[R-G] Re: Rad-Green digest, Vol 1 #239 - 8 msgs

[Macdonald Stainsby]

Maurice and George: Please do not simply respond to the message by hitting
reply; please make sure you cut the useless stuff first.

secondly, re:

From: "George Snedeker" <snedeker at concentric.net>

> perhaps I should just ignore this message. I am troubled by the use of the
> "you" in the following question. who exactly does the "you" refer to? like
> the other people on this list, I oppose the killing of civilians in any
> country. "American" lives are not of greater value than those of Afghanies,
> are they? I don't think anyone on this list supports either Bin Laden or the
> Taliban.

That's true, noone endorses the brutality of the Taliban- except to defend them
"against imperialism"- regardless of who imperialism attacks, it should be a
matter of course we defend that people- and the right of the Afghanis to solve
their own problems vis-a-vis the nature of the patriarchal regime.

However, this is an opportunity to do something I am usually loathe to do:
dispute with Nestor. The actions of the Taliban and other groups do have the
effect of being anti-imperialist in that their existence makes it much more
difficult for the Empire to rule their subjects. Such resistance is not one I
could co-ordinate with even if I were to believe such were appropriate; the
Islamic fundamentalists (in the current case, the Taliban and their friends in
Al-Qaeda) would kill me and hang all our listmembers after the battle was over
(if not before). They are not friends of communists, anarchists or other secular
progressives- they are murderous enemies. Despite all the nationalisations of
oil (etc. etc.), done for reasons to gain personal strength for the government
and run as public capitalist enterprises (which the ruling elites garner much
from- as well as financing health care, education and the like).

 BUT BUT BUT- in the current global context, their struggle is bastardised
anti-imperialism which is essentially defensive- rather than the offensive of
the US and imperialism maintaining the murderous policies they do in the Middle
East. The second half of the bin Laden speech of the day of the attack on
Afghanistan (in regards to the hypocrisy of America and the pliant regimes,
American global crimes, etc. etc.) left a strange feeling in the pit of my
stomach: He is far closer to the mark than most of us believed- or want to
admit. At least in what motivates him to want to challenge America (although I
saw his speech as brilliant opportunism, rather than serious emotions).

For example: Who believes that `America' should live in peace while Palestine
remains enslaved?

Macdonald