Re: [A-List] US/Saudi tensions

[Macdonald Stainsby <mstainsby@xxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>
>
> Yes, and a daily intake of vitamins is good for you. Is it really necessary
> to be reminded of these truisms in such a fashion? Is the A-list veering off
> the "correct line"? Just what is the "correct line"?

I don't know, but I am concerned that we not get too caught up in the details of
this supposed "split". It wouldn't have happened AT ALL, i.e. it would not have
become public discourse if it was not suitable to the US ruling juntas
interests. That's the way things work now, not much different than before but
far far more refined. The details are not as important as the article being on
page one. You seem bent on getting a cardboard cut-out Leninist dogmatic out of
me, or insinuating one. I'm not a party, much less a sect, sorry.

Does the bourgeois
> media have a single line? All too often your pronouncements are made in what
> appears to be an analytical vacuum because you make simplistic dualistic
> right/wrong declarations that ignore the complexities of the issues you
> tackle with such absolute certainty. Zimbabwe is a case in point -- who am
> I, sitting on my perch in southern Finland, to make such sweeping statements
> on topics about which people like Patrick Bond and John Enyang know far
> more?

Michael, your humilty will not protect you. We are living in the part of the
world that is targetting them. We are quite capable of saying that we know how
to spot when imperialism is going after a country. Have I quoted Mugabe? Have I
said the land reform was akin to the land reform of the Mexican or Chinese
revolutions? Nothing of the sort. However, I have said that it is very clear
that our governments are after them and now they have chosen to manipulate the
national/tribal divide in Zimbabwe, in order to NATO it. I have every right, in
fact, where I sit (a country that would no doubt be part of the expedition) to
question this. What I don't know is the level to which the two main tribal
bodies are "for" or "against" the ZANU or the MDC. It's not my job to spend my
time looking for human rights abuses in Third World Countries that decide to
tackle land issues brought about by Western, white imperialism. It's my job to
get the imperialist boot off their necks while they do that. If that means
giving uncritical support to ZANU, then that's what I'm doing, but only because
I'm trying to hold back imperialism who declare that "Mugabe is holding his
people hostage like Saddam Hussein". When American policy wonks say this, you
better get down to understanding whose side you are on.

I'm not with the sanctions. Go sanction Britain. If that's dogma, then I'm
dogmatic. Proud of it, too.

However, on the subjects I do not know I have asked twice. What are the balance
of Matabele and Shona? If this gets ignored, then how nuanced is that? How
dogmatic is that?

> If you think that the above is in any way deficient or somehow lacking in
> "correctness", then you, as moderator of both "Leninist International" and
> "Rad-Green" are in a position to develop something that fills the gap. Or
> you can make constructive contributions to this forum in ways which address
> those topics you deem important. Just don't waste bandwidth on unnecessary
> ideological correctives.
>
> Michael Keaney

Michael, you are the one who chose to make this personal, fine. I left Proyect's
list for reasons I won't go into here, suffice to say I don't give a damn about
the history of the SWP US, nor am I interested in a forum that is all about
spanking people into thinking the same way as the moderator (and his clique) on
fundamental issues. I prefer this list because of the higher state of
contributions and because it isn't purely Marxist, or for that matter First
World Marxists. We *need* something new, something better, right? This list has
a chance to do that, Marxmail is all about replicating the old. Rad Green is
attempting to do the same thing as this, but on a far more activist/younger
basis and less academic basis as well. It is a lot of news and some debate,
almost always about that which we can actually do.

Your invective is wholly surprising, but I'm guessing you don't believe that
Saudi is next.

Macdonald