jmg@houxk.UUCP (12/01/83)
When I first read Don Chan's reply to my article "A Tribute to Freedom Fighters" I was amazed that someone could have come to such an erroneous misreading of my words. At first I decided to write a reply and straighten him out. Then I decided that he must be the only person on the net who could have come to such a wrong interpretation. And why should I waste my energy? I decided to let him languish in his own ignorance. But now I find that there are actually two of you out there! I should first mention that I was inspired to write this poem by hearing the brother of a man who recently died in non-violent protest over the occupation of his small country by a foreign power. The small country and its people receive no military aid from the U.S. and the occupying foreign power is a nominal ally of the U.S. I'll let you wonder who's who in this particular instance. I think this poem applies very well to Benigno Aquino and the Phillipine people or the people of Chile or the people of El Salvador or Nicaragua or the Mujahadin fighting against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. It also applies very well to those Chinese who fought in the "Boxer Rebellion". Although the original inspiration was one incident, I dedicated it to freedom fighters around the world because they all seem to be fighting the same fight. Even Ferdinand Marcos was once a freedom fighter, but as we all know "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". The best lesson in the Phillipine political situation is that government leaders, like socks, should be changed frequently otherwise they become rigid and begin to stink. I happen to think that the American Revolution was one of the greatest things that's happened to this world since the birth of Christ. I am certainly not a supporter of Ronald Reagan or Richard Nixon and I don't give my blind support to any President or government that happens to occupy the White House. The misinterpretation that was applied to my article probably stems from the misreading of "partriot" as "American patriot" and misreading "freedom fighter" as "American freedom fighter" or "American-backed freedom fighter". PLEASE DON'T INSERT EXTRA WORDS IN MY TEXT. EVERY WORD THAT'S NECESSARY IS ALREADY THERE! And please don't assume that all Americans support the policies of Ronald Reagan. His chief problem in perform the function of President seems to be that he apes the policies and procedures of Margaret Thatcher. I'm sure Ronald Reagan has a little Margaret Thatcher shrine somewhere in the White House. And I'm sure he decided to carry out the Grenada invasion to show his teacher, Margaret Thatcher, what valuable lessons he's learned from the Falklands War, like how to dump on South Americans in their own territory, just as he showed us all how good he is at applying Margaret Thatcher's austerity policies in America. Another source of chaos in American government is that many, if not the majority of people in the government today have abandoned the principles of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States. The men who fought and died to give life to America were revolutionaries in every sense of the word - a fact that seems to cause no end of embarassment to the present government leaders. And everyone who becomes a government official in either a major or minor capacity swears to "support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies - foreign and domestic". I wonder how many people really take that oath seriously when some of the major enemies of the Constitution are our "allies". Don Chan says "Countries are not separable into angels and devils." I certainly agree with you there, but just try to tell that to the New York Times or one of the major TV networks when they are gripped by Anglophilic ecstasy. I've quoted a number of English people who criticized the English government for its transgressions and I can quote you many more. As I pointed out once before my father was born a British subject and I was certainly an Anglophile in every sense of the word when I was young and naive. The point is that I am criticizing the GOVERNMENT and NOT the people, just as we know that the Russian PEOPLE are not responsible for the crimes comitted by their government. But if their people are misled into acting against us, we have to struggle against them even though they are misled. The same principle applies to any other nation that violates human rights and national sovereignty by maintaining a permanent army of occupation in another nation without being invited. For example, if Britain were to conduct an internationally supervised plebicite in Northern Ireland today, the inhabitants of four of Northern Ireland's six counties would vote the British out and another county would be questionable. Only one county, Antrim, would probably vote for British rule. The logical solution would be to let those counties go free, but don't hold your breath waiting for "Her Majesty's government" to do something logical or humane. I never regarded Canada as being British because I know the British never regarded Canada as being British no matter what SOME Union-Jack-flying diehards in Canada may think. I know that Canada chose its own flag and national anthem because it wanted to express its individuality and freedom, but sometimes I have slight misgivings when the Canadian Supreme Court refers cases to London or when SOME Canadians go into a bootlicking frenzy when a member of the British royal family pays a visit. If they really are figure- heads, why is everybody groveling in their presence as if they were absolute monarchs? I hope this clears up any confusion about my "American jingoism" a phrase I find quite hilarious since I've been called "rightist" by people on the left and "leftist" by people on the right.