>organic farming. The idea is that the resistance to disease >of one type of crop will protect another crop nearby. Now >China has shown that it works not just in little garden >plots but in large-scale agriculture, too. > >It's a simple method that can quickly be adopted all over >China--and all over the world, for that matter. It doesn't >require the purchase of costly chemicals or seeds. It >doesn't force the farmer into an endless cycle of borrowing >before each harvest. > >The New York Times of Aug. 22 called it a "stunning new >result from what has become one of the largest agricultural >experiments ever." > >This is a real "green revolution"--unlike the corporate- >driven one several decades ago that drove so many small >farmers in the Third World into bankruptcy. > >The question to be asked is, Why didn't anyone do this >sooner? These methods of gardening have been around for a >long time. Organic farmers swear by them. Why hasn't the >government of a huge agricultural country like the United >States carried out a similar large-scale experiment? Why was >it left to China to do it? > >Without knowing all the details on how this experiment came >about, one thing stands out very clearly. The United States >is a capitalist country where the agribusiness companies, >including large chemical corporations, dictate agricultural >policy. China, on the other hand, is still primarily a >planned economy, despite some capitalist inroads. The >governing Communist Party is not a capitalist party like the >Republicans or Democrats. It is driven not by profit motives >but by the desire to feed China's 1.3 billion people as >efficiently as possible. > >This experiment didn't take place in India or Indonesia or >the Philippines or Louisiana. It took place in China. Think >about it. > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > >Message-ID: <022c01c014f0$b012c2e0$0a00a8c0@home> >From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [WW] South Korean movement wins strafing ban >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 11:15:54 -0400 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="Windows-1252" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >South Korea > >PEOPLE'S MOVEMENT WINS STRAFING BAN > >By Berta Joubert-Ceci > >On Aug. 18, the Korean people won a partial victory when the >U.S. Air Force announced that it would stop strafing the >Koon-ni range at Maehyang-ri, south Korea, with live >ammunition. > >For 45 years the Pentagon has waged war against the people >living in villages adjacent to the strafing area. > >U.S. fighter planes stationed on the nearby bases of Osan >and Koonsan fly to Maehyang-ri to practice machine-gun >artillery. They shoot at four circular targets on the >coast's edge, less than a mile from civilian homes. > >The Koon-ni range is the only one south of Seoul authorized >for training for automatic weapons. > >The U.S. planes--many times in formations of four--fire at >the same time, creating such an incredibly loud noise that >it is beyond the scope of sound-measuring devices. > >The pilots start firing while still flying above civilian >territory. > >Chun Man-Kyu, leader of the Maehyang-ri Task Force to Close >the Bombing Range, calls this noise "the unseen weapon." He >says it has produced even more psychological damage than the >artillery that U.S. forces drop on the range. > >The noise pollution has created pent-up anger that causes >aggressive behavioral problems in children and adults, Chun >says. A very high suicide rate in the area is another >consequence. > >OPPOSITION TO U.S. OCCUPATION > >After 45 years, why has the U.S. military finally responded >to the villagers' demands? > >On May 8, a U.S. A-10 plane dropped six 500-pound live bombs >on the beach at Maehyang-ri. The explosions rattled the >village and damaged 170 houses. Seven residents were >hospitalized. > >This incident galvanized growing sentiment against the U.S. >military presence in Maehyang-ri. Many militant >demonstrations have taken place in the village and beyond. > >The residents defied the anti-communist National Security >Law that forbids any act perceived as supporting socialist >north Korea. Labor and student rallies demanding >reunification and the ouster of all 38,000 U.S. troops have >made a great impact in the struggle. > >Farmers, religious and cultural groups, and other >organizations have put Maehyang-ri's battle on the front >burner. International delegations traveled to the village to >offer support. They included representatives of the >struggles against the U.S. military presence in Okinawa and >in Vieques, Puerto Rico. Other supporters have come from the >United States and Germany. > >Support demonstrations have also taken place in cities >around the world, including Washington. > >The dirty little secret of the U.S. forces in Maehyang-ri >couldn't be hidden much longer. Especially not after last >year's revelations of the Pentagon massacre at No Gun-ri by >U.S. Korean War veterans. > >Yet this is only a partial victory. The May 8 tragedy was >not the result of strafing, but of bombing. The Pentagon >plans to continue bombing practices in the Nong Island, >right in front of the strafing targets. > >The villagers have already said that the Air Force decision >stops far short of what they need. Their demand is that U.S. >forces completely withdraw from Maehyang-ri and the range be >closed. They vow to continue the struggle until victory is >won. > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > >Message-ID: <023401c014f0$c0693200$0a00a8c0@home> >From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [WW] What is Marxism all about? Part 3 >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 11:16:21 -0400 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="Windows-1252" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >What is Marxism all about? Part 3 > >'AFFRIMATIVE ACTION' FOR THE WORLD > >By Deirdre Griswold > >Marxists are revolutionary socialists. But what is >socialism? Where can it be found? > >Karl Marx called it the next, higher stage of society after >capitalism--when the workers have taken the power, have >taken over the means of production from the capitalists, >have banished private profit, and have put production on a >planned basis. > >But socialism is not the ultimate stage of society. > >Socialism, wrote Marx, is a transition to communism. And >communism--when the repressive state has "withered away," in >Marx's words, and everyone contributes according to their >ability and receives according to their needs--is only >possible when social equality has finally been achieved, >when the antagonisms and struggles among people over wealth >and the status it confers are a thing of the past. > >Obviously, it will take a lot to undo the injustices and >divisions of the present and bring about such a society. > >Today there exists a great gulf not only between the >classes, but also between the developed, oppressor nations >and the oppressed nations. These are the countries, most of >them former colonies, which have been deliberately kept >underdeveloped except for those industries needed to extract >their resources and super-exploit their labor. > >Perhaps we could say that socialism is the period in human >history when "affirmative action" replaces profits as the >driving force of social and material development. That's >what the vast majority of the world's people want and need-- >a global, coordinated effort to erase the terrible >inequalities that capitalism and imperialism have created, >along with other dangerously destructive legacies like the >degradation of the earth's environment. > >CAPITALISM DYNAMIC BUT DESTRUCTIVE > >After centuries of feudalism, when growth took place so >slowly as to appear stagnant, the feudal system was >overthrown in revolutions led by the bourgeoisie--the >moneymen, the capitalists. Capitalism proceeded to >revolutionize the means of production. > >The level of science and technology now attained in most of >the world gives human beings all the tools needed to provide >good food, clothing, shelter, education, health care and >recreation for all. > >In previous class societies, a low productivity of labor >dictated that only a small, privileged ruling class could >enjoy these things. That is no longer true. > >Yet even with abundance, with stores and warehouses >overflowing, hunger and poverty persist and even grow. The >problem is not a lack of material things. It is the monopoly >of political power and economic control by the capitalist >class, which is compelled by the very nature of this system >to constantly seek greater profits at the expense of >everything else. > >The last decade of the 20th century showed beyond the shadow >of a doubt that capitalism, when unchecked and unchallenged >by any large bloc of socialist countries, intensifies this >polarization between rich and poor. A handful of >billionaires now controls more wealth than the 50 poorest >countries of the world. > >This time of unprecedented expansion and growth--by U.S. >capitalism, in particular--was preceded by the collapse of >the Soviet Union and the dismantling of its planned economy. >That led to unrestrained gloating that "socialism is dead" >and that Marxism had become nothing but a historical >curiosity. > >But a little over a decade later, it is capitalism that is >under attack from a new and youthful movement growing up >inside the imperialist countries themselves. The heavy >repression that has come down on them betrays the >establishment fear that the protesters' message rings true >for many people. Hundreds of millions are looking for a way >out of the great New World Order. Thus, a new generation is >thinking about how to replace capitalism. What does Marxism >have to offer them? > >NOT A DOGMA OR A BLUEPRINT > >First of all, Marxism is not a dogma or a blueprint for a >new society. But it is a method for analyzing the concrete >historical conditions that shape each revolution. > >In the United States, one of the most important issues for >revolutionaries is the unresolved legacy of slavery, which >can be found in the extreme racism permeating every aspect >of social life. In Marxist terminology, this is an example >of national oppression, even though the oppressed African >American nation exists within the same geographical borders >as the oppressor nation. > >The foremost exponent of Marxism in the 20th century, V.I. >Lenin, wrote volumes on the oppression of other nations by >the Great Russians, explaining why the working class >movement should, in its own revolutionary interests, support >self-determination for oppressed nations. As an organizer >and leader, he worked to develop structures within the early >Soviet government to assure that all nations, no matter how >small, would have fair representation. > >So while the socialist revolution in the United States will >be very different than the 1917 revolution that produced the >Soviet Union, it shares with that multinational country some >very important features that are well worth studying. > >Karl Marx was no dogmatist. He constantly had to set >straight those who went to the workers' movement with pre- >conceived and utopian notions of what socialism would be >like. > >In one famous book, his "Critique of the Gotha Program," he >showed that it was ridiculous to promise workers that under >socialism they would receive the "undiminished product of >their labor." This was a slogan that some socialists used to >draw attention to the fact that the capitalists keep for >themselves as profit a large part of what the workers >produce. But the slogan was false, because there are all >kinds of purposes for which a workers' government must >reserve funds out of the social product in order to make >life better for everyone--like building and maintaining >schools, hospitals, parks, libraries, childcare facilities, >scientific institutes, transit systems, sewage plants and so >on. > >When a revolutionary workers' movement takes the power and >starts figuring out a plan for socialist construction and >development, it has to take all these things into >consideration. It needs to consult those with expertise. But >it must always make sure that in setting policy--like wages >and prices, for example--it furthers the basic aims of the >revolution. That is to deal with the most pressing social >problems first, to bring up fastest those who have been >historically pushed down. > >No revolution would be worth its name if it didn't deal >first with questions like homelessness, malnutrition, >illiteracy, preventable diseases, and so on. > >It also has to develop mechanisms to defend the conquests of >the revolution from those who, with plenty of money at their >disposal, are trying to obstruct, sabotage and destroy what >has been won. > >These problems have been acute in countries where capitalist >war, exploitation and oppression drove the masses to seek a >revolutionary solution. Most of the revolutions of the 20th >century have been fragile because of the extreme difficulty >of trying to build socialism from a low material base, often >after the devastation of war, while surrounded by richer, >hostile capitalist powers. > >It is a testament to the fighting spirit of the workers and >peasants in Vietnam, north Korea, China and Cuba that they >have persisted with socialist construction even after >decades of struggle made so arduous by imperialist >blockades, threats, invasions and outright wars. > >The countries of Eastern Europe had a different kind of >problem: except for Yugoslavia and Albania, their socialist >transformation did not come out of popular revolutions but >from the military defeat of fascist regimes by the Soviet >Red Army in World War II. The fascists had massacred most of >the left. The limited political base for these new >progressive governments, and the exhausted condition of the >masses, hobbled them from the very beginning. > >Yet even with all these problems, it can be seen clearly >today that all the socialist countries made great strides in >bringing education, culture, health care and stable >employment to the people. Where they have been overturned, a >cataclysmic decline in living standards for the masses has >followed, along with the rise of a privileged few. > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > _______________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi _______________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________
