Our readers speak out

Scan page 15

P-9 speaker Dear editor, I was sorry to see that your May 1986 edition supported the decision to prevent Local P-9 (Hormel strikers) from speaking at the April 19 rally in San Francisco.

Your statements that the P-9 local's talk might be seen as a provocation to the AFL-CIO affi -liates and that P-9 does not have the support of the International UFCW or the AFL-CIO is curious since on page 4 of this same issue you criticize the actions of both the International (calling it "treacherous") and the AFL-CIO (who invited the same Gov. Perpich who called out the National Guard against the Hormel strikers to speak at its political action conference.)

It is also curious since other unions (you cite "dozens of unions from over 30 states" on page 1) have already publicly expressed their support for the P9 workers. This includes San Francisco unions.

I also fail to understand how the P-9 local is supposed to settle its problems within the union, as you seem to suggest it ought to, when your own paper chastises the International UFCW for its tactics against this local.

There were 20,000 or so people at the April 19 rally. Allowing the P-9 workers to state their case could have helped to increase their base of support. Surely the San Francisco AFL-CIO is not so anti-labor that it cannot bear to have workers state their case to the public and let the public decide who is correct or incorrect?

On the other hand, if the AFL-CIO is that anti-labor, then what is the logic in a socialist newspaper supporting that kind. of decision?

G. Thorpe, Sacramento, Calif.

A response Dear G. Thorpe, 1 completely agree with your interest in providing P-9 strikers a platform to publicize their struggle. My article stated that "Undoubtedly, it would have added to the April 19 rally to have a P-9 speaker."

But that is not the point. The Mobilization for Peace, Jobs and Justice organized the largest spring anti-intervention demon -stration in the United States largely because it retained its extremely broad base. The Mobi -lization leadership continues to involve the widest representation of labor unions of any coalition in the country.

Yet, most major labor offi -cials, unions, and central labor bodies supporting the demon -stration opposed scheduling a P-9 speaker for the April 19 rally. Official labor support for April 19 and any future activities would have been severely undermined had P-9 supporters in the coalition overridden their objections.

Socialist Action did, therefore, support the "tactical decision to not push the issue" to avoid making "the Mobilization the battleground for this dispute," as I stated in my article. We believe that arguing for a P-9 speaker was subordinate to the impor -tance of forging the widest possible unity in action against the U.S. war drive-particularly the U.S. war against Nicaragua.

The extent of political agree -ment in the Bay Area coalition is determined by the character of the forces leading the coalition. Under different circumstances—in the context of a resurgent labor movement—a new union leader -ship would emerge from the militant struggles against the employers. This class-struggle leadership would, in turn, inevi -tably alter the character of the united-front type coalitions.

Militant trade unionists would then be in a position to advance these action coalitions to a higher political level in the struggle against the bosses and their government. A situation such as arose around the P-9 speaker would not exist. This, however, is not the case today.—JOE RYAN Chinese TV Dear editor, In 1965, Malcolm X, the great Black revolutionary leader, com -mented on the fact that he had come across copies of The Militant newspaper in Paris and even in Africa. He said that he didn't know how they got there but that "If you put the right things in it, what you put in i will see that it gets around."

The Militant, while still existing in form, has changed drastically in content and outlook since then. In my opinion Socialist Action newspaper is the continuator of the dynamism of a Trotskyist perspective. A recent example has come to my atten -tion here in Los Angeles.

In December 1985 Socialist Action carried an article on South Africa titled "Capitalism and apartheid: The deadly connection" by Ann Robertson. A Chineselanguage television program called "Look at the World" on Channel 18 (KFTI out of the Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley area used this article as the basis for a discussion on the economic roots of racism in South Africa.

There are tens of thousands of Chinese-speaking people in Southern California, and this popular program gave a wide audience the unusual opportunity to hear our ideas in their own language.

Our ideas are getting around in unusual ways and reaching ever-more people. Keep up the good work.

Kathleen ONan, Los Angeles Chevron jobs Dear editor, Recently Chevron announced plans to reduce its workforce of 60,000 employees by 15 percent. This reduction was alleged to be the result of the drop in crude oil prices. According to Chevron, drastic cuts in operating expenses must be made in order to main -tain its "competitiveness."

However, a look at last year's available for $42. Subscribe now!

Write to 3435 Army St., CA 94110 ACI IOI profits reveals a different side to this current " oil crisis."

According to Chevron's report to its stockholders, in 1985, Chevron paid $2.40/share in dividends for 341,003,000 shares of common stock. This meager $814,000,000 paid in dividends would keep over 23,000 people employed for one year at $35,000!

The chairman of the board received total compensation of $1.25 million last year, which included $500,000 "incentive" pay. Together, the top 10 exec -utive officers in Chevron were paid a total of $6.15 million in salaries, incentives, and bonuses. Clearly, the executive officers and large shareholders do not have much reason to complain. They have enjoyed superprofits for many years. Why not let them bear the losses resulting from the capitalist cycle of overproduc -tion?

Chevron employee, Berkeley, Calif.

308,

Scan page 16

SociAList Action

----- pull-quotes -----

nternational VIEWPOINT