[lbo-talk] Achcar's latest

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Fri Mar 25 10:27:37 PDT 2011


Granted, "Imperialism" in any of its usual senses doesn't cover it. Granted there obviously is no neat plan or precise agreement among the aggressors.

But the elites throughout the capitalist world are pretty conscious about a "friendly climate for business." But I've got other things to think about than Libya.

Carrol

-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Eric Beck Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 11:37 AM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Achcar's latest

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 25, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Marv Gandall wrote:
>
>> Of course I agree with the thrust of your analysis, but am less certain
that the aim is partition.
>
> Do the intervening parties have any idea what they're doing?

Exactly. This whole thing is such a hastily conceived and executed clusterfuck, I can't see any coherent plan being carried out here. No doubt each participant has some motivation and interest, but to think these elements add up to an "imperialist agenda" is folly. Partition is as silly of a reason as oil.


>There's always this tendency that the bourgeoisie has a huge file drawer
full
>of plans, but the Western powers are divided against each other - and the
>USG is divided against itself.

No, everything must have significance and a singular cause. There's no room for ambiguity or non-sense at times like these. ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list