Re: [A-List] A Chinese Marxism view: Problems ofint'l.strategyfortoday's China

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Superpower involovement was a rivalry between a socialist imperialist
and a capitalist imperialist.  National liberation was at best an
excuse.  Cuba was acting as a poxy for the USSR. Cuba had no choice, as
it was dependent of Soviet aid. China was also involved in Africa in
that period. The situation was confused and complex. It was not the best
years for world socialism, with one imperfection battling another.  But
even then no one in China wished the total demise of the USSR.  If you
view the events in Africa in that period as good versus evil, you will
have a hard time being consistent as to which side is good.

Henry C.K. Liu

bar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> PS. Or the Cuban deployment of troops to fight the South Africans in
> defense of a socialist soutethern Africa in which they won an overwhelming
> victory. Is that an example of Cuban imperialism?
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> > I dont see how a reply to a request by the Afghans to the USSR to help
> > support their regime in the face of an assault by the US proxies can be
> > construed as "imperialism." The evidence is clear the Afghan war drained
> > the USSR and it did not benefit one whit from that war. Are you saying
> > that any time a socialist country comes to aid of another and sends troops
> > there that it is engaging in imperialism? Then what was the Chinese war
> > agaisnt Vietnam in the mid 70's all about?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > > What was the "imperialism" involved in Afghanistan?
> > >
> > > The Soviets neither exploited nor plundered resources. Nor did they
> > > attempt
> > > to control the government.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, take a look at what the United States is after there!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > From: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reply-To: The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Subject: Re: [A-List] A Chinese Marxism view: Problems
> > > > ofint'l.	strategyfortoday's China
> > > > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:11:14 -0500
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Charles Brown wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Henry:
> > > > > The US was also less exploitative during the Cold War with its allies.
> > > > >
> > > > > ^^^^
> > > > > CB: Well, yes, they were in a creative _destructive_ phase in their
> > > > > relationship to their colonies.
> > > > >
> > > > > Soviets didn't seem to have to carry out big imperialist wars as the
> > > > > U.S.
> > > > > did. This is an indirect indicator of less exploitation.
> > > > Yes, Charles.  That is because the Soviet imperilaist phase started late
> > > > and came into full bloom in Afghanistan, which eventually brought down
> > > > the
> > > > USSR.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Henry
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
> > > FREE!
> > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/