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.

South Dakota Victory

I'm writing in response to Paul Cienfuegos' uplifting article in a recent issue of Eat the State!

Speaking of the fight against corporate farms, Paul says: "...the people of South Dakota went to the polls attempting to pass a similar Constitutional Amendment. (I don't yet know the outcome of the vote.)"

For the record, South Dakota voters did approve the amendment. It seems the only time South Dakota passes any progressive legislation is when the question is put directly to the people. Go figure.

Thanks for noticing us.

--Michael Hall, Sioux Falls, SD

Against the Bombing

What's important to remember when considering the question posed to Chomsky (stand by and do nothing while all the poor people are slaughtered) is the U.S./NATO role in creating the whole fucking mess in the first place. Remember--all of us should make an attempt every single goddamn day not to forget this--there was no mass refugee crisis/ethnic cleansing until NATO started dropping bombs! (Go to www.aim.ac.yu for German Foreign Ministry documents arguing that Kosovo had calmed down this last winter, people were returning to their homes, the cities were okay, etc.) Also, U.S. and Germany have been arming the KLA from the git-go; hence, violating the U.N. arms embargo on the Balkans and destabilizing the region.

Why does engagement work with PRC but not with FRY? It was after the trade sanctions on Yugoslavia were lifted (following Dayton) that Milosevic had the roughest go of it (with the street protests in Belgrade).

Bombs haven't helped grow democracy in Belgrade, and they haven't kept Albanians (not to mention Roms, Turks, and Serbs) safe and snug in Kosovo. So any of those "peaceniks" out there who can't imagine what else to do besides bomb, put on your fucking thinking cap and figure it out.

Mike Maloney, Seattle, WA

For the Bombing

What do Richard Gere, Elie Wiesel, Vaclav Havel, and Vanessa Redgrave have in common? They all support NATO intervention in Kosovo, and none of them can be considered lacking in moral courage and remiss in terms of social/political activism.

I would like to continue to suggest that people of great moral courage believe that NATO's actions in Yugoslavia are justified, including: Sonja Biserko, Executive Director of Helisinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia; Susan Sontag, author; Vanessa Redgrave, actress; Vaclav Havel, Nobel Prize winner & president, Czech Republic; Elie Wiesel, Nobel Prize winner for peace, author, and Holocaust survivor; Richard Gere, founder, Tibet House; Daniel Goldhagen, academic and author of Hitler's Willing Executioners.

They are not fascists, I believe.

I would like to see an open forum within the Progressive Community of the U.S. that allows for divergent points of view with regard to the Kosovo conflict.

It would be wonderful if ETS!, Seattle Weekly, and others could offer just such a debate rather than present just one side of the picture ... that, I believe, would be far more anti-authoritarian than ETS! presumes to be: part of the left community, after all, believes that "the fundamental cause of the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo are the human rights abuses committed by Yugoslav forces against the civil population" (Peter Bouckaert, Human Rights Watch).

Thank you. These people are not fascists and have pretty good human consciences.

--Denny Chiu, via e-mail

The "A" Word

Although I often find myself at odds with ETS!, I value the existence of a grassroots political paper, and I don't want ETS! to go away.

What I would like to go away is Maria's authoritarian use of her position. Her treatment of letter writers (along with her general approach to politics) is not "edgy" as Geov describes it. It is dehumanizing, alienating, and destructive. It is also a misuse of community-created power.

ETS! exists through the labor and money of a lot of people. It therefore belongs to the community that supports it and is most affected by it. Editors of such a community paper should facilitate community power and activism. The position should never be used to vent, scapegoat, exercise power over others, or humiliate ordinary individuals.

Positions of power in a community need to be earned. I support Michael Gross's withdrawal of support in what I interpret to be his demand for accountability. Unfortunately, accountability at ETS! seems to be nowhere in sight. Maria merely responded to Michael's objection with a somewhat indirect counter-charge of sexism.

Sexism is a huge problem on the left and, in fact, appears quite frequently at ETS!--at the discretion of the first- and last-word editors. I resent Maria's manipulative use of the charge. Various readers' mistrust of the facts she presents may or may not be based on sexism, but that issue is entirely separate from community concerns about an editor's abuse of other people. Maria clumps both issues together to avoid accountability for the latter.

Is withdrawal of support the only way to hold ETS! editors accountable? Geov says ETS! is not a monolith. Yet all editorial decisions are made by two people, one of whom seems to have little concern for how grassroots community works. What system of checks and balance exist in this situation? Gradual withdrawal of support is the extent of it, as far as I can see.

Unfortunately, by the time ETS! editors notice the impact of such a response, it would be too late altogether for accountability, because the necessary support for the paper's existence would no longer be there. And the community would be out another publication that it helped create.

Sincerely,

--Adriene Sere, via e-mail

And, Adriene, I wasn't aware that you've been to any ETS! meetings, talked to me on the phone, sent me e-mail or otherwise had a chance to observe how I work with the rest of the ETS! staff--or even observed how an issue of ETS! comes together. Our readers are aware that we need help, and many of them have come forward to write and volunteer for us (including provide editorial help). When just one of them turns out to have a problem, that's not the end of the world.

Take My Junk, Please

What are we going to do about this new law that says cops can search our cars when they feel like pulling us over? I'm a dumpster diver and now instead of them protecting their garbage (I've seen them sitting out there when I dig dumpsters and giving me dirty looks; they run out there when they see my car--see how these Neighborhood Watch people operate?--while they let the child molesters and woman beaters go free, but I'm really a threat to them, aren't I?). What a bunch of petty jerks. And now they have their cops watching me like I'm a criminal. I've never hurt a child, I've never hurt another person, nor animal, not even verbally if I can help it. Yet, they treat me like I'm a criminal, when all I'm doing is taking their junk that they don't want anyway. (And I don't cause any damage to their dumpster. What a bunch of petty Americans and stupid!)

--Thomas Perry, via e-mail