Views in brief

Which side are they on?

MANY THANKS to Todd Chretien for his article on "Taking sides about Libya" regarding the positions of the Workers World Party (WWP) and Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL)--or is that Party for Socialism NOT Liberation? The latter name seems to better describe their opposition to revolution in Iran and elsewhere.

The goal of imperial powers is to limit the scope of the revolutionary wave we see spreading across North Africa and into the Middle East. The sooner they can contain the revolution, the better the chance of restoring exploitation of labor and resources in the region.

Internationalists understand that the victory of the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia depend on the outcome of the revolution in Libya. This is why progressives in the Arab world have supported the movement to topple Qaddafi: The fate of Arab workers are inextricably linked together, as well as linked with the fate of the workers of the world. By not embracing the revolution in Libya, WWP and PSL undermine their support for the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia. It is the same revolution.
John Osmand, Los Angeles

Was it right to leave?

IN RESPONSE to Elizabeth Wrigley-Field's "Lessons of the Capitol struggle,", I was also in the Capitol that last night, March 3. I think that if we could have gotten more people inside to occupy, then that's what we should've done, but between having the 50 people that were inside stay and having the Capitol opened back up to the public, I choose the latter.

The numbers outside were beginning to dwindle because people knew they couldn't get in, and the people inside were not representative of the movement--and frankly were more concerned with living in a peaceful democratic commune than doing what was best for the movement. Half of the conversations I was involved in dealt with when the drummers should drum and for how long.

I realize that holding the Capitol was important, symbolically more than anything, but the reality of the situation was that the public was locked out, and the media were going to start portraying the movement as nothing more than a bunch of hippies sitting around playing drums and eating free pizza. If that's how it was portrayed--we were going to start losing public support.

I completely agree with everything you said about staying the Sunday before, on February 27. It's exactly what I was rooting for while I was watching the live stream at my house (I couldn't be there, unfortunately). I'm as anxious as you seemingly are that this will end with appeasement. I want things "to get out of hand." I want a line drawn in the sand, and I want workers to know that they have the power to shut down this state if they want. A general strike would make me the happiest Marxist in Milwaukee.

So ideally, I would like the Capitol to be occupied by thousands of people around-the-clock until workers are not only heard, but realize the true extent of their power. But given the exact circumstances of that last day of occupation (basically everything that resulted from Walker's unconstitutional restrictions), I think leaving the Capitol in exchange for lifting those restrictions was the best thing for the movement.
Chad Olle, Milwaukee

Speaking up about our schools

THANKS to Brian Chidester for your excellent summary and analysis ("Why did they fire the Providence teachers?") of the local terrain of the large struggle to preserve education and social rights so crucial for the well-being of our communities. You illuminate the multiple layers of mystification involved in the classic process of privatizing profits/benefits and socializing the risk and costs of our political economy.

I'm a public educator myself (at the University of Massachusetts), and I recently relocated to Providence from California. I've been shocked at the invisibility of my own union during these times, and outraged at the silence with which actions such as that by the Providence mayor have been received by unions and the community.

The policies and political leadership in California has made public education untenable, but at least the unions, for all of their considerable flaws, were mobilized and agitating.

Thank you again for your excellent reporting.
Tryon Woods, Providence, R.I.

Solidarity in Indianapolis

I WAS at the Indiana Statehouse protest on Thursday, March 10, and I thought that Tithi Bhattacharya did a great job reporting it ("Indiana labor pushes back"). I would like to add a couple of things.

There was a significant presence of the building trades since there are a lot of us out of work right now, due to the continuing economic crisis. Solidarity also came from unions and community groups from outside of Indiana. I talked to people from Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Illinois. There were also quite a few retirees who came out in solidarity.

There were a lot of guys I talked to who had been there at the 1995 protest to defend the prevailing wage. They all were saying that they thought this protest was larger than that one. The 1995 one was estimated to be around 20,000. So this protest could actually be the largest one in Indiana's history.
Carole Ramsden, Chicago

Facts that need to be known

THANK YOU for writing the story "A portrait of transgender discrimination." It needed to be told.

My only comment is with the phrase "from people who choose to physically transition to another gender." We do not choose to transition--for many of us, the only choice that we have is if we want to live or die. As you wrote, for many trans people, the stresses build up until they are too much to bear, and they commit suicide.

Not only must we pass laws to end discrimination, but we also have to educate the public not to fear people who are different--to embrace diversity. Here in Connecticut, the unions are standing along side us in our struggle for equality and to pass a gender-inclusive anti-discrimination law.
Diana, from the Internet