On Sep 20, 2009, at 7:54 PM, nada wrote:

> Shane (and Nestor),
> I wasn't talking about 1945. I was talking about 1942, 43 and 44.

After Coral Sea and Midway Japan had strategically lost, just as the  
Germans had strategically lost after Stalingrad.
The US occupation of the Philippines was part of its imperial strategy  
and had no *military* purpose.
That imperial strategy--defined in Cairo in 1943 in the Unconditional  
Surrender doctrine of Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill--was  
intentionally and unambiguously counterrevolutionary.
How can the Allied use and counterrevolutionary manipulation of  
resistance movements led by "patriots" offset in the slightest degree  
the holocaust inflicted on the workers of Hamburg, Essen, Berlin,  
Hanover, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc., etc?
>

> When Marxists say "No to the Imperialist War" I wonder, and have  
> always wondered, what  this means concretely? Or is it simply  
> revolutionary hyperbole with absolutely no on the ground meaning vis- 
> a-vis allied *imperialist* aid
> to resistance movements, troop landings, etc? I think it's very, very
> complex question.


For revolutionary workers under occupation it meant fighting the  
occupation in every occupied country--the Germans in France as the  
British in Greece--using any aid offered from anywhere (like Casement  
in 1916) but never subordinating revolutionary objectives to  
conditions imposed by those helpers.  For revolutionaries in  
imperialist countries it meant using any shred of democratic rights  
left to them to expose the imperial ends for which and the barbaric  
means by which the war was being fought--and, legally or illegally, to  
support every effort at proletarian class struggle despite the   
screams about hypothetical detriments to the "war effort."  It most  
emphatically does not mean refusing to serve in the armed forces or  
carrying out sabotage--suicidal in some countries and  
counterproductive everywhere else.  I don't see what's complex about  
that, beyond the inevitable complexity of every concrete reality.

Shane Mage

> This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
> always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
> kindling in measures and going out in measures."
>
> Herakleitos of Ephesos

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: [email protected]
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to