[lbo-talk] State-run oil company is being weighed for Iraq

[Charles Brown]

"C. G. Estabrook" wrote:
>
> I think the oil companies were quite hesitant about the invasion, rightly
> considering how disruptive it would be throughout the Mideast -- which
> suggests that the reasons were strategic rather than narrowly economic.
> The decision was made by the executive committee of the bourgeoisie, not
> without internal dissent. --CGE
>
Something like this has been my conviction since the first Gulf War.
Narrowly economic explanations are not only inadequate in respect to the
initial decisions to make war but _also_ are offer no illumination
whatever for the acquiescence of the capitalist class as shown in the
treatment by the corporate media. The internal dissent is visible but
only faintly. If it were all about oil (or all about Haliburton, etc.)
that dissent would be far more visible.

Carrol

^^^

CB: I agree with C.G. and Carrol , although I would affirm explicitly that
oil is part of the strategic reasons. 

On the quietness of dissent, the ruling class practices a form of democratic
centralism, and as Michael Pugliese has posted two of the principles teach
keeping disputes in the family and away from the children ( that's us).

Michael Pugliese posted:

 From "Marx at the Millenium, " by Cyril Smith, Pluto Press. Footnote 5, pg.
178, "...The Three Priciples of Democratic Centralism...by Don Cuckson: 1
Father Knows Best 2 Not in front of the children 3 Keep it in the family.