Reclaim the Night I
This year's Reclaim the Night rally in Melbourne highlighted the need to raise politics in the women's movement. The speakers talked either of their own personal experiences of abuse, or of the abuse of women in general.
There were no demands. The organising collective claimed that demands place an agenda on the speakers, and that they exclude ethnic and Aboriginal women and don't allow these women to share their personal experiences of sexism. The rally and march failed to explain why and, more importantly, how we can stop violence against women.
The organisers fail to recognise that demands are a way of expressing our rage and stressing what we want to be done. They are a way of winning back women's rights. No demands mean that there is no problem. The whole point of protesting is because you want to put pressure on the government and force them to implement your demands.
The exception was Surma Hamid, from The Committee in Defence of Iraqi Women, who talked about the need for women to get involved in the anti-war campaign and demanded that the war be stopped.
The event was built primarily through an email group that was not openly advertised. Every time a "controversial" point was raised, such as who the speakers should be or what demands should be raised, discussion was diverted to the email group. This was not only undemocratic, it dismissed any alternative point of view.
The first organising meeting was not built at all and was announced only on the email group. Here it was decided that RTN was going to be a women-only rally and march, and that stalls where money was exchanged would not be permitted. This singled out left organisations that sell their newspapers, books and so forth.
At the rally, women from various organisations, such as Amnesty International, were allowed to speak and make announcements. However, when a socialist woman asked the chair to announce the next anti-war demonstration, they refused because it clashed with a "Womyn Interrogating Whiteness" meeting.
The collective chose to march down to King Street. This area is particularly violent and dangerous for women. It is infamous for its strip joints, pubs and so forth. The aim of marching there was to "reclaim the street as women's space".
Instead of being inspiring and empowering, women had to suffer sexist heckling from onlooking men. This was extremely demoralising, and the result was women walking with their heads down, many embarrassed to be there.
Vivian Messimeris
Melbourne
[Abridged.]
Reclaim the Night II
"The war is not the issue, children here are being killed." With this bewildering attitude, the organisers of this year's Reclaim the Night rally in Adelaide sought to silence the small but vocal anti-war contingent.
Women activists from the Network Opposing War and Racism and the Socialist Alliance determinedly put their argument that the violence being meted out against women in Afghanistan, with the support of the Australian government, was a critical issue for the women's liberation movement.
This was met with attempts by rally organisers, led by South Australian Legislative Council hopeful Edith Pringle, to silence the anti-war message including attempts to physically stop activists chanting anti-war slogans.
The interconnection between the issues was not given a hearing from the platform of the rally either. No chance was given for an explanation of the conditions endured by the women of Afghanistan under the Taliban, or the impact of the US-led war on women.
Instead the platform was dominated by speakers from pro-war, anti-women parties — Jane Lomax Smith (ALP) and Trish Draper (Liberal Party) — who, even when questioned about their parties' stand on the war, made no mention of the devastation being meted out in Afghanistan.
Kathy Newnam
Adelaide
[Abridged.]
Crime against humanity
The indiscriminate carpet-bombing of Afghanistan is a crime against humanity! The lives of innocent men, women and children are being destroyed by a US military/technological complex, eager to parade its strength and might.
Currently, the human pain and sorrow of those Americans, who have lost their loved ones in the September 11th events in New York and Washington, are being politically manipulated by the US government so as to serve the interests of unscrupulous arms manufacturers, amongst others, that have "invested" in Bush's "stolen presidency" by backing his electoral campaign to the tune of millions of dollars.
The currently orchestrated "search for Osama bin Laden" is not an act of justice, but a blind and senseless revengeful act of war that aims at re-establishing the unjust predominance of the US as the "global cop"; a predominance which the US government perceived to have been undermined by the September 11th events.
Indeed, such a predominance will need to be increasingly more inhumane, bloodier and intense, as the degree of unfairness and injustice that underpins the present "world order" increases.
Yet again, by blindly following the US government, our parliamentarians have failed us. I wholeheartedly support those who are ready to expose this senseless hypocrisy!
Michel Amati
Perth
No peace under Zionism
I have read with much interest Yula Geredov's letter (GLW #469) which ends with the entirely predictable line allegations of anti-Semitism and racism against any critics of Zionist Israel.
Coming to the desire of Israel to live in peace, how is it possible for a violent colonising and racist power (any Jewish person in the world can live in Israel, but the Arabs cannot return to their own homes) to live in peace with its victims? As for the Palestinians' own state, the country was theirs before it was handed over by British colonialists to the Zionists.
Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust were the outcome of the national chauvinism and racism of the Europe and Europe should compensate the Jews for the Holocaust.
Instead, British and American imperialists and their Zionist collaborators have planted Europe's cancer in the Third World and have created an armed outpost of imperialism much the same as the crusaders had created their outposts in the name of Christianity.
Handing over a few bantustans to the Palestinians, with no control over water and roads, is not an offer of living in peace. The only lasting solution to the region is the dissolution or abolition of the Zionist state and the creation of a secular and democratic republic.
Of course, for the Ashkenazi rulers of Israel uncomfortable with such a prospect, there is the choice, for most of them, to emigrate to America or Europe. The one problem with this is they will be deprived of the super profits from the slave labour of Arabs and the cheap labour of black Jews.
Narendra Mohan Kommalapati
Canberra
Billy Bragg
In response to the defenders of Billy Bragg (Daniel Sullivan, Write On, GLW #468; Bill Nevins, GLW #469), I wish to point out that I thoroughly enjoy Bragg's music and admire the political content of many of his earlier songs.
Admiring an artist, however, need not blind us to their political (d)evolution. While he may have a progressive stance on refugees and domestic violence, these were not the issues he discussed during his press conference.
He spoke of the anti-globalisation movement, the attack on the World Trade Center, the subsequent war on Afghanistan and the role of Marxism in the 21st century. On these topics he stands condemned by his own opinions. I did not put words into his mouth, but quoted Bragg verbatim.
Despite what Daniel Sullivan claims, I nowhere state nor do I think that "blocking traffic was more important than unionising". Rather, Sullivan, Bragg and the establishment media all share the same analysis of the anti-globalisation movement as people smashing up McDonald's.
This analysis denies the obvious trade union and working-class presence at Seattle, Melbourne and Genoa. Since when is participating in mass mobilisations and unionising workers counterposed? There are biased readers as well as biased writers!
Iconoclasm may be an unpopular task but political artists are not untouchable idols.
Linda Waldron
Melbourne
Terrorism I
The so-called "War Against Terrorism" is nothing of the sort; it is a war against enemies of the US. The US is not at all interested in any acts of terror committed against any other country except its own.
No Western world leaders or major media organisations have been prepared to stand up and suggest that we should examine the policies that have led to the majority of the Arab world, and much of the world's non-Arab Muslim population, holding such strong grievances against Western foreign policy towards the region. Instead, we are all expected to blindly follow the US into war.
It is timely to consider where some of the "terrorists" of previous decades are now: Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness of the IRA are now Northern Irish political leaders; Yasser Arafat of the PLO is now the Palestinian leader; Daniel Ortega, former leader of the Sandinistas, became president; Sukarno ended up as Indonesia's first president; Nelson Mandela became president of the nation that previously labelled him a terrorist; while Steve Biko and Che Guevara are now revered as martyrs. While violence can never be condoned, terrorism is war fought by the oppressed.
Ken Thorley
Hong Kong
[Abridged.]
Terrorism II
The anti-terrorism hysteria now gripping the USA twice prevented Neil Godfrey from flying with United Airlines from Philadelphia International Airport on October 10 because of the books he carried. The two offending novels were Edward Abbey's Hayduke Lives and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azbakan.
How will the Howard government react to boatloads of Americans with their libraries arriving off our shores seeking refuge from repression?
Gareth Smith
Byron Bay NSW
Kissinger
So the Schneider family is suing Henry "Napalm" Kissinger over the CIA murder of their father, Chilean army general Rene Schneider, who refused to back the CIA's bloody destruction of the elected Allende government of Chile.
Now I'd call that "queue jumping" with a vengeance.
Denis Kevans
Wentworth Falls NSW
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, November 7, 2001.
Visit the