|
In a message dated 6/21/2004 10:30:20 PM Central Standard
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We were briefly discussing the question of whether the Chechens sought to ethnically cleanse Chechnya of Russians et. al. at the beginning of the 90s. Reply
We live in the most imperial of all imperial states and the
word imperialism does not in any way frighten me or send me into an orgy of back
flogging over concepts of self determination.
Russia's imperial ambition is inexplicable tied to its history
of emergence as a multinational state dating back to the 13th Century if memory
serves me correct. Imperial has a meaning and imperialism has existed as a form
that manifest the relentless advance and evolution of means of production and
their export to less developed areas of the world. That is to say that
those who become conquered in history as a general rule lack the ability to
defeat the conquerors of what is the same lack the
infrastructure development that allows one to arm themselves and achieve an
equilibrium, that prevents economic subjugation.
Screaming "imperial subjugation" is fine and dandy and gets
one in trouble in today's world without an economic analysis of the world and
the various centers of gravity. Center of gravity means economic relations with
the property relations within.
No one likes bombs and to be bombed. Bombs upset people
especially when ones loved one has been killed . . . dead . . . funeral
arrangements and everything else.
On Pen-L are we not at least challenged to discern the
profound economic relations that are the impulse for a probable future? What are
the economic enters of gravity that are going to compel what was the autonomous
region of the old USSR called Chechnya, to descend into? If it is not Russia and
the Russian State as an economic center of gravity then what are we talking
about?
Self determination and political ideology?
What about eating, secular schooling, medical care,
pensions, higher education, public transportation. Theater, music,
literature . . . life love and the pursuit of happiness? These are profound
questions that cannot be detached from the real world division of labor or
specialization that gives a country and people a chance to achieve ascendency
over the level of barbarism.
What is the direction of the economic logic that is so-called
Chechnya, self determination?
I have no love affair with Putin or the Putin administration
but one must at least be mature enough to understand real world politics and the
economic and perceived national and state interest that drives leaders.
One can of course cry crocodile tears over the people of
Chechnya, but the real question is were they better off fifteen years ago
compared to today?
The answer is a missed bag depending upon the real individual
in Chechnya, and not ones ideal about democracy.
Chechnya, as an independent state demands the question
independent of what and who and what geopolitical forces in today's world.
In as much as this thread is called "Putin" - by choice, is
not the question what is Putin's vision, economic and social policy toward
Chechnya?
This begs another question or series of questions. Who is
Putin the man and what is his history that allowed him to rise to the head of a
very powerful state structure?
Putin has more legitimacy than Bush Jr., and most Presidents
elected in the American Union for the past century. I am not a cheerleader for
Putin but political.
There are exactly what . . . 500,000 people of Chechnya. Look
there are about 40 million African Americans and the same count on Mexicans.
I care about the little man and "the one" . . . but
large states and economic centers of gravity define history and all the
crocodile tears about who got hurt does not alter history. Yes, we are concerned
about the individual.
What is the economic logic that gives us a framework of
probable future projections?
What are the geopolitical circumstances that makes oil in
Chechnya important and what forces are at play?
Crying over self determination might clam the bleeding heart
but in the real world of politics . . . where someone must elected you or a
consensus appoint your (which means being elected) the world is more real.
Stating that the Russian are bad and imperial is a no brainier
in the sense that the Russian people inherited the state and imperial
prerogative. Are the Russians bad is a question worthy of examination because
"bad" is in relationship to exactly what?
If the relationship is in your head then one is compelled to
ask who are you and who elected you to anything to have such profound insight
into political and economic relationships in the first place?
Now what?
Yeas . . . I want everyone to be free and dream of
peace, c=democracry and communism.
Every freaking morning I wake up to a real world that does not
operate on the basis of something in my head.
Melvin P.
|
