DEMONSTRATE MEXICO CITY- From the standpoint of revolutionary politics, the year 1975 ended with a huge and impressive proletarian demonstration in Mexico City. Even the bourgeois press estimated the crowd at between 150,000 and 200,000 people, the majority of whom were workers. Called by the Tendencia Democrática (Democratic Tendency) of the SUTERM (one of the two electrical workers unions), the significance of this demonstration went far beyond the trade-union issues that were at its origin. Of course, the formidable display of workers and revoTutionary solidarity can justly be cited as support for the struggle now being waged by the Tendencia Democrática. But the political context in which this demonstration took place lent it the character of an expression of the consciousness of political opposition to the regime. In fact, in 1975 the presidential candidate of the official party, the PRI, was "revealed" to be José López Portillo. (See INPRECOR, No.37, November 6, 1975.) On November 15, López Portillo held his first big meeting in Mexico City, in Zócalo, the main square. The meeting of the PRI took place in the morning and fell far short of attracting the enthusiastic working-class crowd that the electrical workers demonstration assembled that same afternoon. The obvious contrast between the two political expressions was impressive; it showed a clear decline in the political strength of Echeverria's successor. The great significance of the action on the trade-union level was also evident. The Tendencia Democrática 30 succeeded in mobilizing more than 50,000 of its members from throughout the country, thus demonstrating that it holds a large majority within the SUTERM. The struggle of this trade-union tendency inside one of the key national trade unions is the highest and most conscious expression of a workers movement that is beginning to go beyond the limits imposed by the official trade-union bureaucracy (the well-known and detested "charros"). The demonstration represented a clear blow against the bureaucracy of the electrical workers union, which has been attempting to oust the Tendencia Democrática from the union. A sector of the revolutionary left criticized the enormous efforts expended especially by the CP and the two sympathizing organizations of the Fourth International (the Liga Socialista and the Grupo Comunista Internacionalista) to make this demonstration a great success. The criticism was based on the fact that the leadership of Rafael Galván, recognized leader of the TD, is "revolutionary nationalist" and does not break with official views and policies. But, as always, the ultraleftist criticism fails to distinguish between the leadership and the movement that follows the leadership, in this case one of the broadest and most combative sectors of the Mexican proletariat. It also forgets that in the case of the two organizations of the Fourth International, no concession was made to "revolutionary nationalism" and that their united action with the workers of the SUTERM and the rest of the trade-unions that demonstrated in solidarity with the electrical workers permitted these organizations of the Fourth International to participate with a broad contingent in one of the
FREE ALL INDIAN
POLITICAL PRISONERS!
on repression in India: "Land of Political Prisoners. " The address of the CRIPP. is: NOTE: The comrades of the CRIPP in London have published a very detailed pamphlet most important proletarian mobilizations in Mexico today. This was also understood by the thousands and thousands of student and worker activists who came to the demonstration, lending it a clearly socialist and revolutionary coloration and character, the spirit of which was picked litical prisoners; such a movement must be broadly based and nonexclusive, grouping together all the workers parties and organizations. This divisive attitude goes hand in hand with an opening toward the far right on я ня 387 G. Kumar, 22 Boundary Road, London NW 8.
up by thousands and thousands of workers who chanted and took up slogans coined by the communist movement. The presence, for the first time in a demonstration of this size, of a revolutionary Marxist contingent of 1,000 people sealed a commitment: From this point on, all the workers demonstrations will be marked by a revolutionary Marxist presence. O cont'd. from page 32. the part of these same Maoists, who have made common cause with the partisans of the Indian fascist organization Jana Sangh, which preaches intolerance against the Muslim masses and an exclusive Hinduism that aims at dividing the workers in the worst manner. A representative of this organization spoke at the meeting preceding the January 25 demonstration, under the cover of the "Friends of India" organization. The revolutionary Marxist militants of the Asian Socialist Forum opposed the presence of this speaker and shouted the slogan: No to Indira, no to Jana Sangh, for workers power! The organizers threatened to exclude these militants from the demonstration if they did not desist. But the organizers had to give up when hundreds of demonstrators took up this slogan, as well as another: Stop the torture! Stop the killings! Down with the state of emergency! In the course of this demonstration, the contingent marching behind the banner of the Campaign for the Release of Indian Political Prisoners (CRIPP), supported by the Asian Socialist Forum, numbered more than 300 people. The mass of Maoist militants af this demonstration were divided according to their counterposed political positions: some of them sided with those who booed the representative of the fascists. It appears that the disintegration of the Indian Maoist current may inhibit solidarity actions in defense of Indian polifical prisoners because of the hegemony this current has held up to now. Since the Indira Gandhi regime has committed itself to a long period of suppression of basic liberties and has made the state of emergency its daily law, all demonstrations of solidarity with prisoners and of condemnation of the existing regime must be pushed forward. Everyone who agrees to act in this way should be brough! together, without the slightest exclusion. O
RELEASE • OF •