Detrimental to many, not most

Detrimental to many, not most

This is in response to Ms. Melody Kemp's letter (The Jakarta
Post, Aug. 29, 1995).

My reference to communism had nothing to do with the elected
East Timor government of the time. It was as follows: With the
debacle of Vietnam still fresh in mind, Australia viewed the
instability in East Timor as an open invitation for Vietnamese
inspired communism to possibly infiltrate the region, and
therefore supported the integration with Indonesia as a means of
effectively closing the door. This was the mid 1970s, Ms. Kemp,
and "Reds under the bed" was still very high on the West's
Paranoia Priority list.

"Australia's laudable democratic system" lost its wheels when
Gough Whitlam was sacked and only recently got a pumped up new
set from Keating and Co. Your knowledge of Portuguese political
history is astonishing, save one rather major oversight. Perhaps
one page of the book you quoted from was missing?

Portugal, in its holy pursuit of a squeaky clean new "colony
free" democratic image deserted only its non-profitable colonies.
It chose to retain its island casino colony of Macau as it was,
and as it still is, a major contributor to the Portuguese tidy
democratic colony free coffers.

Flags to some people are not just a peace of cloth. The
Bendera Merah Putih represents to the Indonesian people the
blood, sweat and tears they shed in a five year war of
independence.

"Selective memory." I am not opposed to morally or politically
justified protest. I was among the first in my hometown to
demonstrate against the Holt regime for committing young male
Aussies to go "all the way with L.B.J." into Vietnam, then
eventually fled to England when no one listened. However, I
strongly oppose unjustified protest. The flag burning by Fretilin
and their ill-informed followers has absolutely no genuine
foundation on Human Rights as claimed.

Finally, I take offense at your insinuation that I am naive,
stupid or both in placing economic growth above political
freedom. Its money makes the world go round, not soapbox
screamers. "To the political detriment of many" is not
necessarily to the political detriment of most. The fundamental
rule of democracy is that the 51 percent plus vote wins the day.
The 49 percent minus vote loses. The losers can choose to adapt
or move on. In the case of East Timor your "political detriment
of many" constitutes less than 20 percent. Sure, that's many,
but, that's not most.

G. N. BROWN

Sanur, Bali