Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Wrong emphasis in draft coverage

First Published: The Call, Vol. 9, No. 27, July 7-20, 1980.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.

Two articles on GM, planned obsolescence and imports by the two people in L.A., were very good and useful because of the facts. The Call has really improved over the last two years. Your articles are very non-sectarian and usually factual. That’s the reason my mother has started reading it.

But you have to straighten out your line on the draft. Your draft articles by Duffy (Feb. 18) and Davidson (March 24) were terrible. They were supposed to answer why it was important to fight the draft. Instead, they mainly talked about dealing with Soviet aggression.

The Soviet threat to countries’ independence is obviously real, but Duffy and Davidson adopted your old “main blow” bull and didn’t even mention fighting U.S. imperialism once! Even though the anti-draft movement will have to deal with Soviet aggression (something the ’60s anti-draft movement didn’t have to worry about), the primary focus must be (at this time) targetting the U.S. war drive and then bringing in the question of fighting Soviet aggression.

Also, I would like to see an in-depth analysis of the internal workings of the USSR. I’ll agree it definitely isn’t socialist, but how do you analyze its economic base? Many of the old “proofs” of its being capitalist could now be applied to China, which, we would both agree, is socialist.

J.H., New York, N.Y.