"No, not entirely, which is why a truly radical left that can shift its critique and action as history and geopolitics shift would be a tremendous boon for what passes for civilization."
If I have read this correctly I would on this small point agree wholeheartedly. There is much too much moralisms in the left and not enough cool assessemnt of unfolding history. Perhaps this is a feature of the US left, it is certianly an obvious symptom of US culture, that geopolitical questions are subjected to moral comparisons and moral stands.
But Dennis your point of supporting the "war" effort (more correctly "punative military actions") carries the same odium as those you disagree. Decontextualisied examples thrust against current events is silly, likewise attributing moral or amoral intent to the pertpetrators (US Foriegn Policy or what passes for it at present). A curse on both your houses.
Place the whole thing into geopolitical and historical context, for God's sake, and see what is actually going on. The US is pursuing a policy of unilateralism for the sake of sustaining its supremency, where that action takes place and under what excuse is irrelevant, likewise the immediate and long term effects of these interventions is irrelevant. at least this much can be understood by the devotedly bellicose attitude of the Bush administration apparent well before S11 which created such a convenient immediate reason for action.
In short, US foriegn policy, the particular thrust of American super-powerism at this moment, is summed up quite nicely in Bush's defining statement that you are either for us or againsty us. It is a stance which given enough time to mature will break the world in two, those who allign subserviently to the US and those who find themselves forced to oppose the US - you see what the US is actually rebelling against in its bloody way is internaltional law and governance. It is a self-defining rogue state an international menance.
Is this anti-americanism, well fairly obviously it is. No civilizied person can be anything other then anti-american at this juncture. It is not that the US is misbehaving on the world scene, it has done this before, but rather that given its position this behaviour can only become worse.
To talk in this context of the oppression of the taliban, or the threats of Al Qeada, to wage war against an abstract "terrorism" is only to display the extent of state identification (or in the case of Australia the level of cultural and political collaboration). These are excuses and as far from the real logic of what is developing - it is an illusion carefully fostered, but not dreamstate acceptable in someone who ought to know better in having the facilities to think and the ability to read.
Want to know the secret to Sharon, well that is simple, Isreal plays in micro what the US plays in macro. War without end, lawless military cowboyism, right as might made into the very essence of state existence.
Back to geo-politics and history the end of imperialism has left an anomily on the world stage, a single world superpower without a future as such, there is no way that a single state can be the ruler of world, the US actions prove as much, all we have is senile terrible, unable to step down or go forward it can only vampirishly bleed the world uintil it is properly staked - and that is when it is forced to become one state amongst many instead of a state above all.
Denis step back a little empires are not long-lived at the best of times, the US supreme-empire not likely to survive many more summers. Stand aside from you patroitism and see the state for what it is, and see that going about the world as it does now offers nothing to the world except Isreal writ large on a global scale (I write this as a another sucide bomber attacks and Isreal announces a new "offensive" against the West Bank - is this the future the world deserves?).
Greg
--- Message Received --- From: Dennis Perrin <dperrin at comcast.net> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:33:19 -0400 Subject: Re: second wave attacks
> It is a problem. But do you trust the very agents & institutions that
> had a large hand in creating the problem to solve it? We've got a
> principal (people like us who'd like to stay alive) / agent (the U.S.
> imperial state) issue here.
>
> Doug
No, not entirely, which is why a truly radical left that can shift its critique and action as history and geopolitics shift would be a tremendous boon for what passes for civilization. But to grant everything to the status quo, to oppose the Afghan intervention based on previous struggles, is self-defeating. In the short term Bush's gang actually got it right and saved millions of lives while (temporarily) dispatching mass murdering theocrats -- the same way Eisenhower got it right with Suez in 1956, to cite one grand example. But the short term isn't everything, and a real left -- not a fantasy one based on campuses and in small sectarian groups -- would recognize this and act accordingly. Instead we have . . . well, what we have.
DP
Greg Schofield Perth Australia g_schofield at dingoblue.net.au ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Modular And Integrated Design - programing power for all
Lestec's MAID and LTMailer http://www.lestec.com.au also available at Amazon.com ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________