COCKROACH! #4 A EZINE FOR POOR AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE. WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT OUR CHAINS. It is time that the poor and working class people have a voice on the Internet. Contributions can be sent to Subscribtions are free at How often this zine will appear depends on you! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Read the book! Ha Ha Ha McNamara,Vietnam-My Bellybutton is my Cristalball. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- CONTENTS: 1.Bougainville! 2.Tactics and Strategy for Socialists in the 1990s.. 3.Their moral and ours..And exchange.. 4.Bulletin Board ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The war over Bougainville is escalating. Members of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) have been waging a war of independence for 7 years. They want independence from the rest of Papua New Guinea (PNG). At the end of June, the war took a new turn. PNG troops invaded the neighbouring Solomons to search out rebel soldiers of the BRA. They claim the Solomons government are harbouring revolutionary soldiers. This latest action has earned condemnation internationally. The New Zealand government has offered to mediate. Class Struggle backgrounds the conflict as a problem created by imperialism which imperialism cannot solve . It is necessasry to fight for an international workers solution. Solomons Proximity If the Solomons are involved, it puts in question the claim that the Bougainville conflict is a civil war inside PNG.There is strong sympathy in the Solomons for the rebels. The BRA have an office in Honiara, capital of the Solomons. This time the PNG government forces have taken action against the Solomons. In 1992 they blew up a tank on Shortland Island. Geographically, Bougainville is part of an archipelago, the northernmost island in the Solomons chain. The culture, language and physical characteristics of Bougainvillians are closer to Solomon Islanders than either Papuans or New Guineans. Suggestions that Bougainville be made part of the Solomons have re-surfaced during this latest skirmish. But the Bougainvillians want independence. They do not ask imperialists to allocate them another `protector'. Their close relationship to the Solomons is a support for their primary aim - self determination. Imperialist Creation The attachment of Bougainville to PNG was an outcome of European imperialism in the Pacific. Germany colonised PNG and Bougainville, while Britain colonised the Solomons. This arbitrary carve up cut through historic connections between Bougainville and the Solomons in pre-European times. After the defeat of Germany in World War 1, the League of Nations gave New Guinea, including Bougainville, to Australia to administer, while Britain kept the Solomons. (New Zealand got trusteeship of Western Samoa at the same time.) This has meant that the fate of Bougainville continues to be tied to the machinations of imperialism, now to mini-Imperialist Australia. After the next world war, political independence was on the agenda. Australia granted PNG independence in 1975. But Bougainville demonstrated its unwillingness to be tied in to PNG, declaring itself independent 15 days before the mainland. This act of independence could not be tolerated. Prime Minister of PNG, Michael Somare, claimed this independence was at risk from the exploitation of the Australian company that ran the big copper mine in Bougainville, Conzinc Riotinto Australia (CRA). Bougainvillians submitted to Somare when he claimed he was rescuing them from CRA. Profit First; mining giant CRA Bougainville regretted their compliance as Somare showed himself to be on the side of multi-national capital, the mining company CRA, and the Australian government. The CRA and Australian governments have worked in collusion. Initially CRA established itself in Bougainville with the support of the Australian colonial police in a paramilitary operation to subdue locals. The copper mine at Pangua made an enormous hole in the middle of Bougainville. CRA made billions from it. They gave generous donations to the Australian Labour Party election campaigns. Australian PM Goff Whitlam, in granting independence to PNG, was not about to make life precarious for CRA. His lackey, Somare, protected them. Somare's independent PNG was still economically dependent on Australian capital. Big Australian companies like Burns Phillip ran the local economy. The CRA copper mine was a particularly massive earner of foreign exchange for PNG, an essential part of the new PNG state. Somare misled Bourgainvillians into believing that he was protecting them from CRA, when it was CRA he was protecting. It was in Somare's interests to protect CRA. He and his mates operated as a comprador elite, working to serve imperialism, ensuring CRA and other companies ran unrestricted plunder for Australian capital in PNG. In return Somare's clique made personal fortunes while the local economy flagged. Even the World Bank noted this `excess spending' into the pockets of the bureaucratic elite was endemic in a corrupt administration. Independence from mining Although Somare brought in the troops to quell striking miners at Pangua, jailing 800 workers just before PNG independence, it was troubles at the mine after independence, that triggered the strongest reaction. Locals demanded compensation for the damage to the environment that the `big hole' CRA mine was causing. CRA have expropriated land by force. Waste from the mine polluted rivers and destroyed fishing. It polluted the land the locals depend on for their livelihood. After 24 years of fruitlessly pursuing legal channels for compensation, locals began a guerilla campaign of sabotage against the mine. PNG reacted with an armed blitz. Despite official Australian non-involvement, PNG forces were engineered by Australia. They continue to be backed by Australian military hardware and personnel. Australian helicopters and mortar shells have not defeated Bougainvillians. The mine closed in 1989, followed by a declaration of independence from BRA. The war continues. Peasants not workers Although the Bougainville revolt has erupted over mining, its real purpose is secession. The Revolutionary Army want to end the exploitation of the CRA. They want to reclaim their traditional lifestyle, and end the connection to PNG. The BRA are the military wing of the Panguan people, small farmers who are fighting against the loss or damage of their land by CRA. They support traditional Melanesian socialism based on land tenure. They do not see the exploitation of mine workers as their reason for struggle. They reject workin g class struggle. They do not want to be part of the working class. They are not revolutionaries against capitalism. Their support in NZ comes from church groups who recognise the justice of their fight for human rights.But as their fight involves a challenge to a multi-national company, they are confronting imperialism, the spread of capitalism internationally. We know that it is impossible for oppressed nation s to free themselves from imperialism short of a socialist revolution. That is why it is important for workers to support their fight. Only the organised working class can defeat the capitalist system that nurtures companies like CRA. We can do this by campaigning in our unions to put bans on CRA and the other companies ripping off Bougainville. We can mobilise workers aid for their military struggle, and we can oppose the NZ government deploying its armed forces in Bourgainville, as back-up forces for the Australian military, or posing as "peace-brokers. Only by supporting their right to self-determination can the Bougainville freedom fighters be won to the struggle for international working class revolution. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- Tactics and Strategy for Socialists in the 1990s Adam writes; >Seems to me that there's two ways of approaching a problem - technically >or politically. The former gets (limited) results, but doesn't really >serve any purpose in orienting revolutionaries to the working class and >its aspirations; all you end up with is a bunch of the most impressionable >'recruits', and zero feedback or support from the class. > >So my guess is that the answer's political: revolutionaries need to get >off their butts and work out what the objective/subjective determinants >are at this end of the 20th century. It's got too easy for 'Trots' to rest >on the laurels of First Principles long-established, and very difficult >getting to grips with politics in 1996, where the 'working class >for-itself' taken as our starting point is conspicuously absent. I almost agree with you! However not quite. The reason that a lot of these old fights are going on has two faces. 1. The importance of learning from history. This is vital so that the International workers does not get led down some of the paths which have meant both defeat and disaster. And that there are still organisations around that stand for a lot of these politics. 2. However, this debate should not be a cover for a lot of our "marxists" recruited in the post war intellectual envionment to just continue these polemics as an academic exercise which is basically a tendency of petting their own egos as talking and debating politicians dominating the left envionment. > >Just one example - I don't think racism is *de facto* a priority issue for >us: it's been transformed into such a moral, petit-bourgeois battlefield. >It might be better to focus on questions more central to the lived >experiences of the late 20th Century working class - the lack of control, >fear of the future, loss of cohesion, and search for security that >dominates contemporary experience. You are dead wrong here. It is basically the issue that the evermore desperate middle class are being duped into believing is the main issue. Without a line to combat racism and a strategic line of creating a multi-racial and black centered Bolshevik party in the United States we are doomed.. > >Want to know how to achieve communism? - rescue our tradition from the >heritage industry it's becoming by putting in some hours on relevant >politics. Yes, Anti-Imperialism, yes Working Class Autonomy, but these are >answers to questions no-one is asking: first you've got to work out how to >get people demanding answers. I guess the first lesson is realising the neccessity of a combat party of Leninists in the United States would be a important step forward. Without this the working class vanguard can not find a way forward.. > >I suggest we start by standing against every current prejudice against >human agency and potential: against environmentalism, against >'empowerment', against determinists of both natural and social varieties, >against the 'Nice and Safe attitude' of Generation X. Naturally the above is a statement which i believe does not say to much. It is hardly concrete nor does it have a poor and working class perspective. So i,m afraid that it can not solve the problems facing us.. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ Their Moral and Ours--An Exchange In a message dated 96-06-28 13:04:51 EDT, you write: On the one hand the chruch says thou shall not kill, in the next as the boys march off to war the church says thou shall kill.. >Actually, the proper translation is "Thou shalt not commit murder." which is >far different from killing. If you think about it, this makes more sense >being that after god handed Israel the ten commandments, the tribes still had >to wage war to win the promised land. In Psalms it states there is "a time >to kill" and I think that war is one of them. For if we were to take the >stance that "thou shalt not "kill"", then the likes of Hitler, who had no >trouble violating it, would control the world. Hitler not only killed in >war, but he committed mass murder in the prison camps. A stark difference. > And makes more sense than "thou shalt not kill." The above is not entirely true. Hitler was a product of someting and so was his Brown shirts and SS.. Perhaps the highest form of the present system we live in which can,t solve any moral dilemas or social and economic dilemas facing humanity. In fact world war 2 did not solve the question of Facism, it just redevided the world under the present system. And Poof, 50 years later the facists gangs are once again raising there heads.. You say that the gang members should be imprisoned. Does the same go for those who fly a B-52 over Vietnam and kill indiscrimately?>> >First off, gang members shouldn't go to jail simply BECAUSE they are in the >gang. That is "association" which is guaranteed by the first amendment. > It's when they commit a CRIME, which usually goes hand in hand with gang >membership, is when they should be locked up. But they do! Because the state and society has determined that there behavior is criminal. However the state does not take up the envionment the gangs are raised in. In fact they are usually responsible for this. And as of late it appears that the state is even putting increasing pressure on these invionments with cuts in Benefits which in turn will lead to race wars for example in the United States.. >As for the B52 pilot, the aswer is absolutely NOT. He is participating in >war. War is the breaking of an economy and government to the point where >they cannot wage war in return. There are civilian casualties, that is a sad >fact of war. Something on the order of 20 million non-combatants died during >the fighting of WWII. But I am sure you agree that Hitler had to be stopped. Did the Vietnamese right to Independence have to be stopped by colonialist intervention first by the Japanese,then the French and finally the Americans. Do the 1 million children effected by Agent Orange born after the war with mental and physical defects get chalked up as innocent victims of war. Or are they victims of a colonial aggressor who dropped this shit on the villages.... >Whereas, the likes of William Calley, etc. in vietnam, the Japanese actions >on the Ratan deathmarch, and the aforementioend Nazi atrocities against he >Jews, did not perform ordinary functions of war. Calley slaughtered a >village that was defenseless. Both Japanese and Nazi's were forced to answer >for and were punished by either execution or life in prison for the >"war-crimes" they committed. These actions were not sanctioned by the >articles of war. These are examples of committing murder and going to jail >for it. I see and true to and extent. However today its not the Bill Calleys being put on trial in Hague. It is the leaders of the Serbian Nationalists who rightly are accused of being responsible. However who ever even thought that Richard Nixon should be brought to Hague... We come from the animal world and our invionment has told us that survival of the fitess is the bottom line in human behavior. >> >Yes, I have heard this argument before. But humans don't possess all the >behavior of the animal kingdom. We mate face to face (for the most part), we >take a mate for life (not like a dog, where 'any dog will do') and we protect >our children. Unlike some in the animal kingdom who eat their young. You must be joking! This might have been true if you had been watching television in the 50ties, however not today. In fact divorce is more the norm and sexual deviation is far more apparent then you think. >We develop and maintain relationships. Clean up after ourselves. Have >conern for the environment. Our competitions aren't based on kill or be >killed. An ordinary man doesn't do business by achieving the top by >assasination and then killing to stay there. Whereas in the animal kingdom, >battles for control of territory often go to the death. And humanity tends >to try and give relief to those who are weak, rather than let them die >because they couldn't survive. I think these, and many other behaviors show >some innate morality. Morality that is built upon by mentoring, education, >and even spiritual devotion. Oh really which world do you live in. My world is called the rat race. And there is a saying that behind every great fortune are some pretty terrible crimes. Naturally we can see 15 year old on death row for killing someone while robbing a drugstore for 20 dollars. But the big fish don,t get blood on their hands, they just give the orders.. I mean even Hitler was adored by some in fact millions. And if he had won the war the moral code would certainly see a lot different then it does today..>> >I am not so sure about that. When Germany marched and occupied Europe, he >defeated forces with relative ease and established puppet governments or >military governors. But there was still underground resistance. People may >have been defeated, but they never stopped resisting his immoral tyranny. > History is full of rebellion for freedom. Sometimes it is successful (The >US revolutionary war) sometimes it isn't (Tienneman Square). But the theme >is the same. People who wish freedom fight to be free. Morality doesn't >change depending on who is the victor. Morality is constant. And there are >basic elements of morality that are shared by all cultures. Really? In fact there were far more collaborators then resistors and ten times as more passive elements that accepted Hitlers status quo in the occupied countries.The reason Hitler was defeated was the mistake of a two front war. And hardly had anything to do with morals. Your theme is very romantic but in the final analisis it is the violent overthrow of one society by the other which decides the moral code. >Back to the relationship of character to morality. Can a man have character >and be immoral or amoral? And can a man with no character have morality? Both! and Yes! Just depends on who sets the rules.. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- BULLETIN BOARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Read the book! Ha Ha Ha McNamara,Vietnam-My Bellybutton is my Cristalball. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------