[lbo-talk] Libya

Dissenting Wren dissentingwren at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 23 07:37:00 PDT 2011


Marv is right - and even the bourgeois leadership of the democratic opposition would be better than Gaddafi. If we're going to discuss this honestly, we have to hold onto two hard facts: (1) The imperialist intervention is bound to fuck things up in Libya. It will kill a bunch of people and do its level best to divert the revolution to an elite-led, compliantly pro-West, corrupt, pseudo-democracy (at best). (2) WIthout the imperialist intervention, the revolution would have been crushed by now, also killing a lot of people, and Gaddafi would now be hunting down every democratic element left.

These two hard facts create a serious dilemma for anyone trying to find a decent place to stand in this mess. Wojtek, like Carrol, is trying to find a place to stand by minimizing hard fact #2. This is a classic sour grapes response.

("The rebels were no good anyway, so fuck 'em.")

----- Original Message ---- From: Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Sent: Wed, March 23, 2011 9:11:53 AM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Libya

Marv: "I would say we do have a dog in this fight - not the ruling regime nor the bourgeois leadership of the democratic opposition, but the workers, students, small propertyholders, mutinous soldiers, and unemployed who constitute its rank and file"

[WS:] Similar elements also supported Khomeini's revolution in Iran against a pretty rotten and murderous Western stooge. And look what happened to them. This part of the world has a history of rotten elites putting democratic or populist storefronts to legitimate their power grab. Supporting these "human shields" is not the same as supporting the broader movements and grey eminences that hide behind their backs.

Wojtek ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list