna was clearly intended to intimi­date the masses of Tamils intosubmission-the actual incidence ofeven alleged Tamil terrorism has neverassumed threatening proportions (overthe last three years 15 policemen w~re

killed, allegedly by Tamil separatists).Jayewardene would like to nip in thebud the "Liberation Tigers," youngTamil nationalists who reportec,ilynumber only several hundred, and isprepared to use the same kind ofmurderous repression unleashed againstthe leftist Sinhalese youth who partici­pated in the 1971 insurrection.

The iron-fisted police-state measuresdirected against the Tamil minority

21 SEI'TEIIeER 1.71 5

The petty-bourgeois nationalist spirit of Sandino(continuedfrom page 12) revolution in Nicaragua.

SWP: Reformist Through andThrough and To the Core

We will have a good deal to say belowabout the charlatan-adventurer NahuelMoreno and his pseudo-leftist Bolshe­vik Faction. But as regards the S W P, foranyone who still had doubts, the blow­up over the Simon Bolivar Brigade andthe SWP's unconditional. almost hys­terical political support to the FSLN arcproof positive that it is reformist fromhead to toe. For more than a decade theSpartacist tendcncy has been uniljue ininsisting that the long-since ex­rrotskyist S W P was committed tosupporting the bourgeois order. Thishas been contested by those who areafraid to break definitively with theUSec "family," and therefore argue thatprofession of formal Trotskyism indi­cates subjectively revolutionary will.(What about the Brezhnevite, Maoistand Castroite Stalinists who profess tobe Leninists?) Here it is spelled out sothat even the willfully blind can't miss it:support to a government of capiialistsagainst left-wing opponents, explicitpopular frontisrn, warnings againstfrightening the bourgeoisie, a parlia­mentarist program and a calion theimperialists to "aid," i.e., strangle, therevolution.

Having embarked this year on acampaign of unbridled adulation of theCastroite regime in Havana-SWPleader Jack Barnes. in a speech on the20th anniversarv of the Cuban Revolu­tion. termed Ca"stro & Co. "superior tothe Bolshevik leadership. once you leaveaside Lenin, Trotsky. Sverdlov. andpeople like that"!~the Socialist Work­ers Party is treating Sandinista Nicara­gua as if it were already the "secondCuba" so feared by Washington. Andfollowing out their own Cuban prece­dent in justifying this backstabbingattack on the Morenoites. Barnes isclearly harking back to the S W p'srefusal to defend the Cuban Trotskyistsjailed by Castro. (The Spartacist ten­dency denounced this Stalinist repres­sion and brought the case to theattention of the socialist public. See"For Workers Political Revolution inCuba." WV Nos. 223 and 224. 19January and 2 February 1979. and "InDefense of the Cuban Trotskyists:' WVNo. 225, 16 February, for a n;countingof the SWP's betrayal and the Trotsky­ist analysis of the development of theCuban Revolution.)

However, by the time that the SWPbecame lawyers for Castro's repressionof the Cuban Trotskyists, a socialrevolution had taken place on theisland. Joseph Hansen was defending aStalinist leadership of a bureaucratical­ly deformed workers state againstwould-be communists who called foropening the road to socialism byinternationalizing the revolution andinstituting soviet democracy. In thepresent case. Hansen's apprentices arccovering the left flank of a governmentincluding a number of capitalist minis­ters and committed to protecting theprop'erties of the "anti-Somoza bour­geoisie." And the SWP defends thisregime against all those "trying to

cei\ cd thirty pieces of silver. althoughthey clearly hope to cash in on theirperfidy by becoming the authori/edcheerleaders for the FSL\. But theroots of such treachery arc political andgo back more than a ljuarter of accntury. to the refusal of Michel Pablo.then secretary of the Fourth Interna­tional. to defend the Chinese Trotskyistsjailed by Mao. He called them "refugeesfrom a revolution" for refusing to bowto the new bureaucratic rulers in Peking.For Pablo it was part of his liljuidation­1st program that led to the destruction ofthe Fourth International as the organ­lied \\orld re\olutionary vanguard. Inthe casc of hiS epigones it is theconseljuence of their Pabloist policies.\\ hich lead a II Wll1gs of the USec to chascalter non-proletarian. anti-Marxistleaderships-from the Chinese Stalin­ists to Portuguese army officers andnow the Sandinista nationalists.

Morenoites brag ofsubordination to

Sandinistanationalists.

dent." Finally, a resolution by the LCRcentral committee (published in the 7-13September Rouge) screwed up itscourage to utter the mildest of formalprotests, declaring that the expulsionsthemselves "constitute an unacceptableprecedent." Anyone counting on such"militant solidarity" to back him againstanti-communist repression had betterforget it.

But while Rouge was graduallyescalating its adjectives from "disturb­ing" to "unacceptable." its man inManagua was taking a sharply differenttack. According to the SWP's Intercon­tinental Press (24 September), a USeedelegation including LCR Latin Ameri­can "expert" Jean-Pierre Beauvais (aswell as Hugo Blanco, Peter Camejo.Barry Sheppard and others) handed astatement to the Sandinistas hailing "therevolutionary leadership of the FSLN"and declaring: "All activities whichcreate divisions between the mobilizedmasses and the FSLN are contrary tothe interests of the revolution." Dottingthe i's and crossing the t's, it added:"This was the case specifically with theactivities of the 'Simon Bolivar Bri­gade'." which it termed "sectarian." Andto top it off the USec delegationexplicitly endorsed the expulsion:

"In a political and economic situationthat required the greatest possible unityin struggle. the FSLN was right todemand that the non-Nicaraguan mem­bers of this group-which defined itselfabove all as a military organization­leave the country."

It is not reported whether Blanco(Camejo (Sheppard( Beauvais et al. re-

PC' !.li:,0[1

el,;:O 1~·V""j~··

QU~ ~~ TE;ti:,~

CI,:~lc3 ti1 ~'.i'::":C") ~

Que 1'·.'·3 u;"·3 ':>",EspelG:'II)S ce ~~~:~

uesta ~ 11 -;'''-"

\e· .:. ~':;' ~ •.

rn~,~~;r. J" ::.l.:.t: ~'':P'~c~~ ~:;r U1 pe .,,­S"~:'~::~ 1:, "~.

-~~ C"I.1_a -eool'lUaa4or _ Col.-bJ.a.

c...w..ftII t.J._~1" 4, 1& .rl,.. S1_ JlDl1~.

_n••• _.I..... "",-h.ci-no • __ft ul het, s...ullilta 4' 1.1ben.C16a-.c~-IS1.I.

:to. ....... 1JU•.,.laaYo .. aJlO7o • l' l~ 4'1 ~~o 4, .1......

0CIII.tn. 1& 41c\aduoa 4, ao-... Wl &lJ.cu~t. JI&ft qVi_ ...u1lD1 .uno.

~la 411Za1lta~•• '-b.t-:o _ "'--tract&. 1I:Ita=-O:1-.lbta \l"1

nooc- lw -Jo~ U~1".c1all 4, 1.. l~ l1ben.don...

El &JOFo ~t.1oo .. 1& an--. St.6rl aou~ I' 7& .. c.eno, \&Q\(l por 10

,~ '~1l1_ \& oaat~t. 4e ,,_t_re. d' ~l_tadGa 11_ .. IUI\a.II ..

CaloUloa ~ .. ot,,", sal.... co.. pIlr 1.. acu,,14ad.. lj,,,a b& ...u.lia 4...

n'Cl~ d P!'~r cOllt~t. '011.& ...r.c~Qtra laq,w. .. II i'rwr.u Su.

a Br~ S1a5la &11'1" ba c_M4o ya • b&c.lr .fecU~ 10& plan~"",_)tI II .... b 41•• cr1~.M! "\oa ~tO'.Jur1to C;/l _llatilllt.. ..1C&Za€"'''.

_tal prJ...,.. '~.Na "\.Ul co"c-at~.... III 10• .,t"-iertte. Q". 10011

u'~~l- •• )' entr.. tar, en aoe •..z c-."l4.o "1 10 c.t• .J'II.LD. 1, Illr.ec16n .._

naJ. ear.Jlat. •.D.1. a.l.-a&il'A..tl&~c.:.1 41:_CW.cOOrllU1.O.(;C16cl,a1a"Drll.<1.

'r~ ilIw:l ~40 P&:'tlO;JIall.~o en -..;Hn<1i.d•• d.. cllnIolWael0l: 4. col__

c.. a_baH"'ta, Q'" tIO)' .. , 0". trs,r, en aeci6n ., .1 ;r-.t. ';;u.r b.o.Jo 1.~016::l 4.1 ~t.do ",,"yor.

~ S~ hcl1~ .. Pn>yOK~ no kilo 00::00 _ bripd. 1ntun~i.o.ll&.1i.._~~",,"w.rioa lahnO&;,,,neano.,,,i.oc d....... " "~L1'1 1.Il.tagr~d.a inc.ltO_

""i,,,.noM ~/ -"o,o'''OO'~''M'''''' '",,'o,.''''~o_~._l~ ~l . ISlt! 0 ~~1)1l. "'''J' •• \ill :-.cO.llOCiaa.r.~.o • 1, l.i.re. ~".. 1,;4a.4'..rl'>ll&tl )' .oj lLa c

'" "."". J.l ~ "_o • ,ro'=,,", ,". ~"o., '0'''''''' c, '"'' .,,, ~,. _P ,a,;. en );.O&,.,.,.. :t.r. -UlerH'. :"u~.-

• P4Td 1.l.B.-u: G~W

o 21 d' '9'7') COORO\1'l-'OOl' .,o~~ COOROIN-'DOR

- h'iL(-·< .ta!L/.~;i""" IJaI"'" Ift"'- 'S'- &J-.Jr''''- I

pdUO-.

,•. _,.. altascis" ..':.0\0 al t:l'Jeb1o hetman!) de Nicaragua~ No lrnli:en~W:>..,,%:'s;. ...'!C",~IQ "p,nal ".~

tS por e':.O Que nuestro partido na le~a{1tado l~ iniciatwd

de formar \3 brigada de lloluntHloS Sim6n Bolivar, ~aril~._ ~~ Ninf::lC'lla. baio 13 direCClon mihtar d~\ frU\te

"'."'.""~1.J O~ liberaci6n N.lClOno1. c.ordl;:'~ 'camra ei

.,.101 Somora

.. al __............ ,. ""....,. q..... ~."o~·= .....t, 1

_" _ >.oa _. _ '" >.Oc>%,o-.o.. '-' ro;ro·"-· ,

>.oa ~,...,.no.........._- .. Co'~l>l.·· Por "'..........

,. c"",,,o.~'" i.~~C_CA ."" ," c~'-''''O> cooUo-­

w'" .-' _ro' 1 ".no .;=~"" , .. lAfo-' ",bro nu~_ • ",,_ci

on- 0,," ro'?"'''' • " ",,,,_~'i" c,l ",-., d' ,oO-

• _.ro .. ,. ,..-,~"F.\;.r'ot:;;l,':',,-~,,·.., ,,"..:P, roo'­_ "" .........._', ..-'''''.0-'0 1 ......,iOi.to ,.,.. '0___ .. ,. ...-10_'-' su.5n "'u-. 4i....~... __ ....... ,. 'oc" ,,__- .., pu.blc d' 111-'

• "'" y;,LIJI'dII" .. 100 .,.o.n- 1oo=--;I81C.I·> ,,,,,: ",iol"""

found themselves on opposite sides ofthe barricades in the summer of 1977.But what about the other wings of thispseudo-Fourth International. long ac­customed to the dirtiest of factionaltricks? Those sections associated withthe former International MajorityTendency of Ernest Mandel were lessvirulent than the SWP in their attackson the Morenoite-Ied Brigade, at mostclucking their tongues at the FSLN­ordered repression. Thus the newspaperof the French LCR, Rouge (24-30August). felt constrained to condemnthe remarks of agrarian reform ministerWheelock, who in announcing thedeportations launched a diatribe against"Trotskyism and all those who want toaccelerate the evolution of the regime inNicaragua." Of course, on the next pagethe editors published a friendly inter­view with the same Wheelock, remark­ing favorably on his revolutionarycredentials.

As to the expulsions themselves, theLCR statement said only that "It israther unlikely, whatever may be thepolitical differences, that 60 foreignerscould pose a real problem for arevolutionary leadership enjoying im­mense popular support." Supposedly.then. if leftists did pose a real threat tothe Sandinista regime, the LCR wouldbegin foaming at the mouth like therabid SWP! By the next issue, Rouge(31 August-6 September) could onlybring itself to complain that "the termsin which the Nicaraguan governmentdecreed the expulsion of 'foreign'militants constitute a disturbing prece-

and must be roundly condemned by allwould-be socialists. But this is not whatthe American Socialist Workers Party(SWP) thought of it. The SWP did notprotest at all. In fact, it issued fourdifferent "explanations" of the Sandi­nista repressian against the ostensiblyTrotskyist leaders of the Simon BolivarBrigade, one of which consisted oflJuoting without comment a statementby the Nicaraguan ministry of theinterior. Moreover. the SWP's explana­tions not only shamelessly support theFSLN government against their own"comrades," but they join in the witch­hunt themselves. An August 21 SWPPolitical Committee declaration enti­tled "New U.S. Propaganda DriveAgainst Nicaragua" states:

"The Simon Bolivar Brigade wasorganized by the Colombian PST(Partido Socialista de los Traba­jadores-Socialist Workers Party).under the direction of an internationalgrouping known as the 'BolshevikFaction,' led by Nahuel Moreno...."In the case of the Simon BolivarBrigade. the Bolshevik Faction neverconsulted the Fourth Internationalabout this project or about the policiesthe Brigade followed. These policies rancounter to the policies decided by theleadership bodies of the FourthInternational."Through the Simon Bolivar Brigadethe Bolshevik Faction led young mili­tants from several Latin Americancountries-people who wanted to helpthe fight against Somoza-into asectarian adventure. Masquerading as asection ofthe Sandinista Front (FSLN),the Simon Bolivar Brigade enteredNicaragua from the outside to engage inits own organizing efforts along thelines of 'outflanking' the Sandinistas onthe left. Their tactic was to up the ante inwhat the Sandinistas were saying, tryingin this way to build a counterforce tothem.'This grotesque idea-that people fromthe outside can maneuver to capture theleadership of the revolution from thosewho have emerged in the course of thestruggle---':'has nothing whatever to dowith Trotskyism, revolutionarysocialism."The unfortunate episode of the SimonBolivar Brigade was just what theCarter administration was waiting for:'

-Militant. 31 AugustIn another article in the same issue of

the Militant, on "The Facts About theSimon Bolivar Brigade," the SWPlabels the Managua workers demonstra­tion a "provocative clash" and accusesthe leaders of the Brigade of having"acted irresponsibly." Again, the "fact"­sheet charges that the Brigade's at­tempts to "outflank [the FSLN] fromthe left" had "absolutely nothing incommon with the position of the FourthInternational." And it osten,atiouslywashes its hands of any association:"The Fourth International is in no wayresponsible for the activities of theBrigade." Quite a mouthful comingfrom people who are formally part ofthe same "International."

The SWP's response to the expulsionof the Bolivar Brigaders was the mostnaked stab in the back by a section of thefake-Trotskyist "U nited" Secretariat(USee) since its supporters in Portugal

Revolution•In

Nicaraguaand the

Left"

6 WORKERS VANGUARD

FSLN-appointed junta members Borge, Ortega, Ramirez, Chamorroand Robelo at press conference in July.

~

r

rf~II~

~t

•

·•r~·rJ

I,

IfII(

!l·I...'

I"O!

rfJ

I",f

'"·,If,(([

It~

front" including the governments ofPanama, Costa Rica, Mexico and theAndean Pact countries, or that the U.S.itself finally voted against the proposal.

If the SWP hereby joined Castro inpropagating illusions about the possibil­ity of hemispheric "peaceful coexist­ence" with the predatory imperialistcolossus to the north. its central politicaldemand-for "massive U.S. aid to!\ icaragua"-is far more sinister. Inappearance a utopian call on theimperialist leopard to change its spots,in realin' it is an appea!f(Jr a hloc withthe liheral American hourgeoisie toprel'ent socialist revolution in CentralAmerica. This demand encapsulates theSWP's whole reformist-i.e.,counterrevo!utionar I'-pers peet jve onNicaragua. As we pointed out in a boxin our last issue ("Reformists Who Can'tSpell"), these State Department social­ists are literally picking up the line of theState Department, which is tellingCongress that if the U.S. does notprovide aid, Nicaragua may well "goCommunist." This is also the position,for example, of Mexican presidentl.opez Portillo, who told the Nell' YorkTimes (23 September) that:

"I do think that the best way to dissuadethe Nicaraguan Government fromtaking extreme positions would be toprovide it with unconditional andgenerous financial help."

The latest Militants read like CAREappeals for philanthropic aid to thestarving Nicaraguans. But behind "hu­manitarian" dollars there is alwayspolitics. Aid to rebuild what-a capital­ist or collectivized economy? And fromwhom'! What we see here is the SWP'stouching faith in the reformability ofAmerican imperialism, the butchers ofMy Lai and authors of the Bay of Pigsinvasion. It is their appeal for federaltroops to Boston to "protect" blackchildren writ large. Would revolution­ary Marxists have called for "massive

- allied aid to the Russian Revolution"after the February 1917 revolutionoverthrowing the tsar'! Of course not,because such aid-strings or nostrings-would necessarily have beenaimed at preventing the Bolsheviks fromtaking power and at keeping Russia inthe war.

The principal "aid" which the Nicara­guan working people urgently need isthe leadership of a communist vanguardwith a program of permanent revolu­tion, going beyond the bourgeois­democratic program of the FSLN tonobilize the forces for proletarian

;evolution. And they won't get it fromthe reformist SWP, which supports theSandinistas against the left and calls on

continued on page 10

PeoPle Wno SUPPorted theOl'igaae/jactivities ';.'~r~~~~/\Vith the false~}"'J__'_'~~$~g"-~"'W44), nus attempt by a grOUPing fro

lllOutside the COuntry to Substitute itselffor the real leadership that Was forgedin the revolutionary struggle againstSo"o,. h.. 'baol''''ly nothIng Incommon With the POsition of theFOUrth International, the World Trot.It,~ist organization.

The P§'l.JV1~PIbeton severalOCcasions With the leadership of theBrig'd" to try to oblaln , , , "

the Bri . .'. «>. .>........ cpe,.~_ ly... ·"q~P6~•. ~iPlined and~ve army and militia. .... ,

Several left groups operating in~caragua, in particular the Maoists andthe Sim6n Bolfvar Brigade, have chal.I.

ngodthe FSLN;n th"". ar•••, lry;ng

to Outflank it from the left.

They have utilized objectiveproblems_the gap between the greathoPes for immediate improvements

'h, d;ffl',lff"" In ach;,v;..,~'i~~~l~..~~i:klY_t~ e.1)..S~~$~~ctffl~

fllcts ~~!~'-'~es againstthe FSLN leadership.

"'~ Si-nn

A.lfYRr Brigade,

~"~

Militant

SWP on Nicaragua:popular frontism,

backstabbing, callsfor imperialist "aid" to

contain revolution.

Nahuel Moreno

heavy dose of constitutional cretinism­in a country presently in the throes of 'revolution. The USec has of late beengiven to "socialist constitution" schemesas a device for presenting its social­democratic parliamentarism in coun­tries under the heel of bonapartistdictatorships. Consequently the SWPwas ecstatic when the FSLN proclaimeda "Bill of Rights," printing the full text,all 52 articles of it, in IntercontinentalPress. The most socially "advanced"provision of the new Nicaraguan statuteis a clause on the "social function ofproperty" which is no more radical thanthe right of eminent domain in Anglo­Saxon common law.

And of course there is the constantequation of FSLN-ruled Nicaraguawith Castro's Cuba. Thus the SWPhailed Fidel Castro's July 26 speech on:\icaragua, reprinting it in everyone ofits publications. But they neglected topoint out that the core of the speech wasCastro's reassurance to those (e.g., theU.S.) who "expressed fears to the effectthat Nicaragua would become a newCuba." According to the Cuban leader,the reply of "the Nicaraguans" is: "No,Nicaragua will become a new Nicara­gua. And this is something quitedifferent" (Granma [English-languageweekly edition], 5 August). Instead, theMilitant (10 August) emphasized that inCastro's speech the OAS vote againstthe U.S. proposal for a "peacekeepingforce" to be sent to Nicaragua "wasrightly hailed as 'a great victory for thepeople of our America'." It didn'tmention that Castro hailed the forma­tion of "a great democratic, pro-inde­pendence and anti-interventionist

--':!lliiH'li. i(\,,'\iSM i !'i'~•• 0 •• '" ...... ,,_ •• _ ...~-~~~l'~toj~ -socialistSdemandmassive U.S. aid

\0 licargaguaLaLf'Ch ~980 presidef1tial campaign

t. -

AP

"In the struggle against Somoza theSandinistas consciously tried to createthe broadest possible front, includinghourgeois forces who were opponentsof Somoza. That was ohviouslr thecorrect. intelligent, and revolutionarypolicy." [our emphasis]

No clearer endorsement of thetreacherous policy of the popular frontcould be asked for. As Leon Trotskywrote after the tragic experience ofSpain and France in the 1930s: "Therecan he no xreater crime than coalitionlI'ith the hourxeoisie in a period of"socialist revolution" ("'Trotskyism' andthe PSOP," July 1939).

1\1 ot only is the policy the same asStalin's, e\Cn the language and theexcuses are identical. Thus in polemiciz­ing against the danger presented by the"provocative" actions of the SimonBolivar Brigade. the SWP writes thatthe FSLN leadership "must makeinroads into the bourgeois order,without giving the imperialists easypretexts to whip up propaganda in favorof intervention" (Mililant, 31 August).Haven't we seen this somewhere before?Yes. we have. It was the famous letter ofStalin, Molotov and Voroshilov toSpanish prime minister Largo Caba­llero explaining the need not to frightenthe bourgeoisie: "This is necessary toprevent the enemies of Spain consider­ing her a communist republic and thusto avert their open intervention which isthe greatest danger for republicanSpain" (21 December 1936).

Naturally the SWP adds its ownpeculiar spices to this traditional refor­mist recipe for class betrayaL notably a

a "concession"-and moreover a correctone:

outflank it to the left"-i.e., anyone whoeven pretends to mobilize the workingmasses around demands which goheyond the democratic program ofo\erthrowing the Somoza dictatorship.

rhus in a front-page statement in the~ I August Mililant, SWP vice­presidential candidate Matilde Zimmer­mann unreservedly endorses the FSLNn:gime: "We think that the Sandinistagovernment that is trying to get 1\:icara­gua on its feet is doi ng a good job of it."And an article written from Managuahy Pedro Camejo. Sergio Rodriguezand Fred Murphy hegins with the flatassertion: "The socialist revolution hashegun in Nicaragua" (IntercontinentalPress. ~ Septernher). If that is so. thenwhat need is there for an independentTrotskyist \anguard? Not only is theSWP opposed to such "irresponsible"acts of the Simon Bolivar Brigade asmohilizing Managua workers to raisedemands on the Sandinista regime. butto the ex istenee of any left group outsidethe FSLN, including the otficial USecsection in Nicaragua. In all of thearticles on the Sandinista revolutionappearing in the main USec organs, notone so much as mentions the LigaMarxista Revolucionaria ("sympathiz­ing section of the FourthInternational").

According to Camejo/Rodriguez/Murphy, "The power that exists todayin Nicaragua is a revolutionary power."And this praise should not be mistakenas some kind of "critical support" to theFSLN. The classic formula for such atreacherous policy toward a bourgeois"revolutionary power" was provided byStalin in March 1917, before Leninreturned from exile and presented hisApril Theses calling for "all power to thesoviets." The Bolsheviks would supportthe Provisional Government, wrotePravda under the editorship of Stalinand Kamenev. "insofar as it strugglesagainst reaction or counterrevolution."But today's S W P is lI'orse than the /9/7Stalin, for these raving all-the-way­with-the-FSLN hundred-percentersgive a hlank check: " ... the only way forrevolutionarv socialists around theworld to help advance the Nicaraguanrevolution is to recognize the revolu­tionary capacities of this leadership, toidentify with it, and to join forces with itin the struggle to defend and extend therevolution" (Intercontinental Press, 3Septemher 1979).

Stalin's support for the ProvisionalGovernment in 1917 anticipated hisreformist degeneration in the 1930s,tying the workers to their class en~my

through the polic~ of the People'sFront. And it is a hallmark of the SWP'sfully flowering reformism that it todayopenly defends popular frontismagainst left critics. Its articles onNicaragua virtually call for the Stalinist­Menshevik "two-stage revolution."Camejo and his friends recognize that"The capitalists and those determined todefend their interests still remain afactor in the government." But this isnowhere criticized, merely presented as

28 SEPTEMBER 1979 7

BART Workers ,'Teachers Strike -Threatened

Beat Back Scabherding Assaultin Bay Area!SAN FRANCISCO-Two drawn-outunion struggles here escalated sharplylast week as local ~ovemment

employers threatened massive scab­herding. School teachers on strike sinceSeptember to and workers of theBART (Bay Area _Rapid Transit)system locked out since August 31 arefacing a showdown with capitalistpoliticians bent on destroying SanFrancisco's reputation as a labortown. Union strength was alreadybadly damaged by the defeat of themunicipal craft workers strike in 1976.Today the 3,800 teachers and 1,650transit workers are on the front linesagainst a vicious provocation by citybosses determined to finish the job.And labor's battle must be fought notonly with militant strike action, butalso politically, as the Democrats andRepublicans join hands against theworkers movement.

BART officials, who locked out theunions and shut the system down lastmonth, are now boasting on the frontpage of the San Francisco Chronicle(20 September) that salaried engineersand foremen have been doing unionmaintenance work on damaged cars inthe Concord yards. Managementplans to re-open the system with"recertified" (read "scab") trainoperators in about two weeks, thepaper reports. It was BARTs openviolation of union jurisdiction thatsparked a workers sit-in at theConcord yard in late July-now it isthreatening to smash the transitunions altogether.

Both of the unions affected,Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)Local 1555 and United PublicEmployees (UPE) Local 390, havebeen trying to negotiate a contractsince their old one expired July 1, butBART management is determined tobreak union standards. The mainissue in the lockout is the transitworkers' defense of the cost-of-livingformula, one of the few escalatorclauses which actually keeps step withgalloping inflation. Yet to hear thebosses tell it, fighting for 100 percentCOLA has made BART workers

Public Enemy No.1.Perhaps taking a cue from the

BART directors, San Franciscoschool superintendent Robert Aliotosuddenly took a hard line in the ten­day-old teachers strike and beganreopening schools on Friday using$90-a-day "substitutes." Negotiationsfor a new contract had broken downas SF Federation of Teachers presi­dent Jim Ballard justly, thoughbelatedly, began demanding the rehir­ing of all 1,200 teachers laid off lastspring. Using smokescreen budgetfigures, the school board has arguedthat only 700 of the 1,200 could berehired-as substitutes withouttenure!-and the expense would resultin a pay raise of only 5 percent. Totop it off, Mayor Diane Feinstein,who as a supervisor led the attack onthe craft workers in 1976, is sitting inthe bargaining with the teachers as a"mediator."

There must be no mistake about thethreat hanging over the unions. Thebourgeoisie has already sent out theword that it means business. A majorarticle in the New York Times (22September) announced, "Strike­Support Tradition Shaken in SanFrancisco":

"For almost 40 years the traditionaround here has been that the publicwill support organized labor when itstrikes to force a recalcitrantemployer to terms.... City agencies,aware of that annoyance, have begunto chip away at tradition...."Yesterday the San Francisco schoolboard used the ultimate weaponagainst a striking union. It opened forbusiness behind the picket line, withstrikebreakers carrying out unionmembers' jobs. That first, tentativestrikebreaking effort has so far notbeen rebuffed."

The bosses have made it clear: all BayArea labor is affected. Either theunions close ranks to reverse their1976 defeat and ensure victory for theBART workers and teachers, or theywill go down separately before theanti-labor onslaught. The scabbingmust be stopped! But even this simpledefensive action is too much for thecringing union bureaucrats, whohaving been kicked in the teeth just

crawl back for more punishment.In the BART dispute the two main

union leaders, Varacalli of UPE andDanzy of ATU, have not called a strike,arguing that an official strike mightendanger efforts to get unemploymentbenefits. But since the lockout began,with almost 200 workers suspendedand both local presidents fired, theyhave not even called a union meeting,let alone set up a mass picket line.And even so, the locked-out workershave not received a penny of unem­ployment benefits (presently blockedby the invervention of BA RT man­agement). All Bay Area transitunions have a vital interest in de­fending the BART workers and theirCOLA clause. They must helpmobilize working-class support fortheir brothers and sisters under attackby shutting down the entire masstransit system, not just this elite unitcatering to suburban executives.

Such militant strike action and boldacts of labor solidarity are crucial tosecure victory for the BART workersand San Francisco teachers. But thebureaucrats' "answer" has been to lickthe feet of Diane Feinstein and therest of the capitalist politicians whoare leading the attack on the unions.At the last BART workers meeting,on August 23, the general staff of BayArea organized labor showed up­including Richard Groulx of theAlameda Central Labor Council, theILWU's Jimmy Herman, Chuck Mackof Teamsters Local 70 and others-inorder to derail a strike vote byoffering to join the negotiations.Herman boasted then, "Solidarity isalive. . . . If there is a struggle ofworkers that needs support fromother workers, we will do it" (quotedin People's World, I September).However, after one abortivenegotiating session on August 25-26,this "high-powered" ad hoc groupquickly disappeared from sight. BayArea workers must hold their leadersto their promises and demand fulllabor support for the teachers andtransit workers, including manningmass picket lines to stop the

scabherding.The bureaucracy refuses to carry

out such a militant defense of theworkers under attack because it isafraid of going up against the state. Areal effort to stop scabbing wouldsoon confront the capitalists' hiredgun thugs, the police. Already, whenthe transit workers seized the Concordmaintenance yard in July, BART copswere assembled in a nearby buildingpoised for an assault. Yet these policeremain members of one of the BARTunions, organized as a separate localof the SEW. They must be expellednow!

"Cops out of the unions!" is anelementary demand in defense of thelabor movement, yet the entire oppor­tunist left has tried to duck thequestion. One treacherous outfit evendefends the police as "fellowworkers"-the Socialist LeagueDemocratic-Centralist (SL-DC), a tinygroup linked to the Workers SocialistLeague (WSL) of Britain. WhenBART cops struck in August 1977,SL-DC leader Tom Cagle wrote anarticle for the group's paper sup­porting the strike and sneering thatgroups like the Spartacist League whoinsist that the police are enemies ofthe workers movement simply"worship orthodoxy and dogma"(Labor News, September 1977). Hownow, Brother Cagle? Are BART copsstill "union brothers" when theirnightsticks are poised and guns drawnagainst transit strikers? A little dogmawouldn't hurt such dyed-in-the-woolopportunists.

Since the craft workers strike the BayArea labor leaders have learned no­thing. Defeated in 1976 because of theirfailure to mobilize effective laborsolidarity, today the trade-union fakerswant at all cost to avoid strikes, placingtheir confidence instead in the Demo­cratic Party. But Feinstein and hercohorts want to discipline the unions bydecisively humiliating them. Only whenthe workers throw out their selloutmisleaders and replace them with class­struggle militants dedicated to forging aworkers party can the defeats bereversed.•

Spartacist League/Spartacus Youth League Public Offices

-MARXIST LlTERATURE-

MullahLovers...(continued from page 2)

Spartacist comrade said, "The Sparta­cist League will be defending your owncomrades in Iran when they face thebloodbath that the 'Islamic Republic'will institute against them" (see "They

Wanted Khomeini. They Got Him,"WV No. 227, 16 March). Now thechickens have come home to roost.

Unlike the SWP, which so far hasseen fit to defend only the utopian/reformist HKS, the iSt defends theTudeh party, Fedayeen, HKS. union­ists. women. Arabs and the courageousKurdish guerrillas victimized by themullah-led terror.

The SWP is now wi Iling to defend theH KS. " so long as nobody raises the

Thef()lIoll'inK motion lI'as present­ed Septemher 20 to an InternationalLonKshoremen's and Warehouse­men's Union (IL WU) Local 6 EastBay Division meeting. Suhmitted hrLocal executive hoard memher BobA1andel, the motion lI'as reFerred hI' amemhership vote to the iniernatio~alexecutive hoard. It reads as folloll's:

"Whereas, Khomeini's 'IslamicRevQlution' has been carrying outincreasingly bloody attacks on Iran­ian labor unions. national minori­ties, women and leftists: therefore, beit resolved that warehouse Local 6recommends as policy to all locals inthe ILWU and to the internationalexecutive board that the ILWUrefuse to ship any arms to thereactionary mullah regime."

WORKERS VANGUARD... ...• ,-. y .-.

exclusion ism of the reformist SWPintimidate us in the face of this historicresponsibility.•

question: why did the left in Iran andabroad work to bring this murderousPersian-chauvinist, anti-communist,anti-woman regime to power? To keepthis question off the floor. the SWP willturn its forums into provocationsagainst workers democracy-provoca­tions which even some of its guestspeakers refuse to sanction. The SWP'soverriding "defense" priority is to keepfrom having to account for its politicalbetrayal of the Iranian working masseswho are now payIng in blood for theopportunists' cynical support toKhomeini.

It is thanks to the criminal tail ism ofthe SWP/HKS and people like themthat Iranian militants are today inmortal peril. Even at the height ofKhomeini's popularity, the Spartacisttendency did not flinch from raising theindependent proletarian perspective­"Down with the Shah! Down with theMullahs! For Workers Revolution!"­required to forge a revolutionary van­guard party in Iran. Nor will the two-bit

New YorkMonday through Friday:6:30-9:00 p.m.Saturday: 1:00-4:00 p.m.260 West BroadwayRoom 522New York. New YorkPhone: (212) 925-~

ChicagoTuesday: 5:30-9:00 p.m.Saturday: 2:00-5:30 p.m.523 S. Plymouth Court3rd floorChicago, IllinoisPhone: (312)427~3

Bay AreaFriday: 3:00-6:00 p.m.Saturday: 3:00-6:00 p.m.1634 Telegraph3rd floor(near 17th Street)Oakland, CaliforniaPhone: (415) 835-1535

•

240

SUBSCRIBE NOW!

not "old" money, just lots of it. JosephKennedy, the spirit of the "mystique."made his fortune not as an industrialistor in his brief connection with themotion-picture industry or in theimported liquor business. but infinance-stock manipulation, to beexact. He was one of this country's big­time hustlers, and surely one of the mostrapaciously cynical of men in a milieu ofgentlemen vipers.

Basically he brought the boys up tobelieve in nothing but their own advan­tage and the family's. A fervent right­winger. he supported "Mr. Republi­can." Robert Taft, and archwitch-hunter Joseph McCarthy. On theother hand, he could wheel and dealwith FDR who appointed him to theSecurities and Exchange Com mis­sion(!). The boys were supplied with thevalues of hucksters and the ideologicaloutlook of the Chamber of Commerce.When John Kennedy ran against HenryCabot Lodge for the Senate in 1952 hemanaged to red bait him as an "interna­tionalist" and "Truman Socialist." Andwhen Robert joined Joe McCarthy'santi-red staff in the early '50s, he wasmerely helping out a family friend.

For liberals, Teddy Kennedy's chiefvirtue is that he doesn't have a Bay ofPigs or a H UAC (H ouse Un-AmericanActivities Committee) in his past. but heis the legitimate heir to the family'spolitical tradition nevertheless. Hissupporters like to portray him as anopponent of the Vietnam war as early as1966. But during a March 1967 televiseddebate with Texas war hawk JohnTower, Kennedy was stating, "I supportour commitment in South Vietnam,"and as late as October 1969 he was onlycalling for withdrawal of U.S. air andnaval support for the Thieu regime alier1972!

/

Similarly, Kennedy's backers portrayhim to black constituents as the manwho stood up to the racist mobs duringBoston's busing crisis. In fact, althoughan early advocate of busing, when it was

continued on pal:e I I

9

Name ,Address _

____________ Phone _

City State Zip _

offer up a "choice" between Kennedyand Carter. DSOC's Winpisinger put itwell when he told the 26 March VillaKeVoice that his pro-Kennedy positionwas perfectly consistent with 'the social­democratic desire to "fine tune capital­ism with a dose of socialism." From thenew breed of labor "reformers" likeWinpisinger to the old dinosaurs of theMeany ilk, the pro-capitalist laborbureaucracy functions to confineworking-class protest within the bound­aries of bourgeois politics. In order tobreak labor's ties to the bourgeoisDemocratic Party, militants muststruggle to oust the pro-capitalistbureaucracy. Forward to a workersparty to fight for a workers government!

$3/24 issues of Workers Vanguard $1/6 introductory issues of(includes Spartacist) 0 Workers VanguardDNew DRenewal (includes Spartacist)

$2/9 issues of $2/4 issues ofo Young Spartacus 0 Women and Revolution

Make payable/mail to: Spartacist Publishing Co.• Box 1377 GPO. New York, New York 10001

Dynasty of Reaction

One of the creepy side effects of aprospective Kennedy candidacy, letalone presidency, is the heap of mediaconfetti shredded from what is called theKennedy family mystique. We will notonly be sprayed with tearful nostalgia ofliberal martyrdom, but confronted withthe family vigor (once again pro­nounced "vigaa"). Carter's praying,jogging and collection of faith-healingcrackpots seemed bad enough, but nowit will be all of Them and their Rat Packagain (how old is Peter Lawford,anyway'?): white-water rafting down theSnake River, slumming in Harlem'sd rug areas and generally acting withunbounded arrogance and privilege. (Itis peculiar to America's commercialfascination with youth culture that thetwo major figures of. Democratic Partypolitics square off against one anotheras lingering adolescents calling them­selves "Jimmy" and "Teddy.")

The mystique of the Kennedy familyis supposed to be Teddy's greatest assetin his bid to become president. Surely,the family fortune is a big asset. Thebourgeoisie is no doubt tired of modernself-made millionaires with their expo­sures of Watergates and Peanutgates.But with the Kennedy billions they get

WV SubscriptionDrive in

2nd Week­Ord~Now!

Labor Fakers Heady for Teddy

crs" and "big government," they don'tbuy the reality. Carter talks about less,but Americans want more. They wantmore wages. more cars, more gas, moreeducation. more health care. Many ofthe same Americans who correctlydamn the failed liberal schemes and"wars" on poverty favor a cradle-to­grave national health insurance plan.Ihat same ideologically conservativepublic is faced with unpayable costs anda financial fear of aging and sicknessthat rivals the fear of death. Thus.Kennedy's popularity is in part due tohis identification with "big spending"social programs. But make no mistake.leddy understands what the role ofliberalism must be in this period ofausterity and stagnant social struggle.

The trade-union bureaucrats arc notonly hoping for a Kennedy candidacy.they arc praying for it. One AFL-CIOofficial said. "We had been hearing fromall over the country that unio!) leaders.when they said their prayers at night.would say, 'Please God, let Teddy run.'Now their prayers have been answered"(;,Vell' York Times, 21 September). Andno wonder. The labor fakers do notrelish the prospect of supporting apresident already hated by millions ofAmerican working people. For the mostpart the bureaucrats are loyal Demo­cratic Party activists who would stillback Carter if he somehow managed toget nominated. But taking their cuefrom the bourgeoisie, they wouldcertainly prefer to switch horses, ormore accurately, riders.

First onto the Kennedy bandwagonwas William "Wimpy" Winpisinger.head of the International Association ofMachinists and Democratic SocialistOrganizing Committee (DSOC) vice­chairman, who launched a "DumpCarter" movement several months ago.Recently one-time Carterite ArnoldMiller of the Mine Workers announcedthat anyone would be better th<!nJimmy, while the Fraser bureaucracy ofthe Auto Workers has adopted a pro­Kennedy "neutrality." Even the ILG­WU's Sol Chaikin of the "Labor forCarter" committee is now having secondthoughts, saying he would take "a longhard look" if Kennedy formally declareshis candidacy.

Certainly the union tops have goodreason to be fed up with Carter. All oflabor's "must" legislation-the $3 mini­mum wage, "common situs" picketing,the Humphrey-Hawkins "full employ­ment" bill and the labor-reform bill weredefeated by an overwhelmingly Demo­cratic Congress. Carter personallytorpedoed the minimum wage andnational health insurance bills. Theselabor traitors are not angry aboutCarter's real crimes-like invokingTaft-Hartley to try to break the IIO-dayminers' strike in 1978 or the railroadworkers walkout that same year-afterall, Arnold Miller solidarized withCarter in that! Rather, the Meanys,Frasers, Millers and Fitzsimmons arepiqued because the wholesale defeats oftheir legislative substitutes for militantunionism leave them without a shred ofcredibility in the eyes of their ranks.

In the coming months the variousunion political machines will startcranking out the propaganda for Teddy,as a "real friend of labor." remindingtrade unionists of Kennedy's support forHumphrey-Hawkins, for his nationalhealth insurance plan. Of course this"liberal showpiece" is already cut to thebone and in any case is unlikely to passthe austerity-minded Congress. Ken­nedy's "friend of labor" image onlyholds up because, unlike Carter, hehasn't been on the hot seat during thecurrent recession and thus has not beenheld directly responsible for spiralinginflation and mounting layoffs.

The bureaucrats prefer to counter­pose the "pr<:>-labor" Democratsto the "pro-big business" GOP. Thistime, however, they're stuck with aDemocratic incumbent, moreover onethey escorted into office. So now they

(continuedfrum page 1)

dom: "I beline we're facing difficulteconomic problems today to whichthere arc no magic or easy solutions"(Veil' York Times, 16 September).

Recognizing that Carter is a hopelessloser, the influential New York Times isp.ushing Kennedy's candidacy. It istrving to convince the ruling class atla~ge th'at the Democratic Senator fromMassachusetts is no big-spending,welfare-state liberal whatever his some­time image. On 14 September the Timesran a front-page article entitled, "Ken­nedy Says That Leadership, Not Eco­nomic Policy. Is at Issue." And thefollowing Sunday (16 September) theTimes lead headline in its "News of theWeek in Review" section informs us,"Now, Kennedy Shifts His Perspectiveson Economics":

"To most Americans, the familiarEdward M. Kennedy is the SenatorialKennedy, an old-style liberal who hasremained true to the credo that everbigger Government is ever better. ...-Last week, a Presidential Kennedyappeared, and during a brief foray intobroad economic issues, offered a moreau courant philosophy dwelling heavilyon free enterprise, the limitations ofGovernment and inflation."

To drive home the point the articlequotes an anonymous Kennegy econ­omics adviser, who assures Wall Streetthat his boss is "a pretty pragmatic guy."

Behind both Carter's holy-rollereconomics and Kennedy's much-toutedpragmatism is the deep concern of theAmerican capitalist class over thepresent economic situation; all of thetalk about "leadership," of course, is adiscussion over who can best "lead" thedrive for austerity. From the standpointof the ruling class, the only way toreverse this unhappy situation is to cutthe consumption standards of theworking people in order to add toprofits. This accounts for the presentdrive for fiscal austerity against "biggovernment," cutting social services andseeking to transfer these resources toprivate capital. Welfare-state liberalismhas become anathema from the no-nukerallies to the boardrooms of the Fortune500 top corporations.

For his part, Kennedy knows that thisis a bad season for New Deal/GreatSociety rhetoric and so is shelving it.For years his main claim to fame as a"fighting liberal" was his $90-millionnational health insurance proposal. Butearlier this year he "pragmatically'scaled down this program so it is nownot essentially different from Carter's.According to a 19 September New YorkPost column by Evans and Novak,Kennedy no longer thinks Carter is"shielding" excessive defense spend­ing-now he says he supports thepresident's 3 percent rise in real defensespending. Kennedy used to say the MXmissile could "increase the threat ofnuclear war"-now he is for its develop­ment and hedges only on its deployment(no doubt till he is elected). On foreignpolicy Teddy claims mere "tactical"differences. And he has dropped hiscrusade against Carter for oil decontrol,pointing with much clamor to his ownsponsorship of deregulation in truckingand air transport.

But Kennedy is not a "betrayer ofliberalism" as his more naive followerswill surely charge. Rather, liberalism forthe moment has a somewhat differentrole to play. It is interesting thatKennedy-who has a 95 percent favor­able rating from the liberal Americansfor Democratic Action (ADA), asopposed to I percent from the ADA'sconservative counterpart, Americansfor Conservative Action-is as popularas he is. After all, this is supposed to be acountry that is shifting ever morerapidly to the right.

It is not merely the mystique of theKennedy name. The truth is that whileAmerican voters may accept the conser­vative rhetoric of hatred of "big spend-

28 SEPTEMBER 1979

Kennedy,Carter...

..

WORK~RS. YAN,G.UARD

:~ .... hc;~ ~'·,..-d ~ .... c,~~,'" '-)1 (/niCrU)'illilellia! rr,

:k;:cmh:r \9-'j . .\nd indeed. theGrccoarticle (RCI'ista de America. August1977) does bear a notable resemblanceto our own writings on the subject(except that. funny thing. the Moreno­ites identify Stalinism with dependenceon Moscow gold). .

In particula', in founding the Bolshe­vik Tendency after his break with theSWP in late 1975-early 1976, Morenoadopted positions on Portugal andAngola strikingly similar to those of theSpartacist tendency. On Portugal hedenounced the SWP's tailing after theCI A-funded Socialist Party of MarioSoares as well as the Mandelite IMrspolitical support to the Stalinistl ArmedForces Movement bloc. On Angola hecalled for military support to the M pLAagainst the South African/CIA invasionwhile formally opposing political sup­port to any of the three competingnationalist groups. The principal char­acteristic of these formally orthodoxpositions is that they are far from homeand they are utterly arbitrary, notderived from a coherent programmaticworldview.

Thus, while Moreno condemns theS W P's shameless support for the Portu­guese SP. in Argentina he fused withJuan Carlos Coral's rump social demo­crats in 1971. While criticizing Mandel'scapitulation to the Eurocommunists. hisVenezuelan supporters are now deeplyembedded in the "Eurocommunist"M AS. While criticizing the IMrssupport for the demagogic Carvalhoand the Portuguese MFA, Moreno'sColombian PST called for "support tothe nationalist policies of Torrijos" inPanama. calling this demagogic militaryofficer (friend of both Castro andChase Manhattan Bank) "progressive"in his "confrontation with imperialism"(see "U.S. Out of Panama Now!" WVNo. 203. 28 April 1978).

Feigning orthodoxy when it is"cheap"-in distant climes and when itsuits his unprincipled maneuvers-closeto home where it counts. Moreno'sopportunism exceeds that of any otherwing of the USee. Trenchantly criticiz­ing Bolivian paR leader GuillermoLora for joining an "anti-imperialistfront" with General Torres in Bolivia in1971 (International Socialist Review.February 1973), two years later Morenohimself joined a popular-front Group of8 together with the Argentine CP andthe leading bourgeois parties in pledgingsupport to the bonapartist governmentof Juan Peron (see "PST CaughtRedhanded," WVNo, 49, 19July 1974).Todav when the Sandinistas are interna­tional celebrities. Moreno is a gung-hoguerrillaist: but when the CastroitePRT/ER.P (then affiliated to the USee)\vas stirring things up in Argentina withits kidnappings and attacks on the army.'\1oreno's PS r eljuated "the guerrillasand their mirror image--lhe terrorist-,of the AA;\ and other organi/ations ofthe ultraright" (/Ilii'l'contilli'lI!al Pre.\I.2X October 1974).

"'ahuel Moreno's record is that of ahuckster who has put on the garb of\ irtually every popular trend in theLatin American left-Peronism. Cas­troism. Maoism, and now Sandinoism.His "leff' positions on internationaltopics bear no relation whatever to hisrightist positions at home. The onlyreason he appears militant over Nicara­gua today is that he was caught out inthe middle of a maneuver with theFSI :"-and that while he is up to hisolJ tricks. the rest of the USec ha..;moved distinctly to the right. Until theFSL:" wok power in Managua the:Vlorenoites' cal! for a Sandinista gov­ernment was formally to the ritSht 01 theother tendencies of the USee. whichraised various criticisms of the FSL.0:ties to the opposition bourgeoisie. Butas soon as Mandel and Barnes smelled achance to hook up to a popular cause,they leapt right over Moreno and lefthim holding the bag in the unaccus­tomed role of the far :eft wing.

Finally, it should be noted that in

1-,('t \\!,-'Cfl

l! '1'--" ~;nd PR inCr!

,j,1\'.. ,.

lhe PSR polemiC' ended b::- loucllingon "the most sensltive point of all. thefinances of the Simon Bolivar Brigade."Many people "have begun to havedoubts about where the funds gatheredby the PST arc going," they report. Andmoney is always the most sensitive pointwith Moreno. For those who know hispast, the involuntary response uponlearning that Colombian Morenoiteswere organizing an "international bri­gade" for Nicaragua was to say: "Nicar­aguans, Colombians-keep your handson your wallets!" But it hardly behoovesthe USee to raise this charge now. TheArgentine Politica Obrera group hasbeen complaining for years that More­no's Editorial Pluma took 50,000 copiesof Trotsky works on contract fromthem, deliberately held off paying forthem for months until the March 1976Videla coup, and then, pleading pover­ty, refused to pay.

Moreno's financial skulduggery islegendary in the Latin American left.The most sensationalist case concernsallegations that he failed to deliverpromised funds to Hugo Blanco'sguerrilla operation in Peru in 1962, andhis role in the disappearance of sev­eral thousands of dollars taken in abank expropriation by the TupaeAmaru' group and destined for Blanco(for a detailed account of this affair, seeRichard Gott, Guerrilla Movements inLatin America [1972]). In a review ofRobert Alexander's grotesquely inaccu­rate book Trotskyism in Latin America,Joseph Hansen noted in 1977 thatMoreno had never answered thesecharges, But in view of the scandalousnature of the charges, it is notable thatHansen evidently never bothered to getan explanation from Moreno during thesix years that they were co-leaders of theUSee minority.

Moreno stands before the workersmovement convicted many times over ofpolitical charlatanism and breaches ofproletarian morality. Yet his operationis such that he frequently puts on a coverof programmatic militancy for purelyfactional purposes. On several occa­sions this has led the Morenoites toadopt positions imitating (or borrowedfrom?) the authentic Trotskyism of theinternational Spartacist tendency. Thusin polemicizing against an article onEurocommunism and Soviet "dissi­dents" by Morenoite Eugenio Greco,SWP hack Gerry Foley noted that the"award for originality" in raising these

:~: l~l~_' In l (\~l<j,~: r:.:. ~j ["; ;.j

R1CLl ill ldC~. It'' l .S.-bd,,:d Supp0rlcr::-,.the Sandlnlst,ls tor Socialism in :"icara­gua. did not nen leave for Managuauntil the day alia SomOla's tall! So theheroic. gun-in-hand guerrilla image theBrigade leaders would like to assume(Colombian PST "cumandante" KemelGeorge reportedly showed up in battlefatigues for a fund-raising rally inBogota) is certainly undeserved.

It is not true. however. that the SimonBolivar Brigade was unprepared to"accept the discipline of the FSLN."Moreno's idea of "discipline" is proba­bly not to the liking of the Sandinistas(or the USee leaders). but the Brigadewas definitely built on the basis ofsubordination to the FSLN. That makesits present situation all the more ironic.fhe "Open Letter" by the MorenoiteColombian PST to form the Brigadecalled for volunteers to go to Nicaraguato fight "under the military leadership"of the Sandinista Front; and it flauntedletters from FSLN leaders Eden Pastora("Comandante Zero") and PlutarcoHernandez Sanchez saying its memberswere "acting under the leadership of theGeneral Staff" (see illustration). (Thereal content of the "military" posing, ofcourse. has to be taken in light of thelack of combat activity by these Johnny­come-lately guerrillas.)

Politically, the Morenoites called for"a Sandinista government"-althoughfor form's sake they tacked on that itshould arise from supposed "organs ofpeople's power" and be based on aprogram of "breaking with the bour­geoisie and imperialism" (£1 Socialista,22 June). Such pious wishes aside, theygot their Sandinista government and­guess what-they get expelled from thecountry! That's what often happenswhen you tail after bonapartists. So theSimon Bolivar Brigade managed toacquire a militant image in spite of itself.As for its detractors in the ColombianPS R, they note that sending off theBrigade was essentially a gimmickrather than a real act of proletarianinternationalism. That is true-genuineTrotskyists, had they the resources,would seek to build a communistnucleus among the urban workersrather than tagging along after Coman­dante Zero on the Southern Front. Butwhat the PSR counterposes is not thestruggle for an independent Trotskyistleadership in Nicaragua but inoffensive"solidarity" demonstrations in Bogota.The difference between Morenoites andMandelites is the difference between

10

Morenoite Charlatans andAdventurers

~~~ir",'~~ ~~rIU'~..,,~I" IlJ l.?i!1 ill ub U Ii 3i 11

(cotllinued!rom page 7)the liberal imperialists to hold back thcrevolution.

So what about the Simon BolivarBrigade and its parent, Moreno'sBolshevik Faction. Certainly in com­parison with the groveling betrayals ofthe SWP and the more shamefacedMandelite majority of the USee, theMoreno outfit might seem a militantalternative. A look at Moreno'schameleon-like political. track record.his notoriety for underhanded financialswindles and his ultra-reformist pro­gram in his home base. Argentina. willshatter this fa<;ade. And, indeed, theSWP is busily dredging up some of thismaterial, filling the pages of Interconti­nental Press with endless scandal storiesabout the disreputable adventurerNahuel Moreno. No doubt Barnes andMandel are getting ready to expel thetroublemaker. But they are in noposition to complain. For years theyhave coexisted in the same International(and in the case of the SWp, in the samefaction) with this notorious snake-oilsalesman. both after and during hisworst betrayals. They have dirty hands.

When they are not echoing theSandinista leaders' slanders that organ­izing workers around anti-capitalistdemands is a "provocation," the S W I'IUSec charge that Moreno is an impostertraveling under false passports. Accord­ing to the USec delegation statement,"to capitalize on the 'prestige of theFSLN," the Simon Bolivar Brigade"cloaked itself with the Sandinistabanner." From news accounts of theAugust 15 Managua demonstration. itdoes seem that many of the protestersthought they were supporting a wing ofthe FSLN (although this does not lessenthe significance of several thousandworkers demonstrating against thegovernment's pro-capitalist policies).But who do Barnes and Hansen thinkthey are kidding? Their international"Nicaragua solidarity" campaign isintended precisely to drape the USee in

.. ' Sandinista red-and-black, just as theS W P's Fair Play for Cuba Committee inthe early '60s tried to capitalize on thepopularity of Castroism. They justprefer to do it at long distance.

Besides. Moreno has a long history ofimpersonating other tendencies. He gothis start in Argentina by pretending tobe a left Peronist. In the late 1950s hisreview Palahra Socialista describeditself as an "organ of revolutionaryworking-class Peronism" and carried onits mast head the slogan "under thediscipline of General Peron and of thePeronis! Supreme Council" (see ""\r­genll11,,: Ihc Struggle Against Peron­iSIll,'" IJ I '\0. 24. 6 July 197J). WhenPcrOtll'ill '.\'IS no longer the rage.Morenn tu"cd with a Castnllle groupand ran end Ie,s pictures of Chc Guevaraon the front pages of his papers. After abrief t1ing as a crypto-Maoist (hailingthe Red Guards). he settled down to amore mundane existence as a socialdemocrat--and to this end fused with awing of the historic Argentine SocialistParty. 111 order to capture its ballot slot.:\ot one to quibble about small change.Moreno promptly wrote a social­democr:.ltlc program to correspond tothe new label (sec Intercol1tinenlalI'rcsI, IJ '\member 1972). Truly.Moreno IS. "s we have often describedhim. a political chameleon.

In a polemic against the Sml<1nBolivar Brigade. the Colombian \lan­delitl: PSR. charges that the Morenoitcundertaking was simply an ~dventure:

"The brigade as such never enteredcombat. It could not have done sowithout adequate training and withoutbeing prepared to accept the disciplineof the FSLN" (see IntercontinentalPress, 17 September 1979). It doesappear that for the most part Moreno'sbrigade, despite its bombastic propa-

I­j!j11'l!IIJ=

LrJI

IIt

choosing the name Simon BolivarBrigade Moreno chose a singularlyappropriate sobriq uet. Perhaps it wasintended to imitate the Abraham Lin­coln Brigade in the Spanish Civil War­although Bolivar. himself from a slave­holding landowner family, would bemore appropriately compared toGeorge Washington. But militarily thegreat hero of the wars of independencewas a disaster in every way: he lostvirtually every battle he fought, literallydozens of them, repeatedly abandoninghis troops in moments of adversity. Hisspecialty. wrote Karl Marx in an articleon Bolivar. was "triumphal entrances,manifestos and the proclamation ofconstitutions." He was, said Marx in aletter to Engels, "the most cowardly,brutal and miserable scum." So tooNahuel Moreno.•

Kennedy,Carter...(continued from page 9)

popular among the liberals, he took adive on the issue as soon as it becamehot, going so far as to vote for aCongressional bill in 1974 which con­tained an anti-busing amendment. Twoyears ago Kennedy co-sponsored theracist and draconian S- 1437 crime bill,the "son of[Nixon's] S-I." And on July4, 1973, he paid an ostentatious visit to

Alabama governor George Wallacewhere he presented the Audie Murphypatriotic award to "the man in theschoolhouse door." On that occasion hetold a crowd of 10,000 Wallace support­ers that perhaps they could teach theNorth how to achieve racial harmony(see Senator Ted Kennedy, by TheoLippman, Jr.).

What is the "Kennedy mystique," thisinherited family tradition, in politicalterms'? It is the tradition of cynicalruling-class attacks against the workingand oppressed people of the world, andthe most violent aggression against theSoviet Union. John Kennedy, the manof peace'? Under JFK this country sawthe most rapid buildup of the military inU.S. peace-time history. The firstmassive escalation of the Vietnam war(from the few hundred "advisers" whenKennedy came to office). The Berlinconfrontation. The Bay of Pigs inva­sion. The Cuban missile crisis. In secretrooms meetings were held to discussCastro's assassination in a period thathas become known to CIA killers as theagency's "Golden Age." The "friend ofthe black man" consciously appointed ahost of racist federal judges throughoutthe South in a deal to cancel outwhatever gains were reflected in civilrights legislation. And what of BobbyKennedy, the "friend of labor" who ranone of the most vicious anti-laborvendettas against the Teamsters Union?

Although Teddy· has not yet had hisopportunity to invade Cuba, that he has

done so little and "worked so hard"seems to be his most attractive featuresto those who would sell him to Ameri­can working people. And selling him isthe family tradition. Father Joe said ofJohn's candidacy. with a rich man's easycandor: "We'll sell Jack like soapflakes." And the Kennedy money-menbought up all the available air time of alocal California radio station. wherethey deemed it necessary, in order toWIl1.

The selling of Teddv Kennedv maymore resemble the ad campaign for thisseason's version of a "pet rock." He is inmany ways the perfect product for abourgeoisie pitching to the narcissisticaudiences of the late I970s-glamour,but no substance. If Roosevelt's "fire­side chats" made him the first radiopresident, and the Kennedy-N ixondebates installed J FK as the first TVpresident, we may be witnessing theemergence of the first disco president.

If gossip continues to be the populargenre then Teddy will keep thoseinvidious mills grinding on into the '80s.It is part of the media mystique thatKennedy is not only sold like the latestTV fashion, but he is also attacked in thesame vein. Thus the Chappaquiddick"non-issue" has become "the greatmoral question" of his candidacy for ahost of moral munchkins. The onlypolitical point of interest gets lost in theshuffle of moral deuces: Teddy was ableto summon nearly the same braintrustto cover up his auto accident that was

gathered for the Cuban missile crisis.The American bourgeoisie presents

its problems as a crisis of charisma. Infact they are undergoing a crisis ofleadership. Their governmental leadersmust administer a decaying and irra­tional social order. (\t has been observedthat the Kennedy clan holds a positionclose to royalty in America. Indeed, aquick measure can be taken of theintellectual and moral decay of theAmerican bourgeoisie by comparingthis dynasty to the Adamses of NewEngland.) However. it is not the crisis ofbourgeois leadership-so well repre­sented by Carter and Kennedy-thathas stalled the progress of mankind, butthe crisis of revolutionary leadership inthe proletariat.

The labor fakers in the U.S. todayhustle betrayal for the DemocraticParty, keeping the powerful labormovement tied to its deadliest classenemies. And there is something parti­cularly ominous and repulsive about thelabor tops joining in the Kennedy/.Carter/ Reagan chorus for a "strongerleader." From the point of view of theworking class and its allies we do notwant a more effective imperialist chief, amore competent strikebreaker, a morevirulent carrier of malignant neglect forblacks and minorities, and a morevigorous enforcer of austerity. Theoppressed do not call for more effectiveoppressors. Break labor's ties to theparties of capital-Build a workersparty! •

~

•I!~

I(I

~

I:

•I!~

I

SPARTACIST LEAGUE LOCAL DIRECTORY

TROTSKYIST LEAGUE OF CANADA

(continued/rom page 3)

Auto Sellout...

•

..

~

WinnipegBox 3952, Station BWinnipeg, Man.(204) 589-7214

San FranciscoBox 5712San Francisco. CA 94101(415) 863-6963

Santa Cruzc/o SYLBox 2842Santa Cruz. CA 95063

New YorkBox 444. Canal Street StattonNew York. NY 10013(212) 925-5665

San DiegoP.O. Box 142Chula Vista, CA 92010

of the Big Three.The most prominent of the existing

UAW "oppositionists," however, havesimply capitulated to the anti-strikesentiments being whipped up by theInternational. Hugh Oginsky forexample, the leading spokesman forthe Thirty and Out Committee whichdemanded "COLA on pensions or astrike in '79," announced that hewould recommend ratification of thetentative agreement in his home local."What we got is great," he told a WVreporter, "but it's sad that it's got tobe diverted from COL." Oginsky isalso a member of the Autoworkers fora Better Contract (ABC), the latestcatch-all dissident group supported bya myriad of fake-left groupings, Butthe ABC couldn't even muster theenergy to call for a strike andcontented themselves with a talentshow dubbed the Autoworkers Per­forming for a Better <;ontract.

After 30 years of Reuther,Woodcock and now Fraser, the UAWhas had enough of gimmicks andexcuses. A real fight is long overdue.The task of constructing a militantleadership which can challenge thesellouts in Solidarity House and leadthe UAW in struggle against the BigThree has never been more urgent.

VOTE NO! For an industry-widestrike against the Big Three! For sit­down strikes against layoffs! Victoryto the UAW1.

VancouverBox 26, Station AVancouver, B.C.(604) 733-8848

ChicagoBox 6441. Main P.O.Chicago, IL 60680(312) 427-0003

ClevelandBox 6765Cleveland, OH 44101(216) 621-5138

DetroitP.O. Box 32717Detroit, MI 48232(313) 868-9095

HoustonBox 26474Houston. TX 77207

Los AngelesBox 26282, Edendale StationLos Angeles, CA 90026(213) 662-1564

TorontoBox 7198. Station AToronto,Ont.(416) 593-4138

National OfficeBox 1377, GPONew York, NY 10001(212) 925-2426

Ann Arborc/o SYL. Room 4102Michigan UnionUniversity of Mich.Ann Arbor, MI 48109(313) 663-9012

Berkeley/OaklandBox 23372Oakland. CA 94623(415) 835-1535

BostonBox 188M.I.T. StationCambridge, MA 02139(617) 492-3928

\,..

year it was over the miners strike, asthe SWP was unable to defend itssupport to the back-stabbing treacheryof UMWA leader Arnold Miller.

Now the SWP is so fearful ofangering the vengeful AyatollahKhomeini that it goes so far as tohold "private" picket lines "defending"their imprisoned Iranian comrades.Excluded are all those who do notpraise the mullahs who are poised toexecute the HKS. And they turn their"public" forms into exclusionist clubs.The SWP has a lot of nerve criticizingformer attorney general Griffin Bellfor belonging to a segregationistAtlanta club. For above every SWPfunction in Detroit is an unwrittenJim Crow sign proclaiming: "Noblack Trotskyists allowed.".

guards and scabherding police toimprove their $2.76/hour wages.

This is the man who negotiated theUAW's new contract. Clearly, the pro­company policies of the UAWbureaucracy spell defeat fo~ thehistorically militant auto workers.Fraser and his ilk must be replaced bya class-eonscious militant leadershipwhose demands are based on theneeds of the membership and nottailored to the sacred profit margins

DetroitExclusion...

present (including one member whowas not even at the February 1Iforum). When comrade Topaz askedwhy she was being excluded, the SWPgoon pointed to her sign and said,"For that." Her picket sign read: "ISpoke Against Khomeini's Repressionof Women and Minorities-Now theSWP Excludes Me!"

Behind the exclusions is the SWP'scringing before the bourgeoisie andtheir labor lieutenants. In 1971 the SLwas kicked out of an NPAC "an­tiwar" conference by SWP marshalsfor objecting to the presence ofDemocratic senator Vance Hartke. In1972 the Spartacist League wasexcluded from a WONAAC "women'srights" conference for protesting theappearance of a spokesman forcapitalist politician Bella Abzug. Last

land as agricultural workers wouldeither remain the most oppressed in avirulently Sinhala-chauvinist state oratbest become unemployed pariahs in the"liberated" Tamil land to the north, likethe Biharis in Bangladesh. Additionally,a sizable component of the upland estateproletariat consists of women workers,posing the need for special methods ofwork to reach this key sector, while astruggle must also be waged to over­come the caste lines that divide theTamil masses.

The oppressed Tamil population willbe able to achieve social liberation onlythrough working-class revolution, ledby a Trotskyist party which fusestogether the conscious vanguard of allsectors of the proletariat. The criticalsignificance of the Tamil question forCeylonese revolutionaries is enhancedas well by the myriad ties which link theisland to the Indian subcontinent on theother side of the narrow Palk Strait. Asuccessful proletarian seizure of powerin Sri Lanka could not long surviveunless it sparked a more general SouthAsian revolutionary conflagration. Andfor the laboring masses of southernIndia, the program of Ceylonese revolu­tionaries toward the Tamil minority willbe seen as a key test of their internation­alist intentions.•

(continued from page 2)

Sri Lanka...(continued/rom page 5)movement akin to what led to the 1953harta! (general work stoppage) orperhaps even renewed insurgency likethe JVP uprising of 1971. Today theJVP has a Robin Hood respect for itsinsurrection, which has gone down inpopular memory not as a criminaladventure like the 1921 March Action inGermany, but as a great patriotic actionagainst oppression by the hatedBandar­ana ike government. Even the enemies ofthe JVP now grudgingly hail the revolt.Perhaps the most graphic example is thebook Insurrection 1971, an account bythe chief government prosecutor, whichcarries a dedication to "the sons anddaughters of Sri Lanka who died in thecourse of the April insurrection,"

In addition, the JVP hasdemonstrated organizational capacityand determination to become an activepolitical factor, running candidates inparliamentary elections and makingovertures to the Tamils. However,unable to grasp the key reason for itsdefeat in 1971-the total isolation of therevolt based on rural Sinhala youthfrom the decisive urban labor move­ment and Tamil estate proletariat-theJVP remains wedded to its eclecticStalinism and is still tinged withSinhalese chauvinism. Thus the JVPrefuses to recognize the democratic rightof the oppressed Tamils to self­determination. simply calling for an"al1ti-communalist front" to fight anti­Tamil repression. Thus the JVP opposes"Eelam" as necessarily an outpost ofIndian imperialism. In contrast, genuineMarxist-Leninists, while counseling atpresent against separation, neverthelessinsist that as an oppressed nationalminority the Tamils have the right to·form their own state, if they so choose.

But a revolutionary policy for theemancipation of the oppressed Tamilsmust go beyond the struggle for demo­cratic rights. Even if some liberalcapitalist government were to grant allTamils full citizenship and languagerights, their oppression would continueas a result of the superexploitation ofTamil plantation labor-up to now theheart of the Ceylonese export economy.And even if"Eelam" were established inthe north, allowing the bourgeoistraders and bureaucrats to become theruling class of an enclave linked toIndia, the large number of "IndianTamils" locked in the Sinhalese heart-

28 SEPTEMBER 1979 11

iI!&>to::

"'"----

ilIJ!-­:J'.1

WfJRIlERS "Mfill'RIJ~.·Sandinistas Expel "Simon Bolivar Brigade"-~

~-SWP Knifes "Comrades" in the Back

--

fr-o""~--PI!H--....-

SEPTEM BER 24-lt took 18 monthsof bitter struggle, including two insur­rections totaling eleven weeks of theblood iest fighting, before they drove outthe hyena of Managua. Almost 50,000died out of a population of 2.3 million.and today the cities are in ruins. thesurviving population on the brink ofstarvation, three quarters of the work­torce unemployed. Those who havesacrificed so much are burning to rootout every trace of the hated dynastywhich bled the country dry. Layingclaim to what is rightfully theirs. the'\iicaraguan masses are already infring­ing on the property of the belatedlyoppositional bourgeoisie. which fordecades extracted fat profits from the'weat of the working people In

Somozaland.

"National reconstruction" is now thewatchword of the victorious SandinistaNational Liberation Front (FSLN). Buton what foundations? With their pro­gram for a "government of unity of allanti-Somma for.:es" the Sandinistaleaders hope to limit the revolution tothe replacement of a rapacious familydictatorship by a reformed, "popular­democratic" capitalist regime. As proofof the "generosity of the NicaraguanRevolution." they have refused toexecute any of the National Guardcriminals who tortured at random andrained high-explosive bombs on theirown cities. While expropriating theproperty of the tyrant and his under­lings. the new rulers have vowed toprotect the holdings of other capitalists.

From the beginning it has been clearto all that the "government" in Mana­gua is highly unstable. The guns areclearly in the hands of the petty­bourgeois radical-nationalist Sandinis­tas. but a united FSLN was establishedonly at the last minute by papering overa th ree-way split. While the "anti­Somoza bourgeoisie" are presentlypliant, and their influence declined asthe fighting intensified, they are notpassive nor are they discredited by thestIgma of collaboration with the dicta­tor as the Cuban capitalists were withBatista. On the other hand, the workingmasses are a far more active factor thanin the Cuban Revolution, having armedthemselves and fought key battles in thestreets of the capital and other cities.The common enemy vanquished, it is1'11possiblc to stop the class strugglesimply by telling the combatants toreturn horne.

The array of forces in post-SomozaNicaragua has the potential for anexplosive confrontation-within theuneasy ruling coalition, between it andthe impatient working masses or be-

12

VictoriousSandinistasroll intoManaguaon mini-tank.

a.:J

tween a sector of the radical-JacobinFSLN and reactionary sectors of thedomestic bourgeoisie. This highlycharged situation poses an acid test forrevolutionists. For while the over­whelming majority of the left to onedegree or another is tailing after thepopular Sandinistas. the task of Trot­skyists. who fight on the program ofpermanent revolution, is to remain theparty of. intransigent working-classopposition. Those who proclaim thatproletarian-socialist revolution cancorne about peacefully in Nicaragua bynudging the present bonapartist regimegradually to the left could well be thefirst victims of their own illusions.

The FSLN leaders may themselvesbelieve that their program of "popular­democratic revolution" represents anintermediate stage between capitalismand proletarian dictatorship. But ex­perience will soon demonstrate that onlya show of force can halt the tendency ofthe working masses to turn the victoryover Somoza into full-scale socialrevolution. And if they didn't knowalready, they are quickly becomingconscious of the fact. When the Cubannews agency Prensa Latina asked topFS L:\ commander Humberto Ortega,"How will you deal with the classstruggle that will develop in this stage?"he replied:

"In order to keep this struggle from

becoming more acute, it is necessary toimplement the program supported bythe Front and the anti-Somoza bour­geoisie. Then we must struggle againstvarious kinds of deviations."

-Granma [English-languageweekly edition]. 2 September

That struggle against "deviations"means anti-working-class repressionsoon became clear. notably around theland reform. While its scope is sweeping.affecting as much as 60 percent of thearable land of '\i icaragua, it is limited toestates belonging to Somoza and hishenchmen. This was justified by Agrari­an Reform Minister Jaime Wheelockwith the argument. "We must keepsolidarity with those members of theprivate sector who supported the ousterof Somoza" (Nel\' York Times. 5August). A few days later FSU\officials clashed with a Maoist laborgroup organizing land seizures near thecity of Leon. According to Wheelock."the few disorderly occupations" wereatypical. the haciendas were "reinstatedto their original owners" and thepeasants given Somoza lands instead(Granma [English-language weeklyedition]. 12 August).

Expulsion of the Simon BolivarBrigade

The suppression of "disorderly" landseizures is not the only instance ofmeasures to keep the class struggle from

"becoming more acute." The most.notable was the expulsion of severaldozen foreign leftists, most of them self­proclaimed Trotskyists, associated withthe "Simon Bolivar Brigade" which hadrushed to Nicaragua in the last stages ofthe battle against Somoza. The incidentwas described by Time magazine (3September) at the end of an articlepraising the "merciful revolution" thatwas "steering a middle course":

"Surprisingly. the first serious threatcame from the extreme left. Dissatisfiedwith the government's plans for build­ing a mixed economy melding publicand private enterprise, 60 Latin­American Trotskyites. calling them­selves the Simon Bolivar Brigade.incited a demonstration by 3.000Managua factory workers demandingcompensation for wages lost during therevolution. The revolutionary govern­ment reacted by ordering its armedforces to put the Trotskyites on a planeto Panama."

According to the Washington Post (21August). banners at the August 15Managua demonstration carried theslogans. "The Revolution is in the handsof the bourgeoisie" and "Power to theproletariat." The expelled Bolivar Bri­gaders. however, were charged withbeing "counterrevolutionaries" and"foreign provocateurs."

This expulsion was clearly a blowstruck against any independent leftistagitation among Nicaraguan workers

continued on page 6

28 SEPTEMBER 1979