Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ubvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!cae780!ubvax!tonyw From: tonyw@ubvax.UUCP (Tony Wuersch) Newsgroups: net.politics,net.motss,net.religion Subject: Re: Definitive expose' of Sandinistas? Message-ID: <296@ubvax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 13-Aug-85 17:47:13 EDT Article-I.D.: ubvax.296 Posted: Tue Aug 13 17:47:13 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 19-Aug-85 06:33:47 EDT References: <1520@bbncca.ARPA> Reply-To: tonyw@ubvax.UUCP (Tony Wuersch) Organization: Ungermann-Bass, Inc., Santa Clara, Ca. Lines: 73 Xref: linus net.politics:9791 net.motss:1656 net.religion:6988 In article <1520@bbncca.ARPA> rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) writes: >************************** >PSEUDO-SANDINISM UNMASKED? >************************** > >John Silber, controversial president of Boston University & a member >of the President's National Bipartisan Commission on Central America >(the Kissinger Commission), wrote the following review of Shirley >Christian's NICARAGUA: REVOLUTION IN THE FAMILY, a brand-new study of >revolutionary Nicaragua, and possibly the definitive expose' of Sandi- >nista tyranny and deceit that's been lacking for so long. > >Is Silber's review accurate? Is Christian's critique valid? Get a >copy of the book and read it! I am. I'll post synopses when I finish >reading it. > >I'm cross-posting to net.religion because of information about "libe- >ration theology" & Sandinist manipulation/persecution of religion, & >to net.motss, because many lesbian & gay activists have expressed >support for the regime, believing it was different from Cuba's. I've browsed through Ms. Christian's book, and have seen similar views. Silber's review, as reprinted here by Ron, is more about how the Sandinistas have deceived the US than how they've deceived their own people. Ms. Christian's book uses the same rhetorical theme throughout: by showing that the US has been deceived about the political stance of the Sandinistas, she wants us to believe that Nicaraguans have been deceived too. But one doesn't follow from the other. Most evident from Ms. Christian's book is how the Sandinistas have NOT hidden the political agendas of their leadership from the people, but have made those agendas explicit and frequently mentioned in rallies and speeches. If the US wants to act as if it's been deceived by all this, that's its problem. It's no crime to deceive people who have no business meddling in your affairs. Ms. Christian is wrong if she means to describe the success of the Sandinistas as the success of a Marxist-Leninist conspiracy. Not because it has no Marxism-Leninism, but because it never acted in a conspiratorial fashion towards the Nicaraguan people. Even businesspeople and bourgeois who worked with the Sandinistas always recognized its Marxist background and agenda. And her interviewing mode tells us nothing about why the Nicaraguan PEOPLE might support the Sandinistas over their contra alternatives. All her book is is a set of interviews, again with the rhetorical logic that if we find out that the Sandinistas are Marxist-Leninists, obviously we should then know from our knowledge of Communism that the people of Nicaragua could never support them. Ron Rizzo uses this logic too; he knows Marxism is tyranny, hence no people could support it, hence Christian's critique is final and conclusive. But Christian does nothing to prove this, she just assumes it. Blech. Finally, her book tells us nothing about how Nicaragua would run its country in a Marxist manner. The facts are that the USSR will not bankroll or defend Nicaragua, its economy is open, it's surrounded by hostile neighbors and it's a small country. These simple facts strictly limit the ability of Nicaragua to be doctrinare in any direction, even if its leaders want this (which I doubt). How Christian can imply that Nicaragua will be just like the other USSR-dominated nations and ignore these commanding environmental differences is beyond me. The books' facts, interviews, and chronology are magnificant and well-explained. I would recommend the book as a history of recent Nicaragua. But the argumentation and predictions which Christian wants to peddle from these facts are just pathetic. The book is journalism at its best and at its worst. Tony Wuersch {amd,amdcad}!cae780!ubvax!tonyw