Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party,USA
Please note: this page is intended for quick printing of the entire issue. Some of the links may not work when clicked, and some images may be missing. Please go to the article's permalink if you require working links and images.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/AWTWNS_Israel-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Editors' Note
The article on this page from A World to Win News Service exposes the circumstances surrounding what has happened at the hands of the Israeli occupiers to the children of Subhiyeh Abu Rahmeh, a Palestinian woman living in the West Bank. Her daughter Jawaher Abu Rahmeh, a school teacher, was killed by Israeli military forces on December 31. She was part of a protest demanding the dismantling of an Israeli wall that cuts off the Palestinian village of Bil'in from olive orchards and other farmland that belongs to villagers. One of Subhiyeh's sons, Bassem, a prominent non-violent activist, was killed by a projectile fired by Israeli troops in April 2009. Another son, Abdullah, remains in prison since his arrest at a protest in December 2009. And yet another son, Ashraf, was shot in the leg with a projectile fired at close range.
The Israeli wall that snakes through the West Bank, forces some 250,000 Palestinians to live in areas completely surrounded by that wall. Half a million Israeli settlers in the West Bank have violently appropriated much of the most strategic, and best, land and water resources. Israeli military checkpoints choke off commerce, medical services, and social interaction among Palestinians. Frequent Israeli raids, often in partnership with the complicit Palestine Authority (PA), create a generalized reign of terror directed at the Palestinian people of the West Bank.
As we go to press, mainstream media are reporting that on January 7, Israeli troops shot and killed a 67-year-old Palestinian man "by mistake" in a pre-dawn raid. An Israeli army statement expressed "regret" but blamed the victim for being "present in one of the terrorist's homes," as if that would justify murdering a man in his bed (and in fact the man was in his own apartment). That murder and the deaths described in the page 11 article have again shined a light on the ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people, set off a new round of protest among Palestinians, and posed essential questions about the nature of the state of Israel.
At this critical moment, we encourage readers to study, and get out, the special issue of Revolution, "Bastion of Enlightenment... or Enforcer for Imperialism: The Case of ISRAEL," available at Revolution Books and at revcom.us and stay tuned to revcom.us, and upcoming issues of Revolution for coverage of developing events.
From A World to Win News Service
January 3, 2011. A World to Win News Service. Why has Israel inflicted so much suffering on the children of Subhiyeh Abu Rahmeh?
Her son Abdullah was a founder of the unarmed and largely non-violent protests that have been held in Bil'in every Friday for almost six years. The villagers are demanding the dismantling of the Israeli wall that cuts them off from most of their olive orchards and other agricultural land that still legally belongs to them. An Israeli settlement built on land that was taken from them earlier, in the 1980s, sits on the other side of the double row of wire fence.
Abdullah was arrested for organizing these demonstrations in December 2009. He remains in prison. One of the charges against him is possession of weapons: the spent tear gas grenades and bullets fired at protesters that he collected to mount an exhibition exposing the Israeli security forces.
Another son, Ahmad, once told BBC that he believes in peace and a two-state solution to the Israeli occupation. He wore a t-shirt showing the Israeli and Palestinian flags flying side by side, which is supposedly what the Israeli government and the U.S. are seeking to bring about.
But this stand didn't help his brother Ashraf, who was grabbed by Israeli soldiers at a protest in the nearby village of Na'alin in 2008. While he was on the ground they tied his hands behind his back and put a hood over his head, stood him up and tied him to a jeep. Acting on orders from a lieutenant-colonel, one soldier held him while another shot him in the leg with a tear gas projectile at nearly point-blank range. Ashraf lived to press charges, but the case remains unresolved, even though the whole incident was captured on film.
In April 2009 their brother Bassem was at the front of the weekly march to the wall. As they turned the corner, the Israeli soldiers waiting for them, as always, began firing tear gas. A few undeterred protesters advanced towards the fence anyway. Standing further back and to the side, 30-40 meters away from the soldiers, Bassem called out in Hebrew, "We are in a non-violent protest, there are kids and internationals..." Before he could finish his sentence a soldier shot him in the chest with a high-velocity tear gas canister.
It was the same kind of new lethal projectile called "the rocket" that had been fired at the head of an American participant in a march in a nearby village a few weeks before, leaving him in a coma to this day.
The 29-year-old Bassem fell to the ground writhing in pain, and died soon after. This shooting, too, was filmed, but this time there were no charges. The Israeli military recently issued a formal decision that there will be no investigation.
People in Bil'in believe that Bassem, a prominent non-violent activist well-known to the soldiers and clearly visible in a florescent green jersey, was specifically targeted for murder. Ballistics experts who examined the two sets of video footage concluded that the grenade was fired directly at him and not toward the ground, contrary to supposed Israeli rules of engagement for the weapon. The soldiers probably also knew who his brother Ashraf was when they used the same weapon to punish him for demonstrating.
The weekly march held on December 31, 2010 was bigger than usual, with hundreds of people taking part in the protest to mark the end of the year. One of them was Subhiyeh Abu Rahmeh's daughter Jawaher, a kindergarten teacher who also worked as a tailor since her family had become largely dependent on her income.
Israeli soldiers fired an unusually large number of gas canisters at the demonstrators. Jawaher collapsed, unable to breath, and went into convulsions. She was taken to hospital in Ramallah, but the medical staff couldn't save the 36-year-old woman. She was pronounced dead the next morning. Israeli authorities refused to identity the kind of gas that the doctors say killed her.
Three thousand people attended her funeral on the first day of the new year. In Tel Aviv hundreds of people protesting her killing rallied in front of the defense ministry, where police attacked them. About a dozen people were arrested on weapons possession charges when demonstrators attempted to "return" U.S.-supplied empty tear gas canisters to the American ambassador's residence.
Bil'in and Na'alin are north of Ramallah. Israelis consider this prime real estate because it is so close to Tel Aviv that you can sometimes see the city's beaches from the rooftops of the Jewish settlement uphill from Bil'in. The village has been walled off from the sea and about 200 hectares of the villagers' land for what the Zionists hope will be forever.
The protests in these two West Bank villages are often promoted as examples of the kind of non-violent movement that could wrench concessions from Israel through moral and political pressure. A son of Martin Luther King and a grandson of Mahatma Gandhi made symbolic visits to the area in 2010. Organizers have trained villagers in non-violent resistance tactics and sometimes pacifist philosophy. They are supported by the Fatah movement, the key organization in the Palestinian Authority that serves as the bullied local partner of the Israelis on the West Bank and has sought to negotiate a two-state solution for many years. Their insistence on non-violence is linked to their belief that American support is their only hope. Some people uphold this movement as an example of "legitimate" protest, as opposed to the "illegitimacy" of those who advocate the liberation of Palestine by any means necessary.
Further, these protests have international law on their side. The International Court of Justice at The Hague has ruled that the Israeli wall is illegal, and even the Israeli Supreme Court ruled more than three years ago that some of the Bil'in villagers' land should be made accessible to them again, although these rulings have never been enforced.
Yet these protests have been repeatedly met with beatings, arrests, stun grenades, tear gas, rubber bullets and live rounds. As of early 2010, about 1,200 participants in the weekly marches had been injured and 85 arrested. Some are still in Israeli prisons. Since the demonstrations began in February 2005, when construction on the wall first started in Bil'in, the Israeli army has murdered 21 protesters.
Israeli soldiers killed two of Subhiyeh Abu Rahmeh's six children, badly wounded a third and locked up a fourth to stop these protest marches and punish their participants, whether non-violent or not. The fact that they were struggling to regain Palestinian land was enough to justify violent repression.
In fact, Israel sometimes kills Palestinians who aren't engaged in any kind of resistance. Two days after soldiers killed Jawaher Abu Rahmeh in Bil'in, they also gunned down a young Palestinian farm laborer going through a West Bank checkpoint to work for Israeli settlers. Ahmad Maslamani had gone through a metal detector and apparently made a wrong turn leaving the checkpoint area. Israeli military officials at first claimed that their soldiers felt threatened by Maslamani because they thought he was carrying a water bottle, which in their eyes constitutes a weapon. Then, when witnesses said that he had been empty-handed, they said that the killing was due to a "misunderstanding." For Israel, any Palestinian is a potential enemy.
Because the Zionist state was built on stolen land, and because a state defined as Jewish cannot exist without denying Palestinian rights, Israel will always feel obliged to use violence against them. Its soldiers kill even those who advocate some sort of coexistence with Israel, Palestinians and even some Jews and others, because the only kind of peace Israel can ever accept is one in which the Palestinian cause is crushed. The cry for justice is an "existential threat" to the Zionist state because there can never be justice as long as it exists.
This militarized settler state is a central pillar of U.S. domination of the Middle East. And while the Obama government rails at what it considers rights violations in China and Russia, it has said nothing about any of these murders. Continuing arms supplies and financial backing for Israel is considered a given by political figures on both sides of the American political mainstream.
A World to Win News Service is put out by A World to Win magazine (aworldtowin.org), a political and theoretical review inspired by the formation of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, the embryonic center of the world's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties and organizations.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/AWTWNS_corrections-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
From A World to Win News Service
January 10, 2011. A World to Win News Service. There are two mistakes in the article "West Bank: Israel meets non-violence with murder," dated January 3, 2011 [published in Revolution #222, January 16, 2011 as "One Family's Horror... Israel Meets Palestinian Protest With Murder"].
The Israeli soldier who deliberately shot Ashraf Abu Rahmeh in the foot as he stood, hooded, arms handcuffed behind his back and tied to a jeep, did not fire a tear gas projectile. It was a so-called "rubber bullet", a rubber-coated steel projectile that left him with a limp since that day in 2008.
Tristian Anderson, the U.S. activist shot in the head with a tear gas canister by an Israeli soldier in March 2009, is no longer in a coma. After three brain operations, the removal of part of his brain and months in a "minimally responsive state," "he has recovered some physical and mental functions." ("IDF resumes use of prohibited tear gas canisters," Haaretz, December 8, 2010)
The Haaretz article points out that these "extended range" canisters, with a range of 250 meters, are basically 40 mm artillery rounds. Anderson was shot from about 60 meters away. Ashraf's brother was killed when shot in the chest with such a projectile in April 2009.
We also reported on the death of Ashraf and Bassem's sister, Jawaher Abu Rahmeh, the day after she was gassed at the weekly protest that has been held since construction began on the wall cutting off Bil'in villagers from their farmland. Ever since Israeli military officials gave an off-the-record briefing to selected pro-Israeli military journalists and bloggers, there have been a number of unsubstantiated claims in the media and floating on the Net suggesting that Jawaher's death was not due to the gassing but some "previous medical condition."
The Israeli military said that the fact that she underwent a complete medical exam shortly before she was killed, including a brain scan, might mean that she had cancer. But if, as they claim, their intelligence services have (illicitly) acquired her medical records, they know that her doctors saw no serious reason for concern after viewing the results. According to her family, she had sought medical attention because of a persistent earache. These facts seem to further indict Israel, not exonerate it.
This disinformation campaign has been accompanied by public lies by the Israeli government, such as the totally manufactured claim that the hospital released her shortly after she was gassed and that she died at home. In fact, doctors worked on her all night but could not save her.
What this pusillanimous media manipulation reveals is little about Jawaher and a great deal about the fact that Israeli contempt for justice is matched only by its disregard for truth.
If Jawaher did have some condition that contributed to her death, that would still not change the fact that she, like 12 others who have taken part in these protests over the last six years, died after being shot or tear gassed. Even if argued by a defense lawyer for Israel, this could at best only be construed as reckless disregard for human life. But in fact, the many deaths and serious injuries suffered by non-violent West Bank protesters would lead any fair-minded jury to conclude that Israel knew exactly what it was doing when it killed these people. In the case of the Abu Rahmeh family, the facts suggest that Israel has deliberately targeted at least some of them because of their prominent role in these demonstrations.
On January 7, 2011, as on every Friday, another protest took place in Bil'in. Once again Israeli soldiers fired various potentially lethal weapons from behind the barbed-wire fence. Dozens of people suffered tear gas irritation. One of the organizers was hit by a gas canister. Two people were left unconscious by the tear gas. One of them was the wife of Ahmed Abu Rahmeh, brother of Jawaher, Bassam and Ashraf. (International Middle East Media Center, imemc.org)
For more details about Israeli disinformation in this case, see "The Lede", the New York Times Web blog where its reporters post additional information that, whether due to editorial interference or self-censorship, doesn't make it into the daily newspaper (thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/israeli-bloggers-question-israels-use-of-tear-gas-against-protesters).
A World to Win News Service is put out by A World to Win magazine (aworldtowin.org), a political and theoretical review inspired by the formation of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, the embryonic center of the world's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties and organizations.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/israel-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
From "Bastion of Enlightenment... or Enforcer for Imperialism: The Case of ISRAEL"
In much of the world, and in a very intense way in the Middle East, Israel's displacement and ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people and other crimes makes that country the object of tremendous outrage and anger. That is a big problem for the U.S. as it seeks to counter oppositional Islamic forces and impose pro-U.S. regimes in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Widespread outrage against Israel puts reactionary pro-U.S. regimes in the region, like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan, in an awkward and even precarious position. And the close bonds between the U.S. and Israel provide openings for rival powers to exploit in their contention with the U.S.
When U.S. General David Petraeus (now commander in Afghanistan) told the Senate Armed Services Committee, "Enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the area of responsibility," he was identifying a real contradiction for the U.S. ruling class.
It has not proven easy for the U.S. to broker a settlement that would integrate the Palestinians into some semblance of a stable situation, and, at the same time, satisfy what the Israelis see as their need for unchallenged domination and a thoroughly Zionist state. This has remained a sore point in the region and around the world, and as Israel resorts to more and more extreme measures to lock down the Palestinians, this contradiction becomes sharper.
And yet, in profound ways, the U.S has not only stuck by Israel—it is stuck with Israel. Despite real problems and even significant differences at times, the unique "strategic relationship" between the U.S. and Israel continues because, from the perspective of U.S. imperialism, there is no real alternative on the chessboard in terms of the role Israel plays in the Middle East and throughout the world.
With the U.S. deeply mired in wars throughout the Middle East, the role of Israel is more critical than ever. In an op-ed piece, U.S. Representative Steve Rothman (a "liberal" Democrat and strong supporter of Obama), enumerated how "One strategic ally in particular has always stood out from all others: the state of Israel." He noted that Israel provides "America with vital security assistance in the Middle East and around the world." Rothman argued that "without our partnership with the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces—the Israeli army), the United States might need to have 100,000 or more additional troops stationed permanently in that part of the world to make up for the protection of U.S. interests and vital intelligence provided by Israel to the United States."1
One reason why Israel is so important to the U.S. is that it is the one country in the region where the pro-U.S. government has a big social base. That loyal social base, in turn, rests in large part on the history and present-day place of Israel in the world's "food chain"—that is to say, the ways in which it shares in imperialism's parasitical relation to the oppressed nations of the world. European-immigrant citizens of the country have a high standard of living measured in nice houses, wages, and access to gadgets and luxuries. Israel provides its citizens with the trappings of bourgeois democracy—various rabid Zionists along with some moderate critics of the government who accept the terms of Zionism can run against each other in elections, while any politics that opposes Zionism is violently suppressed.
In short, with its massive nuclear arsenal, its European/U.S. level of technology, and a substantial section of its population enlisted in the "logic" and immorality of Zionism, Israel plays an irreplaceable role enforcing U.S. interests.
It is these factors that make it very difficult for U.S. imperialism to alter the "special relationship" between the U.S. and Israel—particularly right now. And this is true even though U.S. support for Israel provokes further opposition to the U.S. in the region, and creates fertile ground for Islamic fundamentalist Jihad.
1. "U.S.'s valuable, strategic relationship with Israel" by Rep. Steve Rothman, The Hill, June 3, 2008. [back]
Special Issue of Revolution
|
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/editorial-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
"This Constitution (Draft Proposal) is written with the future in mind. It is intended to set forth a basic model, and fundamental principles and guidelines, for the nature and functioning of a vastly different society and government than now exists: the New Socialist Republic in North America, a socialist state which would embody, institutionalize and promote radically different relations and values among people; a socialist state whose final and fundamental aim would be to achieve, together with the revolutionary struggle throughout the world, the emancipation of humanity as a whole and the opening of a whole new epoch in human history—communism—with the final abolition of all exploitative and oppressive relations among human beings and the destructive antagonistic conflicts to which these relations give rise." (From the Introductory Explanation: On the Nature, Purpose and Role of this Constitution [Draft Proposal])
In the weeks since the publication of this audacious and visionary Constitution, hundreds of people have gotten it. It is impacting on a wide range of people—from those who are committed to making revolution to those who are agonized about the world as it is—and open to thinking about and discussing new views.
Among those who have been part of the movement for revolution, the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal) has stirred tremendous interest and deep engagement. This is evidenced in part in the letters sent to this newspaper. And wherever people have come together to discuss its content, there has been lively grappling with its vision of the new society, the relations among people that are embodied in this work, and how this society would function. It has given people who long for revolution a deeper sense of what that revolution would actually do—and through study, wrangling and wrestling with the document, advanced their understanding of the goals of this revolution. Many have deepened their commitment, as revolutionaries, to bringing this new society into being—and beginning on Day One of the new socialist republic to confronting and working through the contradictions to transform society towards a communist world.
For others, this Constitution challenges all the preconceived ideas people have about what socialist society would be like—and shows how things could be different. Is socialism an airy pipe dream or worse, a nightmare? Can it actually work? Yes, and how it will work is presented in this historic document. It contains a sweeping framework for moving from the capitalist epoch to a communist world. And this Constitution concretely shows how that could be done; it envisions and models a new society. There has been a vivid glimpse of the potential the Constitution has to change how people look at the possibility of a different—and far better—world. Many who have been skeptical are looking anew at socialist society—and compelled to rethink the views they have held. Including about the possibility for this Party, with the leadership of Bob Avakian, to lead in constructing a truly new and liberating society. And it has been welcomed by many who disagree with sections of it—and others who have even more substantial disagreements—but all of whom feel these are burning questions.
This Constitution has resonated in unexpected and unanticipated ways. And it has stimulated, as it says in its Introductory Explanation, the "serious and substantive engagement with this Draft Proposal, and vigorous discussion and debate about what it puts forward as the kind of society and world to be not only imagined but actively struggled for." We should not underestimate what we have glimpsed—the pivotal role this Constitution can play in raising people's sights to a new world; and we should definitely not stop with what we have accomplished.
The engagement and the ferment this Constitution provokes needs to spread broadly throughout society and the world. This Constitution must find its way into the hands of many people—and a mass movement must be unleashed around it.
We must build on the beginning climate of serious wrangling and substantive engagement and questions and disagreements with this Constitution. In this way, the Constitution can not only be a framework for a whole new society but an impetus in building the movement for revolution today. We do not live in the best of all possible worlds... and another world and society of humans is possible. As many people read this Constitution and see there is a road which leads to the emancipation of all humanity, more people will be moved not only to get this Constitution out more broadly, but to work for revolution.
Look to this newspaper and revcom.us each week for continuing discussion of the Constitution, and guidance and direction for maximizing its impact throughout society. In an ongoing way, this newspaper will play an important role in uncorking the ferment and discussion of this pathbreaking work—and will serve as the scaffolding of the movement to get it out in the world. Let's get a vibrant back and forth where people are anxious to get their hands on each new issue and are actively going to revcom.us to see the latest discussion on some of the key issues concentrated in the Constitution. Beginning this week, we will be publishing correspondence from readers with their thinking on the Constitution as a whole and different aspects of it. Already we have featured the light projections of the Constitution cover on a UN building in New York City and in Berkeley at Sproul Hall. Imaginative and creative popularization like this should be unleashed everywhere—and this paper will play the key role in letting the whole movement know what is happening and in people connecting up with each other.
And then on that basis and with that direction... take the maximum initiative to get the word of this Constitution out and get it to people. Already, there has been a beginning outpouring of ideas for how to get this out into the world. A few of them are outlined in this article... and we look forward to more!
Four key tasks now to launch this mass movement:
1) Promote the Constitution in a multitude of ways. Beginning with getting palm cards out all over the place: in neighborhoods, on campuses, in bookstores and coffee shops, at barber and beauty shops. Make plans and post (with permission) the center spreads on the Constitution which have appeared in Revolution in places where they will stir broad interest. Get the word of this up on the Internet... on blogs, websites, and out through listservs including internationally (in English and Spanish)—and raise the funds needed to post the ads everywhere. (Art work is available for different size ads at revcom.us.) Nationally, RCP Publications is aiming to buy ads in selected, key print and Internet publications... and funds are urgently need to do this!
2) Circles and networks which are growing up around this paper should meet and discuss the Constitution. Inviting people who have gotten the Constitution to these discussions can be an important way to expand the circles. Start a book club or organize discussions where you live or work or go to school to discuss the Introduction and Preamble and then go through the Constitution Article by Article. Meet at the same time each week, so people will know when and where to find you. Or begin an informal discussion group at Revolution Books. Combine this study with looking at the Revolution Talk by Bob Avakian (revolutiontalk.net). Write to this paper with your questions/experience.
Putting this into the hands of high school teachers and students is one important avenue for reaching into different sections of society... from the neighborhoods and communities to people from different walks of life. Teachers: Write to Revolution with your thoughts on a syllabus that could spread far and wide.
3) Distribute this Constitution everywhere... think creatively and make plans to get this out to different groupings of people... people in the projects and neighborhoods in your city... to legal scholars and legal organizations of different nationalities...to academia...to environmentalists and scientists... to writers and people in the arts... and many others. Buy five or more and then sell them to your friends, colleagues, people where you live, etc. Take it into classrooms and distribute and discuss it there. And mix it up—with people from the projects and neighborhoods going to the campuses and students going into the community. Contribute to the fundraising efforts to fill prisoner requests so this Constitution penetrates into the hellholes of incarceration.
Focused work needs to be organized to get this Constitution out to the college campuses. This document will challenge students, provoke debate, and should inspire many from among this new generation of students to join the movement to bring a whole new world into being. Right now, we should begin with truly massive distribution of the palm cards and posting of the promotional materials. Raise money to take out ads in campus newspapers. Set up book tables in busy quads and thoroughfares. And select specific departments and classes where short presentations are made—and books sold. Law schools, biology and ecology departments should be buzzing about this historic document along with ethnic studies and humanities. Talk to professors about incorporating it into their curriculum and about hosting brown bag lunches to discuss it among themselves.
In key neighborhoods and communities, go door to door with palm cards and to sell the Constitution and the newspaper. Develop the ways and means to bring this to people's attention through posting the materials and bringing people together both in mass speakouts and discussion. But don't stop there—bring people together in circles to deeply engage with what this Constitution is saying. And organize all kinds of fundraising.
Take this Constitution into the midst of outbreaks of struggle involving all sections of the people—wherever ferment and debate is unfolding around the kind of society we live in. And especially where questions of the real nature—and legitimacy—of this society and those who run it are opening up.
Distribute it at all kinds of gatherings where there is developing ferment and debate about the state of the world, including conferences of educators, Marxists, scientists, librarians, and more. And these days, with all the tea baggers and the like pushing out the U.S. Constitution, there is a lot of hoopla about the U.S. Constitution being whipped up and events organized to discuss it... let's get into the middle of these with this radically new way society could be organized. And where it's possible: challenge people to debate! In the next few weeks, Revolution newspaper will be printing challenges to discuss and debate this document—and its readers can take these up and take them out.
Work with RCP Publications to get it into libraries and bookstores of all kinds. (Go into your local Revolution bookstore or write to RCP Publications if you would like to work on this project in your area.)
4) Fundraising is a crucial front. $20,000 is needed for major national advertising and promotion, to fill prisoner requests for the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal) and to spread it throughout this country and around the world. This is an audacious and visionary draft proposal—and this should give rise to an outpouring of creative ideas and collective projects to raise money, including parties and fundraising salons and sales of art and photos, food and other things! Reaching out to individuals from all sections of society—including many new people—for donations is an important way to meet people, get them the Constitution and draw them into the discussion of it—and a critical part of this mass movement we must build. And there has already been some beginning but important experience in academia, for example in raising significant funds in this way. Materials are available at the Revolution bookstores and from RCP Publications. Specifically, $4,000 is needed for 400 copies to be sent to prisoners. See PRLF.org for how to make a tax-deductible contribution or send a non-tax-deductible contribution to RCP Publications. Earmark your contribution for prisoners' copies.
So, let's go to it and build a mass movement around the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal)!
| Promotional materials, English and Spanish, for the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America
|
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/constitution_letter2-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Discussion on the CONSTITUTION For The New Socialist Republic In North America (Draft Proposal)
We greatly appreciate receiving letters from prisoners, like the one below, and encourage prisoners to keep sending us correspondence. The viewpoints expressed in these letters are those of the writers and not Revolution newspaper.
December 6, 2010
Dear Family,
Greetings once again from the Texas gulag! I received the Draft Proposal for the RCP,USA Constitution, and I'm very thrilled to see, and be a part of, a group of far-sighted and sensitive individuals with the cojones to actually put themselves "out there" by putting forth such a proposal. It gives me great heart to realize there's a rather large group of revolutionary-minded comrades in the so-called freeworld who not only talk the talk, but walk the walk, when in fact it'd be much easier and safer to just go along to get along and keep one's subversive viewpoints to oneself. You are indeed my high-minded and courageous family, and I take courage and direction from you. It is this priceless gift for which I owe my undying gratitude. You help to raise the bar and set the standard for all people who dare to dream of a better world.
I recently heard that the late, esteemed historian Howard Zinn said, from one perspective, the entire U.S. history is a struggle of differing groups of individuals to simply be recognized as people and accorded the "unalienable rights" espoused in the Declaration of Independence. Whether it's Native Americans, Blacks, Hispanics, women, GLBTs, or even convicts and addicts—everyone just wants to be a "we, the people."
In a broader sense the entire evolutionary history of the animal kingdom is one of, or in a direction of, inclusion without fear. Amoeba and other one-celled protozoa live without fear because they're unaware of any other lifeforms. So far as an amoeba is concerned, everything it comes into contact with is an object. When an animal evolves to the state it can recognize "otherness," its first emotional reflex is fear. This incites the fight-or-flight response. Further up the evolutionary scale, the common housefly still doesn't appear to sense otherness. If you swat at it, it will fly away but then return, oftentimes as not, to the exact spot it just fled... It exhibits no sense of fear.
Still further up, an ant definitely recognizes otherness and will aid and assist another ant if it's a member of its hive. Otherwise, generally speaking, it will murder or enslave (yes, ants take slaves!) any other lifeform. Unfortunately, many humans have not evolved beyond the mentality of ants: They're still inclined to fear and attack or enslave any lifeform not recognized as a member of their clan or group.
I sincerely believe, if we live long enough, we will reach a point in our evolution in which we'll expand our consciousness to fearlessly include all lifeforms and even our mother earth. Murder will become recognized for the primitive response it is, as well as the fear of otherness and the need to subdue that which we fear.
On that great day all members of the animal kingdom will be elevated to the lofty tier of "we, the people" and will be afforded the opportunity to live in peace so long as they abide in peace. This includes the right to self-determination, which is intrinsic to any truly peaceful society. But it will take a radical shift in consciousness, a great leap forward, such as has never been done before. I hope and believe the RCP is a pathway to such change.
Yours for the revolution,
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/constitution_letter1-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Discussion on the CONSTITUTION For The New Socialist Republic In North America (Draft Proposal)
From a Revolution reader and distributor:
I was anticipating the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal) anxiously and in a very positive way. I didn't know what I was going to encounter in reading it because when you think of a constitution you think of previous documents like the Constitution of the United States and think that is what this one is going to be modeled on. I found it to be so much more uplifting and so much more symbolic of something that represents and is much more impactful for human beings than what the Constitution of the U.S. represents. Now this is a very health-bringing document, this is a look into tomorrow and what kind of real advancement for human beings there is. It is through waging revolution and looking at society as if we have revolution victoriously won on behalf of the proletariat already. And looking at society as though we have set up a new socialist power to effectively establish an economy and set up a basis of living as human beings that is on a more fair and unbiased and equitable level for human beings based on the fact that they are human beings, not that they belong to a certain class anymore, because they are male anymore, because they are white anymore. In reading its pages, reading the details, the nuances about how things are going to be set up as far as gun laws, or autonomous regions, or what the media is going to represent in the Socialist Republic, it just really reminds me as an individual of the fact that we have people thinking in a forward motion fashion regarding what is going to take shape, what is really going to become of this country once revolution is successful and reading it is a very helpful process. It gives you hope as a human being that we can be involved in something that is enriching on that level and represents positive things for humanity.
A big misconception people have with socialism and communism is that it is sort of like a dictatorship that anything that opposes the state in terms of your right to free speech is going to be outlawed and you are not going to be able to represent who you are by expressing your emotions and thoughts and ideas through art and culture, cultural expressions like different types of art work or being able to express yourself in public in spoken word format or in writing essays. This is a drastic misrepresentation of what communism and socialism are really about; to understand it better you would know that free speech is a value that we hold very high in society as communists, that there will always be the right for people to be dissenters, always going to encourage dissent. The Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal) represents this. We have a healthy value in our society for people being dissenters and being in a place where they want to question and even mock government and the establishment and parts of the socialist republic. We think this is healthy for the discourse of the people, that it is necessary for the discourse of a people, that people need to be able to vent themselves in a frustrated fashion against the establishment. And if they feel they cannot do that it is not really freedom and doesn't represent a new level of freedom. So as far as the media there will be a certain part of the media set aside for people to vent their ideas being against the party, the legislative, the executive council, and being against the Socialist Republic as a whole because that is necessary for our growth as a species to have total freedom of speech, not just the stuff some people like or these people like but total freedom of expression. People will be allowed to vent but of course we can't let it endanger the public health and safety of the Republic and the safety of the citizens of the Republic. But if you are, say, a white supremacist or a male chauvinist or something like that, your comments are going to be as honored as anyone else as long as you are not posing a detriment to public health and safety or taking away the rights of anyone else to enjoy their lives. Sometimes we are going to have to put up with people saying things that are absurd but that is the cost of having freedom of expression. Say people like Glenn Beck, he has the right to express himself whatever way he wants until he poses a detriment to the Republic and its security and the public health and safety of other people. He has to be the idiot that he is.
This Constitution is significant because it's such a projected look into the future, with so much ironclad resolve in what the real good of what revolution really represents is that people can look to this document and become more enthusiastic about revolution because of what it represents and how it is fashioned. This gets to the details [of the new society], that's significant, that's monumental; this is a historic document in every respect of the word and the more people read it and get engaged in it, the more people will get enthused about revolution because they are going to see we have people who are using their creative abilities as thinkers and revolutionaries to put ourselves in a place of being past the goal line with the victory already achieved. We have not only won the revolution but are enjoying the new Socialist Republic and this is how it is taking shape. When you read its pages, you put yourself past the goal line in your mind and you put yourself in the frame of experiencing your life even if for a short moment of time in reading through its pages of living in the New Socialist Republic. This is what this document will do for you and it's uplifting because it represents a world not based on exploitation and oppression anymore and that is refreshing to anybody, that is something that would give solidarity to anybody.
In getting this Constitution to others, I have gone through my whole roladex of my phone list of anyone I can think of that might be minorly receptive, that might need to get a copy of this new Constitution because I believe every American should have it. This is the sort of thing we need to be discussing as a culture and we need to be getting into the group enjoyment of it to be able to sit down and read through its pages and put yourself in the mind state or the projected mind frame feeling like you are already in a new socialist republic where this oppressive, tyrannical system doesn't exist anymore. This is a liberating thing for anyone who values what human beings' experience is meant to be as far as what we are entitled to, as far as having dignity, worth and self respect and opportunity and be able to contribute something to the whole and feel like we are being productive and engage in relationships that are not based on exploitation and not oppressive relationships and things like that. Anyone who values the traditional values of just being human and wanting to enjoy life is going to find a lot of enrichment in the process of reading through its pages. It has motivated me to get it to people, I spent all day yesterday going through my whole phone list trying to get hold of people in my phone list. So that they could be more aware that this document has come out so they can get a copy of it. I think every American should have it.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/wikileaks-afghanistan-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
WikiLeaks Cables on Afghanistan
On December 14, 2009, a routine meeting took place in Kabul, Afghanistan between Afghan President Hamid Karzai, U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, and other U.S. officials. A December 16, 2009 cable from Eikenberry on the meeting said: "Karzai said Ismail Khan was still his choice for Minister of Energy, claiming that Secretary Clinton 'agreed to a compromise' after Karzai promised to keep Atmar [interior minister] and appoint competent deputy ministers under Khan. Ambassador Eikenberry countered that Secretary Clinton did not endorse Khan—underscoring that the United States has indicated that Energy and Water is a key U.S. development priority, and that our policy was not to invest in ministries not competently led. Eikenberry added that during his Congressional testimony, all members of the U.S. Congress expressed great concern over the long-term costs of Afghanistan, especially during the current financial crisis."1
This is from one of many secret State Department cables from Afghanistan recently published by WikiLeaks. Because these cables are written by U.S. government officials to other officials (reflecting their mind-sets, worldviews, perhaps internal arguments, and other factors), they should not be taken at face value—they both reveal and conceal the truth. But many of the leaked cables concerning Karzai—who was put into power by the U.S. after the U.S. invaded and occupied Afghanistan in 2001—can provide a window into the larger reality of the U.S. relationship with the Afghan government and Karzai's role.
With this in mind, let's look at what's being described in the above quote. First, Karzai seems to feel compelled to discuss "his choices" for various ministries with the U.S. ambassador (and such discussions are also described in other cables). Then to justify his choice he argues that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton already approved it.
In response, Ambassador Eikenberry essentially tells Karzai he is either mistaken or lying because "Secretary Clinton did not endorse Khan." Eikenberry then basically threatens Karzai, telling him the U.S. might cut off funding because it will not invest money "in ministries not competently led," and because America's Congress was concerned about U.S. spending in Afghanistan.
We are told the U.S.-Afghan relationship is a "partnership" between two sovereign, independent states working together to further their "shared interests." After WikiLeaks published the State Department cables, Eikenberry issued a statement saying: "The U.S. is absolutely committed to building and strengthening a long-term partnership with the Afghan people and the Afghan government. Our shared goals do not change based on the release of purported diplomatic reporting from the past."2
But cables published by WikiLeaks tell a different story. Some of these cables describe Eikenberry micro-managing the actions of whichever candidate won Afghanistan's August 20, 2009 presidential election in which Karzai ran against Abdullah Abdullah. On August 31, 2009, Ambassador Eikenberry met with Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. The results of the election had not yet been determined. Yet Eikenberry laid out a detailed series of proposals for which ministers the winner should appoint, what plans should be announced, even the inauguration speech that should be given. Eikenberry warned: "[B]oth leading candidates should understand we are paying close attention to their conduct in this interim period before the certification of the vote, and that their conduct will impact their relationship with the international community ... Secondly, the next President shoudl [sic] understand that we will scrutinize closely his ministerial appointments for competence and commitment to good governance."3
As a thought experiment, imagine if Afghanistan's ambassador to the U.S. (or any other official from another country) demanded a say in the U.S. president's cabinet picks. Imagine this official telling the U.S. president that his/her country was paying close attention to the actions of the president's cabinet choices, implying that if the picks were not to the foreign country's liking, it would jeopardize the U.S.'s relationship with the "international community." And imagine if another country told Obama it would continue to "scrutinize closely his ministerial appointments for competence and commitment to good governance."
The power of any state rests on its control of its military and police power. And it is evident from a number of WikiLeaked cables that the U.S. is calling the shots in the formation of an Afghan army, and that this army will be completely reliant on the U.S. for most, if not all, of its funding and weaponry. The fact that Afghanistan has to rely on the U.S. to provide weapons and military funding gives the U.S. a lot of direct control over the Afghan army—including controlling how it will operate.
At the December 14, 2009 meeting between Karzai, U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, and other U.S. officials (cited at the beginning of this article), Karzai agreed to a key U.S. demand: making sure the Afghan military obtains "sufficient security force recruits and training." Karzai and his Defense Minister then asked for heavier, more advanced weapons for the Afghan military.4
Here it is important to note that other State Department cables as well as military war logs reveal the enormous—and largely unreported—levels of violence and brutality being unleashed on the Afghan people, and the murderous attacks that are routinely carried out by U.S., NATO and Afghan forces against the people. So expanding the power of the Afghan military, which the U.S. considers crucial to its military strategy, means expanding the violence being inflicted on the Afghan people. (See "U.S. Raids: High Tech Terror in Afghanistan," Revolution #221, January 9, 2011; "Made in America: The Gardez Massacre," Revolution #197, April 4, 2010.)
The cable describing the December 14 meeting then describes how U.S. Admiral Mullen refused Karzai's and Wardak's [defense minister] requests, saying "the United States would continue to equip the Afghan forces for counter-insurgency operations since the territorial defense was not currently a priority, especially considering the U.S. strategic defense relationship with Afghanistan." When Wardak argued Afghanistan needed heavy weapons to defend itself and for such counter-insurgency, Mullen told him "heavy weaponry was not needed at present." In short, it was the U.S. deciding what role the Afghan military would play and which weapons it would get, based on U.S. strategy and interests.
There are other examples of how the U.S. is calling the shots (literally), with regard to the Afghan military—making it clear who is in charge. Military reports published by WikiLeaks in July 2010 show that "The Central Intelligence Agency has expanded paramilitary operations inside Afghanistan. The units launch ambushes, order airstrikes and conduct night raids. From 2001 to 2008, the C.I.A. paid the budget of Afghanistan's spy agency and ran it as a virtual subsidiary."5
One cable reports on a meeting between Eikenberry and defeated presidential candidate Abdullah Abdullah, during which Abdullah claimed that Karzai "asked his Defense Minister 'Your ANA [Afghan National Army] can manage without the Americans, can't it?' but the answer was 'We get 400,000 liters of petrol a day from them; without them, we'd end our operations in two days.'"6
After a February 6, 2009 night raid in Zabul province, a February 12 State Department cable reported that local Afghan officials and elders "questioned the legality of the operations under the Afghan constitution," adding: "Note: Article 38 of the Constitution stipulates, 'No one, including the state, shall have the right to enter a personal residence or search it without the owners permission or by order of an authoritative court, except in situations and methods delineated by law.'"7
This is an example of how the Afghan Constitution is trumped by whatever the U.S. decides is necessary. And there are numerous other examples, many revealed in these cables, of how the U.S. routinely violates this article of Afghanistan's Constitution.
The nature of the relationship between the U.S. and Afghanistan, and the need to conceal the real nature of this relationship, are dictated and defined by the reasons the U.S. is in Afghanistan in the first place.
The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was not launched in 2001 to liberate the Afghan people, but to strengthen the U.S.'s imperial grip on the strategically crucial Middle East-Central Asian regions. In Afghanistan, this included striking al-Qaeda and overthrowing the Taliban regime (to weaken Islamist movements regionally), and installing an Afghan regime suitable for U.S. aims, one of which was increasing its permanent military presence in the heart of Central Asia. These continue to be core U.S. objectives.
However, the U.S. rulers understand they cannot achieve those objectives without a subordinate—but functioning—Afghan government with a certain degree of legitimacy and credibility among the Afghan people. So the U.S. and its allies have gone to great lengths to orchestrate the cobbling together of what is portrayed as an independent regime.
So what kind of "partnership" do the U.S. and the Karzai regime have? A "partnership" in which the U.S. dictates who is in the Afghan government and who's not, what it does, and what it doesn't do. A "partnership" to continue the brutal U.S. occupation and war in Afghanistan.
The client, puppet government that Karzai is the president of would not last a day without the economic, political and military backing from the U.S. Karzai is in power not because he has some mandate from the Afghan people. He's in power because the U.S. put him there. Karzai and his government continue to serve the larger strategic objectives of U.S. imperialism—which are all about the extension and preservation of empire. And what this means for the masses of Afghan people is a horror of U.S. bombs from the sky, massacres, continued enforcement of reactionary, feudal traditions, night raids, round-ups and extreme torture.
Footnotes
1. "US embassy cables: Cables say Obama's troop reductions were a military recommendation," Guardian UK, December 2, 2010. [back]
2. "US embassy cables: Afghan's finance minister warns leaked cables will damage relations with US," Guardian UK, December 4, 2010. [back]
3. "US embassy cables: 'We are not just another imperialist force' in Afghanistan," Guardian UK, December 2, 2010. [back]
4. See Footnote #1. December 16, 2009 cable continues: "Karzai inquired whether ANSF expansion would include only an increase in training, or also an increase in more sophisticated military equipment for Afghan internal defense." Then Defense Minister "Wardak further noted that more heavy weapons were need for the ANA over time to increase their capability to defend themselves, and could also be used to fight the Taliban." [back]
5. "View Is Bleaker Than Official Portrayal of War in Afghanistan," New York Times, July 25, 2010. [back]
6. "US embassy cables: Karzai asks defence minister: 'Can you manage without the US?'" Guardian UK, December 2, 2010. [back]
7. "US embassy cables: Afghan tribal elders threaten to 'fight Nato like the Soviets,'" Guardian UK, December 3, 2010; "U.S. Raids: High Tech Terror in Afghanistan," Revolution #221, January 9, 2011. [back]
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/wikileaks-torture-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
The files WikiLeaks released in late November reveal beyond doubt that the U.S. military in Iraq and the U.S.-controlled Iraqi army were given an official green light for the systematic use of torture, as well the cover up of those war crimes.
"Frago" ("fragmentary order") is a U.S. military term for a concise summation of longer orders. Frago 242, issued in July 2004, directed U.S. forces not to investigate any breaches of "military conduct" unless U.S. troops and those of its "coalition" were "directly involved." Frago 242 said that if an Iraqi detained by the U.S. or coalition troops was abused by another Iraqi, then "only an initial report will be made ... no further investigation will be required unless directed by headquarters."
One example of Frago 242 in effect was reported by Al Jazeera on October 24: "An alleged militant identified only as 'DAT 326' was detained by the Iraqi army on July 7, 2006 at a checkpoint in the town of Tarmiya, north of Baghdad. When US forces interrogated him later that night, he described hours of brutal abuse at the hands of the Iraqi soldiers, an allegation apparently backed by the findings of a medical exam."
The report from the exam, one of the files published by WikiLeaks, says: "DAT 326 states he was told to lay down on his stomach with his hands behind his back, which is when the Iraqi soldiers allegedly stepped, jumped, urinated and spit on him.
"[...] Injuries include blurred vision, diminished hearing in his left ear, bleeding in ears, bruising on forehead, neck, chest, back, shoulders, arms, hands, and thighs, cuts over the left eye and on the upper and lower lips, hemorrhaging eyes, blood in nasal cavities, and swollen hands/wrists."
Al Jazeera continued, "Since the alleged torture was committed by Iraqi forces, the US quickly dropped the case: 'Due to no allegation or evidence of US involvement, a US investigation is not being initiated,' the report said."
In other words, the Iraqi soldiers tortured their prisoner, "DAT 326," and then handed that prisoner over to their ringleaders, the U.S. military. The U.S. forces were perfectly aware of what had happened to the prisoner—they just had their Iraqi underlings carry out the actual dirty work. And all this was in line with official U.S. policy.
The Guardian newspaper in the UK reported (October 22, 2010) that "other logs record not merely assaults but systematic torture. A man who was detained by Iraqi soldiers in an underground bunker reported that he had been subjected to the notoriously painful strappado position: with his hands tied behind his back, he was suspended from the ceiling by his wrists. The soldiers had then whipped him with plastic piping and used electric drills on him. The log records that the man was treated by U.S. medics; the paperwork was sent through the necessary channels; but yet again, no investigation was required."
The WikiLeaks files reveal that prisoners were also routinely burned with cigarettes, electrocuted, raped, and beaten with any available implement, such as steel rods, wire cables, television antennas, chains, water pipes, fan belts, and rubber hoses, as well as fists and feet. Some were executed.
According to the Guardian, one WikiLeaks file tells of a U.S. Army log that contains "an official account of deliberate threats by a military interrogator to turn his captive over to the Iraqi 'Wolf Brigade.' The interrogator told the prisoner in explicit terms that: 'He would be subject to all the pain and agony that the Wolf battalion is known to exact upon its detainees.'"
Not long after the torture of "DAT 326," U.S. president George W. Bush was interviewed by Katie Couric of CBS News in a national broadcast, "We have to have the capacity to interrogate—not torture, but interrogate people to learn information ...I've said to the people that we don't torture, and we don't." ("Bush: 'We Don't Torture,'" CBS News September 7, 2006)
Bush brazenly and blatantly lied. Orders like Frago 242 came directly from the U.S. military leadership down through its chain of command. And these orders—and the justifications for torture—originated at the highest levels of the Bush administration. None of these officials has been charged for their war crimes—even as the current administration is working feverishly to persecute and possibly indict WikiLeaks' Julian Assange, and accused leaker U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning has been held in isolation and tortured in military prisons for seven months.
Torture is built into the "way of fighting" of the U.S. military, and a big part of what the WikiLeaks files have shown is how systematic, widespread, and commonplace these atrocities have become for the U.S. military—a military that combines the use of the most modern technology such as pilotless drone bombers, robot sensors, long range surveillance, and ballistic missiles with crude and savage means of torture and domination—all in pursuit of preserving and extending its domination of much of the planet.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/person_of_year-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
In the run-up to determining and announcing its 2010 Person of the Year, Time magazine conducted a poll asking people who their choice would be, among the magazine's 25 suggested candidates. The people's choice? Overwhelmingly, and quite significantly, it was Julian Assange, director of WikiLeaks, the Internet media outlet dedicated to government transparency. Assange received 382,024 votes, greater than the number received by the second and third choices combined.
The public choice of Assange didn't sit at all well with the editors of Time. And this, despite the fact that, according to Time itself, its Person of the Year selection is not an award or an indication of approval on its part, but instead goes to the person who "for better or worse ... has done the most to influence the events of the year."
In 2010 WikiLeaks published hundreds of thousands of secret U.S. military reports on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq followed a few months later by batches of secret U.S. embassy and consulate cables, which will number more than 250,000 when all have been made public. In bringing to light these secret documents, WikiLeaks broke no law, but governments and police agencies demanded Assange's arrest anyway. (Assange turned himself in—on supposedly unrelated charges—on December 7 at a London police station, and is now out on bail and under virtual house arrest.) Some prominent U.S. media and political figures clamored not only for his capture but also for his execution—all of which was given major play in the mass media and accompanied by major editorials and columns vilifying Assange as a dangerous "cyber-terrorist," while remaining silent on what the WikiLeaks exposures reveal about the truly terrorist workings of the U.S. imperial state.
So who, then, did Time select? Founder and CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg. No matter that Zuckerberg finished a distant 10th in the editors' own public opinion poll.
Time not only did not choose Julian Assange as its Person of the Year, despite the strong popular vote in his favor—it also selected as a major runner-up the Tea Party. That, despite the fact that the Tea Party wasn't even among the Time's poll's 25 suggested candidates.
Here it is worth reflecting on how often, and how definitively, the sacrosanct POLL is invoked by those who control the media to claim that their actions and policies, their wars and round-ups, the prejudices they promote... are simply reflections of "the people's will." And, the way polls are used to tell people what to think in the form of telling people what "everyone" (supposedly) thinks—marginalizing, isolating, and declaring irrelevant and illegitimate any thinking and action that strays outside the box of terms defined by "the poll."
Except, as in this case, when those who orchestrate the whole process don't like the results.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/221/editorial-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
A Revolutionary Resolution:
As you start the new year, scan the globe.
Start in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where U.S. drones rain death down on families in wars that grind on, seemingly without end.
Move down to the Congo, where political forces and militias—set up by and serving competing capitalist entities and governments—systematically rape women and girls so brutally that they can no longer hold their bladders or their bowels.
Look at the razing of the planet's forests, the extermination of its species and the poisoning of its waters and air by corporations and militaries competing for dominance.
Cast your eyes into the concrete and broken-glass ghettoes of the U.S., where Black and Latino youth as young as ten or twelve years old are daily brutalized by police.
Turn to the southern border of the U.S. where immigrants live in the shadows and in fear of being locked up and deported for nothing more than crossing the border in search of the means to survive.
Look to Washington, DC—the pulsing heart of the so-called beacon of "freedom" and "democracy"—and witness the ever-narrowing range of political discourse with its open fascists at the one end and an aggressively repressive and compromising-with-fascists president at the other.
In view of all this, we at Revolution newspaper will not be updating you on who was the best dressed in 2010, filling you in on the latest celebrity break-up, or predicting the 2011 trend-setting iPhone app. Nor will we be offering tips on how to take off the inches gained through the holidays or whether it is okay to exchange the gifts you got. We won't EVEN be focusing on those admittedly much better resolutions about being a "better person" and "doing good" in this messed-up world.
Instead, we call your attention to something much less reported on and much less known, but also much bigger-hearted, much more global-minded, much more impactful than any of that. It is also something that we resolve—and hope you will join with us in resolving—to turn into something that cannot be ignored in 2011.
A revolution that can lift all of humanity out of its war-torn, blood-soaked, hunger-stricken state... a revolution that will empower people to build a society where people are no longer exploited, competing with each other just to survive, and brutally oppressed; that can not only put a stop to the plunder and destruction of the planet; but can unleash the creativity and joyfulness, the critical thinking and highest aspirations of masses everywhere as they join together to transform this world, and themselves, in the most liberating ways.
Over the last year, this revolution has been fighting its way onto the stage of history with new depth, renewed strategic approach, new momentum and—most of all—tremendous, still untapped potential. While there are many aspects to this movement for revolution, we want to highlight three developments which carry a great deal of the hope humanity has for a better world.
The first is the publication of the Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal) from the Revolutionary Communist Party. This Constitution makes concrete and vivid the vision and the actual workings of a liberatory, socialist society starting "Day 1" after the revolution. It lays out the economic and social principles of a society in transition to a world without classes or any of the oppression bound up with them and it gives a working, breathing sense of what it would actually feel like to be free. In the short time since its publication, we've glimpsed the unique potential for this Constitution to change the discussion and lift people's sights to another way, including in sparking people who had been convinced, or had convinced themselves, that communist revolution was hopeless to look at it anew with life and interest.
The second is the campaign: "The Revolution We Need... The Leadership We Have," with its three interrelated goals of putting revolution on the map throughout society for real, making Bob Avakian—the leader who has both re-envisioned revolution and communism for the world and who is actively leading the movement for revolution here—a household name, and bringing forward a growing core of people who are taking up the goals and outlook and method of this revolution, getting organized into it, and fighting for it to advance all throughout society. While this campaign has real leaps to make before it achieves its goal, this past year was marked by significant advances in this campaign, particularly the distribution of hundreds of thousands of copies of the Message and Call from the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, which powerfully and concisely captures the sweep of this revolution, the strategy for making this revolution, and the precious leadership we have in Bob Avakian. This historic campaign is critical in the struggle for the future of humanity.
While each has importance in its own right, these two things together take on even greater significance. The success of the campaign will bear greatly on the chances of an actual revolution succeeding in this country, which itself is necessary if the Constitution is to be implemented with everything that will mean for humanity. Yet, even before the seizure of power—and the construction of the new society—this Constitution can and must become a catalyst in this movement for revolution now. People will be introduced to the actual character and content of this revolution. Their sights will be elevated to the positive vision of a whole new world, repolarizing for revolution. And it will train and prepare growing cores of people to take part in leading the new society when we do succeed.
Third, a key dimension of our work to make Bob Avakian known throughout society in the coming year will be the publication of BAsics. This will be a book of powerful quotations from Bob Avakian. It must introduce many thousands of people to this leader BA and give them the BAsics of revolution. BAsics will include concentrations of method and truth that are principles to live by and fight for, that provide a framework for understanding and changing the world, that provide a materialist source of inspiration and daring, that provoke and challenge.
In an ongoing way, this newspaper will have much more to say about this new Constitution, the campaign, and BAsics. It will spotlight the experience people are having among different sections of people; it will serve as a center of the dialogue over that experience as well as the content of this work; and it will give shape and direction to the efforts to maximize both their reach and impact, projecting important plans for getting these out into the world.
But, in this first issue of the year 2011, we want to speak to the role Revolution must, and intends to, play in society and the world—and in advancing this burgeoning movement for revolution.
In the whole ensemble of revolutionary work, this newspaper must be at the hub of hastening the development of—and preparing the people, ideologically, politically, and organizationally for the emergence of a revolutionary situation. This newspaper is central to getting people ready for revolution. Revolution gives guidance and direction to all our work; it is the scaffolding of the movement for revolution. For this movement to grow in the way it can and must, Revolution looks forward to going far beyond what we have done thus far as the scaffolding of the movement for revolution.
Revolution is essential to fighting the power right now. What is exposed in this paper week to week can fill people with an irresistible desire to resist. As the Message and Call says: "It is up to us: to wake up...to shake off the ways they put on us, the ways they have us thinking so they can keep us down and trapped in the same old rat-race...to rise up, as conscious Emancipators of Humanity. The days when this system can just keep on doing what it does to people, here and all over the world...when people are not inspired and organized to stand up against these outrages and to build up the strength to put an end to this madness...those days must be GONE. And they CAN be." Getting this paper out consistently and broadly is essential in bringing people to that position.
The MORE people see that this oppression is not only brutal but unnecessary... that this is not something that people brought on themselves but something imposed on the people by this system... and that there is a better system and a better society possible... the MORE people grasp that, the MORE they will resist, and the more that resistance will feed into building a revolutionary movement.
Fighting the power is very much part of what this paper has to and will be about. We will be there when people stand up, taking our communist understanding into these struggles, spreading the word about them, and highlighting, popularizing and building on what they achieve.
We will be there when students fight against cuts in education. We will be there when people stand up against police brutality and murder, and when people fight against attacks on immigrants. We will be there, covering the struggles of people all over the world to save the environment. We will give people the full and uncensored picture of the movement to end the horrific wars the U.S. is waging. And more.
Revolution needs to connect with those who are most inclined towards revolution—but it needs to reach far more broadly, to everywhere people are dissatisfied or angry, everywhere they are standing up or just searching, to those who may be put off by its revolutionary communist perspective but are willing to listen. Everywhere we go, we should be taking this paper and getting it into people's hands—and utilizing it to unleash discussion and debate over events in society and the world.
It is true that there is not right now a high tide of struggle against the system—though there ARE instances of people standing up, and these must be popularized and given leadership to. But there are elements pulsing beneath the surface—a book like The New Jim Crow begins to become a phenomenon among Black students and Black people more broadly. Cultural works that, with whatever shortcomings, in some way express a mainly progressive defiance for the values of this society and at the same time become very popular, striking a chord with people very broadly—works like the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series, the movie Avatar, or "The Suburbs" by Arcade Fire—indicate that "all is not well," that there is dissatisfaction and more beneath the surface, even if people are not yet giving this political expression. This too forms part of the basis for the works of Bob Avakian and for this newspaper—and more than that, this movement FOR revolution and communism—to find much farther reach and deeper root in society.
Nowhere else can people from all corners of society find the systematic exposure and analysis they need to understand, and to become an active part of knowing and changing the world in the most liberating ways. Nowhere else can people regularly engage the writings of Bob Avakian on questions of strategy, philosophy, art and science, life's choices and meaning, and more. Nowhere else can people connect up with, hear the voices of people here and around the world, and see the revolutionary potential of others—from behind the walls of America's prisons to the halls of academia, from the suburbs to the shantytowns, and beyond.
In this next year, we at Revolution will continue—and go even further in—featuring the engagement and debate of this growing movement. In the pages of this paper and at revcom.us, readers need to engage each other...taking on the toughest questions and sharing experience. And the newspaper will be an active participant in this back-and-forth. In this way, the embryos which have been forged in building the movement for revolution can be both consolidated and spread.
Emphasis must be given to systematically organizing people in circles and networks around this paper. Building these networks gives people the means to link up with each other, to think and act together in a meaningful way—and work towards a real, radical alternative. Even as many do not yet fully agree with everything the paper says, they can get organized around it, work on it, dig into it and study it, and develop ways to distribute it.
Step back and think about the people described at the start of this article: the child who has grown up under U.S.-made bombs, the women who have lived through hell, the beautiful Black youth and others who have been made to feel there is no place for them on this planet. Think about the people who are in turmoil over the crisis of the global environment, or the deadly "choices" framed by electoral politics. Most of these people—and the millions more like them—have never heard of this revolution or its leader. Yet, all of their futures and all of their hopes for something better, not only for themselves but for their children and the planet, are objectively bound up with this revolution advancing.
In this next year, let us who do know of this revolution not keep it to ourselves. Let us find the ways, as it says in the Message and Call, to "spread the word to every corner of this country... giving people the means to become part of this revolutionary movement, and organizing into this movement everyone who wants to make a contribution to it..." Let us put ourselves—collectively, creatively and energetically—to fighting through to the success of this campaign and towards the greatest advances that can be made towards revolution.
In sum, let us refuse to be hemmed in in our dreams and our determination by the weight of the very horrors of this world that we so righteously detest, let us not aim merely to "do some good" in this terrible world, but let us instead take up the challenge—and the joyful work—of fighting to bring a whole better world into being.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/AWTWNS_India-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
From A World to Win News Service
January 3, 2011. A World to Win News Service. With the December 24 sentence of life imprisonment for Dr. Binayak Sen, another travesty of justice has taken place in the Indian courts. Despite the clearly fraudulent evidence in the case and protests in India and from international figures, the Indian government is calculating how far they can go with a clampdown on those from different strata who oppose Operation Green Hunt and other state crimes committed against the masses of India.
Operation Green Hunt is an unprecedented military offensive against the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and the masses hungry for radical change who make up the army they lead. This war is being waged in the jungles and forests that are home to the tribal peoples known as Adivasis in central and eastern India (the states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and West Bengal). That large swaths of these areas are under the control of the Maoists is intolerable to the Indian government. And it is desperate to ensure that India's continued economic growth and heightened role in the global economy remain unhindered by any vision and struggle for an alternative to the present system of poverty and humiliation for the masses.
The legitimacy of Operation Green Hunt has been sharply called into question by many well-known intellectuals, activists and academics. Whether or not the Indian government can silence them will have serious repercussions on both the government's ability to carry out this military offensive and the struggle to make revolution in India.
A graduate of one of India's leading medical schools, Sen has been working in the state of Chhattisgarh since 1981. He and [his wife] Ilina Sen train rural health workers in Adivasi and poor peasant areas, organize rural clinics and promote campaigns against alcohol abuse and violence against women. Their work has substantially reduced the deaths of children due to diarrhea and dehydration, helping to bring down the overall infant mortality rate in the state. This success has made Sen one of India's most prominent public health specialists.
As a senior member of People's Union for Civil Liberties that works for the tribal poor, he earned the wrath of the Chhattisgarh authorities because of his political advocacy for Adivasis and his vocal opposition to the Salwa Judum, a state-backed militia formed to fight the Maoist-led revolutionary movement among [the Adivasis]. His 2007 arrest came shortly after he exposed a massacre of tribal people. He was charged with sedition and waging war against the state.
Dr. Sen spent two years in prison before he finally won bail. Two co-defendants, Narayan Sanyal (said to be a senior Maoist leader) and Piyush Guha, were not granted bail and have remained in custody. Sen is accused of passing letters from the imprisoned 74-year-old Sanyal, whom he visited in his capacity as a physician. The letters were allegedly found on Guha.
To prevent planting of evidence, Indian laws require that material seized from an accused's home be signed and sealed before witnesses. At his court statement, Sen described the police process in the raid on his house:
"Several policemen in the search party were involved in the process of the search at my house. Having found a document, the person finding it would hand it over to Mr Rajput. Mr Rajput would first read it, and then hand it over to me for my signature. He would also sign it himself. After we had both put our signatures on the document, he would dictate to TI Jagrit what was to be written in the seizure memo. Mr Jagrit would then make the entry, following which Mr Rajput would then hand over the document to Mr Jagrit. In this manner, each document was seized, signed, and entered in the seizure memo. None of the documents were signed by the public witnesses in my presence. Nor were the documents sealed in my presence. At the end of the search process the documents were carried away in a paper bag in an unsealed condition." The manufactured letter that is the "key'' to Sen's conviction is a simple computer printout. It is not signed either by Sen or the police who raided his house and is not mentioned in the list of seized material taken from his house.
According to an article in Economic and Political Weekly, Sen's visits to Sanyal were so closely monitored that even their conversations were listened to. Sanyal's jailers denied the police story about passing letters. The prosecution could not prove that Sen ever met Guha. Witnesses who came forward in support were discredited as Naxalites, as Maoist revolutionaries are called in India.
Sen's wife, who is also a doctor, says she will challenge his conviction and launch an international campaign. She and her family no longer feel safe in India as they face continuous harassment and threats by the authorities and others. She has publicly stated they may have to request political asylum.
In another blatant case of injustice on the same day in Chhattisgarh, Asit Kumar Sengupta—former publisher of the English-language edition of A World to Win magazine—was sentenced to eight years in prison. (See the CPI [M-L] Naxalbari press release in the article online at revcom.us from A World to Win News Service and AWTWNS090629 for background on Sengupta.)
Arundhati Roy, also a well-known opponent of Operation Green Hunt and India's bloody repression of the Kashmir struggle for self-determination, has also been threatened with arrest for sedition. While no formal charges seem to have been filed against her so far, despite howls from the media demanding that she be imprisoned, her home was attacked by a mob organized by the Hindu fascist BJP[Bharatiya Janata Party] in what she called a government act of "outsourcing" repression.
In response to the outrageous sentencing of Sen and Sengupta, the CPI (Maoist) has called for a week-long protest starting January 2, 2011.
A World to Win News Service is put out by A World to Win magazine (aworldtowin.org), a political and theoretical review inspired by the formation of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, the embryonic center of the world's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties and organizations.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/toughest_questions-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
"Toughest Questions"
Editor's note: We received from a reader the following "tough question from a friend," and we encourage readers to respond.
Here's a thought I've had about names.
If the Republicans used words for their name to describe who they actually are, they would call themselves the Radical Fascist Party.
That name would alienate millions and millions of Americans. But it would be a really good description of who they are. I recall that you said your organization's name is an accurate description of what your organization is, and that's the way it should be. Well, no. Actually that name is a very poor description to the masses of people in this country. The words in your name are loaded with almost 100 years of a massive negative thought campaign against them. Those words evoke frightening images of atheism, terrifying nuclear war, duck and cover, loss of personal property, gulags, Siberia, and so many many more horrifying images that were drilled into the heads of the American public.
That name is the biggest turnoff in the U.S.A. today. If you all worked really hard at it, you could not come up with a worse name in this country at this time. It alienates millions and millions of Americans.
The GOP does not call themselves the Radical Fascist Party, because they have the best marketing people in the world working for them. The corporations who control the GOP employ the best marketing people—and those people also work for the GOP. (People virtually always give their loyalty to whomever is paying their salaries.) They do amazing marketing campaigns that make the corporations' products and services and the GOP appear to be wonderful.
Look at what they've done for the Tea Party. Despite all the hype the media puts out about the Tea Party being a grassroots movement, the reality is that the Tea Party is the result of an amazingly sophisticated PR campaign paid for by corporate/GOP dollars. They've used "American" words to appeal to the vague discontent of ignorant people who suspect the government and don't realize how much the corporations control the government. "Tea Party" is a reference back to the Boston Tea Party—how safe, how patriotic, how appealing.
When your name scares away millions and millions of people, they will never learn what you stand for and what your ideas really are. They will run away in droves. You don't stand a chance. You will continue to be a relatively small irrelevant group viewed with suspicion and fear by the masses.
I've thought about this for many years—ever since I did marketing for a civil liberties organization years ago. The best chance of reaching out to the American public is by using names that are easily acceptable to those masses. Innocent words, patriotic words, American words with positive connotations. This is just basic semantics. The best chance is to co-opt the right—use their words to bring the people in to your meeting hall so that they will be able to hear and read your ideas.
| The Toughest Questions You Face... We want to know the toughest questions that you run up against. When you are getting out Revolution newspaper, or wearing the T-shirt with the image of Bob Avakian, or in some other way representing for revolution... what questions do you run up against that provoke you, or intrigue you, or bother you—and that you want help understanding and answering. Especially if you are newer to the movement, or cut off from other revolutionaries—we want to hear from you. Send us the questions you run up against, and we'll do our best to answer them. Not only that, we'll ask everyone else who reads the paper for help. If you can, tell us a little bit about who tends to ask you these questions, and how you understand and respond to them. You might also want to let us know a little bit about what you're doing—without going into specifics, in what kind of situation are you building the movement? For instance, whether you are selling the paper on a campus, or wearing the BA T-shirt in a neighborhood, or debating with people in prison, etc. But that's optional. The main thing is this: we want to hear the questions you're running up against. You can send your questions to RCP Publications, PO Box 3486, Chicago, IL 60654. Or, email us at rcppubs@hotmail.com, or use the Comments link at revcom.us. |
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/222/AWTWNS_release-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Revolution received the following from A World to Win News Service, and we are making it available to our readers
From A World to Win News Service
January 3, 2011. A World to Win News Service. Following is a December 26 press statement by Krantipriya, spokesperson for the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Naxalbari.
A court in Raipur (Chhattisgarh) has convicted comrade Asit Kumar Sengupta on two charges including sedition and sentenced him to three and eight years imprisonment. This comes after the three years he has already been forced to be in jail after being arrested on trumped-up charges, denied the right of bail. He was the President of Struggle India, an all-India forum of struggling mass organizations, at the time of his arrest. Comrade Asit was active in the publishing and propagation of Maoist literature through Poorvaiya Publications. He had been legally responsible for the publication of the English-language edition of the revolutionary internationalist journal A World To Win. All of these activities were perfectly legal, registered activities. Not a single one of these publications were banned. Yet the court has declared that he was involved in illegal activities despite the flimsiness of the evidence paraded by the state prosecutor, including published books seized from his house, were cooked up.
Such brazen violation of justice is the truth of the legal system in India. Recently, some factions of the ruling classes have themselves been forced to express disagreement publicly through their media. This was done in relation to the life sentence given to the noted human rights activist Dr. Binayak Sen by another Raipur court on the same day as comrade Asit was convicted. Evidently, it is not concern for justice but fear that motivates them, the fear that their trumpeting of India as the largest democracy in the world will be severely exposed by such openly biased functioning of its judiciary.
The arrest and trumped-up charges against comrade Asit, Dr. Binayak Sen and many other public figures were opening moves, preparations, for the assault launched by the Indian state on the revolutionary masses, the so-called Operation Green Hunt. It was essential for the ruling classes that all public protest, all people who could give voice openly against this inhuman war of the Indian state against the people, are silenced. But despite the killings, rapes, arrests, torture, intimidation and detentions of many, the opposition to Operation Green Hunt has only strengthened. The polarization of pro-people forces against the reactionaries has deepened. The people's war led by the CPI (Maoist) and the preparations of other Maoist parties to open new fronts forges on. The people will triumph!
A World to Win News Service is put out by A World to Win magazine (aworldtowin.org), a political and theoretical review inspired by the formation of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, the embryonic center of the world's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties and organizations.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/avakian/principles/index.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Revolutionary Strategy
At every point, we must be searching out the key concentrations of social contradictions and the methods and forms which can strengthen the political consciousness of the masses, as well as their fighting capacity and organization in carrying out political resistance against the crimes of this system; which can increasingly bring the necessity, and the possibility, of a radically different world to life for growing numbers of people; and which can strengthen the understanding and determination of the advanced, revolutionary-minded masses in particular to take up our strategic objectives not merely as far-off and essentially abstract goals (or ideals) but as things to be actively striven for and built toward.
The objective and orientation must be to carry out work which, together with the development of the objective situation, can transform the political terrain, so that the legitimacy of the established order, and the right and ability of the ruling class to rule, is called into question, in an acute and active sense, throughout society; so that resistance to this system becomes increasingly broad, deep and determined; so that the "pole" and the organized vanguard force of revolutionary communism is greatly strengthened; and so that, at the decisive time, this advanced force is able to lead the struggle of millions, and tens of millions, to make revolution.
Fight the power, and transform the people, for revolution. |
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/208/read_spread-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
We have a strategy—and our newspaper is, as "The Revolution We Need... The Leadership We Have" statement says, "the foundation, guideline, and organizational scaffolding for [the] whole process" of carrying out that strategy. This is the paper that cuts to the bone to tell you WHY things are happening... to show you HOW it doesn't have to be this way... and to give you the ways to ACT to change it. It is a call to action and a means of struggle. It is, and has to be much more, the scaffolding on which this movement is built, where those who are getting into it and following it can wrangle in its pages and on its website with how we can better build this movement. It is a guideline where today thousands, but soon tens of thousands and eventually millions, all over the place, stay connected and learn to act in a powerful and united way. It is the foundation where those who read it learn about the larger goals of revolution and communism and come to see the ways in which the struggles of today are connected to those larger goals... where they come to grasp the scientific communist outlook through its application to all the many particular events and outrages and developments in society... and where they get organizationally linked up to this revolution.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/208/sustain-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
Revolution newspaper is the foundation, guideline, and organizational scaffolding for the movement we are building for revolution. Stop and think about it—how essential is that?! But the reality is that this newspaper will not fill this need without more people becoming regular monthly sustainers. Sign up yourself to contribute regularly. And then, wherever you are—at a protest, a concert, selling Revolution, at FaceBook... or just hanging out—struggle with people, including people you just met, to sustain Revolution regularly. Once a week, check yourself: How is this going? How many new sustainers did you sign up?
To sustain Revolution: click the "Sustain/Donate" link at revcom.us or send a regular amount at the beginning of each month to RCP Publications, P.O. Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/196/communist_revolution-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
It is this system that has got us in the situation we're in today, and keeps us there. And it is through revolution to get rid of this system that we ourselves can bring a much better system into being. The ultimate goal of this revolution is communism: A world where people work and struggle together for the common good...Where everyone contributes whatever they can to society and gets back what they need to live a life worthy of human beings...Where there are no more divisions among people in which some rule over and oppress others, robbing them not only of the means to a decent life but also of knowledge and a means for really understanding, and acting to change, the world.
This revolution is both necessary and possible.
Permalink: http://www.revcom.us/a/196/bob_avakian-en.html
Revolution #222, January 16, 2011
| Current Issue | Previous Issues | Bob Avakian | RCP | Topics | Contact Us |
In Bob Avakian, the Chairman of our Party, we have the kind of rare and precious leader who does not come along very often. A leader who has given his heart, and all his knowledge, skills and abilities to serving the cause of revolution and the emancipation of humanity. Bob Avakian came alive as a revolutionary in the 1960s—taking part in the great movements of those days, and especially working and struggling closely with the most advanced revolutionary force in the U.S. at that time, the Black Panther Party. Since then, and while many others have given up, Bob Avakian has worked and struggled tirelessly to find the way to go forward, having learned crucial lessons and built lasting organization that could continue the struggle, and aim to take it higher, while uniting with the same struggle throughout the world. He has kept on developing the theory and strategy for making revolution. He played the key role in founding our Party in 1975, and since then he has continued the battle to keep the Party on the revolutionary road, to carry out work with a strong revolutionary orientation. He has deeply studied the experience of revolution—the shortcomings as well as the great achievements—and many different fields of human endeavor, through history and throughout the world—and he has brought the science and method of revolution to a whole new level, so that we can not only fight but really fight to win. Bob Avakian has developed the scientific theory and strategic orientation for how to actually make the kind of revolution we need, and he is leading our Party as an advanced force of this revolution. He is a great champion and a great resource for people here, and indeed people all over the world. The possibility for revolution, right here, and for the advance of the revolution everywhere, is greatly heightened because of Bob Avakian and the leadership he is providing. And it is up to us to get with this leadership...to find out more about Bob Avakian and the Party he heads...to learn from his scientific method and approach to changing the world...to build this revolutionary movement with our Party at the core...to defend this leadership as the precious thing it is...and, at the same time, to bring our own experience and understanding to help strengthen the process of revolution and enable the leadership we have to keep on learning more and leading even better.