[Marxism] Repeatedly misquoting Achcar :-(

Manuel Barrera mtomas3 at hotmail.com
Sun Aug 28 10:05:37 MDT 2011


Well, Lenin (or, should I refer to you as Tomb?). I agree with Paddy, but perhaps it is a bit hysterical to point out that this quotation war is not only irrelevant, it almost seems designed to obfuscate the real problem: Achcar's mealy-mouthed position on the the NATO intervention; something that he calls, laughingly, "consistent". First, Achcar wants to ask imperialism to "protect" the Libyan revolution, but only for "week or 10 days" and then metaphorically say "thank you, goodbye now, we'll take it from here"; all in the name of being "decent" from our supposed perches in "London or New York". Then (!) He calls on all us to oppose that intervention and the U.N. resolution because of that whole "Oil" motive. So, therefore, "we", out West, are just being "indecent" for opposing outright Imperialism's motives, intentions, Bombs, Sorties, spies, and propaganda. But Gil is not being indecent by saying Yes, bring your bombs--but only for a week (ok, or 10 days)--but I oppose it because You (imperialism) have the wrong motives. Push me, pull you? What, is this some bad love affair?


The real problem is Both the "indecency" of opposing the Libyan uprising because it was not "pure" AND supporting NATO's bombs (and all else). Really? The "only" alternative (in answer to Gil) was to ask NATO to come for a short holiday bombing spree in defense of the Libyan revolution--wholeheartedly opposed by imperialism--you know, because Imperialism never wears out its welcome when asked to intervene "on the side" of the people? And, the "only" alternative for revolutionists ("leftists" aren't always exactly the same as revolutionists) is to oppose the Libyan people's Rising because, what, they're too prone to seek the help of the wrong people? Did ANY of you EVER think that there was a BETTER source for revolutionary support, you know, like the Egyptian revolution next door, never mind the Arab Spring as a whole, the Gaza youth, the Indignados/Aganaktismenoi of Europe, worldwide solidarity? Oh, Hell, What about the people who actually ended up making the difference in the end, you know, the Libyan masses? 


There is a name for the kind of politics that calls for us to "cry wolf" because we think that we "know" what is going to happen, therefore, we must engage in "knee-jerk" oppositions with no thought to the masses or knee-jerk demands for "10 days" of on-call bombing from imperialism. Such "disaster politics" has been imperialism's stock in trade for at least the last decade and, now, it seems it has crept into discussions of revolutionary politics. If Achcar wants to be consistent, then he simply needs to recognize who He is--a revolutionary devoid of any worker's state or power of any sort to control imperialism's dirty hands--and act like a revolutionary--from his own perch in London--and tackle the Enemy he can oppose, imperialism, and not try to justify the machinations of desperate people in Benghazi who were simply trying to survive. It was not (is not) "indecency" that motivates revolutionaries in the imperialist world rightly to oppose NATO's clearly anti-working class, counter-revolutionary aims in Libya. It is also not for revolutionaries "out here" to denounce the Libyan masses and their, let's say, erratic leaderships for doing anything they could to win this fight--Qadaffi was and is the enemy As Much As is NATO and its U.S. and European military underwriters. They Both needed to be fought and the world revolutionary movement, no matter how small, needed (needs) to fight on each of these fronts. Yes, such things require coordination, "consistency" of purpose--to advance the world movement for democracy, and united solidarity with the struggling masses actively engaged on the ground. There are no other people, except for revolutionists, who can negotiate such intellectual and political territory. 


Hence, why I agree with Paddy, the quote wars are wholly irrelevant; because that "war" emasculates is the actual point. 		 	   		  


More information about the Marxism mailing list