Liberal imperialist Todd Gitlin witch-hunts antiwar movement on Fresh Air

Mike Friedman mikedf at amnh.org
Sat Jan 25 13:41:37 MST 2003


Yes, it is a "normal imperialist war," i.e. a war to allow imperialist
capital to plunder Iraqi oil and establish total control in the Middle
East. Whether or not Saddam Hussein is a good or bad president is utterly
besides the point. On the hypocritical side, the U.S. government has never
ONCE pushed for a UN resolution condemning Saddam Hussein's human rights
record. Why not? Because the U.S. government has put hundreds of
bloodthirsty disctators (including Hussein) in power, and will continue to
do so. The U.S. government has proven though ACTIONS over the past decade
that it isn't interested in the human rights of the Iraqi people. On the
contrary, these represent an impediment to its unobstructed plunder of
Iraqi resources. Nor is it the U.S. government's place to install and
remove leaders (sic) of sovereign nations, although it will obviously
continue to do so as long as it is...imperialist. Our role, as  U.S.
citizenry, is not to support "regime change" in Iraq, but here at home. Our
role is to defend Iraqi sovereignty, to oppose Washington's adventures in
support of big oil's profits, to stop Bush's pretensions of global
domination and block the U.S. militarism that threatens the Iraqi people as
well as our own youth. As opposed to Gitlin and friends.

At 08:04 AM 1/25/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>I think the problem is that you can't simply label the war in Iraq (as
>you couldn't label the war in Afghanistan) simply as a normal
>imperialist war.  It isn't as though Saddam is a popularly elected
>leader who reflects the will of his people (as opposed to say the
>Sandinistas or whoever).  He himself was put in place by the same
>imperialists who now want to get rid of him.  The fact remains that WE
>SHOULD GET RID OF HIM.  He's a horrible leader who has done horrible
>things to the people of Iraq.  That has to be acknowledged.  One can
>admit that yet still be against THIS war.  Personally, explicitly
>accepting such a fact would give the anti-war movement much more
>credibility than trying to posit Saddam as an innocent bystander.


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



More information about the Marxism mailing list