consequences of U.S. warmaking

DMS dmschanoes at earthlink.net
Sat Feb 1 14:08:52 MST 2003


All.

CB is having trouble transmitting to the list.  So I offered to paste his
offline transmissions to me for reposting.  This is an act selfless
generosity on my part, rare and difficult to believe as that may be, and I
expect to be rewarded in heaven, but I'm in no real hurry or need of the
reward. Please don't count these postings against my 2 a day limit, unless I
start pretending these are from CB, when they are really mine.  You should
be able to see through the ruse without too much difficulty should i attempt
that.  Anyway.................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------



from dms:
CB:

Thanks for the reply.  And I must say, after I sent my missive, I reread it
and thought it was a little too harsh on you. I apologize for the excess.

I hope you get back to the list soon. If not, please feel free to contact
me, and I will transmit for you if you like.

Ann Arbor, huh?  Hey you're not the CB I worked with at Red's Rite Spot, are
you?


CB:  On transmissions to the list. It might be helpful if I transmitted at
least exchanges with you , because it would save Les Schaffer, my good
buddy, from having to reformat them. We can't figure out how to change the
settings on my AOL email. So , Les kindly reformats my posts. However, for
that reason I don't want to send your reply below, through me, because Les
would have to format it ! Maybe you could send it tomorrow so as to stay
within your daily quota.

NOW the Substance:


ds:
I disagree with 9/11 being the why in the why now.  Vice versa is more like
it for me.


CB: Well, we agree that 9/11 is not the real "why".   I am saying that the
timing is based on a fake claim, an phony excuse, by Bush et al. ( Bush
being an agent of the ruling class).  The terrible thing about 9/11 is that
it has given the American bourgeoisie an excuse to do what they want. The
perpetrators of 9/11 were rightwingers helping other rightwingers, in that
sense.

ds:
But in any case,  it's a 10,000 pound elephant all right, a 10,000 white
elephant, in the fact that it hasn't any real value.  We can say, we
Americans had it coming, because we are such bad guys, but that says nothing
and has no value.  That is precisely the white elephant.  First it ignores a
few facts, namely, almost 1/3 I believe of those killed were not
"Americans," per se.  Secondly, nobody deserves to die like that.

CB: Again, note I said my argument was not based on justifying 9/11. It's
that we can pragamatically use the American fear and horror at 9/11 to say
" don't attack Iraq, because that will cause another 9/11, justified or not.
Whether we or anybody killed in another 9/11 deserves it or not, it will in
fact occur."

ds:

Thirdly, it's very unclear if the act was in retaliation for anything, or if
it wasn't just a
set-up from the gitgo.  And most important, it shifts the terrain to "moral"
issues, good/bad, deserved/underserved, instead of the issues of capital and
what capital causes, requires to happen.

CB: No, read my post. I specifically said I was not making a moral argument.
It is a pragmatic argument. Ignore morality.  If you keep attacking them,
they will keep attacking you.

I did say American's have to face the fact that they have been attacking
"them" and I mentioned "who started it ?  "  I can see why you would
interpret that as a moral argument.  But assume that the U.S. war in '91 was
the moral high ground because it got Iraq out of Saudi Arabia, or that the
U.S. was championing democracy and freedom.  The U.S. might have the moral
high ground but it will not stop future 9/11's.

ds:
It might be nice to have realtors and dentists against the war, but believe
me that, like terrorists, will have absolutely no influence on the demands
of capital. The point is not to convince voters as tourists, or tourists as
voters, but to develop a program that shatters the "commonality" of capital.

CB: That is a point, the longer term goal. But it won't occur in time to
stop this war.

ds:
As for personal safety, I live in NYC, my wife works/worked across the
street from the WTC; I work in Grand Central, my will to survive is as
strong as anybody's.  But telling people, "If you don't stop your
government, then revenge will be taken on all of you without distinction,"
sounds just like what the right wing death squads do and say in Latin
America.  Not a revolutionary strategy.


CB: We are not saying we will take revenge. We are saying it will occur as
an objective fact. You can't keep attacking other people without them
eventually getting you back. And , no they aren't going to make distinctions
among Americans anymore than Americans are making distinctions between
Saddam and other Iraqi's. Saddam Hussein was not injured in the last war,
but lots of other Iraqi's were

ds:
Much better to point out the Saudi links to bin Laden; the CIA links to bin
Laden; the US role in the defeat of the USSR in Afghanistan, or, if we want
to drive the point home more provocatively, how about quoting Malcolm X
"Chickens coming home to roost"?  I'd support that.



CB: Yes , chickens coming home to roost is the idea. The others are good
too. Even our right wing Detroit News had a cartoon on Rumsfeld's "old
acquaintance" with Saddam. I'll see if I can attach the cartoon hear

ds:
The trick about war, is that there is no effective deescalation.  Wars don't
stop without defeat, victory, revolution, or any combination of the three.
I don't look at the antiwar movement as a protest that will hamper Bush.  I
look at it as a grounds to shift the discussion to capital and its
overthrow.  That's why I work in it.  That's why I attend the
demonstrations, as frustrating as it is having to listen to priests,
lawyers, and self-serving Democrats.


CB: Yes, I understand your point. Communists are supposed to struggle for
reforms ( stopping this war is a reform) in a revolutionary manner. The
revolutionary issues have to in some way point toward  changing the system
of property relations,  overthrowing capital. This is the Communist's duty
always - to somehow interject this element.  I think your whole focus on
oil, and the seeking of oil is being raised. One of the most common slogans
in the demos is "No Blood for Oil" . I here many, many regular people saying
this is about oil. The consciousness of the economic motive is widespread.

ds:
I don't know IF the US HADN"T been waging war since 1991 what would have
happened.  I do know that that war, this war, and the WTC attacks are all
about the needs of capital.


CB: I think you do know something about the connections among these.

ds:
Your right about PF.  My remarks were gratuitous.

Best,
dms


Address All Complaints to C Brown.




~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list