<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
David McReynolds of UFPJ recently wrote a piece for a symposium on
Syria, including this:<br>
<br>
<blockquote><font size="4"><font face="georgia,serif"><font
face="verdana,sans-serif">"Most of all I don't think there
is anything the left can or should do except profoundly and
totally oppose any military aid to the rebels, and give all
possible support to negotiations."<br>
<br>
</font></font></font></blockquote>
His full article is below.<br>
<br>
(Also quoted for some reason on the same UFPJ thread is a bit from
the Christian Science Monitor on the resurgence of the Communist
Party in Japan - "unlike the other parties, they were always
anti-nuclear" and "“It’s
healthy for the political development of the country that there is a
party that is at least clear in what they say, whether you agree
with
their positions or not.”" - so that's included below too. (The one
time I visited Japan, in 2001, I happened on a candidate speaking to
a lively political rally. I understood nothing but took a
picture. A Japanese friend later explained: it had been a JCP
rally.))<font size="4"><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><font
size="4"><br>
<br>
</font></font></font>
<div class="moz-forward-container">-------- Original Message
--------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [ufpj-activist] Syria piece</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Tue, 6 Aug 2013 22:11:57 -0400</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>David McReynolds <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davidmcreynolds7@gmail.com"><davidmcreynolds7@gmail.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">To: </th>
<td>Joanne Landy <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jlandy@igc.org"><jlandy@igc.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">CC: </th>
<td>Bruce Cronin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bcronin60@gmail.com"><bcronin60@gmail.com></a>, ufpj-activist
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ufpj-activist@lists.mayfirst.org"><ufpj-activist@lists.mayfirst.org></a>, 'CCDS Members'
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:members@lists.cc-ds.org"><members@lists.cc-ds.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<font size="4">And here it is - sending it also to my EdgeLeft
list. I look forward to the issue.<br>
<br>
<font face="georgia,serif">Friends, Joanne Landy, of New
Politics, is running a symposium on Syria and asked for my
comments, They follow.<br>
<br>
<font face="verdana,sans-serif"><b>Syria: what is to be done?</b><br>
<br>
We know that the war in Syria - which is a civil war, not a
revolution - is profoundly tragic, with over 100,000 dead,
with tens upon tens of thousands of people fleeing into
neighboring countries. I'm baffled that the left seems in
confusion. I know there are some on what might be called the
"hard left" (I'd be inclined to call it the thick headed
left) who see Assad and his regime to be socialists under
assault, including, by one recent statement, by Israel. (I
have no idea what Israel will do - its foreign policy is
brutal and clumsy but not usually insane - I doubt very much
the Israeli generals, much as they may hate Assad, want to
risk trading a relatively peaceful border for one under the
control of extreme Islamists). And I'm aware that another
part of the left seems to feel that we must intervene (a
small segment of the left, but one we heard from on Libya as
well).<br>
<br>
At least I know how little I know about Israel. I have never
been there, nor made a study of it. (Unlike Libya, about
which I did know something, and where I think US/NATO policy
was dishonest). I know Assad has run a brutal regime. I also
know that he does have some genuine popular support (my
source for this is the New York Times). And I know that at
this time, the rebels are in retreat and Assad is gaining
the upper hand in a military sense. It may well be that
Syria cannot be "put back together", that a Rubicon has been
crossed in terms of bloodshed. I know there are deep
religious divisions in Syria (not, I think, the cause of the
trouble, but, once the trouble begins, then, as with Iraq,
they take on a terrible life of their own).<br>
<br>
Most of all I don't think there is anything the left can or
should do except profoundly and totally oppose any military
aid to the rebels, and give all possible support to
negotiations. Some things to keep in mind. Lebanon had a
similarly bloody civil war which continued until it finally
simply ran out of steam. The US had a civil war which,
considering how small our population was, took a terrible
toll. More Americans lost their lives in our civil war than
were lost in the Spanish American War, World War I, World
War II, and the Korean War <u>all put together!!!<br>
<br>
</u>We do know (even if, as with me, we don't know much)
that there were some decent, secular, democratic forces
involved in the original uprising against Assad. We can seek
to maintain contact with them, even as we categorically
refuse to send military aid, either overtly or covertly.
(Here, as so often, I would urge those who feel we need to
send military aid to find a way to go there and join the
fight - I'm sure the rebels would rejoice in a few English
speaking radicals willing to carry guns, and I'd suggest
that those in the hard left who think Assad must be defended
to take similar action - put their bodies where their
slogans are).<br>
<br>
I'm disturbed by the shallow level of some of the
discussion. We have heard of possible use of poison gas by
Assad - though of late that charge seems to have lost steam.
For Americans to raise the question of chemical war is in
poor taste, since we were teachers in this area, not only
with tear gas, but with the enriched uranium littering the
battle fields of Iraq, and the terrible toll agent orange
took of the Vietnamese (and of Americans serving in that
war).<br>
It is in particularly poor taste for the Americans to raise
this, given the "covert" role we played in helping Saddam
use poison gas against the Kurds and the Iranians.<br>
<br>
And speaking of Saddam, and bloodshed, and the need to
intervene for "humanitarian reasons" in Syria, I do not
remember <u><b>one word</b></u> from the White House during
the terrible war Iraq launched against Iran and which took
the lives of a half million young men <u><b>on each side</b></u>
over the course of that war. On the contrary, the US was
delighted to see Iran under military attack.<br>
<br>
As a pacifist I would not fight in this or any war - some
would say a cheap way out. But I can distinguish between and
among wars. If ever there was a just war, it was that of the
Vietnamese people against the US, and if ever there might
have been reason for a Security Council decision to
establish a no-fly zone, it would have been there, against
the US. I think all of us who are now old would say the
Spanish Civil War was also a just war, and we salute those
who fought there in defense of the Republic. We can say, of
the Israeli attacks on Gaza and on Lebanon, that while they
were not attacking secular, democratic forces, they were
engaged in barbaric attacks on civilian populations, and
involved the use of white phosphorus. I'll take the
"humanitarians" in the State Department seriously when they
speak out in defense of the Palestinians.<br>
<br>
But most of all - granting how terrible this war is, and how
unjust it is for its impact on the civilians - have we not
learned by now that one cannot count on an imperial power to
act with democratic and humanitarian concerns? Have we
forgotten how, in Indochina, the US sold out the Viet Minh,
with whom we had been working, and turned that area back
over to the colonial control of France?<br>
<br>
No military aid to the rebels. A curse on all who send in
weapons, whether Russia, Iran, or Hezbollah or, as some seem
to forget, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States which have been
so eager to fund the rebels but are totally opposed to
democratic and secular movements in their own territory.
What has happened to that part of the left which seems to
think the US has a positive role to play in these areas?<br>
<br>
Let me close by noting of the voices in the State Department
for some form of humanitarian "aid" that they represent an
armed and oppressive state which invaded Iraq without
reason, has laid waste to Afghanistan and has given Israel
unconditional support. They have lost the right to speak in
moral terms. Silence would become them very well. Or, at the
least, serious work with Russia for an international
conference to bring the warring parties to the table.<br>
<br>
- 30 -<br>
<br>
</font></font></font>[...]<br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<dl>
<dd>
<blockquote type="cite"><dd>
<dl>
<dd>
<blockquote type="cite"><dd>On Mon, Aug 5,
2013 at 12:31 PM, Rick Kissell
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rick@kissell.org"
target="_blank">rick@kissell.org</a>>
wrote:
<dl>
<dd>Communist Party makes a comeback
... in Japan
</dd>
<dd>by Gavin Blair </dd>
<dd>The Christian Science Monitor </dd>
<dd>8/5/13
</dd>
<dd>A smiling, smartly attired
30-year-old woman sits at an
expansive
table in a meeting room decorated
with simple elegance on the fourth
floor of a modern office building
in central Tokyo. </dd>
<dd>Only the sunflower broach – an
anti-nuclear symbol – on the
woman’s
suit, and perhaps that the large
calligraphy scroll on the wall
behind
her that isn’t hung perfectly
straight, betray the fact that
this isn’t a
scene from corporate Japan.
Yoshiko Kira doesn’t look like she
intends to
dismantle capitalism, but this is
the headquarters of the Japanese
Communist Party (JCP), and she is
one of its rising stars, and
that’s her
plan. </dd>
<dd>When Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's
Liberal Democratic Party cemented
its grip on power with a victory
in the upper house elections on
July 21,
the unlikely other winners were
the Communists. Ms. Kira was one
of the
party’s newly elected lawmakers
who saw the JCP raise its
representation
in the House of Councilors from
six seats to 11, giving it a large
enough
bloc to propose legislation. She
was the first Communist to win in
the
five-seat Tokyo constituency in 12
years, while another young JCP
candidate won in Osaka, the
party’s first victory there in 15
years.
Overall, the Communists came in
second to the ruling party in
terms of
votes collected in Japan’s two
giant metropolises. </dd>
<dd>How? Part of the reason has to
do with the deterioration of the
main political parties. </dd>
<dd>DISARRAY </dd>
<dd>What had been the main
opposition, the left-of-center
Democratic
Party of Japan – which spent three
years in government until its
defeat
in December's general election –
is in almost utter disarray. </dd>
<dd>Two of the founding members have
left the party, while the third,
Naoto Kan – the prime minister at
the time of the 2011 earthquake,
tsunami, and nuclear disasters –
has just been suspended from the
party
for three months after supporting
an independent candidate in the
recent
election. Some voters appeared to
have seen the Communists as the
only
party able to counterbalance
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/0926/Would-Japanese-nationalist-Abe-s-return-to-premiership-fuel-row-with-China"
target="_blank">
the nationalism of the Abe
administration</a> and its talk
of amending
Japan’s pacifist Constitution. </dd>
<dd>Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso
caused consternation in some
quarters
this week when he appeared to
suggest, during a speech to a
conservative
think tank, that the current
controversy around the
constitution could
have been avoided if Japan had
changed it in secret, as was done
in Nazi
Germany. </dd>
<dd>“When I was a child there were a
lot of books in my house with
pictures of the war and the atomic
bombing. I used to worry that
planes
flying overhead might be carrying
bombs. Then one day my mother told
me
that Japan can’t have wars anymore
because of the Constitution, and I
thought I was lucky to be born in
this country,” Kira says. “But now
the
Abe government wants to change the
Constitution so that Japan can
start
wars again.” </dd>
<dd>“It’s not just about war. When I
was looking for work I applied to
a
large number of companies, and was
told during interviews that hiring
a
woman was a risk. I realized there
were many things about Japanese
society that need changing,” says
Kira. </dd>
<dd>ONLINE MASCOT CHARACTERS </dd>
<dd>Founded in 1922, the JCP is the
oldest political party in Japan,
and
has enjoyed constant
representation in parliament for
longer than any
other. But until recently, its
image was one of older activists
and it
struggled to attract younger
voters. </dd>
<dd>July's elections were the first
in Japan where online campaigning
was
permitted, and it was the JCP that
is widely seen as having made best
use
of it. As well as savvy leveraging
of social networks and video
streaming
platforms, the party created a
series of online mascot characters
that
addressed individual issues such
as the planned consumption tax
hike,
shady business practices, the
heavy US military presence on
Okinawa, and
constitutional change. </dd>
<dd>“We were able to use the Net to
reach out to younger people, many
of
whom don’t read newspapers or
watch TV much. Through the
characters, we
could communicate issues simply
and appeal to young voters,” says
party
spokesperson Toshio Ueki, who
reports that the characters’
webpages got
1.5 million hits in the weeks
before the poll. </dd>
<dd>While the party has embraced new
technology in its campaigning, it
can still lay claim to a
consistency in both policy and
personnel that
sets it apart from other parties
in Japan. Kazuo Shii has led the
party
since 2000, during which time
Japan has seen nine different
prime
ministers. And while some
politicians have turned
anti-nuclear since the
accident at Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear power plant, the JCP was
always
against nuclear power. </dd>
<dd>'REFRESHING' </dd>
<dd>“One of the appeals of the
Communists has been the clarity
and
consistency in their pledges;
people find it refreshing,”
suggests
Takashi Inoguchi, professor
emeritus at the University of
Tokyo. “It’s
healthy for the political
development of the country that
there is a
party that is at least clear in
what they say, whether you agree
with
their positions or not.” </dd>
<dd>Although Japan is not yet on the
road to a workers’ paradise,
having
struck a chord with the
electorate, the JCP may now have
the opportunity
to establish itself as the most
cohesive opposition to the current
government. </dd>
<dd>“If we did take power, the JCP
wouldn’t try to implement a
Communist
economy immediately. It would
require huge changes and we would
seek the
support of the people for each
step,” Kira says. “And we would
want to
use the best parts of the current
economic system, too.”<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</dd>
<dd>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://news.yahoo.com/communist-party-makes-comeback-japan-134436281.html"
target="_blank">
http://news.yahoo.com/communist-party-makes-comeback-japan-134436281.html</a>
<br>
<br>
</dd>
</dl>
</dd>
</blockquote>
</dd>
</dl>
</dd>
</blockquote>
</dd>
</dl>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>