Fascist mullah

CEP iwp.ilo at ix.netcom.com
Sun Nov 26 19:11:02 MST 1995


You (Mauro) wrote: 
>
>What does it mean semicolonial when colonies do not exist any more 
since the
>II Worl War (a parte from some residuals in Africa)? The fact is that
>imperialism (which is not a politics nor one/some countries) is an 
epoch or
>-better- a form of beeing of the capitalist mode of production which 
implies
>the real domination of capital in every corner of the world (if not
>socialist, and no socialism existed and exists today).
>

    Carlos:

    I thought that some Marxist categories were implied in the          
    discussion. I guess not.  If anybody believs that there are
    not imperialist countries and semicolonies (that is the economic
    domination but the maintenance of national political structures),   
    then, of course I can understand why you call everyone from the
    bourgeois camp who exercise violence against workers, fascists.
    Then, every bourgeois government on earth is fascist, or is it
    a certain degree of violence necessary to claim the title?

    Mauro wrote:

>We have seen such complication at work during the Gulf war: Saddam is 
surely
>not *** democratic and until the war many leftists were used to call 
him
>fascist. When the Usa attacked the problem arose: to defend Usa? 
(orrible)
>to defend Saddam? (unpleasant an a bit impolitical). Conclusion: the
>leftists divided themselves in two camps: one camp criticizing the so 
called
>West for his imperialistic defense of *** oil, without supporting 
Saddam,
>but "the Iraki people; the other camp supporting straight Saddam as an
>anti-imperialist fighter. The workers of the world standed watching 
the TV
>war games and believing the simple truth of Bush and Powell: much 
easier to
>understand than the sophisticated discussion about oppressed/oppressor
>nations, which never take in consideration the same working class.

    Carlos replies:

    Uhhhmmm!  I never had that problem.  A defeat of US imperialism in
    the war against Iraq could have meant encouraging every oppressed
    country to resist imperialism and the Iraqi masses to gain enough
    confidence to overthrown Saddam.  The defeat of Iraq meant the      
    establishment of a second chain around the necks of Iraqi' workers  
    in addition to that of Saddam: that of
    US imperialism (embargo). The defeat of Iraq strenghtened Saddam
    internally.  So during the war I supported the slogan: Sink the
    the US 7th Fleet! and Victory to Iraq! 

    As to the war in Yougoeslavia, Serbia is not/and was never an
    imperialist country.  The conflict is between non-imperialist
    bourgeois governments, therefore I have no problem being against
    everyone. I'm for the defeat of all bourgeois governments in
    the Yougoeslavian war and, of course, of their different            
    imperialist sponsors. Cheers!

    Carlos
    




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---



More information about the Marxism mailing list