> And of course, it remains the case that the Turks have >done nothing to the Kurds that is comparable to what the >Serbs have done to the Albanians in the last two months, >not even close, which was my original point in this thread. >Why are people so resistant to admitting this? >Barkley Rosser Because it is similar to the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" Also, you are approaching the whole question from a "human rights" angle, where the rest of us are trying to understand things from the standpoint of political economy and history. By analogy, one can say that Central American governments repressed indigenous peoples in the 1980s, from Guatemala to Nicaragua. For argument's sake, let's say that Rios-Montt was not quite as brutal as he was and that the number of displaced and murdered Mayans approximated the same number of Nicaraguan Miskitus. Would this lead to the conclusion that the conflicts were identical and the governments were equally culpable. What I've been reading about Kosovo in the 1980s, long before the termination of autonomy, is that the problems in Nicaragua and socialist Yugoslavia were of the same nature. Rising expectations of a traditionally disenfranchised people led to massive unrest. Imperialism intervened to take advantage of ethnic strife and provoke a counter-revolution. Turkey is a much different story. Turkey is Guatemala. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
