ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Breeding Blows

ETS!,

To Mr. Eddie Tews of Redmond: You say "population growth is very closely correlated with poverty" and "if we ever see a decline in poverty, we'll see a concommittant decline in population growth." Well, that's nice and dandy, but by the time everyone on the globe becomes as good as we Westerners at living well, there ain't gonna be resources left for anyone. (See UN data showing a population doubling in the next century to 12 billion --think you have trouble with congestion now--"you ain't seen nothing yet, b b b baby!")

Eddie, you bring up a lot of good issues, some of which I agree with (capitalism has got to go, giving up red meat would be great for the planet, building a decent public transit system in the region would be a plus).

On your analysis of the population growth issue you've got a little ways to go, though. For those interested in a good question and answer session on population growth and what we can do about it, I'd like to refer you to an excellent website of an organization I've been proudly affiliated with for the past two years called VHEMT. That the Volunteer Human Extinction Movement and their URL is http://www.vhemt.org.

For a better world,

Albert Kaufman, Seattle

Save The Slots!

Dear ETS!,

Why would you want to nuke Las Vegas or anywhere else? Even if the two men WERE white supremacists intent on terrorist attacks, one of their (supposed) intended TARGETS was Las Vegas! And what is so "plausible" about white supremacists being in Las Vegas?. White supremacists are (unfortunately) everywhere in the U.S. and the territories it occupies (Las Vegas happens to be located in the northern half of Mexico that the U.S. has been illegally occupying for 150 years). Have you ever been to Las Vegas? If you have, you would see that Las Vegas has a very diverse population. Many of the area's 1.3 million inhabitants hail from, or are descended from ancestors from around the world. So, whether it's "military grade Anthrax" dumped in the city's water supply by white supremacists, or your proverbial nuke, the result would still be the same-1.3 million dead people. Why would you ever wish THAT anywhere-even in jest? Looks like you needed to correct more than just the accuracy of your report.

--SJA, via e-mail

Semi-Oops

Geov, Maria, et al. --

In the Short Takes section of v2#25, Maria describes Netscape as "the maker of Netscape Navigator and the Java programming language." They certainly make Navigator but Sun Microsystems was responsible for creating Java. Netscape supports it (as do all other commercial browsers including, minimally, I.E.) but they aren't responsible for it.

The correction to the "nuke Las Vegas" piece was nice. Who knew the reports could have been wrong? After all, it was the FBI, and they always get their facts straight before they firebomb separatist compounds or snipe at unarmed pregnant women.

I was pleased to read Geov's mention of Patty Murray's latest award (#4 [with a bullet?] on Ken Silverstein's "10 stupidest" list). I was quite amused to see her right on the scene in the C-SPAN coverage of the Bill and Barksdale show, proudly falling asleep behind Bill [Gates] in her oh-so-photogenic red suit, proving that nothing can prevent our elected representatives from spending their time and our dollars doing whatever they damn well feel like. Mom in tennis shoes? Only if they're the latest overpriced Nikes donated and autographed by Phil Knight himself.

Regarding the "Rah Rah Rah You Fucking Assholes" headline scandal-- may I refer to it as "FuckingAssholeGate" for short?--I think you made the right decision. I still remember 1991, when you could get beaten up or even shot at for being overtly anti-war. Today's excuses for military action are so much more pathetic than Bush's were that anyone who buys into them this time around must be very seriously deluded indeed, and perhaps even more dangerous than the sheep of seven years ago. The fact that virtually none of the former "Gulf War" allies agrees with the U.S.'s posturing should give some people a clue, but unfortunately they mostly seem to be beyond grasping one.

While all the parties opposing military action should certainly be tolerant of each others' divergent viewpoints, the "Fucking Assholes" referred to are NOT in this camp. If it acts like a Fucking Asshole, and it talks like a Fucking Asshole, then it ain't a duck.

Lie under oath,

--Phil Kos, via e-mail

Ed. note: The Netscape/Java info was in a draft of the article; it was corrected for our print version, but it slipped thru (ironically) on the e-mail/web versions. We regret the error, and apologize profusely to the very diverse population of Sun Microsystems.

The Revolution Arrives!

Editor(s), ETS!,

On the masthead of ETS! are the words "a forum for anti-authoritarian political opinion, research, and humor"; in addition, the first issue of ETS states that Seattle does not have any publications that are explicitly "anti-statist" and "explicitly activist" (which was incorrect, incidentally --there was "Black Autonomy"). After a year and a half of publication, it appears to me that these principles have become muddled and nearly lost from your pages, and that ETS! is neither "anti-statist", nor a forum for those who are.

To be "anti-statist" or "anti-authoritarian" (meaning that corporations and governments are the same, in your own words in issue #1) implies a tradition that the "left" is generally unwilling to discuss or even admit exists, and will openly shun when pressed. This tradition has been written about for two centuries by many, including William Godwin, Proudon, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Rocker, Dolgoff, and (indeed!) Chomsky; these ideas have been taken up by average folks (many of your readers) to better their lives materially, and collectively defend themselves from tyrannies, left or right, public and private. This tradition had been called "anarchism," "anarcho-communism," "libertarian socialism," anarcho-syndicalism" and a myriad of other isms. What these things mean to us as average working folks is that people not only have the right, but are fully able to self organize for their own collective and individual freedom, and maintain those gains through collective decision making, while explicitly rejecting the "help" of politicians (local or otherwise), "vanguard" leftie parties, or elites to run government programs and pass laws to do it for us.

There are many examples of these kind of principles being put into action locally and on an international scale, initiated by people who are just trying to build a better world, most of whom are not leftie intellectuals. ETS! has failed to report on most of these things, other than actions that consist of people wanting new laws passed or old ones preserved. The continued focus on the machinery of statist politics, large corporate enterprises, and the old drum-beating of corporate control of media, without any analysis on what is actually being done, leaves us with nothing but a tendency to believe that nothing will be done and that we will be crushed like bugs. Give us something we can use.

Folks that have never opened a "progressive" publication know that the corporate media is full of it. What we want is a voice that will connect us with other people that are actually building real community and worker controlled institutions, and give us a blueprint on what is working and what is not. If ETS! is what it claims to be, then it will serve the needs of the readership, rather than just the political agenda of those in control of the content.

To make ETS! consistent with its principles, I would suggest the following changes: 1) That ETS! focuses its content on activities that are building real counter-structures that can survive without the control of political elites, and do not need to beg politicians for "reform," 2) ETS! should list at least monthly what businesses contribute money, as well as which political groups, and who gives money to those groups, and 3) criteria for submitting articles should be published or given to those who ask, so that those who want to contribute can be clear on what to expect. In this case, it would also be good if editors were elected, and could be recalled any time, to uphold the principles that ETS! is claiming to bring forward.

If ETS! cannot accomplish these things, then claiming to be anti-statist or anti-authoritarian is contrary to how ETS! actually operates, and places the responsibility on real anti-authoritarians to challenge your legitimacy, by publishing a paper that upholds the principles that ETS! claims to espouse.

John Persak, Seattle

Except for our chronic space shortage, it's real easy, via article or letter, to get into ETS!; letters alone are, each week, a quarter to half of text not committed to regular features. Beyond accuracy, all we've ever asked is that writing be interesting, jargonless, and relevant to a non-activist audience.

It takes a certain amount of privilege to argue that reporting on the institutions that are killing us only lends them legitimacy, or what's really needed is good theoretical dialogue. We've never been interested in that debate, not with so many things to print that aren't being reported elsewhere.

So go ahead, John, launch a zine! Analyze 200 years of philosophy! Be more "anti-authoritarian." We'd rather use the word in the sense non-dogmatists read it: giving hell to institutions that damage people. (That requires engaging them.) Some people--lots, apparently--like details missing from most media on who's doing the damaging, how, why, and what we can do. Yeah, it's reactive--but it lets folks know that other substantive opinions exist. For us, that's more important than fawning profiles of activist groups and alternative institutions, even ones we're involved in ourselves. If readers wanna get involved, it's on the back page every week.

Most of Seattle's precious few "anarchist" projects of various stripes and degrees of marginality--Black Cat, Left Bank, Books To Prisoners, CopWatch 206, Black Autonomy, Boomtown Cafe, FUCC--have been sustained by a handful of dedicated people who saw a need and filled it. The Black Panthers called it having a practical program; it works for activists, revolutionaries, even (gasp) small businesses. That's your blueprint. We do it every week; the demand has been more than we ever expected. (In fairness, plans for a "Local Heroes" column have been stalled for over a year by lack of space--we do want to give more credit and examples.)

Your other suggested changes are ludicrous. No groups or businesses have ever given money to ETS!, only individuals (saving one donor who recently scammed a large, laundered matching grant from Microsoft--hee hee.) We sure wouldn't mind some. And we're s'posed to obtain and print every donor who gives money to any group that sends a check to us? Earth to John? Electing editors? Who elects? The workers? The proletariat? Stockholders? And recalls? Do you think a weekly publication can possibly come out on time under such a structure? Or would you rather see one ripped apart over principle? How very anarchist, John. We publish by working together, not by the adversarial "dialogue" you seem to relish. Some three dozen volunteers pitch in regularly to do what's needed. Our business meetings are on first Mondays; anyone's welcome.

Judging from thousands of weekly readers, John, we're filling a need. Don't like it, go fill a different one. But please don't invite me to the Statement of Principles Manifesto meetings. I don't do them. That's why ETS! is on Week 78, not pre-debut-publication meeting #78. And spare us the "challenge your legitimacy" crap (what the hell is an illegitimate person, anyway, Mr. Real Anti-Authoritarian?) when we're out here every week making a difference, making our community a better place. Your energy is better spent proving your own value in that struggle.

P.S. As long as you're quoting us, quote fully: in our first issue, the third condition of what print publications Seattle didn't have, along with "explicitly anti-statist" and "explicitly activist," was "published frequently enough [to be visible and timely]." This, alas, excludes Black Autonomy, an outstanding paper that is published sporadically and can be very hard to find (address: 323 Broadway Ave. E. #914, 98102; send $). I did my part--last year I donated a month of my income to BA's publisher to help out. I challenge you to do the same. Talk is cheap. How 'bout it?