Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
--- Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:29 PM -0500 4/10/04, dmschanoes wrote: the fighters in the streets demanding the withdrawal of US forces It is understandable that secular Communists are weary of fighters inspired by their religious faith, as the latter may not have any fond regard for the former, but the only way that Iraqi Communists can survive the occupation and its aftermath is to quit the Governing Council and position themselves at the forefront of the demonstrations in the streets, building up working-class support for the party in the process. Unless they can do that, they will be pretty soon back into exile or the underground. -- Yoshie *** Point of information: Iranian workers, organized into workers' councils in the petroleum sector were instrumental in making the relatively peaceful political revolution against the Shah a success through the strikes they enforced. They were rewarded with death for their unity with the religious tendencies in this battle against an oppressive regime. Blocking with fundamentalists is not a healthy thing for proletarian revolutionaries to do. Regards, Mike B) ** In the 20 years since the Islamic counter-revolution, the regime has murdered close to 100,000 political prisoners from many communist, socialist and left groups as well as from Mojahedin, a religious group. Their tormentors raped every woman and teenage girl facing the firing squad.1 Women have been degraded to second-class citizens. All workers associations, including shoras or workers councils, were disbanded and thousands of activists in the factories killed. The level of real wages fell from $11 to $1 a day.2 Today in Iran there is not a single independent union, no collective bargaining and strike action is illegal. Attacks against national minorities like the Kurds and religious minorities continue unabated. The war with Iraq to export Islamic counter-revolution to the region also brought devastation, a million dead or injured and a total damage of $500 billion. http://www.revolutionarycommunistgroup.com/frfi/150/150-irn.htm = Objectivity cannot be equated with mental blankness; rather, objectivity resides in recognizing your preferences and then subjecting them to especially harsh scrutiny and also in a willingness to revise or abandon your theories when the tests fail (as they usually do). Stephen Jay Gould http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Point of information: Iranian workers, organized into workers' councils in the petroleum sector were instrumental in making the relatively peaceful political revolution against the Shah a success through the strikes they enforced. They were rewarded with death for their unity with the religious tendencies in this battle against an oppressive regime. Blocking with fundamentalists is not a healthy thing for proletarian revolutionaries to do. Regards, Mike B) Avoid being instrumental, i.e. instrumental to success of others. Communists have to get involved in the struggle against the occupation and become leaders of it. Unless they can do that, they are goners. -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
MB is absolutely correct. But blocing with fundamentalists is not the issue, no more than blocing with the Taliban was the content, meaning or program of fighting the US invasion of Afghanistan. The issue isfirst, the recognition that the actual struggle going on has social, not religious roots, in the class structure; 2. the religious manifestation is inadequate, and will become, sooner rather than later, hostile to the tasks of that struggle-- changing the social structure at its root. 3. the only way to supplant the religious groups is in the development and practice of a combat program by revolutionists. That means being in the midst, and forefront, of every struggle against the occupation. dms - Original Message - From: Mike Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 2:01 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation? Iranian workers, organized into workers' councils in the petroleum sector were instrumental in making the relatively peaceful political revolution against the Shah a success through the strikes they enforced. They were rewarded with death for their unity with the religious tendencies in this battle against an oppressive regime. Blocking with fundamentalists is not a healthy thing for proletarian revolutionaries to do.
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Let's see: the fighters in the streets demanding the withdrawal of US forces are actually hoping for an extension of US dominated occupation by displacing other democratic forces that opposed Saddam all along? What other democratic forces-- those that now sit on the US dominated governing council? Chalabi? He opposed Saddam all along. He's a democratic force? Well he certainly has the credentials, having been convicted of bank fraud. Actually it is the line of the U.S. media that the IGC is only composed of Chalabi. Chalabi has no base od support in Iraq. He is no democrat, nor is he capable of anything other than ruling in the name of the Bush administration. But he not the IGC, nor is he the future of Iraq. This is actually an inter-petty capitalist squabble for power in and after the handover? That's why there is the growing alliance of Shia and Sunni forces? That's why some members of the governing group have resigned and denounced the US actions as unacceptable and illegal? This argumentation by rhetorical question actually is starting to clarify the situation. From my position safely tucked away in NYC, as opposed to your position dangerously located.exactly where?, it looks to me like you're not really talking sensibly. Just one man's opinion, of course. I too am safely tucked away here in the U.S. I made no claim to be anywhere else. But I think my point that brave intellectuals in the west who seem to support anything and everything that seems anti-imperalist because it is violent has been made. Joel _ Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar FREE! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
I disagree that this is the only way. The fact is that the ICP is at the forefront of the reorganization of the working-class movement in Iraq. It has led the process of organizing the IFTU, which has come under attack by the US forces. It has called for the inclusion of Arab nationalist, secular democratic parties, and even parties that are religious in the reconstruction process, an inclusion that forces aligned with the US, like Chalabi, have opposed because his/US goal is to keep the recosntruction process as narrow as possible in order to ensure that as many pro-US individuals control it as possible. I think the ICP's view is that if they focus their work only in areas outside of the reconstruction process and outside of the arena to which the US plans to turn power over to on June 30 by quitting the IGC, they will be forfeiting that political ground to U.S. controlled interests. This won't be a positive thing for Iraq. It won't create an independent country, nor will it unify the diverse class and ethnic/cultural forces. Their view seems to be that unity is the key to rebuilding Iraq independent of the US. They have even said that Iraq doesn't need to have a completely secular constitution if it will promote unity and a national democratic movement. Joel It is understandable that secular Communists are weary of fighters inspired by their religious faith, as the latter may not have any fond regard for the former, but the only way that Iraqi Communists can survive the occupation and its aftermath is to quit the Governing Council and position themselves at the forefront of the demonstrations in the streets, building up working-class support for the party in the process. Unless they can do that, they will be pretty soon back into exile or the underground. -- Yoshie _ Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN Premium! http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlbpgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
I too am safely tucked away here in the U.S. I made no claim to be anywhere else. But I think my point that brave intellectuals in the west who seem to support anything and everything that seems anti-imperalist because it is violent has been made. Joel __ Like the Holy Roman Empire, I am neither brave, nor an intellectual, nor in support of anything and everything that is violent. My recommendation is to avoid close quarters combat whenever possible. Sometimes, however, it is just not possible to avoid. And then? Make sure you got a back up, a way out, extra ammunition. And water. Dry mouth is a gross understatement. But in the interim-- the situation in Fallujah, Baghdad is not a clash of two equal evils, or one greater one lesser evil, and the violence there has not been caused by the undemocratic militias, religious fundamentalists, or Ba'athist remnants, no more than the invasion of Iraq was precipitated by Saddam Hussein, any weapons of mass destruction, supposed links to terrorism, or the oppressive nature of his regime. The violence is caused by the presence of the occupiers. It is truly that simple. dms
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Avoid being instrumental, i.e. instrumental to success of others. Communists have to get involved in the struggle against the occupation and become leaders of it. Unless they can do that, they are goners. -- Yoshie Who says they are not involved in the struggle against the occupation? http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/4882/1/205/ http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/4747/1/201/ http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/4516/1/193/ http://www.iraqitradeunions.org/ http://www.iraqcp.org/framse1/ Joel _ Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Last comment on this. The mobilization of the general population into open combat against an occupying army, and/or its private equivalents, is fundamentally different than terrorist bombings. It is the eruption of the social struggle beyond the limits of both stabilizing and destabilizing forces, (as if the stabilizing forces weren't the biggest fomentors of destabilizaton). It is not just opportunism, not just a mistaken/failure, to confuse or ignore this critical distinction, it is outright reactionary, giving credence to the equal legitimacy of the occupation. No democracy is possible with, through the organizations sanctioned by the occupation. To preach about democracy while participating in the occupation government is to give new and true meaning to Hegel's description of liberalism as a philosophy of the abstract that capitulates before the world of the concrete. dms - Original Message - From: Joel Wendland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Who says they are not involved in the struggle against the occupation?
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Joel Wendland wrote: I too am safely tucked away here in the U.S. I made no claim to be anywhere else. But I think my point that brave intellectuals in the west who seem to support anything and everything that seems anti-imperalist because it is violent has been made. The content of support is a bit vague here. As far as I can tell all it means is sit in one's chair earnestly wishing that such and such will be the case in Iraq. There _is_ violence in Iraq. There will continue to be violence, ebbing and flowing but tending towards ever more violence, until all foreign troops are withdrawn unconditionally. There will very possibly be violence, a great deal of violence, after the troops withdraw. The longer troops remain, the more likely of great violence after they do withdraw. This is a statement of empirical fact, and nothing progressive forces in the west can do will change that fact. There is only one honorable course for intellectuals (or anyone else) in the west to follow: do all we can to force the withdrawal of foreign troops. U.S. out of Everywhere! Carrol
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Unfortunately the bit of over-dramatic rhetoric below indicates the lack of grounding in the reality of events in Iraq by some on this list. The statement posted was indeed authentic and was written by folkswho have lived and struggled in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq rather than analyzing info from within the U.S. It is pretty clear that uprisings in the last few days are not anti-imperialist but indeed are a struggle for power within the framework of the handover by the US on the June 30th. The forces at the head of these movements that have emerged in the past few days may have a lot to gain by forcing an extension of U.S. -dominated occuaption by displacing other democratic forces that opposed Saddam all along. This isn't revolutionary or anti-imperialist. Pretensions to being really revolutionary aside, why are some on this list so eager for continued eruptions of violence and killing in Iraq? Joel Wendland http://www.politicalaffairs.net Statement of the Political Bureau: About Recent Events This is without a doubt either a plant of disinformation designed to disgrace the very word communist in Iraq, or the self-delusion of a party that has absolutely no grounding in the reality of events in Iraq. _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Joel Wendland wrote: Unfortunately the bit of over-dramatic rhetoric below indicates the lack of grounding in the reality of events in Iraq by some on this list. The statement posted was indeed authentic and was written by folkswho have lived and struggled in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq rather than analyzing info from within the U.S. This is not a question of proximity. It is a question of participating in a quisling formation run by Ahmed Chalabi, a CIA asset and thief. It is pretty clear that uprisings in the last few days are not anti-imperialist but indeed are a struggle for power within the framework of the handover by the US on the June 30th. This is exactly the line of Fox TV. Pretensions to being really revolutionary aside, why are some on this list so eager for continued eruptions of violence and killing in Iraq? For the same reason we back the Palestinians or any other oppressed people fighting against occupation. Louis Proyect Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
It is pretty clear that uprisings in the last few days are not anti-imperialist but indeed are a struggle for power within the framework of the handover by the US on the June 30th. The forces at the head of these movements that have emerged in the past few days may have a lot to gain by forcing an extension of U.S. -dominated occuaption by displacing other democratic forces that opposed Saddam all along. This isn't revolutionary or anti-imperialist. Let's see: the fighters in the streets demanding the withdrawal of US forces are actually hoping for an extension of US dominated occupation by displacing other democratic forces that opposed Saddam all along? What other democratic forces-- those that now sit on the US dominated governing council? Chalabi? He opposed Saddam all along. He's a democratic force? Well he certainly has the credentials, having been convicted of bank fraud. This is actually an inter-petty capitalist squabble for power in and after the handover? That's why there is the growing alliance of Shia and Sunni forces? That's why some members of the governing group have resigned and denounced the US actions as unacceptable and illegal? From my position safely tucked away in NYC, as opposed to your position dangerously located.exactly where?, it looks to me like you're not really talking sensibly. Just one man's opinion, of course. dms
Liberal Technocrats the Iraqi Communist Party (Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?)
At 7:59 PM -0400 4/10/04, Louis Proyect wrote: Joel Wendland wrote: Unfortunately the bit of over-dramatic rhetoric below indicates the lack of grounding in the reality of events in Iraq by some on this list. The statement posted was indeed authentic and was written by folkswho have lived and struggled in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq rather than analyzing info from within the U.S. This is not a question of proximity. It is a question of participating in a quisling formation run by Ahmed Chalabi, a CIA asset and thief. It is pretty clear that uprisings in the last few days are not anti-imperialist but indeed are a struggle for power within the framework of the handover by the US on the June 30th. This is exactly the line of Fox TV. Leslie Campbell wrote in _Arab Reform Bulletin_ 2.1 (January 2004), a publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, alarming conservatives (e.g., J. Michael Waller, U.S. Taxpayers Could Back Iraqi Reds, February 6, 2004, http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/02/17/Features/U.Taxpayers.Could.Back.Iraqi.Reds-593491.shtml): * Secular constitutional democrats, inspired by western notions of universal democratic standards, are scattered throughout the country. At present, the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP) boasts the most significant organizational structure of the secular parties. With dues-paying members and small offices nationwide, the credibility of long opposition to Saddam, and a newly adopted European-style social democratic platform, the ICP could anchor a secular democratic coalition that could rally some former Iraqi National Congress parties and the newly formed or reinvigorated parties of moderate, secular Governing Council members. These include Adnan Pachachi's Democratic Centrist Tendency and Independent Democrats Movement and Kamil Chadirchi's National Democratic Party. http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/arb-january2004.pdf * Campbell is the director of the Middle East and North Africa programs of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, whose chairman is Madeleine K. Albright http://www.ndi.org/about/bdadv/bdadv.asp. The NDI's field assessment report (NDI would like to acknowledge the support of the National Endowment for Democracy, which funded this report, as well as the Institute's assessment mission, trainings, and focus group research in Iraq, NDI Assessment Mission to Iraq, June 23 to July 6, 2003, http://www.ndi.org/worldwide/mena/iraq/ 1625_iq_report_072503.pdf) approvingly quotes a former secretary general of the Iraqi Communist Party: If the CPA were to withdraw from Iraq, there would be a civil war and democrats would have no chance (NDI Assessment Mission to Iraq, June 23 to July 6, 2003, http://www.ndi.org/worldwide/mena/iraq/ 1625_iq_report_072503.pdf). The same quotation is recycled by Kenneth M. Pollack of the Brookings Institution in After Saddam: Assessing the Reconstruction of Iraq (January 7, 2004, http://www.iraqrevenuewatch.org/reading/After_Saddam.pdf, a report for the organization created by George Soros. Evidently, liberal technocrats affiliated with the Democratic Party have found the social-democratized Iraqi Communist Party quite useful for the purpose of legitimating the US occupation of Iraq. The Iraqi Communist Party, for its part, has been happy to jump at networking opportunities: * SOCIALIST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE Building Democracy in Iraq - Working for Peace in the Middle East Rome, 18-19 July 2003 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS . . . UNITED STATES OF AMERICA National Democratic Institute, NDI Ken Wollack Les Campbell . . . IRAQ Iraqi Communist Party, ICP Hamid Majid Mousa Subhi Al-Jumaily Raid Fahmi Fuad Aziz http://www.socialistinternational.org/6Meetings/SIMEETINGS/Conference/RomeJuly03/Conference-epartic.html * With friends like these, the people of Iraq need no enemy. -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
At 10:29 PM -0500 4/10/04, dmschanoes wrote: the fighters in the streets demanding the withdrawal of US forces It is understandable that secular Communists are weary of fighters inspired by their religious faith, as the latter may not have any fond regard for the former, but the only way that Iraqi Communists can survive the occupation and its aftermath is to quit the Governing Council and position themselves at the forefront of the demonstrations in the streets, building up working-class support for the party in the process. Unless they can do that, they will be pretty soon back into exile or the underground. -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Statement of the Political Bureau: About Recent Events The recent tragic and grave developments, which have taken place during the past few days in several cities in Iraq and resulted in hundreds of people killed and wounded, have only intensified the suffering of Iraqis and deepened their already sore wounds. It is quite clear that these developments do not serve, in any way, the countrys stability, and will not help to resolve any of its numerous problems, but rather will lead to further deterioration of conditions on all levels: political, security and social. If this course of events is persistently maintained, the people will then find themselves in a vortex of violence and violations of the law with unpredictable consequences and an extremely negative impact on the current main objective of Iraqi people: to take control of power from the occupation forces on 30 June. We condemn violence and terror in all forms and shades leading to bloodshed of innocent people as well as destruction of national assets. At the same time we call upon everybody to maintain peace, exercise self-restraint and handle issues wisely and prudently. Law must be respected as the arbiter in all spheres of life. Furthermore, the discourse of democratic dialogue must be adopted as civilised effective means for resolving existing problems and settling differences and conflicting opinions, rather than extremism, bigotry and pressures to impose unjust diktat. It is imperative to arrive at speedy sensible solutions for the current crisis in order to avert the harmful political repercussions and consequences on security, thus eliminating convenient ground for external hostile forces, terrorists and criminals among supporters and beneficiaries of the dictatorial regime. Only then can the Iraqi people direct their efforts to achieve the central task: to prepare for taking their affairs into their own hands at the end of next June, accelerate the elimination of the vestiges of dictatorship and build a democratic peaceful federal Iraq. Political Bureau of the Central Committee Iraqi Communist Party Baghdad 7-4-2004 http://www.iraqcp.org _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
- Original Message - From: Joel Wendland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 9:09 PM Subject: [PEN-L] Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation? Statement of the Political Bureau: About Recent Events This is without a doubt either a plant of disinformation designed to disgrace the very word communist in Iraq, or the self-delusion of a party that has absolutely no grounding in the reality of events in Iraq. The events in Iraq are the imperialist war cojoined with the civil war, and no surgical team can separate the two. The sore wounds the Iraqi people have endured are in no way extended, worsened by this armed rebellion for the wound will/would be inflicted irregardless. The wounds are the product of US capital's need to quite literally destroy the social fabric of Iraq, something not accomplished in the 12 years of sanctions. The armed struggle is a positive development, no less than the armed struggle of Palestinians against the Israeli occupation is a positive development. Communists do NOT condemn violence in all its forms. We do not condemn the violence of the slave against the slaveholder , of the oppressed against the oppressor of the occupied against the occupier. And so we must understand the unreason of reason, and the reason of unreason, the essential, and revolutionary rationality of unreason against the US occupation. Those who thought there was some rationality, that it was reasonable to regard the US occupation as a moderating, constructive, influence on Iraq, holding back the wolf at the door, and the dogs of war, have to account now for the constructive influence of collective punishment, the reasonableness of artillery and rocket strikes against the general population. dms
Re: Will more violence provoke an extension of the US occupation?
Was this written by the Kerry election campaign team? :-P Paul Phillips Joel Wendland wrote: Statement of the Political Bureau: About Recent Events snip It is quite clear that these developments do not serve, in any way, the country s stability, and will not help to resolve any of its numerous problems, but rather will lead to further deterioration of conditions on all levels: political, security and social. If this course of events is persistently maintained, the people will then find themselves in a vortex of violence and violations of the law with unpredictable consequences and an extremely negative impact on the current main objective of Iraqi people: to take control of power from the occupation forces on 30 June. We condemn violence and terror in all forms and shades leading to bloodshed of innocent people as well as destruction of national assets. At the same time we call upon everybody to maintain peace, exercise self-restraint and handle issues wisely and prudently. Law must be respected as the arbiter in all spheres of life. Furthermore, the discourse of democratic dialogue must be adopted as civilised effective means for resolving existing problems and settling differences and conflicting opinions, rather than extremism, bigotry and pressures to impose unjust diktat. snip Political Bureau of the Central Committee Iraqi Communist Party Baghdad 7-4-2004 http://www.iraqcp.org _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
