Re: M-TH: paragraph on Balkans
In response to Rob, my expaination would be that with the collapse of the socialist bloc, and the catastophic effects of capitalism on Russia, Imperialism (in the dual guise NATO the EU) is attempting to pick off all of Russia's neighbours before it has chance to recover. Yugoslavia was the only bulwalk to this advance eastwards (completing the West's 1939-45 war aims). Like in the old Austro- Hungary, they aim to cut it up redistribute it to border states and so isolate and weaken Russia. A Marxist response is far than obvious to me. Other than all out support for Y.C.P., as some argue (we can't support the KLA), there is no real group to support (like Kashmir) and we are left merely hurling abuse at NATO. All fair comment, John. Of course, the west is paying a big price for all this. You can destroy economies, oppose neighbours to each other, manipulate leaderships, discipline labour, and control economic policies, but you can't make people like you. I still think buying them off would have been a better idea (and a lot cheaper) for the imperialists than blowing them away. Another few decades of the sort of shit that characterised 20th century Europe has been irrevocably installed, I'm afraid. As for a rhetorical response, I'd hesitate before articulating all-out support for anybody in this mess - separating the internecine issue from the NATO issue is something worth doing. We have to avoid being seen to side with infamy at any price (unless we have just cause to believe the infamy is tendentiously constructed - but Srebrenica cured me of that illusion in this particular regard, regardless of what has actually transpired in Kosovo itself) - we've enough unhelpful associations (whether with the actual or the discursively framed) going against us already. Support the oppressed everywhere, but never at the price of buying into arguments which presume social cleavages we reject. If white kills black, man kills woman, or Slav kills Albanian, the idea is not to pick sides in fights fought on untenable premises (eg all blacks/women/Albanians against all whites/men/Slavs). 'Tis the fight itself, and the pre-modern idealist prejudices that inform or legitimate it, that must be fought. As racism/sexism/ethnicism/nationalism are the enemy of us all, so is it the generalised exchange relation that oppresses us all. Mebbe the bringing together of theory and praxis (the raison d'etre of this list) is muchly to do with critiquing the former categories in light of the latter. Meanwhile, I'm happy to hurl abuse at the hypocritical murdering bastards at NATO. They are the provisional wing of the exchange relation, for mine. Cheers, Rob. --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: paragraph on Balkans
It seems that the debate on the war on MTh has stalled without many recognising the truth of the Trotskyist position argued early on in the war. The elementary truth of imperialist oppression and the Anti-imperialist united front necessary to defeat it seems to have got lost in the thaxis. Rob's position has the air of not wanting to take sides for fear of being sucked into pre-modernist extremes. George argues for duel defeatism. But these are positions which allow NATO to get away with murder. We are already sucked into barbarism by rotten reactionary imperialism which cannot make everyone modern. Only socialism can do that. Therefore we have to take a side in every question by assessing the gains for the working class so that it can advance to socialism. On Yugoslavia the Trotskyist position is clear - unconditional defence of Yugoslavia against NATO. Yugoslavia is oppressed by imperialism - the main enemy. A defeat for Yugoslavia will be a defeat for workers everywhere, including Kosovo. A victory for Yugoslavia will only be possible if Yugoslav workers and soldiers combine with the workers in the NATO countries and their lackeys like Australia and NZ, and force NATO out. Militant international workers action against NATO is the only course. Only that will create the conditions for socialism and the end to the horrors Rob wants to avoid. Defending Yugoslavia does not mean capitulating to nationalism. On the contrary, imperialism keeps nationalism alive as a means of divide and rule. The national question is the class question. The Balkanisation of Yugoslavia is NATO's testing ground for the Balkanisastion of the whole of Asia. By defending Yugoslavia workers in the NATO countries have to renounce their own nationalism because they are similtaneously calling for the defeat of their "own" countries. Hence workers in oppressor countries must overcome their nationalism to defend Yugoslavia. Workers in oppressed countries (like the Serbs and Kosovars) have the right to defend themselves. That's why we call for the right of self-defence and multi-ethnic militias which includes Serbs and ethnic Albanians. When NATO and imperialism are defeated or out of the Balkans, we can call for the implementation of self-determination for Kosovo. It may be that the result will be a Kosovar Socialist Republic in a Balkan Federation which will include Serbia, Croatia and Albania. (On this question, a recent Los Angeles Times article reports that 1,000s of military age Kosovar men are free in northern Kosovo without any sign of oppression. If that is the case in the middle of a NATO war, that is a sign of hope that Serbs and ethnic Albanians can settle the Kosovo question by getting together to get rid of their respective bourgeois misleaders). Defending Yugoslavia does not mean agreeing with Milosovic. On the contrary, Milosovic cannot and will not defend Yugoslavia because he has a class interest in profiteering from its oppression by imperialism. He is about to do a deal with NATO and is looking for a face-saving formula. However, while Milosovic is leading the army and defending Yugoslavia a military bloc with him is necessary. The lessons of the Anti-Imperialist United Front beginning with the case of China in the 1920's are vital here. In any military bloc with Milosovic, the workers must maintain their armed independence. Thus, in the Yugoslav army the rank-and-file have to organise to take control of the army; to encourage the formation of multi-ethnic militia; to act against any reactionary paramilitaries engaged in ethnic cleansing; and to call for a truce if and when it is necessary for the workers movement to survive. Communists lead this movement by forming cells in the army and in militias and workers councils. Dave Bedggood In response to Rob, my expaination would be that with the collapse of the socialist bloc, and the catastophic effects of capitalism on Russia, Imperialism (in the dual guise NATO the EU) is attempting to pick off all of Russia's neighbours before it has chance to recover. Yugoslavia was the only bulwalk to this advance eastwards (completing the West's 1939-45 war aims). Like in the old Austro- Hungary, they aim to cut it up redistribute it to border states and so isolate and weaken Russia. A Marxist response is far than obvious to me. Other than all out support for Y.C.P., as some argue (we can't support the KLA), there is no real group to support (like Kashmir) and we are left merely hurling abuse at NATO. All fair comment, John. Of course, the west is paying a big price for all this. You can destroy economies, oppose neighbours to each other, manipulate leaderships, discipline labour, and control economic policies, but you can't make people like you. I still think buying them off would have been a better idea (and a lot cheaper) for the imperialists than blowing them away. Another few decades of the sort of
M-TH: paragraph on Balkans
In response to Rob, my expaination would be that with the collapse of the socialist bloc, and the catastophic effects of capitalism on Russia, Imperialism (in the dual guise NATO the EU) is attempting to pick off all of Russia's neighbours before it has chance to recover. Yugoslavia was the only bulwalk to this advance eastwards (completing the West's 1939-45 war aims). Like in the old Austro- Hungary, they aim to cut it up redistribute it to border states and so isolate and weaken Russia. A Marxist response is far than obvious to me. Other than all out support for Y.C.P., as some argue (we can't support the KLA), there is no real group to support (like Kashmir) and we are left merely hurling abuse at NATO. Regards John Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] I propose we each put in one paragraph what best explains the Yugoslav business to us. No essays requested, just a few quick words concerning the single most salient reason for what's going on. We all recognise there may be many reasons and many interested parties, that differing contexts would allow/disallow such adventures for such reasons etc, but you're all busy people (or so it seems), and all I ask is one par on the Yugoslav business *in particular* (ie no general motherhood and apple pie rhetoric). --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
