Views in brief
Slaughtering civilians in Afghanistan
AGAIN TODAY, reports coming out of Afghanistan indicate more dead children.
Three were killed and seven injured when Western troops fired artillery shells at a civilian home in western Afghanistan. This occurs in the wake of the August 22 bombing that resulted in the deaths of 90 people, including 60 children, 15 women and 15 men. Afghans and UN officials have confirmed the numbers, but the U.S. insists there were only five dead children and 25 dead Taliban.
Civilian casualties are a perpetual reality in Afghanistan. In July, 47 were killed in another air strike. Last year, there were said to be 320 civilian deaths due to U.S. and NATO attacks. This year, no improvement appears evident.
A tragic historic reality is the U.S.'s relationship to the most extreme members of the mujahideen. In the early 1980s, the Reagan administration, along with Rep. Charlie Wilson, sought out, funded and armed some of the worst human rights abusers and anti-democratic forces, in its Cold War maneuvers to expel the Soviets from Afghanistan.
During that time, I lived in Pasadena, Calif., and I recall Pacifica Radio reporting on the mujahideen's routine bombings and burning down of girls' schools, and their rape and murder of girls. This, by Reagan's "freedom fighters." The evolution of the mujahideen to today's Taliban was a predictable occurrence.
Rebuilding Afghanistan's infrastructure, food aid and agricultural support are common-sense endeavors we should be engaged in. The most exemplary American in the region is Greg Mortenson, who has built and funded dozens of girls' schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan. His book, Three Cups Of Tea, is a must-read for those who want to gain a better understanding of the area.
A cessation of killing civilians should be the U.S. and NATO's primary venture--not continued denials and excuses.
Brian McAfee, From the Internet
Workers did take part in the Cuban Revolution
PAUL D'AMATO claims that "workers in the Cuban revolution played no significant role in the revolution. It was the guerrillas who marched from the Sierra Maestra to seize power" ("Tyrannies ruling in the name of socialism").
This ignores the role of the urban underground, and the millions of people who participated in strikes and rallies at key turning points in the revolution.
In January 1959, when the guerrilla fighters were advancing on Havana, Castro called a general strike, which was built by urban underground activists. Millions of people responded.
The dictator Batista had fled before the strike started. He was replaced by General Cantillo, who tried to set up a new military-dominated government. The general strike not only blocked this plan, but caused the complete disintegration of the old army and police. Soldiers took off their uniforms. Police surrendered to urban fighters. Anti-Batista union activists took over union offices, replacing corrupt pro-Batista officials, and called mass demonstrations.
This inspiring general strike was followed by a period of ongoing struggles, including further general strikes, mass rallies and workplace occupations. In July 1959, mass action forced the resignation of the conservative president Manuel Urrutia, helping to further deepen the revolution, which culminated in the expropriation of the property of all large local and foreign capitalists by October 1960.
D'Amato claims that the "foundation" of Castro's politics is "nationalism," not Marxism. But Cuba is internationalist. When South Africa invaded Angola, Cuba sent troops to help defeat the invaders, contributing to the fall of apartheid. Today, Cuba sends tens of thousands of doctors to help people in numerous countries around the world, including countries as distant as East Timor.
Chris Slee, Melbourne, Australia
Why can't the left unify?
THE ARTICLE "Chasing the Obama mirage" I think very rightly pointed out the problems of placing too much hope in the Obama campaign.
However, inadvertently, I think it also pointed out one of the greatest challenges to building any viable alternative--namely, the lack of unity among real progressive third parties. You have Cynthia McKinney running, and Ralph Nader running, and then a whole slew of even lesser-known candidates, like Brian Moore of Socialist Party USA.
One of the lessons I have drawn from reading the two excellent works now republished by Haymarket Books, Ray Ginger's The Bending Cross and Ira Kipnis' The American Socialist Movement, is that central to the Socialist Party's astounding electoral success in those years was a strong, unified grassroots network, built around a common platform, despite any smaller disagreements within the movement.
I think all of the independent left parties can agree on the necessity of posing a radical alternative to the Democratic Party. However, until we can unite the grassroots infrastructure and campaigning, we're stuck exactly where the Democrats like us--weak, disconnected, unviable and left with the feeling that there is no alternative to a vote for a business-lite party.
Ian, San Francisco
A failing mental health care system
I JUST read your article by Ken regarding his treatment as an employee in the mental health care industry ("Treated like a child by management").
The point he is making about being treated unfairly by management is the same in North Carolina. I am not sure if you are aware of the problems, but there have been some major problems with the running of the state hospitals.
There is an increase of people being committed to state hospitals because of a lack of community services. There is often not enough room for the patients, so the hospital wards are overcrowded, with inadequate staffing.
In some of the discussion forums, the workers are stating that nurses are often fired or suspended for the smallest infractions, but the doctors don't get any punishment if they make some kind of mistake. These nurses and health care technicians work in a very volatile and stressful place without very much support from the management of the hospitals and the state officials.
There needs to be a change in this system, because these problems are putting lives at risk.
Felicia Stroud, from the Internet
The Republicans' transparent ploy
JUST HOW stupid do the Republicans think American women are? Sarah Palin, John McCain's vice presidential pick, is to the women's movement what Clarence Thomas is to the civil rights movement.
It is yet another sign of how out of touch the major parties are when it comes to the real concerns of working-class people--recall Trotsky's characterization of the detachment of the ruling classes in both pre-revolutionary France and Russia. We may be much closer than anyone realizes to the time when workers say "Enough!" and take the reins of history into their own hands.
I look forward to SocialistWorker.org's coverage of this cynical move by the Republican Party.
Richard Capron, Boston
