Re: An earlier "crime against humanity" by the oppressed

["Lou Paulsen" <wwchi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
To: marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


>On Sat, 6 Oct 2001 01:03:17 -0500, Lou Paulsen wrote:
>>Summary: apparently, for Marx, the religious,
>>monarchic, traditionalist, etc. ideologies of
>>the rebellion, and the killings of civilians,
>>were secondary.  The primary aspect was the
>>national rebellion.
>
>Of course. But our purposes here is to figure out the most effective
>way to achieve national liberation. Our traditions grow out of the
>early Comintern writings on the colonial struggle, not inchoate,
>spontaneous outbursts.

Well, 'our purposes' are several and complementary.

For those of us who live and work in the oppressed nations, our purpose is
indeed to figure out the most effective way to achieve our own nations'
liberation, and I agree that our traditions and models come from the
Comintern writings you cite, and from the many examples of socialist-led
liberation war since that time.

For those of us who live and work in the imperialist oppressor nations, our
purpose is to figure out the most effective way to make socialist
revolution.  This includes figuring out the best way to win over our own
working classes away from social-chauvinism and defensism, and to a correct
attitude of support for those 'national struggles' which may break out in
"our" own colonies or semi-colonies, even if those struggles are NOT
informed by early Comintern writings and have "reactionary" aspects, and
also involve large-scale violence against civilians (as the "Boxer
Rebellion" also did, btw, that's ANOTHER story), which the imperialists then
use to whip up imperialist war hysteria.  And for THAT purpose, our
traditions go back through Lenin's writings on the national question and
into Marx's analysis of the questions of Ireland, China, and India, among
others.

By the way, this is one of those cases where I wish I had invested hundreds
of dollars in that International Publishers set of Marx and Engels' complete
works (or had learned German).  I found a note somewhere which suggested
that Marx's own position on the national question in the colonies developed
considerably under the influence of the Indian Mutiny and of the Second
Opium War by Britain against China; that he had previously concentrated on
the progressive work of imperialism in breaking down the caste system, for
example, but during the 1850's came over to what we would now call an
anti-imperialist stance.

This is interesting enough in itself, but the historical connections don't
stop with the general.  After all, the 'sepoys' were native troops who had
been recruited by the British for the purposes, among other things, of
conquering Afghanistan.  Marx is cited as writing that under the conditions
of British rule, the only organization which the Indians could use was the
native army which the British had created themselves for the purpose of
conquest!

UK is to sepoys as US is to.. Osama   ?

Lou Paulsen





=======
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message