What's Go(o)deaough for the Afghans...
rolf.martens at mailbox.swipnet.se
Wed Oct 9 10:36:59 MDT 1996
What's Go(o)deaough for the Afghans...[Posted: 09.10.96]
A second description, on 06.10, by Louis Godena of events in
Afghanistan during the period 1979-1989 in my opinion merits
attention just as much as did his first, concerning the question
of how deep some people who call themselves "Marxists" can
actually sink, how far they - by whatever mechanism - can go in
support of extreme counter-revolution.
I've already written several postings recently on the subject of
the Soviet social-imperialists' aggression against that country,
the role of their puppets in it and the character it has when
today some people *defend* those actions. Should the subject
be considered exhausted? Not quite yet, I think. The questions
of principle involved are so important, the contradiction between
actual Marxism and certain fake "variants" of it so extremely
sharp precisely in this context. Thus, one more comment.
The radically different kinds of things which different people call
"Marxism" reminds me of some of the "patent jokes" of one
comedian who some decades ago whose theme was classical
music, which he played some lighter "varieties" of on the piano
while also talking to the audience, the Dane Victor Borge. He
drew quite an audience (mainly from "more cultured" circles) , in
his time, in the USA and other countries. He would say, for
"And now we shall play Bach. What would you prefer, Johann
Sebastian or Offen-?" (In the vein of: "What Marx is best, Karl
or the Brothers?") Another standard was: "We'll treat you to
some excerpts from the opera 'Boris Gudinov' - what's Gudinov
for Boris is Gudinov for you!"
"Communism", in the "version" of Boris - no, Louis - Godena,
what is it? Let's look at the "variety" he thinks is Go(o)denaough
for the Afghans. He probably means to recommend it to other
Loius Godena writes i.a.:
>Hugh suggests, obliquely, that the actions of the PDPA may
>have fallen short of the complete emancipation of the peasantry.
>He is somewhat correct. Under the circumstances, however,
>I think they did positively well.
The "PDPA", that was the name of the puppet "government".
1.5 million dead as a result of the foreign aggression which these
puppets "invited", 5-6 million refugees, 7000 villages destroyed,
the country made largely inhabitable by between 10 million and
60 million mines laid (air-dropped) by the invading forces...
the puppets of those invaders "did positively well"!
>Through the National Fatherland Front, created shortly after the
>1978 revolution, and comprised of various peasant, worker, youth,
>women, thnic and tribal organizations, a series of land reforms were
>enacted under the general rubric of Land and Water Reform.
>Agriculture at that time was the occupation of approximately four fifths
>of the population. Under the initial reforms (1979-81) more than
>350,000 peasant families were provided with land.
They were? It may be true in part. But as early as in late 1980, there
were already 85 000 Soviet troops in the country. Indiscriminate
bombings had started. In the main, the country was already being
>A second period of land reform (1983-85) proved even more
>ambitious. An additional 450, 000 families were granted farming
>land--though many of the affected areas had only recently been won
>from "bandit" control and were considered too politically unstable to
In that time, what was "even more ambitious" was the *massive
warfare* against the people, on the part of the aggressors plus
their puppets. In Stockholm, Sweden, for instance, on 23.03.85,
6000 people protested against that aggression. In 1985, 4 million
Afghans had already been driven out of the country.
>It is to be noted that the agricultural reforms of the first eight years
>of PDPA rule (1978-86) were carried out against a background of
>not only frightful civil war and internal sabotage, but also during a
>period of intense industrial devleopment.
So it was a "CIVIL" war?? Those helicopter gunships who bombed
the villages were "not" those of the aggressor? There were "not"
some 100 000 Soviet troops ravaging the country? It was "internal
sabouteurs" who laid that enormous amount of mines all over the
It may be true, for all I know, that for a while, industrial development
was effected in Afghanistan. For whose good, then? For that of
the people perhaps? Certainly not, under those circumstances.
>The continuing ravages of counter-revoluton and the gradual
>withdrawal of support from the Soviet Union and the eastern bloc
>together vitiated many of the reforms put in place during the first
>decade of communist rule.
The "ravages" of "counter-revolution" (= the people's resistance
movement - well, to some extent mingled with forces doing
lackey work for US imperialism too, but in the main a movement
of national liberation) - was it *they* who were doing the ravaging?
The "support", he calls the actual actions of destruction.
"COMMUNIST" rule he calls the actions of those puppets which,
at one point (see my recent Info #19en, part 2/4) even occasioned
Kosygin to (hypocritically? genuinely?) protest against their
proposal "to send people to climb into your tanks and shoot on your
people" - they had said that not even those Afghan pilots sent to the
Soviet Union for training could be trusted and that they would like
some Cubans or Vietnamese to man their helicopters and tanks.
What a nice "communism" Godena advocates!
>The PDPA itself changed its name to the Peoples' Party of
>Aghanistan and dropped Marxism-Leninism as its official ideology
>It did not save them.
What a pity! My heart bleeds for those Quisling creeps who
weren't even saved by the dropping of their most viscious
>While the full story of the effects of Afghanistan's brief and
>tumultuous experiment with socialism remains to be written, the
>record of the PDPA in the countryside remains, in my opinion, an
An "impressive record"! An "EXPERIMENT WITH SOCIALISM"!
Is it out of place to say again what was the actual "record" of
events in Afghanistan 1979-1989?
I refer to the figures on the dead and refugees, on the massive
destruction of the country, above and also in my Info #19en.
*This* apparently, is the kind of "Communism" Louis Godena is
advocating. The peoples of the world certainly must combat
this *Quisling "Marxism"*, this *superpower aggression "Marxism"*,
to the end.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism