Expelled for Saying What You Think?

Dear Eat the State!,

Thanks for the item (ETS "Shorts," Dec.20) about the underground paper put out by Garfield students. Their efforts are part of an honorable tradition -- one that indeed does have legal protection.

Back in 1988, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an important First Amendment ruling that school officials cannot censor publications produced by students on their own time and resources without school sponsorship. The ruling came in an ACLU case involving students at Renton's Lindbergh High who had been reprimanded for failing to let officials reviews the contents their paper, Bad Astra.

This principle has been carried into cyberspace in two ACLU cases in the past year. A federal judge in Seattle and a state judge in Olympia both ruled against public school authorities who had kicked out students for materials posted on Web sites created on the students' home computers.

Please pass on the word that the ACLU is very interested in hearing from any other students who face punishment for exercising free speech rights. To learn more about these rights, check out the booklet "The Rights of Public School Students in Washington," available online at www.aclu-wa.org.

Doug Honigm Public Education Director, American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, (206)624-2184

The Ungovernable

ETS!,

On Saturday January 20th hundreds of thousands of people will converge on Washington DC. Some to cheer mindlessly as their ruler parades in front of them, others to voice their outrage at the stealing of the presidential election, and others to beg for more band-aids to hide the wounds of capitalism. However, one group, that of revolutionary anti-authoritarians of all stripes, will gather with a different goal in mind. That of opposing, not just the fact that tweedle dee prevailed over tweedle dum, but the entire farce of representative democracy which is in fact nothing more than the dictatorship of capital.

When the call to demonstrate at the inauguration was first issued many were skeptical, saying that we should ignore it. However, we feel that doing so would mean in a sense granting legitimacy to yet another ruling class ceremony. Instead we are using our newly found strength to show them that no matter where they go and what they do, from now on they will need thousands of policemen to protect them. It was the case in Seattle, it was the case in Los Angeles and Philly, it was the case in Prague, and it will be the case in Washington. As the slogan says, "Whoever they vote for, we are ungovernable."

Not only are we ungovernable, but we also find ourselves today at a point where we are stronger and more numerous than we have been in many years. Therefore, at least in the eyes of Barricada, we are using this inauguration as an opportunity to escalate the struggle against the state and all the evils related to it. In Seattle, Washington in April, and Prague the battle was centered around capitalism. In LA and Philadelphia it was against the parties of the ruling class. But the inauguration protests for us are different. They are against authoritarianism and against the authority of the state, which defends and foments all the other social ills that divide and oppress us, from capitalism, to racism, to sexism, to nationalism and everything in between. We are attacking the beast directly, and in its lair no less, to show them that people have had enough, resistance is growing, and will only grow stronger and stronger until they are no longer safe anywhere.

Therefore, although it is now quite late in the game, we urge all of you that can to come to Washington. Of course, for those who live far away, or have jobs or other responsibilities that they can't get out of, and are staying in their hometowns or cities, there is still lots that can be done. Resistance does not need to, and shouldn't, be limited to the large actions. If you are committed to taking action, do so. Go to local rallies and show the liberals that Gore and Bush are just two sides of the same coin. Or better yet, use one of the revolutionary's most effective weapons, direct action, to make a statement. Your creativity and commitment are your only limitations. Anywhere, everywhere, and anytime, it is up to all of us to show the ruling class that its abuses will no longer be tolerated.

For Class War and International Revolution,

Severino Di Giovanni II, Barricada Collective

The Right Choice

ETS!,

Already, the presses of the central committee are warming up, generating the idea that a third party effort is to blame for the defeat of a candidate useless to any progressive movement.

The bullyboys of the Democratic hacks are already running their mouths, saying that Nader had better never come near any effort they're part of. It's disgusting, but what else can one expect from party line zealots?

It is fortunate that the much ballyhooed American revolution was not dependent upon the resource of their kind of thinker, otherwise we'd be competing for their dearly esteemed market share with other members of the British commonwealth.

Do you know that Walter Mondale once said that Jesse Jackson cost the Democrats the election of 1984? This was just prior to the destruction of the Rainbow Coalition as a vibrant, combative force in the Democratic party in the late eighties. The DLC drove the livelier factions out of the Democrats, and now resent the fact that many of us went somewhere else. Moreover, they can't believe we would have the effrontery to vote for someone other than who they've selected for us.

Well, I've voted third party four times out of the six presidential ballots I've cast, and the only two votes I've ever regretted were those I cast in 1988 for Michael Dukakis and in 1992 for Bill Clinton. In the former case, I voted against George Bush for Michael Dukakis because I didn't want to vote for a candidate that couldn't win, and in the latter, I voted against George Bush because I didn't want to see a continuation of his policies against the children of Iraq. And, wouldn't you know it? In each instance, I voted against my guiding impetus. In voting for Michael Dukakis, I voted for a candidate who couldn't win, and in voting for Bill Clinton, I voted for a continuation of Bush's policies against the children of Iraq. Moral to the story being that a ballot has to be a "pro-active" effort at the very least, if one is going to be able to live with oneself later. Vote for Al Gore? I've been watching the bastard for a long time, and quite frankly, I'd rather eat dirt.

And on that bright note, I hope this finds you well. Stay strong.

M.H. Perez, via e-mail

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.