> You mean "no one" on LBO-talk? That's probably because the PKK
> doesn't even rise to LBO-talkers' attention, for all the professions
> of love of Kurds. Not much interest in Kurdish politics here,
> really.
It's a discussion list, not Amnesty International. The topic at hand is butcher's lobby within the anti-war movement, and I don't buy that the cause of Kurdistan is one that animates them.
> Indicting as in anti-war activists and movements, _independently of
> the US government_, condemning Hussein and other foreign heads of
> states is one thing; indicting as in _urging the US government_ to
> use "universal jurisdiction," indict them, kidnap them, try them,
> kill them, etc., using means ranging from covert actions, wars, to
> psychological campaigns, is entirely another. The former belongs in
> an anti-war movement, but the latter doesn't.
The likes of the WW -- with their Free Milosevic! petition, opposition to the indictment of Saddam Hussein, and even the odd denial of the massacre at Srebrenica -- should not be euphamised as anti-war. That's bullshit. They're not against the conflict, they simply take the other side when the war comes. They're not against covert actions and extrajudicial killings, they simply have a preference for one brand of it over the other.
> Zizek needs to pay attention to who controls the state. If a
> left-wing political party controlled the US government, I have no
> problem urging it to use its state power _when such use of state
> power does not violate human rights and international law_, but not
> only do we have right-wing imperialists who trample upon human
> rights and international law sitting in control of the government, but
> their loyal oppositions are by and large imperialists, too (with such
> honorable exceptions as Barbara Lee). No left-wing organization is
> even _remotely_ close to any seat of power in the USA (as shown in
> the failure of the Nader campaign). My motto is regime change
> begins at home.
Bush is not trying to haul Saddam into the Hague, in no small part because he doesn't want to legitimize it. That's pretty clear.
If you stop reading every criticism of some anachronistic Marxist sect as a sign of deficient understanding of US imperialism, you might actually be able to hear me. It is possible to recognize the WW/ANSWER as a sham and remain an anti-imperialist.
-- Shane
________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.