I meant Empire in the generic sense, not Empire the new book, which I haven't read. I'm officially agnostic on the book, though what I have heard does not encourage me to read it.
In a previous fracas w/Heartfield, I noted that if a tornado devastated CIA headquarters, we wouldn't call that a blow for the freedom of oppressed peoples, even though some benign effect of this sort could be imagined. I think there are at least two hurdles to cross if any such classification can be defended. First, there has to be some semblance of conscious intention that has some scintilla of left plausibility for an act of force to qualify as an attack on imperialism. Second, there has to be some grain of a case that such an act is effective in some sense. I would add the stipulation that any gross violation of ordinary standards of morality (i.e., killing many innocent people) cannot by definition support any kind of plausible left intention. But this ethical point is not necessary to the argument; it's a personal choice.
In regard to effectiveness, I could endeavor to kidnap Madeleine Albright, roast her over a fire, and consume her carcass, all in the name of anti-imperialism. But the likely political reaction to this act would disqualify it as a blow against imperialism.
Without these stipulations, we could call the Reichstag fire an attack on imperialism. Since there is no trace of left intention or left political effectiveness in 9/11, it could not qualify as any kind of blow against imperialism.
I would go further to say that 9/11 clearly strengthens the Empire. One only has to consider the U.S. military expansionist role that is struggling to be born, the collaboration of Russia and the U.S., the developing cloak of 'UN/international coalition' backing for such ventures, and the shutdown of the anti-globalization action. On the simplest level, all can see the establishment of many new U.S. military/spook bases and prospective incursions in places heretofore thought out of bounds.
Osama is a godsend to imperialism, enough to make conspiracy theories a bit more compelling. If he hadn't existed, someone might have tried to invent him.
mbs
> Yoshie
>
> you forgot attacks on Empire that are not attacks on the Empire.
>
> helpfully,
> mbs
Your "helpfully" is delightful (a Henry Jamesian use of the adverb). But there is a certain ambiguity in your assertion: Do you mean "Empire" (as in the first clause) or "the Empire" (as in the second clause). . . .