> (A) Among the subscribers of LBO-talk who posted on the subject of
> resistance fighters in Iraq, those who must have prompted Dwayne
> Monroe to conclude that "Others (most, it seems) have decided that
> all violent resisters are Ba'athist or Jihadist criminals; I believe
> Rumsfeld used the term 'dead enders'; many on the left apparently
> agree" are Seth Ackerman, Doug Henwood, John Lacny, Mike Larkin,
> Grant Lee, and Luke Weiger.
>
> (B) Those who offered different portrayals of resistance fighters are
> Charles Brown, Carrol Cox, James Heartfield, Hari Kumar, Shane Mage,
> Stephen Philion, and myself (I note that there are three persons of
> color in [B], whereas [A] are all white -- race may be a
> statistically significant variable if we poll on this topic in the
> USA).
I have never said the Iraqi resistance were all ba'athist or jihadist and there are, of course, many, many other kinds of Arab nationalism and Islamism. No one has a clue what the precise numerical breakdown of the resistance is in terms of ideologies, but I really don't believe they represent left/democratic forces in anything like the same way that (e.g.) the French Maquis or the Viet Cong did. I also believe that if the Iraqi resistance were allowed to win, they would form a reactionary government.
BTW the most I've ever said about my race is that I'm not Chinese/Asian. So I don't know what you're basing this on. As it happens I am a white Australian. I have no idea why this is significant to "polling on this topic in the USA", a country I've never been to. And if most people of colour in the US supported the Iraqi resistance, which seems unlikely, what would it prove? Would it represent a huge contribution to breaking down racism in the USA, or a better Iraq?
It seems clear that, even if there were Iraqi communist list members -- which there may be, for all I know -- who would almost certainly be in what you call Group A, it would not make any difference to your position.
regards,
Grant.