Re: [A-List] FW: "911 and its Meta-Politics" - Steve Martinot (analytical, c...

[Waistline2@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 11/24/02 9:55:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

> Well, the problem of conspiracy theory is that it gives the government credit
> for being competent.  I keep thinking of Carter's Iran hostages rescue plan, a
> Murphy's Law that if something can go wrong, it will.  If the government
>
> planned the 911 attacks, it seemed like an overkill with four planes and it was
> too successful for a government operation.  One plane would achieve the same
> results as four planes. It seems to me that SNAFU would be a more likely
> verdict.
>
> The problem of a run-away government theme, as had been frequently invoked
> during the Vienam War was that it presupposes that the US government, its
> people, its culture, its system etc, were fundamentally good and the government
> was just temporarily taken over by sinister elements.  The possibility exists
> that the US system at its best, run by its best and brightest, was inherently
> evil, just like the British empire was evil, while within it there were
> honorable men and women who sincerely believed that were doing good.  US policy
> was and is a reflection of the will of the majority of its citizens and that
> will is often onerous. The government propaganda machine is very sophisticated
> and subliminally effective.  It needs no conspiracy to manipluate the public
> which is already it the government's pocket.
>
> Islam is the most populous religion in the world and the most fundamentalist.
> It considers the separation of Church and State a Christian disease. The War on
> Terror is going drive Islam fundamentalism and Arab nationalism into a
> formidable alliance.  Bush was right.  It is a new Crusade.  Just like the
> previous crusades, the West will lose and will suffer the consequences by
> seeing it civilization set back into a long dark age.
>
> Henry C.K. Liu


Avoiding the topic of conspiracy theory, which is very difficult for me to do as a slave descendant of Southern slavery and a certain embodiment of all that has transpired in America since its founding as a capitalist country, you raise the most profound questions confronting the American peoples. 

>"The possibility exists that the US system at its best, run by its best and brightest, was inherently evil, just like the British empire was evil, while within it there were
honorable men and women who sincerely believed that were doing good.  US policy
was and is a reflection of the will of the majority of its citizens and that
will is often onerous."<

Murphy's law is mentioned in your statement and this law basically states, "Whatever can go wrong will." There is another "law" called the "Peter principle," which basically states, "People rise to their level of incompetence."  That is a person with excellent skills in a field will be promoted and often they are promoted "up the ladder" to a responsibility that they prove to be inadequate to meet. "People rise to their level of incompetence." 

The characterization of governments, systems and peoples as evil is a complex issue. The very real issue of religion and the prospect of Christian soldiers in the Holy Lands are not taken lightly by the world's people and this most certainly includes the large sector of humanity that is neither Christian nor Islamic. 

I long ago adopted and opt for a Marxist theoretical view, although I was raised in the Christian Church and at a tender age aspired to become a Minister. Hidden beneath the various belief systems of humanity are the actual material factors of how people live out their daily lives. You are aware of this and I do not seek to belittle you in any way and at this time is actually studying your three part series on the banking system, which should take me about 6 months to form a coherent view on the subject. 

My point is my point of view and how one's views a point of viewed. Within America calling the system and peoples - the majority, evil presents a host of ideological blocks that are tightly riveted to the working out of world history.

Without a Marxist theoretical point of view I would have gone insane or like my sister become a Minister. What is being said is that from the standpoint of the progressive development of the material power of the productive forces, industrial society represents and is view as an advance over agricultural society by the absolute majority of people drawn into the orbit of modern exchange. 

An advance means "less evil" or a movement from the absurd to the less absurd. As a Marxist my particular view is that industrial society represents an advance over pre-industrial societies only in so far as industrial society crashes the ideological barriers and exposes the naked exploitation of man by man. The only thing God given is existence of organic and non-organic form, and everything else is a dice throw within a given framework described as the material power of the productive forces. 

Sir, evil many times does not know it is evil and shit does not know that it stinks because it smells itself and bases its entire conception and reality of smell on itself.

This is what is being said. In America - a country that experienced a more than less pure capitalist development as compared with all other major imperial centers and countries, the "evil" is the lingering feudal political forms. Not having a separation between state and church appears as evil to those whose psychological makeup is based on the more than less, free exchange of products and the assertion of individual will within and against the collective. 

The historic social contradictions within the ideological psychological makeup of the America peoples is centered on the Negro People perse, because their enslavement is the extreme opposite of individual freedom, freedom to exchange and a contradictions within the Christian doctrine itself. 

To the American peoples - and this embraces the intersection of ideological interest between classes, there is a human problem with the lingering feudal social structures in the Middle East. Speculative capital, which must of necessity destroy all the last outdated social structures that have a tribal and feudal character and to a degree allow for the existence of "national capital" as in Iran and in a real way in the rule of the Saudis, is an impediment to its domination of the world total social capital. 

What are these so-called "problems?" The social position of women is a serious perceived problem because industrial society liberated women with the washing machine and modern instruments of production and hurled her onto the earth as proletariat.  The majority of the people in America are women. Take revolutionary China and her current grappling with the population question. China has 1.3 billion people, totally different from America, but the issues is posed as "do women - not the government, have the final say on reproduction rights?" 

The bourgeoisie cannot win in the ideological plane if economic interests are fought out. Economic interest becomes more complex because the communist in the imperial centers have been ideologues in the main and not really communist. 

The issue is complex, especially for those who seek to defeat evil. 

In my specific culture we say, "I am not a player hater." 

The "player" deals with the individual role in a system of things. 

We say, "don't hate the player hate the game." 

I do not know if any of this makes any sense. Will write a follow up. 

Melvin P.