Steve Perry weighs in

kelley kwalker2 at gte.net
Wed Oct 10 12:38:57 PDT 2001


At 03:25 PM 10/10/01 -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
>[Steve Perry sent this draft of his latest, which seems pretty reasonable
>to me.]
> Likewise, back away from the unconditional support of Arab client
> regimes that repress their own people in the name of continuing U.S.
> control of the region's oil supply. Be prepared to deal flexibly with
> regimes ambivalent toward traditional American domination of the Middle
> East. The first Cold War is over, after all, and there is no
> countervailing power to foil American access to the area's oil reserves.

right. but chip says that they clerical fascists hell bent on taking over the world. this policy would mean their inevitable rise to power once we stop protecting monarchies and other nasty regimes, no? and, accordingly, yoshie says that the left must rise up against fascist states. so... why pursue a policy sure to yield a fascist state with control of a major amount of oil and, thus, a major amount of power in the world and, clearly, an ability to take over the world or at least try, if they so choose.

now, i don't necess. buy this scenario, but if you take chip and yoshie seriously, then i'm left scratching my head as to how such policies are going to foster, in the short-term, governments that won't be taken over by fascistic forces who are really just interested in their own kind of capitalist regime.

kelley



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list