[Marxism] Re: Al Qaeda-Emerging New InternationalResistance to Imperialism
gojack10 at hotmail.com
Sat Mar 20 23:02:40 MST 2004
Rest assured, Lou, I am on no campaign to promote Al Qaeda on this list, or
anywhere, for that matter. Because I see the movement as a resistance to
imperialism of sorts, does not necessarily translate to me thinking that it
Al Qaeda is the type of resistance that is needed to ultimately defeat US
imperialism and world capitalism. I am not endorsing Al Qaeda, but just
examining what is new about this group form previous anticolonial movements.
Any 'new world' that Muslim fundamentalism coud create as their ideal ,
would be a truly horrible world indeed. This, we all agree upon.
Jose has trouble with me even calling Al Qaeda part of a movement against
colonialism. There are probably 4 reasons for Jose's opinion in this
One- He doesn't like the methods of warfare used by Al Qaeda.
Two- He doesn't like the fact that Al Qaeda was originally funded and put
into the field as part of a secret US army and a secret US war against the
Three- He doesn't like the fact that Islamic fundamentalism is the key value
that recruits new soldiers and holds Al Qaeda together.
Four- And then, he also asks how can there be a nationalism without a
The answers to #3 and #4 are easy, because it is easy enough to have a
religious based 'nationalism' and crusade that is international in scope. In
fact, secular communism was once internationalist in the same regard, and
took up national resistance to imperial occupations of colonies and
oppressed nations as a primary cause, and did it a part of its
internationalist message.. But to Al Qaeda, the nation is the religion
Islam, and all the peoples that currently adhere to its beliefs and
theology. They are defenders of the Islamic nation, as they see it.
Now, to answer #1 and #2 of the above problems Jose has with Al Qaeda being
considered part of national liberation struggles. The Iraqi Kurds also use
methods similar to Al Qaeda, asnd also are a secret army most recently
funded by the CIA to use against Saddam Hussein and the old Iraqi
government. They, like the Albanians, have allowed themselves to become US
proxy troops in colonial warfare. That still does not erase the merit of
Albanian and Kurdish struggles against colonialism and imperialism. Nor,
does the fact that Al Qaeda had its origens as US proxy troops in
Afghanistan, now change the fact that they are looking to throw the
Christiansimperialists) out of Muslim countries, from Morocco, to Iraq, to
Afghanistan, to Nigeria, to Pakistan, to Saudi Arabia, to Indonesia and so
on. Al Qaeda is part of the anti colonial resistance movement, like it or
not. And that's why they get recruits.
Lou says that the strategy of Al Qaeda is not successful at decrasing the
ability of imperialists to continue to dominate the countries of the Third
World where Muslims live. He believes that Al Qaeda, through the use of
'terrorism', has only hardened support for imperialism. I disagree with
The strategy of Al Qaeda, has been to try to show that the war can be
brought home to the imperial center itself. And by doing so, provoke a
reassessment of whether the price to pay for warfare and occupation
elsewhere, is a price that the common person in America wants to support.
Have they succeeded in doing this? Why yes, of course they have. Three
years ago, Iraq and Afghanistan were out of sight, and out of mind. The
secret US interventionism in those two regions is now no longer hidden away
today, and causing misery and horror without any notice from anybody on the
planet hardly what-so-ever. Now, the entire world is acutely aware that the
US is at war with these two societies, and wants it stopped. The world has
mobilized gigantic demonstrations to get the US to stop its interventionism
and militarism. Certainly, none of this change would have ever happened
without the actions that were undertaken by Al Qaeda, when they attacked the
Pentagon and WTC towers.
Other colonial resistance movements confined their battles to the regions
where they lived. The Vietnamese kept their battle zones within SE Asia,
the Guatemalans remained within the indigenous areas of Southern Mexico and
the Mayan Highlands, and he Colombians confined their zone of resistance to
Northern South America.
Al Qaeda decided to forget about just fighting on the Arabian Peninsula.
It decided to not just take the fight into frontier areas of the Muslim
world, such as Chechenia, Afghanistan, the Sudan, Somalia, and Kashmir. It
took them elsewhere, too...to Mororcco, Egypt, to Aceh, and inside the
Pakistani army. But all these places, were essentially all still part of the
Islamic 'Homelands' as seen by Islamic fundamentalist crusaders. What was
different, was when Osama bin Laden said to his army, that this was a stupid
thing they were doing, that their real enemy was elsewhere, and that the
fight (warfare, not just 'terrrorism') needed to be done elsewhere. This is
what is different about Al Qaeda, and what makes the US ruling class fear
them, instead of just dismiss them as irrelevant to everything.
It is just a mistake to think that the US ruling class is only making up and
exagerating the danger of Al Qaeda in order to benefit their own rule.
Al Qaeda is a real threat to their power, and not just a pretend thing, as
many Leftists want to believe. Because this is so, we need to look at Al
Qaeda and examine its realities in more than just a superficial manner of
just rejecting 'terrorism'. Yes, we have to reject Al Qaeda's reaccionary
core goal of trying to build an International fundamentalist Islamic Empire.
But Al Qaeda is truly weakening imperialist ideology as it struggles for
its own reacccionary cause, and this certainly has its own value to the
Al Qaeda is kind of a frankenstein that imperialism has created.
Frankenstein wants what his master has, but will never quite succeed.
Meanwhile, the townfolk may get themselves sufficiently arroused enough, to
do something about both the monster and the mad scientist that invented him.
Let that analogy be the end of my comments for now. Frankenstein has joined
the struggle against miitarism and imperialism, but he fights dirty. And he
may burn master's house down.
>And because some of the military strategy of Al Qaeda is so effective, its
>continued success in the field represents a real danger to Rome. Al Qaeda
>has power because it has produced change.
>Others might seek to copy such a strategy, and the US government is dead
>serious about how much it fears what the results of not taking effective
>action might be.
I think you are completely off-the-wall on this, but I suppose it serves
some pedagogical value to answer you. I would strongly advise you, however,
to refrain from seeing this forum as a place to promote Al Qaeda in the
same fashion that Marvin Gandall promotes the Kerry campaign. We do need to
keep up a certain minimum level of propriety.
Check out MSN PC Safety & Security to help ensure your PC is protected and
More information about the Marxism