[Marxism] Has imperialism changed its stripes?

james pitman marinercarpentry at gmail.com
Wed Jul 6 00:27:08 MDT 2011


Personally, I belong to the anti-Gaddafi; anti-NATO camp. So from that
position here's my view:

[The Libyan opposition (the "rebels") are supported by NATO and the western
imperialist powers.  If they represent a genuine force for democracy and
self-determination, why are the imperialists supporting them militarily and
politically?]

I think the imperialists presence is the result of wanting to put a lid on
the uprisings sweeping the MENA and reassert authority in a vital
geopolitical region. Therefore, I think the word 'support' is incorrect. Its
opposite would be nearer the truth. This is why Western powers replaced the
genuine revolutionaries in the transitional council with the cuckold interim
government and demanded various conditions for their help - such as the
release of regime money etc. Furthermore, NATO have attacked aircraft
defence systems that could only have been used the rebels thereby leaving
them [the rebels] at the mercy of both sides. The fact is it would of been
very difficult for NATO to justify their interference if Libya had followed
the contours of a 'classic' revolution, such as Tunisia or Egypt, but then
Gaddafi started bombing his own people - giving NATO the invitation and
opportunity to out-atrocity Gaddafi.  So importantly here, we are not
talking about two sides but three.

[Would a victory for the opposition on the basis of the NATO intervention be
a positive step for democracy, self-determination, and ultimately for the
development of socialism in Libya and in the broader Middle East in
general?]

NO, no and no. I believe the revolution has now been derailed. Partition
seems like a possibility as NATO rhetoric makes it sound like they're losing
their Gaddafi blood-lust. Maybe Gaddafi remaining in power and a new
government in the East, composed of recycled elites from the old regime is
like a home-run for NATO but certainly no victory for any Marxist.

Jamie

On 6 July 2011 05:58, Allan <allan.m.miller at gmail.com> wrote:

> ==============================**==============================**==========
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==============================**==============================**==========
>
>
> I've been following the debate over the war in Libya on the list, and have
> some questions for those who generally put forward the "anti-pro-Qadaffi"
> position, as I'll refer to it.
>
> The Libyan opposition (the "rebels") are supported by NATO and the western
> imperialist powers.  If they represent a genuine force for democracy and
> self-determination, why are the imperialists supporting them militarily and
> politically?
>
> Would a victory for the opposition on the basis of the NATO intervention be
> a positive step for democracy, self-determination, and ultimately for the
> development of socialism in Libya and in the broader Middle East in general?
>
> How do you explain this?
>
>
>
> ______________________________**__________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.**utah.edu<Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu>
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.**
> utah.edu/mailman/options/**marxism/marinercarpentry%**40gmail.com<http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/marinercarpentry%40gmail.com>
>



More information about the Marxism mailing list