ACT-UP San Francisco activist leader writes to MIM Dear MIM Notes: I was quite startled to recently discover that the May Day issue of MIM Notes declared a "victory" regarding price reductions of AIDS Drugs for Africa (MIM Notes 233, May 1, 2001, "AIDS Drugs for Africa: International proletariat gains partial victory"). Despite some minor philosophical differences, I am in solidarity with the Maoist International Movement's mission and tactics to "end oppression of all groups over other groups." I find it odd, however, that in the war against capitalism's global stranglehold over populations and resources, MIM chooses simply to repeat what the corporate controlled AIDS industry spews out about illnesses related to immune deficiency. Your article on the price reductions and U.S. exportation of experimental and highly dangerous AIDS drugs to Africa was merely a rehash of the disinformation promulgated by the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian and drug company financed groups like the Treatment Action Campaign and ACT UP New York. Most egregious of all, in order to justify the unloading of toxic pharmaceuticals on impoverished people, you repeat alarmist United Nations "AIDS statistics" based on the faulty HIV antibody test to reinforce the notion that some new viral apocalypse has gripped the world. The fact is that the international proletariat is a victim of the West's greed and its rape of the world's resources. People are immune deficient and dying not because of some retrovirus proclaimed "the probable cause of AIDS" by the American rapist but because of the manifestations of poverty -- malnutrition, unsanitary living conditions, homelessness, recreational and pharmaceutical drug abuse, internecine wars, and crushing debt caused by IMF and World Bank structural relief programs. The world needs real solutions to these symptoms of Western imperialism not coffers of profitable pills. HIV is junk science. It is the medicalization of poverty for profit. Its incessant promotion is irrational and intended to divide us and provoke anxiety and human distrust. Anti-HIV drugs are poison and the groups that push them have been corrupted by the financial influence of the pharmaceutical industry. This sorry state of affairs renders any price reductions by Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb or GlaxoSmithKline as nothing more than a shallow publicity stunt to make a quick buck before the lid is blown off the AID$ virus lie. As a longtime survivor of a bogus HIV-positive diagnosis who thrives without the use of deadly anti-HIV drugs, I can assure you that MIM's exploitation of the vicious American AIDS fraud to further its political agenda is no victory worth celebrating. David Pasquarelli ACT UP San Francisco 1884 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94102 www.actupsf.com Phone: (415) 864- 6686 Fax: (415) 864-6687 MC5 replies for MIM Notes: David Pasquarelli is a dedicated activist, the type of which MIM seeks to ally with and have join the party. Nonetheless, we have some disagreements. There is obviously also some disagreement among ACT-UP members. ACT-UP DC has waged a campaign for Africa for what ACT-UP San Francisco Pasquarelli calls "toxic drugs." MIM mentioned this campaign and did so in a way that the New York Times would not. In any case, the Chinese Revolution was also reported in the New York Times, so in itself this criterion of rejecting anything in the New York Times while tempting is not the criterion of truth. While Pasquarelli has rejected the choice of monopoly capitalist pharmaceutical drugs for HIV, he does have that choice as do citizens of imperialist countries generally. For people averaging $100 a year in income, the choice is not there. Hence, the type of victory MIM described is important. Of course we agree with Pasquarelli that the monopoly capitalist companies medicalize poverty for profit. Yet MIM does prioritize serving humyn needs, so if that is how profit is made, then MIM will struggle for it in the current capitalist context. When we get to power, matters will be different. The inferior capitalist methods used to approach health and science questions will be gone. We agree with Paquarelli that monopoly capital has tainted science itself and has caused the masses to distrust science. Central to correcting the course of science will be recognizing that the resources to go to it must come with an agenda. The resources for science have an agenda under capitalism-- profit and career. Under the Maoist dictatorship of the proletariat informed by the Cultural Revolution's experience, public interests and communist ideology will come first instead. Nonetheless, we do not find Pasquarelli's assertions about the drugs to be backed by sufficient evidence. The fact that one individual or even 5%, 10% or 25% of all individuals have the HIV virus (or get so labeled) and then do not ever develop AIDS is not proof of a political or medical statement about groups of people with the HIV virus. The tobacco industry hid for decades behind the fact that not everyone who smoked got lung cancer; even though cigarettes definitely do cause cancer in general and more often per persyn than not using cigarettes. Using persynal HIV status as some kind of badge is akin to the tobacco industry's strategy. That being said, we are sure that Pasquarelli has much more to say. We look forward to receiving further literature on this subject and thank him for his letter. On our behalf, I will take the initiative to review the ACT-UP San Francisco site for MIM Notes. Discussion of "cracker" continues Dear MIM: In MIM Notes #233, May 1, 2001 it says, "It is a sad fact that nothing in humyn nature prevents gutter-level white supremacy, but there is nothing natural or permanent about imperialism as a system." Shouldn't we make a statement more general and include ANY arrogant feeling of ANY race or nation toward others? ANY race or nation which has more access to power to technology possibly could have a tendency to exhibit such feelings and attitudes, not only the vague "white" race. The term "crackers" is good enough for the United States only, because as mim3 says, it is already used by oppressed people. However, here [in MIM Notes] by "oppressed people" is meant only a very specific group -- Blacks in the United States. Aren't there any more oppressed people even in this country, leave alone the rest of the world? Have there ever been? Isn't the term too narrow to express the feelings of all oppressed people? To include everybody who is guilty of oppression? And it is too wide at the same time so it casts guilt on those who are totally innocent? MIM has to realize that people oppressed by U.$. imperialism are not always "colored", even in this country, and vice versa. Examples of non-whites oppressing whites, or whites oppressing whites are abundant around the world and throughout history. It is not politically correct to draw a color line, even if the majority of oppressed are non-whites right now. As we all well know, particular circumstances change very quickly, but theory stays. Those who read MIM theory one hundred years later may accuse MIM of violation of one of the basic principles of communism -- internationalism. Without it, communism is just an empty sound. Without it, we will have privileged and preferred nations and races again and again. It's not true that "the end justifies the means." It's not true communism to encourage nationalistic feelings in any form and for any purpose. Moreover, internationalism is the most efficient way to fight imperialism even in the given situation. People have to come to communist ideas because of positive, not negative reasons. They have to be taught many things. --Reader from the Caucusus April, 2001 mim3@mim.org replies for MIM: Karl Marx said that even a portion of the bourgeoisie would join the revolution for socialism, especially at the last minute. However, if we are to speak of groups, we cannot speak of the minority as characterizing the whole group. The majority of the bourgeoisie will not join the revolution and the majority of whites in the world are both bourgeoisie and oppressor nation. As for the role of nationalism, the reader needs to read more Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. They definitely held that nationalism could play a progressive role in some contexts in history. As Mao said, the nationalism of imperialist- country people is reactionary, but the nationalism of the oppressed is applied internationalism. There are First Nation terms, Black terms and Latin American terms all meaning roughly the same thing -- "cracker." Sometimes we use one term, sometimes we use another. It is best to speak in the concrete language of the people. Reader from the Caucusus responds: It's human to err. Even Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao could make a mistake. Unfortunately, in practice, any kind of nationalism proved to be the most inefficient, backward and ugly thing, which could entail only very negative circumstances. There is no such thing as "progressive nationalism". Yes, the national card could be played by world powers when they want to reach certain goals. But even if the goal is progressive, as I said, "the end doesn't justify the means." It's one thing to theorize about nationalism in quite academic environment, however, in practice, nothing could be worse. History proved it. mim3@mim.org replies: You have the wrong party to argue with. There are countless Trotskyist parties and one neo- Maoist party called the "Progressive Labor Party," which agree with you and not surprisingly, they all believe the white workers are exploited too. The economic content of oppressed nationhood is usually super-exploitation, so if you do not see the economic and class realities of this world, it is not surprising that you do not agree with MIM on the national question either. As for "the ends justifies the means," MIM already rebutted the criticism of the violence of the oppressed in the same issue, MIM Notes, May 1, 2001. Reader from the Caucusus responds: MIM, please don't switch the topic. We are talking about principle, not about "economic and class realities of this world." As I said, "economic and class realities" are likely to change, but the world will remember forever, that MIM called itself communist party and defended racism. Yes, racism, just another kind of it. Also, it's not politically correct to accuse another party of Trotskyism or anything like that when there is no scientific argument. mim3@mim.org replies: The first two sentences of this last reply are a perfect definition of idealism. There is nothing "forever" in Marxism, especially in connection to class analysis. As for accusing another party of Trotskyism, in the Caucusus this would be terrible, but here in the United $tates there are several parties calling themselves "Trotskyist" quite proudly. The reader may be unaware of the substance of Trotskyism, but it remains true that those who attack MIM on these questions belong in Trotskyist parties. [MIM refers the reader to the "What's Your Line" section and other bits of the web page in order to find out about proud Trotskyists.] Oppressed Peoples' Party signs DuBois statement ITAL A comrade and leader of the Oppressed Peoples' Party recently requested that h name be added to the signatories of MIM's statement commemorating W.E.B. DuBois' birthday. S/he also included the following comments with his letter. END As a student of history, and as a comrade who practices and has a proclivity for nationalism, as well as socialism and communism and the premise of self-determination, I was deeply disturbed when I read MN #231, where on page 8 "Reader Criticizes Du Bois, Praises Garvey." The comrade [a letter writer, not a member of MIM] misrepresented the honorable Dr. Du Bois when he called him (Du Bois) a hypocrite. Dr. Du Bois was never a hypocrite! The comrade does not seem to understand the meaning of hypocrite and/or s/he is using this term hypocrite too loosely; or, this comrade does not seem to understand everyone goes through changes and develops and matures. Some comrades are nominal socialists. They become socialist only because it's antithetical to capitalism; and they never use scientific proof to base their perceptions on. That's why struggle, agitation, education, and mobilization are foreign to many comrades. Exactly what is "too late" to become socialist - as this comrade espouses? No one is born socialist, just as no one is born capitalist, nor racist, etc. It's a learned/acquired trait. So, Dr. DuBois became socialist at the correct time. He became socialist when his intellect and reasoning dictated to him, not because all else had failed. Also, for the comrade, there really is no comparison to Dr. DuBois and the Honorable Marcus Mosiah Garvey. I'm saying this from a rational, objective standpoint -- I follow the teachings of the Hon. M.M. Garvey. Their social backgrounds were completely different. Their life experiences necessitated them being different. Also, their educational background is a factor, as well as their exposure to the world. Dr. DuBois is a product of Amerikka. Not only did he excel in their society, but he also saw some things as "normal." He felt a person must be euro-educated to lead the Negroes (his nomenclature at the time) in a euro-dominated world. ... Also, it was purely visionary to perceive Africans for Africa, as the Honorable M.M.Garvey said; but his humble birth in Jamaica -- as a protectorate of Britain, and his travels into Latin Amerikka, thus his "exposure" to the vices of the euro settler brought him into "consciousness" early. However, this can not be held as a blemish on Dr. Du Bois. Normally, people of academia/intelligentsia take longer to see reality; but it is not a sign of hypocrisy. Instead of the normal and/or concept, let's try [to admit that] the Honorable Marcus M. Garvey should be honored in addition to Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois. This society is not monolithic, and one of us has no right to criticize one of our Giants. We have not made enough waves in the water to compare to or criticize Dr. DuBois, especially to the point of labeling him a hypocrite. Also, and lastly, MC5 pointed out that Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois did something which we all need to do regularly and frequently: He [Du Bois] performed self- analysis. What more to prove his genius status and his whole-hearted acceptance of socialism/communism. Look where he died; in self-imposed exile in Ghana. How many of us are prepared to do the same? Even our communities don't accept us, because we are condescending and dogmatic to the people. The MIM Notes are great and informing. I've stopped calling MN a great "alternative" to the bourgeois news. I look forward to hearing from you, and continuing to read MN, as well as seeing more points/events (agitation) we can work closely on. Be sure to include O.P.P. on the list of supporters. MIM adds: Du Bois clearly did make some mistakes during his lifetime, for example his endorsement of Amerika's involvement in World War I, which Garvey criticized him for. However, he was always re-assessing his ideas and actions based on his desire to liberate the world's oppressed, and eventually he did publicly adopt Marxism-Leninism. Still, long before this, he had a better grasp on the principal contradiction in the world -- imperialism vs. the oppressed nations -- than many self-rpoclaimed Marxists. This is one of the reasons why MIM called for anti-imperialists and communists to honor Du Bois birthday.