[Marxism] Re: Nuclear power

Tom O'Lincoln suarsos at alphalink.com.au
Fri Jan 13 17:23:07 MST 2006


David W writes:
"The fact is that historically the main reason for opposing nukes was
chance of a meltdown. That 'chance' has now been so far reduced, "

In Australia the issues were and are posed differently. There are no
nuclear power plants here, and I suspect it's because of the strength of
the anti-nuclear movement in the late seventies, when railways unionists
refused to transport sulfur to the Mary Kathleen mine, maritime workers
took strike action in support of anti-nuclear demonstrators, metal shops
refused to work on equipment for uranium mines, and the Australian
Council of Trade Union passed resolutions calling on unions to oppose
uranium mining generally.

The argument here centres on uranium mining, which is still restricted,
again because of the earlier campaigns. The nuclear industry, seeing a
likely increase in demand, is now trying to get rid of those
restrictions. They're also arguing the merits of nuclear power, but I
don't think they seriously expect to build power stations here (the
Australian public is aware enough to immediately ask where the waste
would go) -- it's more about legitimising export of uranium to be used
elsewhere.

Because it's about mining, there is an important link between
anti-nuclear campaigning and Aboriginal land rights. Mining companies
are some of the worst enemies of our indigenous people. So frankly I
think it very unlikely David will convince any Australian leftists to
change their anti-nuclear views.





More information about the Marxism mailing list