Rational Discussion of Threats of Right-Wing Networks out of Power (was Re: Allies and opponents of US fall silent)

Gordon Fitch gcf at panix.com
Tue Dec 11 10:26:17 PST 2001


DP:
> >One can, indeed must, assail US expansionism
> >and the domestic efforts to lock down dissent; but there is a decentralized
> >network in the wider world that is committed to killing as many Americans
> >(and non-Americans) as it can, using whatever tools it has. It is not a
> >liberation force, it is a violent theocratic gang that won't stop until it
> >is stopped, and how it can be stopped should be part of any discussion "we"
> >on the "left" have. In other words, we cannot pretend that it is some minor
> >irritant that will go away in due course. The challenge is incorporating
> >all this into an understandable argument. Not easy by any means.

Yoshie Furuhashi:
> No leftist has said that Al Qaeda is a "liberation force," so that's
> a moot question. Al Qaeda & like networks are _indeed_ a threat to
> the regimes in power & whatever left oppositions that exist in the
> countries in which they operate; and they will _not_ "go away in due
> course"; but exactly what degree of threat do they pose, & to whom?
> It doesn't seem to be the case that they are "committed to killing as
> many Americans and non-Americans as they can." Past terrors that are
> attributed to Al Qaeda suggest that they focus on politically
> symbolic high-profile targets (embassies, warships, the WTC, the
> Pentagon), unlike suicide bombers who blow up buses, pizzerias, etc.
> Threats from right-wing networks that are not in power should be
> rationally discussed, rather than exaggerated; exaggeration will only
> panic people & make them more inclined to accept the destruction of
> civil rights & liberties than otherwise.

Regardless of whether Al-Qaeda are "a liberation force" or not, it is clear that they and others plan to violently resist the continued expansion of the empire of Capital, and that that empire will continue to expand and attempt to absorb or efface all that is not part of it, as it must. A tragic fate is ensured. The behavior of Al-Qaeda etc., is futile and destructive because it will in fact assist in this expansion by providing excuses and provocations for crimes against humanity and the abrogation of rights (which we have already observed), thus conveniencing a rapid military solution to resistance which might otherwise take many years to overcome. In general, you can destroy _a_ state with war, but you can't destroy _the_ State with war, because the State _is_ war, and the empire of Capital is the State _par_excellence_. But I don't expect Islamic fundamentalists or Western liberals to understand this; for each, as with so many others, there's always a version of the State that's really gonna be okay as soon as the bad people have been dealt with, possibly with a lot of moralizing and hand-wringing as well as flags, lies, bombs, cops, prisons and hangmen.

So you're stuck, unless, as I say, you want to think radically -- radically enough to reject the State and its fundamental principle of operation across the board.

-- Gordon



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list