Sociology and Explanations (Re: Hitchens responds to critics

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

At 03:39 PM 9/26/01 -0700, John G wrote:
>Quite frequently "terrorists" of whatever ideological persuasion are 
>well-educated
>and come from the "privileged" classes -- from Russian anarchists of the late
>19th Century (many of whom were children of landowners) to members of the
>Weathermen, the RAF, the Red Brigades, etc. in the late 1960's and 1970's
>(many of whom descended from "professional middle class" -- sorry, Carrol --
>stock). While they may not derive from "oppressed" social backgrounds, 
>"terrorists" claim act to on behalf of the downtrodden masses, who are too 
>befogged or too cowed by state power to act on their own. In this sense the 
>Sept 11 suspects perfectly fit the standard profile of "terrorists." While 
>this observation does not in any sense morally excuse their actions, it 
>does underscore the notion that in no way were the Bin Ladenists unusually 
>"irrational."

I do not buy it.  I do not think that islamic leaders "represent" the
oppressed masses in any meaningful way.  They seem to be simply fascist
entrepreneurs gaining windfall from popular dissatisfaction.  In that way,
they are no diffrent than fascist thugs in Italy  who attracted the peasant

 followers by dispensing favors and privileges bankrolled by landowners.  

It is a sad commentary on the state of the Left to see it being so starved
for a revolution that they take an obviously reactionary, sponsored from
above, plot for one.

wojtek