alanb at SPAMelf.brisnet.org.au
Fri Oct 8 18:35:13 MDT 1999
> From: Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky
> In each case, the anti-nuclear movement may (and I am sure
> it certainly does) acquire different objective meanings. If
> I had been a NZer in the early 80s, I would have opposed
> militarism _in general_ and would have denounced the
> "liberal" propositions of _my own, nuke-less, bourgeoisie_.
In the Australian case, which was similar to the NZ one, I suspect, the
anti-nuclear movement had the meaning, first and foremost, of ending the
military alliance with the US. A moment's thought should tell you the
nature of that alliance, who its targets were in the Eighties, and who its
targets continue to be in the Nineties.
The other side of this was that campaigning against the Holy Alliance was
one of the easiest and most fruitful ways of explaining why Australia was a
member of it - that it was an imperialist state. This movement produced
socialists by the hundreds, and quite decent activists by the thousands.
It even split the Australian Labor Party, but that was just "before my
time" politically speaking.
Hell, without the anti-nuclear movement, *I* wouldn't be a Marxist.
alanb at elf.brisnet.org.au
More information about the Marxism