The Voice of the Anti-Imperialist Movement from

Under Lock & Key

Can you do layout? Help out by laying out pamphlets and study packs to mail to prisoners. help out
[Middle East] [ULK Issue 18]
expand

Imperialist Blockade of Palestine Serving Interests of Zionism

Five months after an emergency relief envoy destined for Palestine was attacked and diverted by I$raeli settler pigs, who killed international relief volunteers aboard a Turkish tanker in international waters, the Amerikan puppet zionist regime announced it had begun allowing international aid to reach the Palestinian people yet again.

Desperately needed human aid such as food, clothing, medicine and construction materials comprised of cement and steel were stopped by zionist occupation forces due to supposed safety and security concerns that armament and explosives were being smuggled among the aid into the oppressed nation of Palestine. These allegations were of course proven untrue, however, the settler state still imposed an illegal ban on international aid entering Palestine as well as an import/export economic blockade.

This "economic blockade" as the settlers and their imperialist masters call it (really just another genocidal weapon, i.e., "excellent weapon of extermination") further destroyed the already pathetic economy which the Palestinian people have been forced to accept by the imperialists and their running dogs. Factories have been at a stand still since May forcing people out of work and most businesses have been shut down. Even agricultural plots which the Palestinians directly rely on to help feed their families have been denied to them. Jewish settlers steal produce from these plots and then destroy that which they cannot carry. The setters then contaminate the land with raw sewage.

So while the Palestinian economy has been destroyed and the international aid which the Palestinian people have been forced to turn towards is turned away, many might wonder exactly how is it that the Palestinians survive? A BBC reporter wondered too, so he took to the streets and found Palestinian markets selling Hebrew products and Hebrew products alone (Leave it to the invincible hand of free market capitalism to recognize where capital has fled and then magically re-organize). However, nowhere in sight was international aid or a re-surging Palestinian economy to be found. This is in direct contradiction to Zionist claims that the ban on aid and economic blockade had been lifted.

When I$raeli Foreign Minister Palmor was asked by the liberal bourgeois media why the supposed expired ban was still in effect despite claims that it's been lifted he resorted to typical oppressor nation rhetoric. Palmor unabashedly stated that the Palestinian people only had themselves to blame for the situation they now found themselves in. Furthermore, this PIG had the nerve to go on and explain that it was the Palestinians own terroristic behavior that caused all this to begin with. As if the Palestinians were the ones to make war on the Jewish people, evict them from their lands and subject them to 62 years of oppression and genocide. Oh wait, those were all zionist acts against the Palestinian people. Of course anytime the oppressed stand up and fight for their rights the oppressors quickly label them "terrorists." The real terrorists here are the backwards looking imperialists and their lackey supporters who refuse to acknowledge the rights of nations to self determination, while they love to talk about "equality" and "freedom."

Well, we in the USW say fuck your equalities and fuck your freedoms! The only freedom and equality we recognize is that of the oppressed.

Palestine and it's people must be defended!

Notes: BBC World News 11/11/10 and 11/12/10

chain
[Middle East] [National Oppression] [Washington] [ULK Issue 13]
expand

Different Strategies Needed to Stop the Slaughter

A new report from the NATO allies revealed the true story behind drone attacks in Afghanistan. A few months back the man of change, Obama, ordered strikes killing three or four Taliban fighters and one hundred and forty some-odd civilians, among them children and wimmin. What a change for the people of the u.$. and the rest of the world! What a change for the oppression of wimmin in Afghanistan! Change came to the Afghan people in the form of 30,000 more troops to oppress, kill and torture them on their own land.

All this was done under the noses of amerikans without a protest. What happened to all those protesters under the Bush administration? The war against the oppressed has not stopped. Have they given up? That is the exact result when people trying to change an oppressive system do not have the right strategy or understanding of how to go about it.

What the Afghan and Iraqi brothers and sisters are going through is what occurred to the Mexica, Incas, Tainos and the rest of the native people of the land now called the Americas.

The capitalist system must destroy, oppress, kill and exploit in order to sustain itself. That is why the united snakes has two war fronts at the same time. We must not allow the destruction that the Iraqi and Afghan people are facing. We must fight to stop the continuation of oppression and exploitation of the rest of the world.

So far, the only way available to stop the exploitation and oppression of humyn beings by other humyn beings is through the formation of a government with a communist philosophy. This is a government we need to struggle harder to form, because the existence of the people of the world is at risk.

You, who believe in caring for your people, study communism. You, who want to help other people and nations, don't wait until a natural disaster hits as the one in Haiti. Study socialism. You, who consider yourself a revolutionary, don't be half-way revolutionary. Revolutionaries are constant causers or helpers of change. Be that every possible moment of your life.

Let's change the capitalist society into a socialist society, and then the socialist into a communist and beyond as we reach communism. For the better well-being of our children's future, brothers and sisters.

note: World Focus with Daijit Dhaliwal. PBS. February 5, 2010.

MIM(Prisons) adds: Today, reports emerged of a u.$./NATO bombing that claimed to be an attack on Taliban fighters, but it turned out to be a civilian convoy and 33 people were killed. Uncounted tens of thousands of people have been killed in Afghanistan since the u.$. occupation began in 2001.

This comrade applies the concepts of line, strategy and tactics to an international issue well in this article. We also commend h for writing an article on international news, and encourage others to follow this example, making connections between the prison struggle and the struggle of oppressed people around the world.

One thing we would add in regards to line is a deeper analysis of the protesters and other amerikans who claim to oppose the occupation of Afghanistan. For those who are serious, we must push a more radical agenda and a studying of Maoism and communism as the writer does. But what holds back most amerikans is that they don't have a life or death interest in opposing imperialism. On the contrary, amerikans benefit from imperialism, so condemnations of war often come in the form of moralistic verbal protests, with little power or force to back it up. That said, our strategy must be adapted to this situation and we must focus on organizing the minority within u.$. borders that can be organized against imperialism. We must organize that minority around anti-imperialist demands that serve them and move them to committed struggle, and we must connect that to the struggles of the international proletariat, which are the foundation of communist revolution. We will explore these ideas more in our upcoming newsletters focused on strategy and tactics.

chain
[Middle East] [ULK Issue 12]
expand

U.S. bombing of Yemen brings attack on Amerika

December 17, 2009 - U.$. President Obama orders u.$. military strike in Yemen killing as many as 120 people, most of whom were civilians including at least a couple dozen children.(1)

December 25, 2009 - Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is alleged to have attempted to ignite explosives on a plane from Amsterdam to Detroit. The explosives failed to ignite.

December 28, 2009 - Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula claims responsibility for the attempted attack by Abdulmutallab as a response to u.$. attacks on Yemen earlier that month.(2)

January 7, 2010 - Obama gives a report citing multiple failures in u.$. intelligence related to the attempted bombing. Politicians express outrage that such a thing was allowed to happen.

Regardless of what facts may still come to light in this case, Obama would have to be completely racist to believe that the oppressed nations are incapable of organizing counterattacks to the slaughter he has ordered across the Middle East.

There are billions of humyn beings in this world whose lives are threatened by the united $tates. The idea that amerikan intelligence can track them all and prevent every attempted attack as the u.$. makes thousands of new enemies every day is nothing but wishful thinking.

While Obama has called for better organization and coordination between u.$. intelligence agents, other politicians have promoted the plan to spend over $1 billion on new technology, including body scanners that can see through clothes. Former secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff was making the TV rounds promoting the products that he stands to profit from as a private consultant.(3)

The amerikan politicians have made it clear that they are not outraged that amerikan lives were threatened, but rather that the oppressed would dare threaten white supremacy. There is an easy way to prevent attacks like this recent attempt - keep the u.$. military and its proxies out of Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran and everywhere else the imperialists are attempting to murder people to keep wealth accumulating in the metropolis.

Al-Qaeda cells have been consistent in their demands since before 9/11/2001 for the u.$. military to get out of the Middle East. So far, amerikans have proven more interested in increasing sales of defense technology and imposing oppressive regimes on other countries than stopping attacks on u.$. soil. (4)

notes:
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236
(2) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8433151.stm
(3) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/31/AR2009123102821.html
(4) Amerika has learned nothing from September 11th. Read what MIM wrote on that day in 2001

chain
[Middle East] [Economics] [Spanish] [Oregon] [ULK Issue 16]
expand

La Privatización de la Guerra: El Imperialismo da su Último Suspiro

por MIM(Prisiones)
Mayo 2009
públicado en ULK panfleto #8

Halliburton, KBR, y Blackwater (quien recientemente fue marcado "Xe") han llegado a ser nombres populares en los años recientes y por lo general con las connotaciones negativas. Hay mucho que decir sobre la corrupción que está detallada en los libros citados más abajo, y también demostrarémos unos paralelos al Complejo Industrial de Prisiones en este y en otros artículos. La pregunta más considerable para los contra-imperialistas, es ¿qué significa esta corrupción para el desarrollo y el mantenimiento del imperialismo?

Los libros repasados para complementar este artículo describen las ambas partes del militar imperialista estadounidense moderno. Por una parte el ejército estatal que está comprando a la juventud americana con la cultura del centro comercial a lo cual están acostumbrados y que está mantenido por el trabajo barato del obrero del Tercer Mundo. Por otra parte tiene contratistas armados, usados para las operaciones más élites, quienes ganan sueldos más altos que los de los soldados estadounidenses. Cuando los mercenarios vienen Tercer Mundo, ganan aun más en proporción de lo que ganaban antes de hacerse mercenarios. Todo combinado, los contratistas llegaron a superar en número al personal militar terrestre estadounidense en Iraq. (Chatterjeem p. xvi) Las historias de Halliburton, KBR y Blackwater deletrean una clara tendencia: le está costando más que nunca al imperialismo para poder sostener los niveles de personal necesario para mantener la hegemonía mundial.

Un Microcosmos de la Economía Mundial

En el libro Halliburton's Army, Pratap Chatterjee reporta que los sueldos para contratistas en Iraq son relacionados explícitamente según sus nacionalidades. Esta imagen es muy significativa a los quien afirman que los americanos merecen sueldos más altos porque son más productivos. Aquí tenemos gente que viene de todas partes del mundo para trabajar en los mismos sitios y los tipos de pago son comparables a los que ganan en sus naciones respectivas (usualmente ganan más en Iraq). Esta norma todavía resonaban cierto en casos comunes donde la persona común del Tercer Mundo tenía más experiencia, más conocimiento, o era más hábil que la persona del Primer Mundo. Contratistas estadounidenses quienes estaban desempleados y desesperados por conseguir trabajo empezaron con sueldos desde $80,000 anuales más gastos de subsistencia para supervisar a filipinos que ganaron $200-$1,000 por mes. Un americano afirmó haber realizado $130,000 al año para trabajar sólo un día por semana. En Bagram, los basureros afganos se pagaron $10 por cada jornada de 12 horas. Mientras que los indios ganaban $600 al mes más alojamiento y comida por trabajar en los restaurantes de comida rápida en las base. Los filipinos quienes construyeron las prisiones en Guantánamo fueron mantenidos sí mismos en prisiones horribles, y recibieron $2.50 cada hora por trabajar 12 horas peligrosas diariamente sin equipo de seguridad. Los abusos de parte de los contratistas llegaron a ser tan notoria que La India, El Nepal, y las Filipinas lo prohibieron que sus ciudadanos trabajar en Iraq. (Chatterjee)

Con 35,000 de los 47,000 empleados de Halliburton en Iraq siendo procedentes del Tercer Mundo (Chatterjee, p. 142), y los sueldos comparables siendo pagados por la nacionalidad, se ve una réplica de la economía mundial que la mayoría de los habitantes del Primer Mundo defienden, incluso muchos de los llamados "marxistas." Alrededor del 25% de los empleados ganaban salarios del nivel explotador mientras que los demás eran obreros del Tercer Mundo (en su mayoría inmigrantes) haciendo todo el trabajo duro y peligroso para salarios por debajo del valor promedio del trabajo. Según los izquierdistas de la nación opresora, Halliburton no emplearía a los americanos con sueldos de $80,000 más las gastas si no los estuviese explotándoselos. Estos pseudo-marxistas piensan que un americano quien firma un cheque produce diez veces más de valor que un filipino que hace la construcción o la preparación de comida. En la escala mundial existen las fronteras y los océanos que de alguna manera le hacen esta mera misma situación aun más agradable a la nación opresora.

La Conexión del Prisión

Mientras los vínculos de Halliburton y Blackwater con el gobierno federal han estado en cuestión durante mucho tiempo, el contratista 39o más grande del gobierno es su propio Industrias de Prisiones Federales – FPI o UNICOR. (Wright, p.111) Como el labor del Tercer Mundo detrás de Halliburton y KBR, el autor Ian Urbina afirma que el militar estadounidense no podría hacer lo que hace sin la inmensa cantidad y diversidad de productos el FPI provee con el trabajo de presos a los cual les pagan entre $0.23 – $1.15 por hora (suma a $400 millones en ventas al Departamento de Defensa en el 2002). Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) estableció la compañía usando legislación que forzó al Departamento de Defensa comprar los productos del FPI, aunque sus precios no eran los más bajos. (Wright, p. 113) Esta táctica de parte de FDR mantuvo el dinero en circulación dentro del estado para seguir financiando sus objetivos represivos, en vez de permitir que el dinero de impuestos regrese a manos del sector privado en la forma de ganancias.

Esto valida, sobre todo, el patrón general que MIM(Prisiones) ha visto: aún la industria la más grande en el país impulsada por el trabajo de presos es un subsidio para la represión del Estado y no una fuente de enriquecimiento individual. Sin embargo reconocemos que el militar estadounidense no está ahorrando dinero por comprar los productos de FPI – las industrias del sector privado tienen la capacidad de ofrecer sus productos tan barato o aún más barato que FPI. Entonces no estamos de acuerdo con las implicaciones que hace Urbina que el trabajo de presos es esencial para las operaciones del militar.

Una relación interesante entre el Complejo Industrial del Militar y el Complejo Industrial de Prisiones se encuentra en las contribuciones de más de $500,000 de parte del dueño de Blackwater Erik Prince al Ministerios del Compañerismo en Prisiones – PFM. PFM es una organización cristiana evangélica que envía más de 50.000 voluntarios en las prisiones de EE.UU. (Wright, p.130) Mientras MIM(Prisiones) queda impedido de mandar correspondencia a presos por todos partes de los Estados Unidos porque mantiene que la revolución es necesaria para acabar el aprieto de los opresos, el fundador de Compañerismo en Prisiones, Chuck Colson, citó a Thomas Jefferson para implicar que la revolución cristiana es necesaria en los Estados Unidos. (Scahill, p. 95) Más de 1,800 facilidades le han otorgado acceso al PFM para que funcione sus programas dentro de las prisiones, los cual han registrado más de 20000 personas.

Americanos Queremosynopodemos

Blackwater está reclutando a ex agentes de la CIA ocupados en todo el mundo como mercenarios, sobornándoles con cheques de pago al nivel de los E.E.U.U. El resultado de esto debería ayudar a demostrar a nuestros críticos la importancia de la compra de toda una nación. El nacionalismo americano provee una defensa mucho más poderosa para el imperialismo de lo que ningún ejército mercenario podría proveer. Aunque la mayor parte de estos mercenarios están impregnadas de la ideología fascista lo cual conduce al militarismo imperialista, las posibilidades de conflictos de intereses son significativamente más grandes.

La globalización del ejército imperialista es un signo de debilidad, no de fuerza cada vez mayor. Pronto no habrá absolutamente ningún manera de que su ejército pueda crecer (excepto con los robots).

Soldados Americanos del Siglo 21

Desde la Guerra Civil hasta la Guerra Fría, el ejército nacional de los EE.UU. no fue reclutado por el motivo de ganancia. Sin embargo, mientras que el nacionalismo estadounidense proporcionó una base sólida para el militarismo imperialista, que siguen aumentando las demandas de la nación parásita eventualmente socavó la voluntad de los soldados a luchar y morir por su nación. Podrían emplear a los mexicanos para hacer sus quehaceres domésticos y trabajo manual, mientras los asiáticos del este están siendo contratado para hacer su producción industrial, no podían simplemente contratar a alguien para manejar el trabajo sucio de luchar en sus guerras de saqueo imperialista? O parafraseando a Chatterjee, los soldados estadounidenses pasaron de pelar sus propias papas en tiendas de campaña que han establecido sí mismos a tener obreros del Tercer Mundo sirviéndoles buffet de todo lo que puedan comer para la cena. Sabes, para que lo haga sentir más como estén en sus casas.

Funcionarios del departamento de relaciones públicas del militar estadounidense explican de la necesidad de proveer tal conforts de criatura como necesario para mantener un ejército completamente voluntario en el siglo 21. (Chatterjee, p.10) Pero la pregunta de por qué una conscripción no es viable es la misma pregunta de americanos quienes no teniendo ganas de entregar a sus vidas cómodas, lo cual atrae la amenaza de un movimiento de resistencia contra la conscripción que da alimento al anti-imperialismo.

Un solado reportó,

"No es una exageración que tengo un estilo de vida mejor aquí en la base en Iraq de lo que tendría allá en los Estados Unidos. Tenemos lavandería gratis, viviendas de tipo apartamento con aire acondicionado y electricidad sin límite también agua caliente, hay varios distribuidores americanos de comida rápida, salones, internet gratis, cafés y un enorme PX... helados de Baskins Robbins... y una vez a la semana nos sirven bistec y langosta... noche de karaoke, y varios tipos de equipos deportivos..."

y concluye con lo siguiente,

"y aun solo a unos cientos metros fuera de la cerca, los niños pequeños andan pidiendo de lo que sea: comida, agua embotellada... la realidad es muy, muy, muy chocante. Somos verdaderamente una cultura de consentidos y mimados." (Chatterjee, p.11)

Esta no es una realización rara para los americanos consentidos que concluyan cuando están enviados a la guerra en el Tercer Mundo. Pero como este soldado señala, varios están allí por la misma razón de que reciben mejores condiciones materialistas en Iraq. Y pues no están exactamente convirtiéndose al internacionalismo en multitud a pesar del dosis de realidad.

Lejos de pelar papas en efecto, Chatterjee describe lo que se encuentra en el comedor típico: helados, barras de panqueque, colitas de langosta y varias comidas elaboradas de día de fiesta, todo esto es gratis para los soldados. Otras facilidades en las bases estadounidenses más grandes contienen un centro comercial pequeño ("minimall") con tiendas como Burger King, KFC, McDonald's, Pizza Hut, y Green Beans Coffee. El continua dándole una descripción del "Scorpion's Den". Uno está presentado de un inmediato con casi completa oscuridad, el trasfondo de música de un teatro despejado de cien asientos, el suave luz de las computadoras portátiles, y el parpadeo de luces de los videojuegos... También hay palomitas de maíz gratis, caja tras caja de agua embotellada... y una máquina de helados "Dipping Dots." Entonces hay el "Sandbox" donde "docenas de soldados se sientan reclinados en sillones de cuero falso, entreteniéndose con video juegos de guerra o programas como Guitar Hero y mirando la película de Star Trek." (Chatterjee, p. 6–7)

Vemos esto como una nueva etapa en la historia de reclutamiento militar de parte de las naciones opresoras. Las fuerzas ocupantes brutales de los poderes colonizadores en el Tercer Mundo hace más de cien años actuaban directamente en sus intereses propios. Eran similar a los conquistadores y colonizadores de Norte América de hace varios siglos anteriores, cuando los americanos robaron la tierra que ahora ocupan. La unidad nacionalista que subsecuentemente crearon con sus riquezas y tierra robada, proveía por más de cien años de relativamente exitosos conscripciones forzados al militar. Hoy día, sin embargo, a los americanos les gusta imaginarse que su prosperidad no fue construida detrás del genocidio y la esclavitud. En combinación con sus vidas cómodas, la idea de ir a guerra frecuentemente les parece no sólo desagradable sino innecesario. En otras palabras, su amnesia histórica quizás ayudara a socavar a la nación opresora, ya que algunos no comprenden de lo necesario para mantener sus posiciones de privilegio.

Al comienzo del siglo 21, Halliburton tuvo que doblar los sueldos de la gente para convencerlos a que les vayan a Iraq, no como soldados sino como contratistas civil. Pero aún así, ¿vale la pena arriesgar la vida cuando la vida en el hogar es tan cómodo? La alianza americana al imperialismo estadounidense se demuestra en la política, pero cuando tiene que ver con ir a guerra, sus acciones caerán un poco corto de la meta hasta que realmente empiezan a ver que su riqueza materialista comienza a disminuir, lo cual ocurrirá cuando al Tercer Mundo empieza a cerrar los caminos hacia la explotación como lo han hecho en el pasado.

El Complejo Industrial Militar no va a ser parado de por contribuyentes americanos. Los que están impidiéndolo son los combatientes de resistencia quienes han asegurado que los que van a Iraq sólo son los que realmente necesitan estar allá. Desafortunadamente, ese incluye muchas nacionales del Tercer Mundo, algunos de quien están detenidos como presos mientras se fuerzan trabajar por poca paga o sin paga bajo las condiciones la más horrible. Más y más aprenderá la locura de tratar de trabajar por los imperialistas. No hay ningún futuro para las naciones del Tercer Mundo dentro del sistema imperialista, sólo en la resistencia a él.

Los debates sobre el envío de más tropas o la racionalización de los militar estadounidense son debates sobre la optimización imperialismo estadounidense. Lo interesante para nosotros es que la lucha parece ser tan grave, ya que ni plan está resultando viable.

En nuestra crítica sobre la economía de prisiones y la aristocracia del trabajo por lo general, señalamos a los burócratas con sueldos exorbitantes como una parte significante del problema. Pero MIM(Prisiones) no es libertario en su ideología. En todo caso, la experiencia parece mostrar un mayor grado de apropiación indebida de los fondos cuando los servicios se subcontratan. La causa de la corrupción es por motivo de lucro, si la posesión es pública o privada. Este es por qué la nacionalización de las industrias o de bancos no se detiene la explotación, ni tampoco señala un avanzo hacia el socialismo.

Notas:
(1) Chatterjee, Pratap. Halliburton's Army. Nation Books, 2009.
(2) Scahill, Jeremy. Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. Nation Books, 2008.
(3) Wright, Paul and Tara Herivel. Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration. New Press, 2007.

chain
[Middle East] [ULK Issue 9]
expand

Iran: The Twitter 'Revolution'

Amerika TweetsThe recent election in Iran has become a phenomenon given unusual attention by amerikans who read the news. One must ask why these amerikans are so upset about potential election fraud on the other side of the world? You didn't hear such concern about the recent Mexican election. In that case it was a country bordering the united $tates, and there was actually evidence of widespread fraud. With the treatment of an incident last week where the Honduran president was abducted and flown out of the country in a coup, it is even more evident that the media and its followers are more upset about the fact that their candidate didn't win then that there was any unfairness involved.

The Iranian election warrants particular attention from the Maoist movement because of the campaign against Iran, and the Muslim world in general, that has been carried out by Amerikan imperialism as well as groups calling themselves feminists, and some even calling themselves Maoists. While years of struggle have occurred against these allies of imperialism, many of our readers behind bars will be new to this.

For years now, the so-called “Revolutionary Communist Party (USA)” has been organizing mass demonstrations in cities across the country on International Wimmin’s Day, targeting Iran. At one rally, this writer witnessed middle-aged men in business casual attire carrying massive banners calling for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran. When asked what group they organized with they claimed to just be a couple guys concerned about the issue. The main topic of the rally was wimmin’s rights.


As one Maoist writer pointed out, the Jerusalem Post (6/23/2009) printed an article entitled, "It's about the women" in response to the post-election protests in Iran, which stated:

“Women are the ones arrested in Iran for having an ankle showing or for wearing lipstick. After three such arrests, women go to prison. At the fourth arrest, they get a public lashing.”

The author correctly comments,

No doubt some Iranian wimmin are indeed afraid of their own Muslim culture. Yet there is no proof that the portion of Iranian wimmin so afraid is higher than the portion of Amerikan wimmin afraid of sexual harassment on the street if they show ankle or wear obvious lipstick. There is also no doubt that large portions of wimmin in both Iran and the united $tates are completely comfortable with the culture they display when walking down the street.(1)

In other words, this is not about wimmin's rights, as much as many try to pretend it is. If it was they would be attacking patriarchy not oppressed nations whose leaders don't succumb to u$ economic interests.

Our readers should know that millions of dollars were sent to anti-government organizations in Iran in the last few years by the U.S. State Department(2), while Seymour Hersh reported that U.S. special operations forces were conducting exercises inside Iran's borders. One can see why the u$-backed candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, might have expected to win the recent presidential election. But a number of polls showed high approval rates of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and showed him winning the election by a similar margin. While anti-Ahmadinejad activists got support from corporations like Facebook and Twitter and their users to get their opinions out, 65% of Iranians don't have access to the internet(4), which likely overlaps greatly with the rural majority who reportedly voted for Ahmadinejad.

In one online discussion of the Iranian elections an apparent anti-imperialist commented, "It’s interesting that some “Western progressives” here are essentially accepting the Western media and government propaganda spin on the Iranian elections–the same Western media and governments they supposedly oppose."(3) It is interesting, in that it exposes the common interests between amerikans and the corporate elite when it comes to issues most important to imperialism.

However, we should not ignore a couple of things that made this embracing of the corporate line a bit smoother. First, many supposedly independent organs have been rallying amerikans against the Islamic Republic of Iran for years. Second you have supposedly independent activists on Twitter reporting from Iran. For amerikans, the individual is the ideal unit for change, far superior to a self-proclaimed revolutionary organization or a corporate news source. Amerikans trust individuals more, even when there is no accountability of who these individuals are. So when CNN says that the elections in Iran were rigged, there is corroborating evidence from "alternative" sources to let one believe it.

Will amerikans support People's War when the proletariat uses Twitter? The obvious answer is no. Twitter serves a certain class with certain interests. The world's exploited majority are not well-represented on the internet. Amerikan liberals would like to think that their little gadgets, paid for with the blood and sweat of the Third World, are increasing democracy and humyn rights. It is only at the fringes that the proletariat is making use of these tools that are still in the hands of the rich. (Rather than a Twitter Revolution, one starts to wonder if this is just one big Twitter advertisement.)

Those who acknowledge that Mousavi does not represent the progressive demands of the masses of Iran are countering that those in the street are who they are supporting. One commentator pointed out:

"Just being in the streets does not make a protester revolutionary. Just as putting down such protests, in itself, does not make one a reactionary. Fascists have had street protests. And, communists have broken up street protests."

It is the most radical of the petty bourgeoisie who fall into this trap of seeing all rebellion as good without considering the greater context or the outcome. These individualists idealize "spontaneous" uprisings, even when they're backed by millions of dollars of u$ funding and years of psychological warfare by the CIA-run media.

As many of the better commentaries have pointed out, this "Green Revolution" being touted in the corporate media is the latest in a long line of "revolutions" that are backed by the the imperialists to replace the governments of mostly former-Eastern Bloc countries with leaders favoring Washington-centered neo-liberalism. While they have all received great praise in the media, none has received such mass response from amerikans in general as Iran. The key difference has been the Islam factor, and the use of gender aristocracy attacks on Iran from a range of amerikans, including the u$ State Department, pseudo-feminist organizations, and phoney Maoist parties.

Gender issues have been used by colonialists and imperialists to attack Islam (ie. the oppressed nations) throughout the last century. There is no reason to believe that such attacks are suddenly progressive.

Amerikans are being rallied around "barbaric" incidents in the Muslim world, while ignoring the fact that u$ imperialism is still the number one imprisoner, torturer and killer in the world. No one else comes close.

notes:
(1) http://mimdown.wordpress.com/2009/06/27/media-standards-for-u-and-iranian-elections/
(2) One request was for $400 million dollars according to Seymour Hersh. Recently, it was reported that U.S. Congress apparently approved $66 million of it.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-06-25-iran-money_N.htm
(3) http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/ahmadinejad-accuses-west-of-waging-psychological-warfare-against-iran/#comments
(4) Schleifer, Yigal. Why Iran's Twitter revolution is unique. Christian Science Monitor, June 19, 2009.

chain
[Middle East] [Economics] [ULK Issue 8]
expand

The Privatization of War: Imperialism Gasps its Last Breaths

profit recruiting
Halliburton, KBR and Blackwater (recently rebranded as "Xe") have all become household names in recent years, and generally with negative connotations. There is much to be said about their corruption that is detailed in the books cited below, and we will draw some parallels to the Prison Industrial Complex in this and other articles. But the bigger question for anti-imperialists is what this signifies for the development and maintenance of imperialism.

The books reviewed for this article describe the two sides of the modern imperialist military of the united $tates. On the one hand you have the state-run military that is buying off amerikan youth with the mall culture they are accustomed to, run by cheap Third World labor. On the other, you have armed contractors, often used for more elite operations, increasing salaries of u$ soldiers by 100% and probably moreso for mercenaries from the Third World. All combined, contractors came to outnumber u$ military personnel on the ground in Iraq. (Chatterjee, p. xvi) The stories of Halliburton/KBR and Blackwater spell out a clear trend: it is costing more than ever for imperialism to keep the personnel levels it needs to maintain global hegemony.

A microcosm of global economy

In Halliburton's Army, Pratap Chatterjee reports that wages for contractors in Iraq are tied explicitly to nationality. This picture is very telling for those who claim that amerikans deserve higher wages because they are more productive. Here you have people coming from all over the world to work on the same site and the pay rates are comparable to what they'd get in their home countries (usually they make more in Iraq). This rule still rang true in the common cases where the Third World persyn had more skills or knowledge than the First Worlder. Contractors from the united $tates who were unemployed and desperate for work started at $80,000 a year plus living expenses to supervise Filipinos who made $200- $1000 per month. One amerikan reported making $130,000 a year to work only 1 day per week. In Bagram, Afghan trash collectors were paid $10 for a 12 hour day, while Indians made $600 a month plus room and board working in fast food restaurants on the base. Filipinos who built the prisons in Guantanamo were kept in horrible prisons themselves, and paid $2.50 an hour for dangerous 12 hour days with no safety equipment. Abuses by contractors got so notorious that India, Nepal and the Philippines all made it illegal for their citizens to work in Iraq. (Chatterjee)

With 35,000 of 47,000 Halliburton employees in Iraq coming from the Third World (Chatterjee, p.142), and comparable wages being paid by nationality, you see a replica of the global economy that most First Worlders defend, even many so-called "Marxists." About 25% of the employees were making exploiter level wages, while the rest were Third World (mostly migrant) workers doing all the hard and dangerous work, for wages below the average value of labor. According to the oppressor nation left, Halliburton wouldn't employ the amerikans at $80,000 plus expenses if they weren't exploiting them. These pseudo-marxists think that an amerikan signing a check produces 10 times more value than a Filipino doing construction work or food preparation. On the global scale there are borders and oceans that somehow make this very same situation even more palatable to the oppressor nation.

The Prison Connection

While Halliburton's and Blackwater's ties to the federal government have long been in question, the government's 39th largest contractor is its very own Federal Prisons Industries (FPI) or UNICOR. (Wright, p. 111) Like the Third World labor behind Halliburton/KBR, author Ian Urbina asserts that the u$ military could not do what it does without the vast amount and diversity of products that FPI provides with prison labor that is paid $0.23 to $1.15 an hour (amounting to $400 million in sales to the Department of Defense in 2002). Franklin D. Roosevelt set up the company using legislation that forced the Department of Defense to purchase from FPI, even when their prices were not the lowest. (Wright, p.113) This move by FDR kept money circulating within the state to further fund its repressive aims, rather than allowing tax money to return to private hands in the form of profit.

This validates the overall patterns that MIM(Prisons) has seen; even the biggest prison labor-powered industry in the country is a subsidy for state repression, not a source of private profit. However we do recognize that the U$ military is not saving money by buying products from FPI - private industries can offer products for as cheap or cheaper. And so we don't agree with Urbina's implication that prison labor is essential to military operations.

Another interesting relationship between the military industrial complex and the prison industrial complex is found in Blackwater owner Erik Prince's $500,000-plus in contributions to the Prison Fellowship Ministries(PFM). PFM is an evangelical Christian organization that sends more than 50,000 volunteers into u$ prisons. (Wright, p.130) While MIM(Prisons) is kept from sending mail to prisoners all over the u$ for saying that revolution is necessary to end the plight of the oppressed, Prison Fellowship founder Chuck Colson has cited Thomas Jefferson to imply that Christian revolution is necessary in the united $tates. (Scahill, p. 95) Over 1800 facilities have granted PFM access to run programs inside the prisons that have enrolled over 20,000 people. Once again, we demonstrate that censorship of Maoist literature is about politics and not security.

Wannabe amerikans

Blackwater is busy recruiting former CIA operatives around the world as mercenaries, bribing them with u$-level paychecks. The outcome of this should help demonstrate to our critics the importance of the buying off of a whole nation. Amerikan nationalism provides a much stronger defense for imperialism than a mercenary army. Even if most of these mercenaries are steeped in fascist ideology that is conducive to imperialist militarism, the chances of conflicts of interests developing are significantly greater.

The globalization of the imperialist army is a sign of weakness, not of growing strength. Soon there will be absolutely no way for their army to grow (except with robots).

21st Century Amerikan soldiers

From the Civil War to the Cold War, the u$ national military was not recruited through profit motives. However, while amerikan nationalism provided a strong base for imperialist militarism, the continued increase in demands of the parasitic nation eventually undercut their willingness to fight and die for their nation. They could hire Mexicans to do their housework and manual labor, while hiring East Asians to do their industrial production, couldn't they just hire someone to handle the dirty work of fighting their wars for imperialist plunder? Or to paraphrase Chatterjee, amerikan soldiers went from peeling their own potatoes in tents that they set up themselves to having Third World workers serve them all you can eat dinner buffets. You know, to make it feel more like home.

U$ military public relations explains the need to provide such creature comforts as necessary to maintain an all volunteer army in the 21st century. (Chatterjee, p. 10) But the question of why a draft is not viable is the same question of amerikans not being willing to give up their cush lifestyles, which brings the threat of a draft resistance movement that feeds into anti-imperialism.

One soldier reported,

"It is no exaggeration that I live a higher lifestyle here on a base in Iraq than [I would] in the United States. We have free laundry, apartment-like housing with unlimited, free A/C and electricity, hot water, various American fast-food outlets, lounges, free Internet, coffee shops, and a large PX... Baskin Robbins ice cream... once a week we get steak and lobster... karaoke night, all kinds of sports teams..."

And he goes on to conclude,

"Yet just a few hundred meteres outside the fence, little kids are begging for anything: food, bottled water... The reality is very, very, very shocking. We are truly a pampered and spoiled culture." (Chatterjee, p. 11)

This is not a unique realization for spoiled amerikans to make when sent to war in the Third World. But as this soldier also points out, many are there for the very reason that they get better material conditions in Iraq. So they aren't exactly converting to internationalism in droves, despite the dose of reality.

Far from peeling potatoes indeed, Chatterjee describes the typical dining area with ice cream, waffle bars, lobster tails and elaborate holiday dinners, all free to soldiers. Other facilities on big u$ bases include a "mini mall" with stores like Burger King, KFC, McDonalds, Pizza Hut and Green Beans Coffee. He goes on to describe the "Scorpions Den": "one is greeted by almost pitch darkness, the background music from a one-hundred-seater open theater, the soft glow of laptops, and the flickering lights of video games... There are also free popcorn, boxes and boxes of bottled water... and a Dipping Dots ice cream machine." Then there is the "Sandbox" where "Dozens of soldiers sit slumped into fake leather armchairs, playing war games or programs like Guitar Hero and watching a Star Trek movie." (Chatterjee, p.6-7)

We see this as a new stage in the history of military recruitment by the oppressor nations. The brutal occupation forces of colonial powers in the Third World more than a century ago acted in their own direct interest. They were similar to the Conquistadors and settlers of North America centuries earlier, when amerikans stole the land they now occupy. The national unity they subsequently built on their stolen land and wealth, provided for over a hundred years of relatively successful forced military drafts. Today, however, amerikans like to pretend that their prosperity is not built on genocide and slavery. Combined with their very comfortable lives, the idea of going to war often seems not just unappealing, but unnecessary. In other words, historical amnesia may help undercut the oppressor nation as some don't understand what it takes to maintain their positions of privilege.

In the beginning of the 21st century, Halliburton had to double people's salaries to get them to go to Iraq as civilian contractors, not soldiers. But even then, is it worth risking your life when life at home is so comfortable? Amerikans allegiance to u$ imperialism is demonstrated in their politics, but when it comes to going to war, their actions will fall a bit short until they really start to see their material wealth start to diminish, which will happen once the Third World begins shutting of the paths of exploitation as it has in the past.

The military industrial complex will not be stopped by amerikan taxpayers. It is being stopped by resistance fighters who have ensured that only those who really need to be there are going to Iraq. Unfortunately, that includes many Third World nationals, some of whom are being held as prisoners while being forced to work for little to no pay under the most horrible conditions. More and more will learn the folly of trying to work for the imperialists. There is no future for the Third World nations within the imperialist system, only in resistance to it.

The debates about sending more troops or streamlining the u$ military are debates about optimizing u$ imperialism. The interesting part to us is that the struggle appears to be so acute as neither plan is proving viable.

In our criticisms of the prison economy and the labor aristocracy in general, we point to overpaid bureaucrats as a significant part of the problem. But MIM(Prisons) is not Libertarian. If anything, experience seems to show a greater degree of misappropriation of funds when services are contracted out. The cause of corruption is the profit motive, whether ownership is private or public. This is why nationalizing industries or banks does not stop exploitation, nor does it signal a move towards socialism.

notes:
(1) Chatterjee, Pratap. Halliburton's Army. Nation Books, 2009.
(2) Scahill, Jeremy. Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. Nation Books, 2008.
(3) Wright, Paul and Tara Herivel. Prison Profiteers: Who makes money from mass incarceration. New Press, 2007.

This article referenced in:
chain
[Theory] [Middle East] [Spanish] [Oregon]
expand

La Cienca Muslemana le Atina de Nuevo

de MIM(Prisons)
Abril, 2008

La clase y la nación triunfa sobre la ideología auto-descrita.

Así como la gente nos ha demostrado bastantemente sobre estos últimos años, la ideología de uno es mucho más que sólo un nombre. Mientras aquellos que reclaman el método científico del materialismo dialéctico en el nombre de Marx, Lenin, y Mao han hecho llamadas de la bienvenida a las fuerzas imperialistas en sus países (sea de las Naciones Unidas o de los propios Estados Unidos), los musulmanes han puesto un límite en la arena y han dicho que ¡NO! al imperialismo estadounidense en África, el sureste asiático y especialmente en el Oriente Medio donde la ocupación imperialista es más pronunciada.

Mientras los maoístas supuestos han dado la bienvenida a las imperialistas estadounidenses como socios en la construcción de la "Nueva Democracia," el clérigo Iraqui Moqtada al-Sadr reprendió los intentos del Secretario de defensa estadounidense Gates de invitarle al procedimiento político dirigido imperialisticamente esta semana. Se le cita declarando:

"Yo estaré siempre tu enemigo porque estás ocupando a Iraq."
...
"Escuché la declaración del ministro de defensa americano terrorista y me siento obligado a dar una repuesta decente a tal terrorista. No tengo ningún enemigo sino tu, tu eres el ocupante. Siempre has sido mi enemigo y siempre serás mi enemigo hasta que derrame la última gota de mi sangre." (1)

Esto estaba en un discurso en lo cual al-Sadr defendía a los miembros del militar Iraqui apoyado por imperialista por no atacar a otros Iraquis durante varias incursiones ordenados por los Estados Unidos (U$), exigiéndole al estado que le devuelva los trabajos a esos mismos. En relación a esto comentó:

"No levanten armas contra otros Iraquis mientras que ellos no le ayuden al ocupante. También le llamo a acción al gobierno Iraqui que apoye a su gente para librar la nación del ocupante." (1)

Esto es lo que revolucionarios científicos llaman reconocer la contradicción principal y unir a todos quien pueden ser unidos para impulsar esa contradicción a su resolución. Así es como la historia llega a ser. Estas declaraciones por al-Sadr están en el contexto de un Iraq con varias facciones establecidas y listas a pelear entre sí mismos siendo aún estando dispuestos a luchar por las imperialistas para cumplirlo.

En otras partes de la region, reportes del grupo Hezbullah fortalecido y atrincherado en el sur de Líbano declaran que han aprovechado y exitosamente han reclutado comunidades tras líneas religiosas que frecuentemente han dividido la nación en el pasado. (2) La necesidad es una gran maestra, y la ocupación Israelí y estadounidense han introducido la necesidad de la defensa unida hacia la vanguardia en naciones como Líbano é Iraq. Similarmente, es llegándole a la meta de las necesidades de la lucha revolucionaria que ofrece el camino más acelerado hacia la liberación de la mujer, sin quien la resistencia seguramente fracasará. Como un sistema de clases que perpetua sus inherentes desigualidades, la intervención imperialista no puede unir a los opresos, librar a las mujeres, ni tampoco proveer constantemente a las masas con sus necesidades materiales como Hezbullah y los "Sadristas" deben hacer en sus regiones.

Data desde la época de Lenin y el principio del primer experimento socialista en Rusia, los comunistas han demostrado que mientras la religión es el opio de las masas, las masas no son enemigos porque aun todavía abrazan la religión. Podemos tener una gran confianza que el método científico triunfará mientras la gente lucha por la supervivencia y la liberación. Los musulmanes en Iraq y Líbano han demostrado esta verdad en la práctica.

notas:
(1) Flashpoints April 14, 2008. http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index/php?arch=25805
(2) Christian Science Monitor. April 15, 2008.

chain
[Theory] [Middle East]
expand

Muslim science gets it right again

Class and nation prevail over self-described ideology

As the people have taught us quite well over the last few years, ones ideology is more than a name. While those claiming the scientific method of dialectical materialism in the name of Marx, Lenin and Mao have made calls welcoming imperialist forces into their countries (whether the United Nations or the united $tates itself), Muslims have drawn the line in the sand and said NO! to u$ imperialism in Africa, Southeast Asia and especially in the Middle East where imperialist occupation is most pronounced.

While so-called Maoists have welcomed the u$ imperialists as partners in building "New Democracy", Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr rebuked u$ Defense Secretary Gates' attempts to welcome him into the imperialist-run political process this week. He is quoted as stating:

"I will always remain your enemy because you are occupying Iraq."
...
"I heard the statement of the terrorist amerikan defense minister and I feel compelled to give a decent response to such a terrorist. I have no enemy but you, you are the occupier. You have always been my enemy and you will always be my enemy until the last drop of my blood." (1)

This was in a speech where he defended Iraqis in the imperialist-backed military for not attacking other Iraqis in u$-ordered raids, asking that the state give them their jobs back. In relation to this he stated:

"Don't raise your weapons against Iraqis as long as they don't help the occupier. I also call on the Iraqi government to back its people to rid the land of the occupier." (1)

This is what revolutionary scientists call recognizing the principal contradiction and uniting all who can be united to push that contradiction to its resolution. That is how history is made. These statements by al-Sadr are in the context of an Iraq with many factions poised to fight each other, even willing to side with the imperialists to do so.

Elsewhere in the region, reports of a strengthened and entrenched Hizbolluh in southern Lebanon have stated that they have embraced and successfully recruited communities across religious lines that have often divided the country in the past. (2) Necessity is a great teacher, and u$ and i$raeli occupations have brought the necessity of united defense to the forefront in places like Lebanon and Iraq. Similarly, it is meeting the needs of the revolutionary struggle that offers the fastest road to liberation for wimmin, without whom the resistance will surely fail. As a class system that perpetuates its inherent inequalities, imperialist intervention can not unite the oppressed, liberate wimmin, nor even consistently provide the masses with their material needs as Hizbolluh and the "Sadrists" must do in their regions.

Dating back to Lenin and the beginning of the first socialist experiment in Russia, communists have shown that while religion is the opiate of the masses, the masses are not enemies because they still embrace religion. We can have great confidence that the scientific method will win out as the people struggle for survival and for liberation. Muslims in Iraq and Lebanon have demonstrated this truth in practice.

notes:
(1) Flashpoints. April 14, 2008. http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25805
(2) Christian Science Monitor. April 15, 2008.

chain
[Theory] [Middle East] [National Oppression]
expand

More Debate on Saddam Hussein

UPDATE: On 9/17/2009 the comrade who wrote this letter was killed in Attica Correctional Facility

[The writer who criticized MIM's article, "War criminals kill Saddam Hussein" responds to our criticisms of his letter below. Some parts of the original letter are left off in the interest of brevity.]

To MIM:

I am in receipt of your letter, entailing your response to my initial letter commenting upon the article featured in the April 2007 issue of MIM Notes entitled "War Criminals Kill Saddam Hussein." ...

The criticisms in your letter were both appreciated and mostly straightforward in style and language. However, they failed on a number of points which I will enumerate as follows:
1) Your statement, "... So the reader's claim that the author is not aware of Iraqi history is clearly due to his own poor attention to the original article..." was false. I never stated or meant to imply even that the author was not aware of Iraqi history in general. Rather, I suggested that the author's knowledge of the history of Hussein's Baathist regime's government specifically is insufficient. Otherwise, how could the author describe Hussein as a martyr for Third World independence- especially after admitting that Hussein killed thousands of communist-minded Iraqis (an admission for which I commend the author for here)? Research of the record of Hussein from the time that Hussein carried out those killings up until the time he himself was killed will reveal that he never renounced this act or any of his counter-revolutionary acts, held himself accountable to the people of Iraq for such acts, or sought to reform himself thereafter. Never. If you can find even so much as a quote of Chairman Mao whereby he at least insinuates the merit of eulogizing leaders who behaved and died as Hussein did, please do share it with me; otherwise, it is just bad "radical chic" propaganda.

Moreover he did not die in the struggle for the national liberation of Iraq. Remnants of his executive and military apparatus fought and perished (including his sons) while he took cover. The image of Saddam Hussein leading a heroic fight against the U$ and Brit invaders simply does not fit the real person or actual curse of events. If you fight an invading force that seeks to occupy and oppress your nation only so that you can re-establish a rule that is equally if not more oppressive, it is NOT a struggle for liberation- it is power struggle between two oppressive forces! Only those who fought and continue to fight against the occupation with the desire to establish a state that is just and beneficial for the people can be referred to as struggling for national liberation. He did not "stand up" to anyone- he was captured while cowering in a hole. He neither fought for nor died for the liberation of the Iraqi people. Stop calling him a martyr.

[MIM responds: Hussein died because he refused to allow u$ imperialism to determine Iraq's future. If he was willing and able to provide the imperialists with what they wanted they would not have waged a war to kill him. He stood up for Iraqi independence and was killed for it. HIs motivations are irrelevant to a scientific evaluation of history.

His status as a martyr is also an objective observation, not necessarily praise for the man. His martyr status was acknowledged by the BBC and New York Times as well, and they certainly don't support Iraqi liberation. See the discussion below of the Zogby poll indicating Arab perception of Hussein for more evidence that he was a martyr for the Iraqi people regardless of whether our writer or MIM likes it or not.]

2) Your statement, "What we're criticizing the stupid liberals for was failing to recognize that Arabs ranked Hussein as the fourth most respected world leader, tied with bin Laden..." is almost as confusing and troubling as the original statement in the article. I did not choose to ignore the "fact," but was simply stressing the point of Hussein's prior service as a U.S. lackey (who never reformed but simply reacted to circumstances he helped to create) excludes him from being considered a revolutionary or martyr for Third World independence. But the statement is as misguided as a Scud missile nevertheless. The article reads:

The stupid liberals on National Public Radio (NPR) said that Arab reaction to the hangings indicated the "confusion" of the Arab people, instead of the chauvinism of white liberals. According to Zogby, Egypt went from 74% negative opinion of the United States to 98% negative in the two years between 2002 and 2004, because of the u$ invasion of Iraq. (3) The overall survey of Arabs showed Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden tied for fourth as the most respected world leaders.

Now are you saying the NPR conducted the survey poll, or are you referring to the same Zogby poll that is cited by the Washington Post? Maybe I am just as stupid as those liberals and cannot comprehend plain English. I now that such survey results would have served the Bush administration quite well in whipping up anti-Arab fervor to keep the war machine going. And of course considering the rogue's' gallery of what constituted leadership in the middle east (or the world for that matter) back in '02-'04 - Mubarak, Jordan's Abdullah, Bashir al-Asad, and Ariel Sharon to name a few- one can hardly accept such a rating without some exasperation (wonder who ranked first).

I do not consider myself to be an American. I am a citizen of this country by birth, not by choice of patriotic allegiance (or even sentiment). Since I was not born in the 1960's, I was not afforded the chance to protest Hussein's murdering of the communists. But I can and will continue to use the fact that he was u$-funded against both him and the u$. In fact, I was using it against him and the u$ in debates before he died, even while he was still in power.

[MIM: All of the data cited is from the Zogby poll, which demonstrated the divide along the principal contradiction quite well. While most Amerikkkans see Hussein and bin Laden as enemies, they are largely admired by Arabs. So here we have science playing out again in facts. Not only was it a fact that Hussein fought for independence from u$ imperialism at the end of his life. That fact is reflected in the fact that he is admired by Arabs as a group; a group which happens to be oppressed by u$ imperialism. (Jacques Chirac of France, Gamal Abdel Nasser former nationalist leader of Egypt, and Hasan Nasrallah of Hezbollah in Lebanon were the top 3 leaders).

Our reader suggests that the results of this study play into amerikkkan anti-Arab sentiments. Well, yes, by definition they only reinforce the attitudes of amerikkkans, which are based on their opposition to the independence of the oppressed to begin with.

We too criticized Hussein as a puppet of u$ imperialism while he was such. But we attacked him for being an arm of imperialism, the number one enemy of the world's people. Once he was no longer serving his imperialist masters this changed.]

3) Your statement, "Clearly our reader has not done much research into the current conditions in Iraq nor compared them to Iraq in the past..." was inappropriate, a distraction from the real purpose for my mentioning that quote of Mao. I am very well informed and aware of the horrible and extraordinarily oppressive conditions created and perpetuated by the invading u$-led coalition/mercenary occupation forces, thanks to NPR, PRI (Public Radio International) and publications such as your own. Let me state first and foremost that I oppose vehemently u$ imperialism (and all imperialism and capitalists) and the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and that I support and commend the Iraqi (and Afghan) people who adopt armed struggle against the occupation forces.

My point in citing that quote of Mao was to outline the revolutionary principle of paying "close attention to the well-being of the masses." Mao was not referring to material aspects only. Nevertheless, it is a revolutionary principle and only a slain revolutionary can be regarded as a martyr for Third World independence. However, the fact remains that even before the first Gulf War Hussein used the distribution of resources in Iraq arbitrarily to oppress dissenting groups (including the communists, Shiites, and Kurds) and to consolidate his own power base while enriching his cronies. I agree the u$-led embargo and invasions have made conditions worse. But never forget that Sadr City was a festering slum prior to the invasions, and that before Abu Ghraib was used by the u$ as a torture factory in Iraq, it was used for the very same purpose by Saddam Hussein and his regime [MIM adds: who were at the time were also working for the u$].

[MIM: So our reader admits, h real purpose for quoting Mao was to draw a line of ideological purity rather than to assess the actual material conditions of the masses. We agree with Mao's revolutionary principles, but we are not assessing Hussein for induction into a communist party. Rather we are assessing imperialism as the number one enemy and killer of oppressed people. You think their fascist puppet states are bad, wait until they come in with their cracker foot soldiers and economic sanctions.

Our reader claims to support the liberation forces in Iraq but still wants to oppose Hussein and the Baathists. Would our reader have supported the Japanese imperialists against Chiang Kai-shek while supporting Mao's People's War. Because that wasn't Mao's line, nor would the communists likely have won the war of liberation taking the strategy our reader suggests.]

Now the MIM discussion that filled out and closed the letter really missed the mark. I cannot be classified in any of the components of the "wrong side of the contradiction" you describe. It appears that you made some very wrong assumptions about me due to your interpretation of aspects of my letter and your blinding desire to defend a statement in the article that was inappropriate. Also, my letter does not mention anything about Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, or the occupation of Afghanistan. Let me dispel some of those assumptions right here:

1) Your statement about "fake Maoists" seemed to be intended to include myself. Well, I am not and never have been a Maoist. Do I have to be a Maoist to respect some of the ideas or work of Mao, or of those who tried to implement his ideas (like the Black Panthers), or to quote Mao- even to debate with a "real" Maoist? ... I am a muslim who believes that muslims must strive to establish an Islamic government amongst themselves derived from the Islamic sources of guidance- to enforce the shari'ah (Islamic law) and preserve the safety and integrity of the muslim community. Moreover, I believe that muslims have a right if not a duty to wage armed struggle against anyone (especially the imperialists) who prevent them from accomplishing this.

[MIM: As explained in the article, it is addressing a much greater context of people trying to side against the oppressed (in Afghanistan, Iran, etc) and the imperialists at the same time; the class position of the petty bourgeoisie. Some of these people even call themselves Maoists.

The letter writer fit into this discussion as an example of what we referred to as "pushing a purity line." Our writer continues to push the same line in this letter. As we said, we'd rather ally with an admitted idealist than someone trying to pass idealism for Maoism. Our writer is a muslim, but h also seems to claiming a materialist analysis of history and class struggle in h letters. So we have criticized h positions from a materialist perspective. You do not have to be a Maoist to struggle for truth and liberation. ]

... If Mussolini did not have the finance capital to carry out his fascist agenda but still harbored and espoused the same fascist way of thinking does the lack of finance capital make him any less fascist? If so, enlighten me. The racist anti-Persian rhetoric Hussein used to influence Iraqis during the Iran-Iraq War of the '80's suffices for me as a reflection of his fascist tendencies, for now.

[MIM: Maoists use a scientific definition of fascism that includes finance capital and this debate is the perfect example of why this is crucial. There are many revolutionaries and internationalists who manage to fall into the trap of talking about fascism of the oppressed independent of imperialism (the writers renunciation of h amerikkkan citizenship indicates h might be in this camp).

During WWII the communists allied with the liberal capitalist countries to fight fascism, as that was perceived to be the principal contradiction. If we agree that fighting fascism is primary and we believe that fascism exists independent of imperialism, then we might ally with the u$ against a Saddam Hussein or the Taliban. MIM believes this is absolutely incorrect and that the principal contradiction is between the oppressed nations and imperialism at this time.

As stated in our previous response to the reader, we agree that the Baath regime could have been considered a fascist arm of u$ imperialism during the time in question when thousands of Iraqis were slaughtered for their beliefs in Iraqi independence. We would not call him an "Arab fascist" as the writer does, as this implies support for the Islamofascist line of the imperialists and their white nationalist allies. ]

...It is not opposition to descriptions of men like Hussein as martyrs that creates confusion and disunity amongst the various elements of the oppressed in this struggle. Rather it is the description itself tat causes such confusion and disunity and undermines the struggle overall.

The resolution of contradictions in achieving unity of the masses seems to lie in dialogue and practice. This is the ultimate purpose of my initial letter and this one. I am still very eager to learn more about Maoism and to discover the means of solidarity with other revolutionary-minded persons and movements. Despite my issue with the article aforementioned and discussed, I commend MIM for its courageous and poignant journalism and literature. I thank you for your persistent efforts to expose the oppression of prisoners here in the u$ and abroad. Please respond to this letter if you like, and provide me with a list of books you have available for purchase as well as the issue of MIM Notes that features the article that critiques my initial letter of commentary.

[MIM: The resolution of contradictions among the oppressed can best take place in struggle against the oppressor. That is why it is of primary importance to distinguish who is the oppressor and who are the oppressed we are trying to unite.

As the Maoist camp has been openly discussing for a long time now, there is great confusion in the International Communist Movement around this idea that we can forego alliances with the oppressed when they don't have a developed communist ideology. This isn't about Saddam Hussein and defending his honor. We take up this debate to push a scientific analysis of how to build United Fronts among the oppressed. Others would rather push alliances with the oppressor and call it communism or peace activism.

The Iraqi people will create much better images of resistance to follow than Hussein's Baath regime. Some already exist.]

chain
Go to Page [1] [2] [3] 4
Index of Articles