Dennis Redmond isn't subjected to half the hostility and denunciation on this list that Yoshie is subjected to, despite the fact that his support for the humanitarian imperialists in Brussels is far worse, from a communist perspective, than Yoshie's sympathies for Islam.
[WS:] Since I was among those who voiced criticism of Yoshie, let me be clear that it was not because of her alleged support for Islam, or for that matter the substance of her argument, but because of her didactic in-your-face style. It is pretty annoying and I believe designed to be so. If someone is "in my face" I tend to pay back in kind with a hearty "fuck you."
As to Dennis Redmond, he is a Europhile and so am I. I think talking about "Brussels imperialism" is a bunch of bullshit, if not outright Euro-hating in the style of the right wing UK-insularism. I can understand that this kind of drivel may have some traction with the completely marginalized Left, which is completely clueless about what hit them and still mumbles old 19th century mantras.
As I see it, the problem is not "capitalism" "imperialism" and any other -ism from the old Left pandemonium. The world is going ahead with technological and organizational development that improve the material conditions of people - not with the pipe dream of 19th century philosophers and their 20th century followers. They are adopting the technological and organizational innovations developed by the West because they work. The communist pipe dreams or nationalist autarkies do not.
Therefore, what matters is which of those technological and organizational solutions developed in the West will be adopted and in what institutional setting. The choice is between the US version with the strong odor of the obnoxious mix of business fascism cum petit bourgeois philistine politics, or the EU version with its flavor of social democracy, parliamentarism cum corporatism. There is no other choice - the socialism as we know it, be it the Soviet version, the Sino-Indochina version, or the African version are gone for good, simply because at the end of the day they did not work (despite their initial successes.)
The Left can either acknowledge that and use the EU institutional architecture as the basis for its new plans for the feature (the US institutional architecture is simply a no-go from the left perspective) - or keep its head in its ass and dream up new fantasies of liberation coming from the "Global South" - after it failed to arrive from the "Global East."
As I see it, EU offers the only viable institutional architecture that can accommodate the Left and offer a realistic platform for the implementation and expansion of its social ideals. There is no other alternative, at least at this time in history. Everything else, including the US and Third World nationalisms, is a step backward. I can go as far as predict that most third countries that manage to develop will eventually adopt some version of the EU model. The left can either use that as an opportunity to implement its social agenda or miss the boat altogether pursuing 19th century pipe dreams.
Wojtek