Interestingly enough, popular committees are running the eastern
cities of Libya and are attempting to coordinate their actions. That's
one of the many good things to come out of Gadaffi's downfall : people's
assemblies have become tools ready to be used by genuine ... people.
But to what extent will the new tribal chiefs, military officers, former ministers, jurists, imams and "intellectuals" that have recently come to prominence be ultimately accountable before and controlled by the popular assemblies in their respective localities ? And what about
Socialism in such an oil-rich country ?
For the time being, each city's local council is ensuring the arrival of food
and supplies, setting up communications, getting local electricty plants
to function normally and providing for their local defense needs by having army
units and anti-Gaddafi fighters organize themselves into a coherent
local defense militia.
Moreover, Socialism appears to be an accepted idea, as all citizens
are aware that they get their wealth from oil, and that the proceeds of
such wealth should come back to the people.
So despite all the flux of civil war, the citizens of Libya have got two
ideas clearly in mind : a) local government answerable to the people and
b) ownership of the billions of dollars of proceeds from oil.
They feel Gaddafi failed them on both a) and b). But, alas, once a new
pro-Western government comes into place, they will once again be
deprived from a) and b). But maybe that's why there is so much chaos in
Libya, as the people do have a pretty good idea of a) and b) and will
not be relinquishing their weapons soon.
Libya could become an interesting experiment in people's power. If, of course,
a new government and corrupt officials intent on stealing the oil wealth for themselves
(and foreign interests) don't step in and take charge. Let's see how the class
struggle unfolds in Libya.
Showing posts with label army. Show all posts
Showing posts with label army. Show all posts
Monday, 28 February 2011
Thursday, 18 November 2010
Gay service(wo)men in the US army
An exchange that took place on the Marxmail list :
I cant' believe that you guys are still fooling around with whether gay
people should be allowed to serve in the US Army.
The answer is of course YES.
Gay soldiers should be allowed to get hit by Kalashinkov (or M-16) fire.
What makes them cleverer than heterosexuals, Blacks, women, Irish,
Indians, Asians, and any other recognized group that has enlisted ?
Homosexuals are just as capable of slaughter when commanded to do so.
Mark Lause wrote :
No, I beg to disagree. Willingly choosing to kill people when ordered to do so by
the state can never be excused, even though it brings short-term money in.
And all those soldiers will NOT get a "decent job and diplomas" when they come back. That is a lie.
They will not get the equivalent of the GI Bill of 1945 enabling them to go to college for free. That is a lie.
They will return with nothing to show for killing 60,000 to 120,000 civilians in Irak (give or take).
Whether an external threat or an internal threat, the Army will always
do its duty as loyal servant to those who yield power (privileges).
It is the basic hierarchical structure of the armed forces we object to.
I mean we, Libertarian Marxists, not we, "anything goes" Marxists.
The Army is a harmful institution that is purposefully disjointed from
the people, and purposefully entrusted with powerful weapons to subdue
the people.
I cant' believe that you guys are still fooling around with whether gay
people should be allowed to serve in the US Army.
The answer is of course YES.
Gay soldiers should be allowed to get hit by Kalashinkov (or M-16) fire.
What makes them cleverer than heterosexuals, Blacks, women, Irish,
Indians, Asians, and any other recognized group that has enlisted ?
Homosexuals are just as capable of slaughter when commanded to do so.
Mark Lause wrote :
"participation in the military, among other reasons,is often the best chance
the poor have of getting anywhere different in this society. It's the key to
an education, to a decent job, to the kind of future that some may well be taking
for granted."
No, I beg to disagree. Willingly choosing to kill people when ordered to do so by
the state can never be excused, even though it brings short-term money in.
And all those soldiers will NOT get a "decent job and diplomas" when they come back. That is a lie.
They will not get the equivalent of the GI Bill of 1945 enabling them to go to college for free. That is a lie.
They will return with nothing to show for killing 60,000 to 120,000 civilians in Irak (give or take).
Whether an external threat or an internal threat, the Army will always
do its duty as loyal servant to those who yield power (privileges).
It is the basic hierarchical structure of the armed forces we object to.
I mean we, Libertarian Marxists, not we, "anything goes" Marxists.
The Army is a harmful institution that is purposefully disjointed from
the people, and purposefully entrusted with powerful weapons to subdue
the people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)