[Marxism] "Honor the warrior"?

["Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mark Lause writes, "I'd suggest that the formulation of the Vietnam
Veterans: 'Honor the Warrior, Not the War' is a good one."

Well, I'm not one for trying to impose scientific precision on formulations
and slogans that arise out of the social movements, but I do not believe we
should adopt or promote a slogan like "Honor the warrior, not the war" in
general, in the abstract. Honor the warrior that has turned against the war,
by all means. But not "the warrior" in general.

Because the role of the imperialist warrior is not one that should be
honored, but negated. And the way to do that is to develop a mass
understanding of just what the role of "the warrior" is. 

That understanding begins with questioning and then opposing this war, the
imperialist one going on. So I very much agree with Louis that the way to do
this is not to demand self-flagellation or confront them with shouts of
"murderers" or banners calling for victory to the resistance. 

But we do have a duty to explain in an educational way to the more advanced
elements that committing war crimes is what the gang of murderous thugs in
the White House, Congress, and the Pentagon will try to impose on them. And
not just the crime against humanity of carrying out a war of aggression.
That by their very nature, imperialist wars are wars which generate war
crimes by individual soldiers and therefore also war criminals.

No, it is not okay, for example, to do what close air support is doing today
and hitting civilian neighborhoods in Baghdad with 500lb bombs. 

I have no objection to "support our troops -- bring them home now," but I do
object to "support our troops" in general. It's just a way of saying shut
up, my country right or wrong and all that other jingoistic crap meant to
silence dissent and justify genocide. "Support our troops" means support the
CinC and his crimes.

I don't know exactly what Carroll means by saying that at the agitational
level "some version of 'Support the Troops' is correct and necessary." If
that means being supportive and human towards individuals caught in the role
of the warrior, I agree. But as an agitational slogan I can't see it as
either correct or necessary. "Support our troops" is not at all about the
troops, it is a loyalty oath and message to every to shut up and be good
Germans and follow orders. That's why I think "support our troops -- bring
them home now" is a perfectly good counter. It says no I won't shut up. And
you bastards using "support our troops" as a club to silence dissent are the
ones getting them killed.

Joaquin


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism