Re: [Marxism] Supporting the resistance? (from Aaron Hess)

[Barney Katz <taxi4marx@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Isaac Curtis <Isaac_Curtis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I am confused about the use of the term "objective."

<snip>

> I think I am confused when the term "objectively" is
> used to describe intersecting interests, such as
> class interests, or in this case the support of the
> anti-war movement for the Iraqi resistance.  I am
> having trouble telling the difference between
> language like this and that of Foreign Affairs
> Editor Gideon Rose who, in a clip played in the
> documentary "Preventive Warriors," asserts:
>
> "You are saying, therefore, that you are siding,
> rather objectively, in the old Marxist terminology,
> with those who are [Bush's] enemies, however
> unpleasant and riduculous that kind of zero-sum
> thinking is...  You are saying you prefer a world in
> which Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and the
> Taliban are riding high in the saddle to one in
> which they are on the run, in hiding, and hopefully
> soon exterminated."
>
> I understand that Louis' language is talking about
> being objectively anti-imperialist, which is our
> goal, not objectively supporting "[Bush's] enemies."
>  Yet it seems clear that Rose is correct (and those
> of us who take that stance openly admit
> among ourselves) that we are objectively supporting
> those enemies in the process of objectively opposing
> imperialism.  Are we not in the case of Afghanistan,
> objectively supporting the repression of women by
> opposing imperialism?  Doesn't this
> application of the term lend itself to ridiculous
> and uninstructive analyses like that of Gideon Rose?

<snip>

> Thanks,
> Isaac Curtis
> Maine Peace Action Committee
> www.umaine.edu/mpac/
>
>


Isaac,

You're correctly concerned about some of the
contradictions that arise from a dogmatic application
of the Leninist policy of support for an automatic and
ahistorical right to 'self-determination' of oppressed
nations, at all times and in all places.

Rosa Luxemburg argued that this policy was the product
of a pragmatic tactical need on the part of Lenin and
the Bolsheviks, who, in order to seize state power
successfully, needed to guarantee as much support for,
and as little opposition to, their revolution, from
the nationalities of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian
empires. The policy was not - and is still not - a
necessary requirement in the struggle for socialism,
rather, it was a tactical shortcut that impeded
progress towards workers' social power and socialism
by ignoring the class character of the oppressed
nations and failing to support in practical ways the
exploited and oppressed classes of the subject
nations. Luxemburg went as far as to call Lenin's
policy "empty petty-bourgeois phraseology and humbug"
(Rosa Luxemburg, The Russian Revolution). It was
calculated to bring the Bolsheviks to power, not to
bring the workers to power.

Applying this 90 year old policy holus bolus to the
situation in Iraq today - as some Leninist elements in
the North are doing - is in complete disregard to the
class needs of working people in Iraq. Some of these
'revolutionaries' of the North are openly supporting
the reactionary and backward-looking forces of
political Islam as much as - in some cases more than -
the forces of the working class. It's no secret that
Sunni Arab millionaires outside of Iraq are the
financiers of much of the Islamist 'resistance', their
long term aim being to unify Arabs under Islamist
rule. Sunni Islamism is the manifestation in our time
of the failed secular, state-socialist-based, pan-Arab
nationalism of the 1950's and '60s, albeit in a much
more reactionary and socially oppressive form.

If you're undecided about what social elements to
support in a conflict in some far off land, the last
people I'd be consulting are the self-styled
professional revolutionaries of the North,
particularly those attached to sectlets to which not a
single worker ever dares to gravitate - these tend to
be the most dogmatic and unrealistic. Their primary
practical activity tends to be the perpetual
replenishment of their high-turnover memberships,
utilising campaigns built on conflicts in far off
lands to do so. This, their primary activity, is a
measure of their opportunism.

Real socialists - whether workers or intellectuals -
whether party members or not - understand that the
working class plays the leading role in the struggle
for socialism, and focus their activism on actual
workers' struggles, and demonstate their solidarity
with real workers engaged in real struggles
everywhere. While in Iraq there may be many workers'
organisations with differing programmes and
strategies, and differing political affiliations, they
must be supported against reactionary Islamists.

The Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions is the largest of
the union federations and recognises the elected govt.
It has links with the govt and with the Communist
Party. Whilst this federation may be perceived by some
as a force for bourgeois rule, it does not follow that
it is a tool of imperialism.

The Federation of Workers' Councils and Unions of Iraq
is the next largest federation and does not recognise
the elections that were held. Some of its demands are:
"Immediate and unconditional end of the occupation in
Iraq through the strengthening of the front of civil
resistance against occupation of Iraq. The workers
should stand in [the] forefront of this massive
movement and they should strengthen it." Also needed
is the "Abolishment [sic] of any administration and
structures based on tribal system and discrimination
according to religion or Ethnicity."

The Worker-Communist Party says: "On the one hand we
have American occupation, violence and torture. And on
the other: armed groups of political Islamists and
ethno-centric racists. Iraqi society is on the edge of
a volcano!" Further: "Our society urgently needs the
intervention of the working class ... its active (not
passive) involvement. No other class or group in Iraqi
society can emancipate the Iraqi society from this
nightmare ...
Workers' unity can remove this nightmare, neutralize
this time bomb and overcome ethnic, religious and
other false identities. The working class can unite
all residents of the country who share [the] same
future and can lead the struggle to liberate the
society from the forces of occupation and from the
nationalist and religious groups."

Sure, the military forces of imperialism must be
ousted, but the forces of the Iraqi working class must
be strengthened to form the basis of the revolutionary
struggle against imperialism into the future.

BK





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism