Re: Fighting about Saddam: materialism and emotionalism

["lvnadal" <lvnadal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Comrades,

Last remarks on this issue, I promise.

Here's my Marxist analysis:  if we were in Iraq, of course we would fight
the US/UK, but not out of any defense of the Iraqi state, not because we
think the Ba'ath Party has a contradictory nature, not because history will
force Saddam to move to the left, not because we think there are any
socialist roots in the Ba'ath Party,  but out of our own class interest,
since only by defeating
imperialism can we create the terms for the overthrow of capitalism on both
local and international scales.

 This does not mean we would abandon our revolutionary program which by
definition is in opposition to Hussein.  On the contrary we would prove that
such a program is intimately involved with the defeat of the imperial
invasion, indeed, is the only way to defeat the US/UK.

Imperialist wars are civil wars.  Class is class.

We are in the US/UK.  We oppose the invasion. We defend the Iraqis fighting
the invasion.  Just that simple.

  Troops OUT, we say as part of
our revolutionary program which includes changes in property relations.  We
don't
abandon our program here either just to accommodate to the "mass" of the
movement.

  We don't need to criticize Saddam or the Ba'ath Party to curry favor  or
to prove our Marxist orthodoxy  since the invasion has nothing to do with
the democracy, freedom, Marxism or socialism of Iraq, and to engage in that
activity obscures the class nature of the struggle in both Iraq and the
US/UK.