Gallery

Politics of Repression

We Have Survived by NO FIXED ADDRESS

Politics of Repression was broadcast on Paradigm Shift on 4ZZZ fm 102.1 Friday at noon on 12 October 2012

“If you fly with the crows, you’ll get shot with the crows.”

Joh Bjelke-Petersen to a former Miss Australia whom he accused of having communist sympathies because of her stance against uranium mining and export.

On May 16 of 2012 the state government deployed 250 heavily armed police against 100 indigenous people and their supporters in Musgrave Park, South Brisbane. Brisbane Blacks were fighting for their sovereign rights to be on their own land and to conduct sacred business as they had done for thousands of years in this place.

For eight weeks in September 2012, industrial spies operating on behalf of a legal firm Minter Ellison conducted surveillance of workers who withdrew their labour to get an enterprise bargaining agreement with their employer.

A couple of weeks ago 2 activists from the Socialist Alternative were arrested at Qld University of Technology when they complained of undemocratic practices by the Liberal National Party students in the QUT‘s student union.

The aboriginal tent embassy in Musgrave park was set alight just prior to the 30th commemoration of the 1982 Land Rights marches where 400 people were arrested during the Commonwealth Games.

This short list of repression reaches from the past Bjelke-Petersen era into the future. It is important to understand the nature of this repression to develop a mature way of dealing with it.

Over 30 years ago a small group of us who had been arrested set about writing a small book called ‘Guilt by Association — a manual for political defence‘. We signed the author as KW Vista and the frontispiece explained the title thus:

“Joh Bjelke-Petersen understands what guilt by association means. In late 1977 after he banned political street marches he said: “If you fly with the crows, you’ll get shot with the crows.”

Cartoon by John Haag

This book was printed out the back of these studios at 4ZZZ by Coronation Press. Some time after, I asked the directors of Coronation Press if I could print another on these premises. I’ll never forget the answer they gave, they said that after many years of struggle we don’t want to have this building bombed again. You see, it had been bombed by a far right activist in 1972. The courts let the perpetrator Gary Manghan off on a technicality. Here is an interview with Ted Riethmuller who was in the building at the time of the bombing.

The acquittal of Gary Manghan occurred thus. On April 19, 1972, Mangham threw 16 sticks of gelignite into the building where I now sit (formerly the Communist Party‘s Brisbane office). The floor where I sit was lifted almost six centimetres from its proper position. Later the same evening, three rifle shots ricocheted through the Maoist East Wind bookshop in Brisbane CBD.

Manghan, a member of a fascist organisation, fled to New South Wales. Because of similar activities Manghan was a prime suspect. Qld police issued orders for Manghan to be apprehended. NSW police picked up Manghan and, because they had no warrant for his extradition to Qld they placed him on a holding charge of vagrancy. Whilst in their custody Manghan confessed to the crime of wilful damage to the building here at 291 St Pauls Terrace. Manghan was subsequently extradited to Brisbane where he stood trial. Members of the Communist Party were called as witnesses and as such sat outside the courtroom. To their dismay, Manghan emerged a free man, acquitted of the crime he had committed!

Picture 1 – shows detectives interviewing those who were in the building at the time. Thanks to Ted Riethmuller for the photo.

Under the liberal justice system there is nothing wrong with a holding charge per se. However admissibility of Manghan’s confession came into question during the trial. NSW police admitted that Manghan had money on him when he was arrested for vagrancy. So his arrest was unlawful. His confession immediately after this arrest was therefore inadmissible. The reminder of the evidence against him including the receipt for the 16 sticks of gelignite he had in his possession when arrested (hmay not have been terribly bright but nor were his captors. NSW police should have waited for Qld police to arrive to interview Manghan based on their leads. This is how the far right got away with their fear and loathing bombing of the CPA building here at 291 St Pauls Terrace, Fortitude Valley.

Ian Curr
12 October 2012

Warumpi Band – My Island Home (1988)

by KW Vista

Politics of Repression
Make no mistake about it, the legal institutions of liberal democracies are the instruments of repression. Wherever the tentacles of international capital penetrate, its representatives use whatever means necessary to assist in the exploitation of wage labour. Of course, these international capitalists will generate conflicts between themselves and the national bourgeoisie and between themselves and the working class.

The extent and nature of these conflicts are determined by the actual economic situation that exists in particular regions, but the crisis is dealt with at two levels. At the economic level, for example, we see movement of capital, alteration to production and marketing. For example the inability of the American motor car capitalists in the 1970s to compete with Japanese capitalists left thousands of workers jobless throughout the world. The social effect of the struggle between capitalist and worker is felt at a second level, the politico-judicial level with changes in government, a declaration of a state of emergency (Queensland, in 1971 during the Springbok tour and in 1982 during the Commonwealth Games), rapid passing of harsh laws, deployment of troops (Newcastle, 1948), riot squads, increased use of batons, stockpiling of major effective weapons (armalites) and so on.

From the policeman’s and policewoman’s beat, to the flying wedge at a demonstration in the city square, in the courts, in the offices of magistrates and judges, in the cabinet chamber law is written, rewritten, interpreted and reinterpreted, forgotten or enforced in order to maintain the power of the bourgeoisie, to protect their property and to make sure any threat to their dominance is ended, squashed, smashed.

The general intent of the law is to protect the capitalists and their property. The day to day task of the police and legal institutions are set in this direction by the law, by the policy of the police ministry, the policy of the Justice department and the open conspiracy of magistrates, judges and prosecutors. (By open conspiracy I mean that only in special circumstances do judge and prosecutor conspire behind closed doors – for example when the judge, prosecutor and your defence barrister retire to the judges chambers during the trial, some amazing deals are cooked up; you have no knowledge of these deals.) Rather the conspiracy usually takes place by the judge and prosecutor combining to confuse and twist the defence’s argument – a simple practice of presuming guilt and making it difficult to establish innocence).

The law, of necessity, must present an image of impartiality. This attempt to disguise the real nature of law gives it the title of liberal justice. This is the justice of the state that portrays itself, flatteringly, as protecting peoples rights, stopping people from hurting each other, protecting people’s property and protecting freedom.

Cartoon by John Haag

So we have laws against murder and assault, against stealing, against drugs and drink-driving; we have traffic police and a traffic code. Where, it may be asked, is the element which makes for class oppression? The ruling class, in writing down laws which protect themselves, create a social order for all of us. The theory of equality before the law does not mean in practice that a working class person who is a victim of a crime will receive the same legal satisfaction as when a bank or business is robbed.

The simple fact is that capitalist law, even in its abstract written form oppresses us under capitalism far more than it protects us from crime and criminals created by capitalism. Nonetheless it is important for us to recognise the contradiction between law as it is written down and its actual practice by legal “protectors” such as judges, magistrates and police. In “The German Ideology“, Karl Marx distinguishes the idealist ruling class and the materialist ruling class. Judges are part of the idealist wing of the state. They abstract the material practice of class exploitation into law pretending that it is a fair, rational and moral code.

In its abstract form, law will disguise the fact that capitalism is based on violence and the political powerlessness of the working class. Marx goes on to say that idealist and materialist ruling classes will come into conflict. We see this occur when liberal judges say nasty things about police fabrication of evidence and violence (the Qld Lucas enquiry in the early 1990s was an example).

Campbell-Newman, a materialist representative of the ruling class has defied bourgeois law on a number of occasions (including protecting a cop who bashed a student over the head and protecting “Cedar Bay” thugs). The importance of using the contradictions between idealist judges and materialist police is discussed in the chapter on political court-defence. However it should not be thought that this is the same as expecting one arm of the state to help you in the fight against another arm.

We should not expect, as the Labor Party does, that we can make the courts or the media our allies in the fight against repressive government and its police. We should know about these contradictions, but we should realize that they are only of limited use to us (a liberal judge, under pressure, is likely to shed his guise of fairness, which may give us grounds for appeal but does not help us immediately).

Written law which is massive and confused, can only be, must be viewed in the context of legal practice in our society. There are laws which are obviously repressive in both written form and actual practice.

Two sets of Queensland laws provide good examples.

The laws against abortion condemn women to enforced motherhood and take any control over their future out of their hands.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Acts that existed under Bjelke-Petersen place blacks under the control of a racist government administration. However in many cases, the statutes themselves tell only half the story and the oppressive weight of the law can only be testified to by those who have had the law used against them.

While the law serves the general function outlined here, in certain circumstances, in the midst of capitalist crises and socialist organisation, the law has a special function – the repression of political opposition. We see the “benign” law turn malignant and the “gallant” police of the media turned to the armed force of the state. Gone is the mask of liberal fairness; the policeman and the policewoman are the enemy, both the willing and the unwilling and their function is clear to those who struggle. The judiciary cannot escape; they too join the ranks of the right; they know clearly for what the state pays them.

Justice is Blind, but the magistrate sees with rare vision. From the benches they repeat again and again “You are guilty if you dare to fight”. These pillars of justice can plead impartiality, but the working class finds them guilty; in the class struggle, they are on the side of private property.

[With thanks to KW Vista.]

Brisbane Blacks by MOP & THE DROPOUTS

Reference

“Guilt by Association – a manual for political defence” by KW Vista. Printed by Coronation Press 1982 Brisbane

2 responses to “Politics of Repression

  1. Pingback: G20 comes to the Lucky Country | Workers Bush Telegraph

  2. Defend the Right to Organise!

    THE COURT DATE BELOW MAY JUST BE A MENTION – SO THE CALL HAS BEEN CANCELLED – BUT ONLY FOR NOW!!

    We support Bob and Dennis in the defence of the right to organise.

    We can’t let rank & file representatives be threatened by UN-FairWork laws

    Just look at this order making the withdrawal of labour illegal:

    Pursuant to s.421(3) and s. 550 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) the first respondent (whether by its officers, delegates, employees, or howsoever otherwise) be restrained from aiding, abetting, counselling, procuring, inducing, being knowingly concerned or conspiring with any person who is a member of the first respondent and who works at the Queensland Children’s Hospital and Queensland Children’s Hospital Energy Plant project in Queensland (QCH Project) to contravene the Fair Work Australia order to cease taking industrial action made by Senior Deputy President Richards on 6 August 2012 (FWA Order).

    Time: 9.30 am
    Date: Wednesday 17th October 2012
    Place: Federal Magistrates Court, Harry Gibbs Commonwealth Law Courts Building – 119 North Quay, Brisbane.

    [Please note: The case file is no longer available (Oct 2015) … ABIGROUP CONTRACTORS PTY LTD versus CONSTRUCTION, FORESTRY, MINING AND ENERGY UNION
    FIRST RESPONDENT, AUSTRALIAN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES AND BUILDERS’ LABOURERS’FEDERATION (QUEENSLAND BRANCH) UNION OF EMPLOYEES (AS A TRANSITIONALLY REGISTERED ORGANIZATION) and others

    Like

Please keep comments brief

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s