Time's 'Person of the Century' coverup

ÁÎ×Ó¹â HenryC.K.Liu ¹ù¤l¥ú hliu at SPAMmindspring.com
Thu Dec 30 09:34:59 MST 1999



The independence of India, not unlike the creation of Israel, was in
large part a desperate price the British offered in return for Indian
nationalists support against Japanese expansionism in WWII.  The
Japanese accused the Oxbridge trained Indian nationalists as suffering
from a racist slave mentality, in that they preferred British
imperialism to Japanese "sphere of co-prosperity" in Asia. This disdain
for the victims of Western imperialism became one factor of Japanese
atrocities in WWII, while the same atrocities in turn justified the
excuses of Western imperialism. There is no doubt that the biggest
policy error committed by Hitler was the Nazi persecution of the Jews,
aside from the guestion of morality. Never the less, the Holocaust sided
the Zionist objective of reconstituting a Jewish state on Palestine, an
objective that faced decline during the 18th and 19th century growth of
liberal attitude toward Jews in Europe. To this day, anti-Semitism is
viewed by many orthodox Jewish leaders as a necessary evil for
preserving Jewish culture.

Ghandi's passive resistance did not secure political independence for
India.
Japanese imperialism did. In fact, British imperialism contributed to
the unification of India. albeit under foreign occupation.

In China, communism, as responsive as it was, and is, for Chinese
conditions, did not gained power through its ideological merits.
Japanese invasion of China provided the window of opportunity to
communism in China.  When Tanaka visited China in 1972, as the first
Japanese prime minister to do so after the War, Mao thanked the Japanese
for helping communism succeed in China.  Mao aptly understood ideology
as the bastard child of geopolitics.

The irony was that the advent of communism in Asia and Africa, and even
Latin
America, extended the death-bed life of Western imperialism around the
world for another half a century under the guise of bogus democracy and
market
capitalism.  This was imperialism with a human face.  When the socialist
government of Portugal offered to return Macao to China in 1973, China
declined.

The Cold War cemented Asian nationalism with leftist movements, while
right wing forces allied themselves with internationalism and
globalization.  With the end of the Cold War, the roof of Asian
nationalism began to be broad enough to accommodate both the left and
the right.  On the other end of the spectrum, imperialistic forces under
the ideological banner of neo-liberalism also enjoy the support of a
coalition of the left and the right.  This coalition is very visible in
the US and in the EU in the post-Reagan/Thatcher era, under a so-called
progressive governance movement, sometimes known as the Third Way. Its
strategic objective is to dull the pains of neo-imperialism while making
the world safe for the virus.  It is even more vicious than old-time
imperialism, because its comes as a savior rather than an oppressor and
it suppresses the symptoms of the decease and therefore the incentive
for resistance.

Henry C.K Liu


"Jose G. Perez" wrote:

> >>The view that "It was the massive upsurge of people all over the
> semicolonial world, and most powerfully in China, that put an end to direct
> colonialism," is not true as far as India is concerned. <<
>
> I'm sorry if my post gave this impression. I should have said "the era of
> direct colonialism" or something like that to make clear that I was speaking
> about the phenomenon on a world scale (and even today some direct colonies
> remain, for example, Puerto Rico).
>
> José
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ulhas Joglekar <ulhasj at bom4.vsnl.net.in>
> To: marxism at lists.panix.com <marxism at lists.panix.com>
> Date: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 2:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Time's 'Person of the Century' coverup
>
> >It is true that masses of people world over taking advantage of the
> complete
> >exhaustion of British etc. during the Second World War defeated
> colonialism.
> >IMHO the exhaustion of British imperialism HASTENED the process of
> >decolonisation, at least as far India is concerned. Indian freedom movement
> >was strong enough by the end of 1930s to make Indian independence highly
> >probable by that time.
> >
> >The view that "It was the massive upsurge of people all over the
> >semicolonial world, and most powerfully in China, that put an end to direct
> >colonialism," is not true as far as India is concerned. Indian freedom
> >struggle was strong enough by 1938(when the Long March had just ended in
> >China) to make Indian independence probable.
> >Indian struggle for independence owes nothing to Chinese Revolution. (The
> >reverse is equally true.)
> >
> >Ulhas
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Jose G. Perez <jgperez at freepcmail.com>
> >To: Marxism List <marxism at lists.panix.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 7:07 AM
> >Subject: Time's 'Person of the Century' coverup
> >
> >>     India and many other colonies won their freedom thanks, not to
> >Gandhi's
> >> tactics, but to masses of people the world over taking advantage of the
> >> complete exhaustion of the British, French, Belgians, etc., in the Second
> >> World War, as is obvious from the fact that Britain lost virtually every
> >one
> >> of her other colonies, too. It was the massive upsurge of people all over
> >> the semicolonial world, and most powerfully in China, that put an end to
> >> direct colonialism.
> >>
> >>
> >> José
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >









More information about the Marxism mailing list