In Honor Of The 100th Anniversary Of The Founding of The Communist International-From The Archives- Iraq Redux In Afghanistan-The Missing Guns?

Commentary

One of the nice things about these modern information technologies like word processors and data retrieval systems is that one can have easy access to his or her earlier work and therefore avoid starting from scratch on every commentary. That is the case with this comment. I have reposted an entry in this space from August 11, 2007. It concerns the question of missing weapons and their fate in that old, almost forgotten, Iraq war posed by the General Accounting Office (GAO) at that time. Recently I picked up a news item from “The Boston Globe” (via “Baltimore Sun”), dated February 13, 2009, concerning this same question posed by this same agency. Except the question is directed to missing guns in Afghanistan in the lead up to the Obama policy that is set to escalate the war there with an increased American troop presence. So, as I said previously, in the interest of “saving” cyberspace I have reposted the old comment. Just put in Afghanistan where I have Iraq and you’ll get the gist of the recent story. As to the numbers, well, the Afghanistan numbers are about 90,000 but who’s worried about the real numbers? Not the GAO, and not Obama. Read on.


August 11, 2007

“Where Did Those AK-47’s Go?

Apparently the American military juggernaut is arming both sides in the Iraqi conflict. What? Well, news has recently come out from the General Accounting Office (GAO) that something like 200, 000 AK-47 assault rifles- the most popular (and useful) weapon in the world for the common soldier- are missing along with plenty of other war material. Now a few thousand rifles mislaid in a war is just ‘breakage’ as they say in the shipping business. 200, 000 missing rifles (enough for several divisions in conventional military terms) that are suppose to be in the hands of the Iraqi security forces , however, is quite another matter. The Pollyanna-ish GAO is worried that such quantities might fall into the wrong hands, that is, the various insurgency groups operating in Iraq. Hello! One can be damn well sure that one way or another, through the black market, stealing or by being given them by those selfsame Iraqi security forces that a significant number have found, or will find, their way into insurgent hands. If we needed one more reason to call for immediate withdrawal from Iraq here it is, in living color.”

Needless to say, Immediate Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops From Iraq AND Afghanistan!

On The 100th Anniversary Of Newly-Fledged German Communist Leader Rosa Luxemburg And Karl Liebknecht-Oh, What Might Have Been-*From The Frontlines Of The Anti-Afghan War Struggle- On The Slogan- “Down With The Obama Government”- A Commentary

On The 100^th Anniversary Of Newly-Fledged German Communist Leader Rosa Luxemburg And Karl Liebknecht-Oh, What Might Have Been-


By Frank Jackman

History in the conditional, what might have happened if this or that thing, event, person had swerved this much or that, is always a tricky proposition. Tricky as reflected in this piece’s commemorative headline. Rosa Luxemburg the acknowledged theoretical wizard of the German Social-Democratic Party, the numero uno party of the Second, Socialist International, which was the logical organization to initiate the socialist revolution before World War II and Karl Liebknecht, the hellfire and brimstone propagandist and public speaker of that same party were assassinated in separate locale on the orders of the then ruling self-same Social-Democratic Party. The chasm between the Social-Democratic leaders trying to save Germany for “Western Civilization” in the wake of the “uncivilized” socialist revolution in Russia in 1917 had grown that wide that it was as if they were on two different planets, and maybe they were.

(By the way I am almost embarrassed to mention the term “socialist revolution” these days when people, especially young people, would be clueless as to what I was talking about or would think that this concept was so hopelessly old-fashioned that it would meet the same blank stares. Let me assure you that back in the day, yes, that back in the day, many a youth had that very term on the tips of their tongues. Could palpably feel it in the air. Hell, just ask your parents, or grandparents.)

Okay here is the conditional and maybe think about it before you dismiss the idea out of hand if only because the whole scheme is very much in the conditional. Rosa and Karl, among others made almost every mistake in the book before and during the Spartacist uprising in some of the main German cities in late 1918 after the German defeat in the war. Their biggest mistake before the uprising was sticking with the Social Democrats, as a left wing, when that party had turned at best reformist and eminently not a vehicle for the socialist revolution, or even a half-assed democratic “revolution” which is what they got with the overthrow of the Kaiser. They broke too late, and subsequently too late from a slightly more left-wing Independent Socialist Party which had split from the S-D when that party became the leading war party in Germany for all intents and purposes and the working class was raising its collective head and asking why. 

The big mistake during the uprising was not taking enough protective cover, not keeping the leadership safe, keeping out of sight like Lenin had in Finland when things were dicey in 1917 Russia and fell easy prey to the Freikorps assassins. Here is the conditional, and as always it can be expanded to some nth degree if you let things get out of hand. What if, as in Russia, Rosa and Karl had broken from that rotten (for socialism) S-D organization and had a more firmly entrenched cadre with some experience in independent existence. What if the Spartacists had protected their acknowledged leaders better. There might have been a different trajectory for the aborted and failed German left-wing revolutionary opportunities over the next several years, there certainly would have been better leadership and perhaps, just perhaps the Nazi onslaught might have been stillborn, might have left Munich 1923 as their “heroic” and last moment.  


Instead we have a still sad 100^th anniversary of the assassination of two great international socialist fighters who headed to the danger not away always worthy of a nod and me left having to face those blank stares who are looking for way forward but might as well be on a different planet-from me.  


Click on the title to link to the Karl Liebknecht Internet Archive's copy of his protest against the granting of war credits to the German government DURING World War I.

From the front lines of the anti-Afghan war struggle, such as it is.


Markin comment on this link:

This is the time for radicals and other anti-war activists to review the work of Karl Liebknecht, the great German internationalist revolutionary, as we face many of the same political problems that he had to confront with a capitalist government hellbent on war and escalation of war, including, in our case, the question of parliamentary opposition to the executive branch's war budget.

Markin comment:

Recently, while attending one of several impromptu ad hoc demonstrations in Boston called to protest the escalation of the latest American imperial adventure, Obama’s massive troop surge in Afghanistan, I fell into a discussion with a young militant I met there who has been carrying a poster that read – “Down With The Obama Government”. While such a homemade poster should gladden the heart of every old time anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist militant (and every new militant, as well) I argued with her, and I argue here that such a slogan is clearly premature. And here is why I think so.

I have made something of a truism in this space of the fact that politics, and that includes revolutionary politics, is many, if not most, times a matter of timing. That is the case here. To help illustrate that proposition I will give just a couple of pieces of information about this woman’s own political trajectory that I think demonstrates my case for the prematureness of her slogan. Budding militant X , in 2008, became as a freshman at a local Boston college an ardent supporter of, and campaign worker, for the presidential campaign of one Barack Obama. Apparently there was no job too small or place too far away that she would not go to on behalf of his candidacy.

Her reasoning, as she immersed herself emerged fully into the political battlefield, for supporting Obama need not detain us here, although that is an interesting story for another time as it somewhat parallels my own checkered youthful political evolution. As she related her story about her hours of campaigning and the places she had gone let’s just say that I not mistakenly realized that she is a fellow political ‘junkie’. In any case, Ms. X had high hopes, especially for Obama’s peace platform, as least as she understood it. By February of this year, with Obama’s deployment of some 20,000 additional troops to Afghanistan just shortly after his inauguration, she was very worried. This latest troop escalation put her into opposition on the streets.

Hey, this is a nice conversion for our side. This, my friends, is the kind of human material we need to recruit as we gather cadre for our future anti-war, anti-capitalist struggles, right? Right. But this saga of a youthful disillusioned liberal seems to me to be exactly the point. We are just now in the beginning of a period that should see the breaking, among some, of illusions in the Obama government. We, certainly, will add to that process with our own timely propaganda (including the use of this example) but this is where we are realistically- in the process of accruing a critical mass of fervent anti-imperialist, anti-war militants.

I strongly emphasize again, we are not there now- not by a long shot. So take another look at that slogan- “Down With The Obama Government”. What could that mean today? It could only mean some alternate form of Democratic Party administration of the executive branch of government (A Biden government?). Or, more realistically, some “Tea Party”-style Republican administration. Egad- we damn sure do not want that.

For those of us who have some acquaintance with revolutionary history, we know that this kind of slogan certainly has had its uses. In a pre-revolutionary or revolutionary period, as most famously demonstrated by the Bolsheviks in their agitation and propaganda in the spring and summer of 1917 during the Russian revolution, a variation of this slogan can have great effect. Unfortunately, as the old saying goes," times ain’t now nothing like they used to be”.

So, here is what I propose (and I did so, in a kidding and gentle manner) to Ms. X. Store that poster for now and help us get the American and other Allied troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq (and the world). Victory in that effort will go a long way towards fulfilling the reality expressed in her slogan. One day we will unwrap that poster and walk the streets under that banner- with plenty of people behind us. Our day will come, but just to be on the safe side for now -Obama- Immediate Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan Iraq! Not One Penny, Not One Person For Obama's Wars! Build A Workers Party That Fights For A Workers Government!

On The 100th Anniversary Of Newly-Fledged German Communist Leader Rosa Luxemburg And Karl Liebknecht-Oh, What Might Have Been-* From The Archives -War-Monger-In-Chief Obama Throws Down The Gauntlet- The Gloves Are Off- To The Streets- Not One Penny, Not One Person For The Afghan War

On The 100^th Anniversary Of Newly-Fledged German Communist Leader Rosa Luxemburg And Karl Liebknecht-Oh, What Might Have Been-


By Frank Jackman

History in the conditional, what might have happened if this or that thing, event, person had swerved this much or that, is always a tricky proposition. Tricky as reflected in this piece’s commemorative headline. Rosa Luxemburg the acknowledged theoretical wizard of the German Social-Democratic Party, the numero uno party of the Second, Socialist International, which was the logical organization to initiate the socialist revolution before World War II and Karl Liebknecht, the hellfire and brimstone propagandist and public speaker of that same party were assassinated in separate locale on the orders of the then ruling self-same Social-Democratic Party. The chasm between the Social-Democratic leaders trying to save Germany for “Western Civilization” in the wake of the “uncivilized” socialist revolution in Russia in 1917 had grown that wide that it was as if they were on two different planets, and maybe they were.

(By the way I am almost embarrassed to mention the term “socialist revolution” these days when people, especially young people, would be clueless as to what I was talking about or would think that this concept was so hopelessly old-fashioned that it would meet the same blank stares. Let me assure you that back in the day, yes, that back in the day, many a youth had that very term on the tips of their tongues. Could palpably feel it in the air. Hell, just ask your parents, or grandparents.)

Okay here is the conditional and maybe think about it before you dismiss the idea out of hand if only because the whole scheme is very much in the conditional. Rosa and Karl, among others made almost every mistake in the book before and during the Spartacist uprising in some of the main German cities in late 1918 after the German defeat in the war. Their biggest mistake before the uprising was sticking with the Social Democrats, as a left wing, when that party had turned at best reformist and eminently not a vehicle for the socialist revolution, or even a half-assed democratic “revolution” which is what they got with the overthrow of the Kaiser. They broke too late, and subsequently too late from a slightly more left-wing Independent Socialist Party which had split from the S-D when that party became the leading war party in Germany for all intents and purposes and the working class was raising its collective head and asking why. 

The big mistake during the uprising was not taking enough protective cover, not keeping the leadership safe, keeping out of sight like Lenin had in Finland when things were dicey in 1917 Russia and fell easy prey to the Freikorps assassins. Here is the conditional, and as always it can be expanded to some nth degree if you let things get out of hand. What if, as in Russia, Rosa and Karl had broken from that rotten (for socialism) S-D organization and had a more firmly entrenched cadre with some experience in independent existence. What if the Spartacists had protected their acknowledged leaders better. There might have been a different trajectory for the aborted and failed German left-wing revolutionary opportunities over the next several years, there certainly would have been better leadership and perhaps, just perhaps the Nazi onslaught might have been stillborn, might have left Munich 1923 as their “heroic” and last moment.  


Instead we have a still sad 100^th anniversary of the assassination of two great international socialist fighters who headed to the danger not away always worthy of a nod and me left having to face those blank stares who are looking for way forward but might as well be on a different planet-from me.  


Click on title to link to the Karl Liebknecht Internet Archive’s copy of his 1915 anti-war speech during World War I, "The Main Enemy Is At Home". He was a man who know how to react to the home-grown war-mongers of his time

Markin comment:

We of the anti-war, anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist left rarely, if ever, get a chance to set the agenda for national and international politics. More often than not we are forced to react to some egregious act or policy, like the current Obama-driven troops escalation in Afghanistan, where we are on the defensive trying to provide the rational voice in the cacophony of voices- Immediate Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops From Afghanistan.

Today, however, we have an exceptional opportunity to drive our propaganda points home against a president assumed to be some kind of progressive. In retrospect it was almost too easy to discredit the bizarre George W. Bush government as long as the “democratic’ alternative was in the wings, especially an attractive, intelligent black man. Now that Obama has shown his fangs by staking his presidency on Afghanistan we have some very effective ammunition for our pro-socialist alternatives. Step one in that direction is the fight against funding the war. Think this: After Obama, Us. But in the meantime- Not One Penny, Not One Person for This War! Forward.

*From The Archives-POPULAR FRONT POLITICS AND THE IRAQ ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT

Click on title to link to Karl Marx's 1850, yes that is not a misprint the question has been with us for a long time, 1850 "Address Of The Central Committee Of The Communist League" which deals with the popular fronts of his day in the aftermath of the revolutions of 1848.

COMMENTARY

DOWN WITH THE WAR! DOWN WITH THE WAR BUDGET!

Radicals and revolutionaries, including Marxist revolutionaries, have been struggling with the implications of popular front politics at least since the European Revolutions of 1848. At that time, due more to the question of political immaturity and inexperience, left-wing working class militants and their allies tried to line up with, and in most cases in subordination to, their national bourgeoisies in the fights for the demands of the classic bourgeois revolutions. And for their troubles these same ‘allies’ suppressed these militants and their demands once the situation became too ‘hot’ and the various capitalist parties made their peace with the old regimes. One of the great lessons that Karl Marx (and his co-thinker Frederich Engels) derived from that turn of events was an understanding that an essential ingredient to successful socialist revolution was the need for independent working class organization and action and a political break with the capitalist parties.

Of course, as latter working class history has made painfully clear that seemingly elemental task has been easier said than done. Since Marx's time time endless numbers of ‘socialist’ politicians and ‘vanguard’ political organizations have broken their teeth on denying the truth of his assertions. One need only think of the classic Popular Fronts in Spain and France the 1930’s and Chile in the 1970’s created explicitly by leftwing forces to act as brakes on developing revolutionary situations to know that such a strategy means political death for the revolution and the physical destruction of revolutionary cadre for decades.


What gives? What do those historic events have to do with today’s opposition to the war in Iraq? Simple, while not all popular fronts are created equal they all serve the same ends. As a primer one should know that the popular front is a left-wing political strategy where its advocates call on all ‘progressive’ forces and people of ‘good will’ including capitalist parties and politicians to unite around some ‘good old cause’. Well, what is wrong with that? On democratic issues such as the right to vote or opposition to government snooping and in political defense cases not a thing. Except we call that a united front. Why? Because depending on the case the fight is a limited one, the time is short and there is no political reason not to gain the support of as many people as possible. No, the popular front is a very different animal. It is a conscious strategy on the part of some left-wing forces to limit the aims of any particular fight to those acceptable to the capitalist parties.

For those who do not believe the import of such distinctions let me give one example. Take a simple slogan like –STOP THE WAR. In the build-up to the Iraq War that did not have a bad sound, if not particularly poliitcally sophisticated. Big burly former football linebackers and pacifist little old ladies in tennis shoes could agree to that. However, until early 2006 this was still the central slogan of the anti-war movement. The more appropriate IMMEDIATE, UNCONDITIONAL WITHDRAWAL OF ALL UNITED STATES AND ALLIED TROOPS FROM IRAQ did not get official sanction until that time. Why? Because those big burly football players and gentile old ladies did not want to go that far? Hell, no. The real reason was no ‘respectable’ capitalist politician, except maybe Congressman Kucinich on a good day, was making that call. And that is the rub. The case of the various umbrella anti-war coalitions such as the ANSWER Coalition and United For Peace and Justice here in America (and elsewhere as this is decidedly an international phenomena) are classic examples of a non-parliamentary popular front. Any thoughtful militant who wonders why the anti-war movement here is spinning its wheels can look to that conscious strategy on the part of the current anti-war leaderships as the root cause of the dilemma.

I have noted above, at least twice, the fact that the popular front strategy is a conscious one on the part of those ‘progressives’ who pursue it. And for those who do not want to make a revolution or are just serious about 'pressure' politics on the face of it that policy makes sense. The capitalist parties and their politicians have no need, except as electoral cannon fodder, to seek an on-going bloc with non-parliamentary leftwing forces. One should note that it has only been this year (2007) that even minor league Democratic politicians have gotten on the platforms at anti-war events. No, this is strictly a strategy pursued by 'get rich quick' artists of the left who pursue this course in order to be at one with the ‘masses’ or not get ‘isolated’ from the political consciousness of the masses. That at the end of the day the wily (and in some case not so wily, take John Kerry in 2004, for example) capitalist politicians reap the rewards of this political treachery seems not to have occurred to these same artists. The next battleground on the fight against the popular front will be on the upcoming war budget. It will not be pretty. However, those are the central slogans for the immediate future. You will definitely see the limits of popular front politics on that one. DOWN WITH THE WAR, DOWN WITH THE WAR BUDGET, BREAK WITH THE CAPITALIST PARTIES.

From The Archives *HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE

COMMENTARY

FORGET DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS AND GREENS- BUILD A WORKERS PARTY

The election cycle of 2006-2008 has started, a time for all militants to run for cover. It will not be pretty and certainly is not for the faint-hearted. The Democrats smell blood in the water. The Greens smell that the Democrats smell blood. Various parliamentary leftists and some ostensibly socialists smell that the Greens smell blood. You get the drift. Before we go to ground let me make a point.

The central issue in the 2006 elections is the Iraq quagmire. As we enter the fourth year in the bloody war in Iraq many liberals, and some not so liberal, in Congress and elsewhere are looking to rehabilitate their sorry records on Iraq and are having a cheap field day. As militants we know that the only serious call is- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal of all U.S. and Allied Forces Now (or rather yesterday). Many politicians have supported a pale imitation of this slogan-now that it safe to do so. These courageous positions range from immediate withdrawal in six months, one year, six years, etc.. My personal favorite is withdrawal when the situation in Iraq stabilizes. Compared to that position, Mr. Bush’s statement in May, 2003 that the mission in Iraq was accomplished seems the height of political realism. Hold on though.

After the last slogan has faded from the last mass anti-war demonstration, after the last e-mail has been sent to the last unresponsive Congressman, after the last petition signed on behalf of the fellowship of humankind has been signed where do we stand in 2006. When the vast majority of Americans (and the world) are against the Iraq war and it still goes on and yet the “masses” are not ready for more drastic action we need some immediate leverage.

The only material way to end the war on the parliamentary level is opposition to the continued funding for the occupation. For that, however, you need votes in Congress. Here is my proposal. Make a N0 vote on the war budget a condition for your vote. When the Democrats, Republicans, Greens, or whoever, come to your door, your mailbox , your computer or calls you on the telephone or cell phone ask this simple question- YES or NO on the war budget.

Now, lest I be accused of being an ultra left let me make this clear. I am talking about the supplementary budget for Iraq. Heaven forbid that I mean the real war budget, you know, the 400 billion plus one. No, we are reasonable people and until we get universal health care we do not want these “leaders” to suffer heart attacks. And being reasonable people we can be proper parliamentarians when the occasion requires it. If the answer is YES, then we ask YES or NO on the appropriations for bombs in the war budget. And if the answer is still YES, then we ask YES or NO on the appropriations for gold-plated kitchen sinks in the war budget. If to your utter surprise any politician says NO here’s your comeback- Since you have approximated the beginning of wisdom, get the hell out of the party you represent. You are in the wrong place. Come down here in the mud and fight for a party workers can call their own. Then, maybe, just maybe, I can support you.

I do not believe we are lacking in physical courage. What has declined is political courage, and this seems an irreversible decline on the part of parliamentary politicians. That said, I want to finish up with a woefully inadequate political appreciation of Karl Liebknecht, member of the German Social Democratic faction in the Reichstag in the early 1900’s. Karl was also a son of Wilhelm Liebknecht, friend of Karl Marx and founder of the German Social Democratic Party in the 1860’s. On August 4, 1914, at the start of World War I the German Social Democratic Party voted YES on the war budget of the Kaiser against all its previous historic positions on German militarism. This vote was rightly seen as a betrayal of socialist principles. Due to a policy of parliamentary solidarity Karl Liebknecht also voted for this budget, or at least felt he had to go along with his faction. Shortly thereafter, he broke ranks and voted NO against the war appropriations. As pointed out below Karl Liebknecht did much more than that to oppose the German side in the First World War. THAT , MY FRIENDS, IS THE KIND OF POLITICIAN I CAN SUPPORT. AS FOR THE REST- HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE.


EVERY JANUARY WE HONOR, LENIN OF RUSSIA, ROSA LUXEMBURG OF POLAND AND KARL LIEBKNECHT OF GERMANY AS THREE LEADERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL WORKING CLASS MOVEMENT. HERE’S WHY WE HONOR LIEBKNECHT.

In honor of the 3 L’s. The authority of Lenin, leader of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917, and Luxemburg, the Rose of the Revolution, need no special commendation. I would however like to comment on Karl Liebknecht who has received less historical recognition and has had less written about him. Nevertheless, Karl Liebknecht apparently had the capacity to lead the German Revolution. A man whose actions inspired 50,000 Berlin workers, under penalty of being drafted to the front, to strike against his imprisonment in the middle of a World War is self- evidently a man with the authority to lead a revolution. His tragic personal fate in the aftermath of the Spartacus Uprising of 1919, being killed by counterrevolutionaries aided by his former comrades in the German Social Democratic Party, helped condition the later dismal fate of the German Revolution in 1923.

History has posed certain questions concerning the establishment of socialism that remains unresolved primarily to due the crisis of leadership of the international labor movement. Although Liebknecht admittedly was not a theoretician I do not believe that someone of Lenin's or Trotsky's theoretical level was necessary after the Russian experience. What was necessary was a leadership that assimilated those lessons. Liebknecht, given enough time to study those lessons, seems to have been capable of that. A corollary to that view is that one must protect leading cadre when the state starts bearing down. Especially small propaganda groups like the Spartacus with fewer resources for protection of leadership. This was not done. If you do not protect your leadership you wind up with a Levi, Brander or Thalheimer (successively leaders of the German Communist Party in the early 1920’s) who seemed organically incapable of learning those lessons

One of the problems with being the son of a famous politician is that as founder of the early German Social Democratic Party Wilhelm Liebknecht's son much was expected of Karl, especially on the question of leading the German working class against German militarism. Wilhelm had done a prison term (with August Bebel) for opposition to the Franco-Prussian War. As for Karl I have always admired that famous picture of him walking across the Potsdam Plaza in uniform, subject to imprisonment after lost of his parliamentary immunity, with briefcase under arm ready to go in and do battle with the parliamentary cretins of the Social Democratic Party over support for the war budget. (THIS PICTURE CAN BE GOOGLED) That is the kind of leadership cadre we desperately need now. REMEMBER HIS FAMOUS SLOGANS- ‘THE MAIN ENEMY IS AT HOME’-‘NOT ONE PENNY, NOT ONE PERSON (updated by writer) FOR THE WAR’. Wilhelm would have been proud.


THIS IS PART OF A SERIES OF ARTICLES OF OCCASIONAL COMMENTARY ON THE 2006-2008 ELECTION CYCLE UNDER THE HEADLINE- FORGET THE DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS, GREENS-BUILD A WORKERS PARTY.

On the 16th Anniversary Of The Iraq War-From The Archives- Will They Be Throwing Boots At Obama Before It Is All Over?

Commentary

Listen; don’t let the extra-parliamentary leftist political tilt of this space fool you. I enjoyed kicking one George W. Bush, at one time the 43rd President of the United States, and his neo-con entourage, especially old Rummie, around when they were riding high in the good old days of 2001 and 2002 while many people were running for cover (and supporting their Afghan and Iraq war policies). This latest ‘boot’ incident in Baghdad only adds fuel to the fire. Let’s face it though, after eight years of giving everyone in the world hell, friend and foe alike, if the worst thing that happened to Bush was a couple of boots thrown at him he got off extremely easy.

However, just for good measure, now that the “Liberator” is down for the count I am more than glad to kick him one more time with my Size 11 boot. And add a little rabbit punch thrown in for good measure. Hunter S. Thompson, a.k.a Doctor “Gonzo”, was, after all, always something of a muse for me despite our political differences and he knew exactly how you had to treat these ‘dogs’. I wonder what the good 'Doc' would make of this latest ‘event’. Damn, I still miss him. That savage wit of his was what was missing from this year’s political sideshow. But we move on.

Karl Marx, in one of his earlier journalistic efforts covering the ‘exploits’ of Napoleon III of France, noted that historic events usually played themselves out as tragedy then as farce. Frankly, the latest wanderings of George Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan can only be deemed as bizarre, if nevertheless providing us with some much needed comic relief. Bush and his addle-brained administration have won the title as the worst in recorded memory hands down, even by the none too high modern bourgeois standards. With its foreign adventures and domestic misadventures I, moreover, feel compelled to argue that he has won the prize as the worst president ever. Earlier in the year I believed that he was merely in a neck-and- neck race with another accidental president, the obscure Millard Fillmore. But note this well, Fillmore at least went on to a ‘worthy’ career as the presidential candidate of the self-described “Know Nothing” party in 1856. Mr. Bush has no such cover.

So much, however, for award ceremonies. That is old news. Let's get back to serious business. What is really at issue in this latest Bush incident is why it was necessary for some local obscure Iraqi journalist in Baghdad in the year 2008 to have the ‘moxie’ to put Bush in his place. Where were the “Tims” of all those high- priced Washington ‘hot shot’ media reporters- WHEN IT COUNTED. More importantly, what will these same media mavens do when the new security arrangements around the Obama White House and other presidential environs dictate reporters running around in bare feet in order to attend presidential press conferences?

Moreover, and here we get back to that leftist political tilt of this space mentioned at the beginning. When, as I am projecting, one Barack Obama, soon to be the 44th President of the United States, gets bogged down in HIS war in Afghanistan who will be ‘tossing’ boots at him. Probably some irate Afghani journalist in Kabul. I will make a six-two-and even bet that it will not be some Washington-based journalist. But, I will not rely solely on my wager. I will, to be on the safe side, keep that other Size 11 boot handy. And to really be on the safe side I start right now to call - Obama, Immediate Unconditional Withdrawal of U.S. Troops from Afghanistan and Iraq.

On the 16th Anniversary Of The Iraq War-From The Archives- AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL ANTI-WAR ACTIVISTS-TAKE THE PLEDGE-SUPPORT THEIR TROOPS-HELL, NO!

THEY MAY BE OUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS BUT THESE ARE NOT OUR TROOPS! END THE OCCUPATION OF IRAQ NOW!! IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES/ALLIED TROOPS FROM THE MIDDLE EAST!!!

FORGET DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS AND GREENS- BUILD A WORKERS PARTY!

In light of the recent seemingly never-ending revelations concerning American military atrocities toward Iraqi civilians it is high time to set the record straight about the appropriate slogans that anti-war militants should use to affect the political outcome of the situation in Iraq. For those militant leftists, including this writer, who have opposed the American war aims since before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 our main slogan expressing our opposition to imperialism has been for the immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all American and Allied forces from the Middle East. That continues to be the thrust of our political struggle today. But, more, much more, is necessary to accomplish that goal. It is no longer up to us-the ball is in the court of the rank and file service personnel in Iraq.

The recent revelations also underscore the aimless nature of the occupation. The role of American troops has been reduced to 'search and destroy' missions against the so-called insurgents with the Iraqi population cast merely as subjects for ‘collateral damage’ in pursuit of that strategy. Moreover, as of August 1, 2006 troops are being deployed in Baghdad, essentially as hostages, in the sectarian civil war between Shia and Sunni. Enough!! Those militants old enough to remember the Vietnam War or who have studied about it must be painfully aware of the similarities to the current situation. Most infamously- Remember My Lai.

Nevertheless the bulk of anti-war militants, abetted by the organizations which have led the anti-war demonstrations over the years (yes, years to our shame not the imperialists')such as the United for Justice and Peace Coalition have centered their calls for action on the social patriotic slogans Bring the Troops Home or Bring Our Troops Home. Even though some elements of that movement have begun calling for Immediate Withdrawal recently, the demand is still tied to getting our ‘boys and girls’ out of harms way. While no one, including this writer, wishes harm to individual servicemen and women this is politically dishonest.

Why are such slogans social patriotic? The essence of such calls is that the American troops used to destroy Iraq and murder and maim Iraqi civilians are our troops rather than agents of the American government- the main enemy of the peoples of the world. Those slogans imply there is just a misunderstanding over policy which reasonable people can disagree over. That is transparently not the case. The hard fact is that we citizens have no control over the military deployment of any troops. To say so creates illusions that we do. While we have no interest in seeing individual soldiers harmed we also cannot take political and military responsibility for their use. If we are going to get anywhere with opposition to the war we better give up these last illusions on that score. We cannot have it both ways. Not on this issue. Support the troops-Hell, no!

Take the pledge- No more illusions! No more social patriotic support for their troops in Iraq! Fight under the slogan- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Now-By any means necessary!


THIS IS PART OF A SERIES OF ARTICLES ON THE 2006-2008 ELECTION CYCLE UNDER THE HEADLINE- FORGET THE DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS, GREENS-BUILD A WORKERS PARTY!

On the 16th Anniversary Of The Iraq War-From The Archives- Looking For A Few Good Anti-Warriors

Commentary

Immediate Withdrawal From Iraq and Afghanistan

Over the past several months I have noted, on more than one occasion, that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have gone beneath the newspaper fold. In fact, these days it is increasingly hard to find news about the situation in those locations anyplace in the first few pages of the major, much less, local newspapers. Even the alternate news sources such as Indy News have more space devoted to the latest rantings of the international 'conspiracies' devotees, valentine posts on Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and the long term fate of the ecosphere than Iraq or Afghanistan.

Yes, I know, American causalities are down, at least in Iraq. The insurgents in Iraq are on the ‘run’ due to the ‘surge’. The Bush/Petreaus military strategy in Iraq, at least for the short haul, has ‘worked’. But as Bush’s latest Middle East tour has made painfully clear the troops are not leaving Iraq or Afghanistan any time soon. This is unambiguous language that means a continuation of the status quo as long as his administration still draws breath or January 20, 2009, whichever comes first. Bush has even waffled on the assumed reduction to 140,000 troops by summer if the security situation requires a continued high presence. At this rate our grandchildren will be fighting there before they are through.

What gives? What gives is this. In 2007 the Democratically-controlled Congress made ‘mighty’ efforts to deny funds for the war in Iraq. In the process that Congress got beaten over the head with the hard reality that breaking off funding required more fortitude than the Democrats had stomach for. The 2008 political realities by that body are- and, you will love this- to fight to the bitter end to elect a veto-proof Congress. Or better yet, elect a Democrat for president. In short, the same old parliamentary strategies that failed last year and that will fail this year as we approach the FIFTH ANNIVERSARY of the Iraq War, having already passed the sixth in Afghanistan. I ask this question. Is it really necessary to permit these wars to continue until 2009 (and beyond) with such dead end strategies?

Here is a hard reality check for leftists today. Those of us who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning from an anti-imperialist perspective were always in a minority. Fair enough. Nevertheless we have let a golden opportunity to teach something about the god-awful nature of this society by not fighting for an anti-imperialist perspective in the anti-war movement. We let the congenital pacifists, ‘the do-gooders’, the faint of heart and, most importantly, the mainly Democratic parliamentary politicians take the high ground. And this is what has come to pass. I will take a few good anti-imperialist anti-warriors who know the real meaning of immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan and know how to act on it. But, damn, we could use more.

*From The Marxist Anti-War Archives- Karl Leibknecht's "Militarism And Anti-Militarism"

Click on title to link to the Karl Liebknecht Internet Archive's copy of German communist revolutionary Karl Liebknechts's seminal "Militarism And Anti-Militarism"

Markin comment:

On a day when I am trying to drive the point home about the necessity of creating soldiers and sailors solidarity committees another look at the murdered early German Communist Party leader Karl Liebknecht's seminal work is most definitely in order.

For Bob Dylan - A Song For Our Times- Bob Dylan's "With God On Our Side"

Commentary

I am in high dudgeon today against the latest Obama moves for troops escalation in Afghanistan. I am also writing a review of the Martin Scorsese documentary on Bob Dylan, "No Direction Home", from PBS in 2005. This film covers the early protest song-oriented part of Dylan's career, among other things. As part of the documentary there are many film clips of early performances. The one that struck me as apt for today is his rendition of the song "With God On Our Side" together with Joan Baez at the Newport Folk Festival in 1963. Powerful stuff. Here is my take on it today.

In the interest of completeness concerning my earlier evaluations of the Dylan songs "Masters Of War" and "With Good On Our Side" on his early albums here are the lyrics to the latter song.

Interestingly, except for changing the Cold War theme against the Russians then to the so-called War On Terror now against seemingly every Muslim that any American presidential administration can get it hands on (Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan) and Obama (same and, maybe, Pakistan) these lyrics "speak" to me today. The word they speak is hubris, American hubris, that the rest of the world has had reason to fear, and rightly so. What do they "speak" to you?

"With God On Our Side"-Bob Dylan-1963

Oh my name it is nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And the land that I live in
Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it
They tell it so well
The cavalries charged
The Indians fell
The cavalries charged
The Indians died
Oh the country was young
With God on its side.

The Spanish-American
War had its day
And the Civil War too
Was soon laid away
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns on their hands
And God on their side.

The First World War, boys
It came and it went
The reason for fighting
I never did get
But I learned to accept it
Accept it with pride
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.

When the Second World War
Came to an end
We forgave the Germans
And then we were friends
Though they murdered six million
In the ovens they fried
The Germans now too
Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war comes
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

But now we got weapons
Of the chemical dust
If fire them we're forced to
Then fire them we must
One push of the button
And a shot the world wide
And you never ask questions
When God's on your side.

In a many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'
I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin'
Ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head
And fall to the floor
If God's on our side
He'll stop the next war.

Once Again Haunted By The Question Of Questions-Who Represented The “Voice” Of The Generation Of ’68 When The Deal Went Down-And No It Was Not One Richard Millstone, Oops, Milhous Nixon

By Seth Garth

I have been haunted recently by various references to events in the early 1960s brought to mind by either seeing or hearing those references. First came one out of the blue when I was in Washington, D.C. on other business and I popped in as is my wont to the National Gallery of Art to get an “art bump” after fighting the dearies at the tail-end of the conference that I was attending. I usually enter on the 7^th Street entrance to see what they have new on display on the Ground Floor exhibition areas. This time there was a small exhibit concerning the victims of Birmingham Sunday, 1963 the murder by bombing of a well-known black freedom church in that town and the death of four innocent young black girls and injuries to others. The show itself was a “what if” by a photographer who presented photos of what those young people might have looked like had they not had their precious lives stolen from them by some racist KKK-drenched bastards who never really did get the justice they deserved. The catch here, the impact on me, was these murders and another very disturbing viewing on television at the time, in black and white, of the Birmingham police unleashing dogs, firing water hoses and using the ubiquitous police billy-clubs to beat down on peaceful mostly black youth protesting against the pervasive Mister James Crow system which deprived them of their civil rights.

Those events galvanized me into action from seemingly out of nowhere. At the time I was in high school, in an all-white high school in my growing up town of North Adamsville south of Boston. (That “all white” no mistake despite the nearness to urban Boston since a recent look at the yearbook for my class showed exactly zero blacks out of a class of 515. The nearest we got to a black person was a young immigrant from Lebanon who was a Christian though and was not particularly dark. She, to my surprise, had been a cheer-leader and well-liked). I should also confess, for those who don’t know not having read about a dozen articles  I have done over the past few years in this space, that my “corner boys,” the Irish mostly with a sprinkling of Italians reflecting the two major ethic groups in the town I hung around with then never could figure out why I was so concerned about black people down South when we were living hand to mouth up North. (The vagaries of time have softened some things among them for example nobody uses the “n” word which needs no explanation which was the “term of art” in reference to black people then to not prettify what this crowd was about.)

In many ways I think I only survived by the good graces of Scribe who everybody deferred to on social matters. Not for any heroic purpose but because Scribe was the key to intelligence about what girls were interested in what guys, who was “going” steady, etc. a human grapevine who nobody crossed without suffering exile. What was “heroic” if that can be used in this context was that as a result of those Birmingham images back then I travelled over to the NAACP office on Massachusetts Avenue in Boston to offer my meager services in the civil rights struggle and headed south to deadly North Carolina one summer on a voting drive. I was scared but that was that. My guys never knew that was where I went until many years later long after we had all gotten a better gripe via the U.S. Army and other situations on the question of race and were amazed that I had done that.         

The other recent occurrence that has added fuel to the fire was a segment on NPR’s Morning Edition where they deal with aspects of what amounts to the American Songbook. The segment dealt with the generational influence of folk-singer songwriter Bob Dylan’s The Times They Are A-Changin’ as an anthem for our generation (and its revival of late in newer social movements like the kids getting serious about gun control). No question for those who came of political age early in the 1960s before all hell broke loose this was a definitive summing up song for those of us who were seeking what Bobby Kennedy would later quoting a line of poetry from Alfred Lord Tennyson call “seeking a newer world.” In one song was summed up what we thought about obtuse indifferent authority figures, the status quo, our clueless parents, the social struggles that were defining us and a certain hurried-ness to get to wherever we thought we were going.

I mentioned in that previous commentary that given his subsequent trajectory while Bob Dylan may have wanted to be the reincarnation Plus of Woody Guthrie (which by his long life he can rightly claim) whether he wanted to be, could be, the voice of the Generation of ’68 was problematic. What drove me, is driving me a little crazy is who or what some fifty plus years after all the explosions represented the best of what we had started out to achieve (and were essentially militarily defeated by the ensuing reaction before we could achieve most of it) in those lonely high school halls and college dormitories staying up late at night worrying about the world and our place in the sun.

For a long time, probably far longer than was sensible I believed that it was somebody like Jim Morrison, shaman-like leader of the Doors, who came out of the West Coast winds and headed to our heads in the East. Not Dylan, although he was harbinger of what was to come later in the decade as rock reassembled itself in new garb after some vanilla music hiatus but somebody who embodied the new sensibility that Dylan had unleashed. The real nut though was that I, and not me alone, and not my communal brethren alone either, was the idea that we possessed again probably way past it use by date was that “music was the revolution” by that meaning nothing but the general lifestyle changes through the decade so that the combination of “dropping out” of nine to five society, dope in its many manifestations, kindnesses, good thought and the rapidly evolving music would carry us over the finish line. Guys like Josh Breslin and the late Pete Markin, hard political guys as well as rabid music lovers and dopers, used to laugh at me when I even mentioned that I was held in that sway especially when ebb tide of the counter-cultural movement hit in Nixon times and the bastinado was as likely to be our home as the new Garden. Still Jim Morrison as the “new man” (new human in today speak) made a lot of sense to me although when he fell down like many others to the lure of the dope I started reappraising some of my ideas -worried about that bastinado fate.  

So I’ll be damned right now if I could tell you that we had such a voice, and maybe that was the problem, or a problem which has left us some fifty years later without a good answer. Which only means for others to chime in with their thoughts on this matter.         

From The Marxist Archives-*U.S. Hands Off Iran -A Guest Commentary

Click on the title to link to a "Workers Vanguard", newspaper of the Spartacist League/U.S, article on the subject mentioned in the headline.

From The Archives-THE NEO-CON INSURGENCY

COMMENTARY

THE NEO-CONS CIRCLE THE WAGONS-KICK THEM WHILE THEY ARE DOWN
HELL, NO. NO MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ

This writer freely admits that he is a political ‘street fighter’. And the rules of engagement for this activity are the same as in any rumble-kick your opponent when he or she is down, and give an extra kick when they are down just for good measure. Therefore I come to today’s commentary ready for bear.

Apparently in response to the aftermath of the 2006 midterm elections which, at least superficially, were a repudiation of the Bush Administration’s neo-con inspired Iraq (and Middle East) war policy these “pointy-headed” conservatives are circling the wagon for one last push for ‘victory’ in Iraq. Aspiring Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain signaled that perspective before the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this fall when he argued for an increase in troops in order to attain ‘victory’. In light of the already ‘leaked’ conclusions of the upcoming Iraq Study Group reportedly arguing for some kind of ‘graceful withdrawal’ from Iraq the leading neo-cons-Robert Kagan and William Kristol, the National Review and the other usual suspects-have issued their own call to arms, literally. Although I note, as always, that they did not personally offer to carry them. Locally, one Jeff Jacoby, a regular neo-con columnist on the OP/ED page of the Boston Globe in the Sunday December 3, 2006 edition took up the same call in his role as armchair military strategist.

Things must be getting politically desperate in neo-con land when they see their worst nightmares coming true. No, not the fiasco of their policy in Iraq, don’t be silly. No, it’s the reemergence of what today passes for the old Yankee Republican Eastern foreign policy establishment. The really interesting part of Mr. Jacoby’s argument for increased troop levels in Iraq is his trashing of Bush I’s foreign policy, which amounts to the old conservative war cry of appeasement before evil. I, for one, am getting pretty damn tired of that old one-size-fits-all Munich 1938 argument every time one of these cowboys decides to argue for and then go on some imperialist adventure. In any case, the scenario Mr. Jacoby lays out is that Bush I, abetted by the real villain of the piece, ‘evil adviser’ James Baker, today head of the Iraq Study Group, acted out the role of Neville Chamberlain while all hell was breaking loose in the Middle East and elsewhere in the 1991 Gulf War. Thus, the logical conclusion is that Bush II should politely decline that group’s recommendation for pullout and instead increase troop levels to insure victory. (Nothing new here-shades of Vietnam escalation strategy, frankly.)

In the event that Mr. Jacoby and the others have not been paying attention during the last four years of first the build up to war and then the subsequent occupation-what planet are you on? Even a superficial look at the situation as it has developed internally in Iraq points to one small kink in the argument for more troops. The problem is the United States presence. Continuing to kick down every door in Iraq, as American/Allied troops, have done since the start of the war in search of the ‘enemy’ is the problem. The sectarian civil war has gone on and will continue to go on regardless on American presence. The body count on any given day (and relentlessly, every day) should clue one to that fact. Thus, the American troops are, at best hostages, in the situation. Now, in true democratic spirit, I am willing to let every person have his or her opinion of military strategy whether they served in the armed forces or not. However, as Mr. Jacoby and the vast majority of his neo-con brethren have not, they should be circumspect, very circumspect, about sending some other mother’s son or daughter to fight for their ‘pet’ imperialist adventure.

In earlier commentaries I have argued that the real role for anti-war activists here in the United States is to form anti-war soldier and sailor solidarity committees in order to fraternize with the troops and get them the hell out of Iraq. I will not restate that case here. See my blog address below. However, I do have to admit that I can see one basis for an increase in troops in Iraq. That is to increase, by whatever necessary number, the number of truck drivers, jeep drivers, humvee drivers, air transport personals and sailors it takes to make an orderly withdrawal from Iraq. And be quick about it. IMMEDIATE, UNCONDITIONAL WITHDRAWAL OF ALL AMERICAN/ALLIED TROOPS!

THIS IS PART OF A SERIES OF ARTICLES OF COMMENTARY ON THE 2006-2008 ELECTION CYCLE UNDER THE HEADLINE- FORGET THE DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS, GREENS-BUILD A WORKERS PARTY!

"Bread, Land And Peace"- Figting Slogans For Obamian Times

Commentary

Earlier this year (see archives, dated May 29, 2008) in an entry with a theme similar to that headlined above I mentioned the strong similarities between the propaganda slogans that militant workers had to fight under now and those which formed the core agitational political program of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution in 1917, obviously taking all historical proportions and differences taken into consideration.

In thinking through some of the points that militant workers will have to fight for in Obamian times I re-read that entry and found that in the intervening months the points made there retain their relevance and can serve to form the axis of our left oppositionist program for the impeding Obamiad. Naturally, there are other slogans that we will need to fight under but we might as well prepare now, especially on that peace point when Obama pulls the hammer down in Afghanistan and escalates the war there. More, much more later. For now here is a repost of that May 29, 2008 entry ([ ] indicates comment added today).

*****

Has Markin gone senile on us with the headline slogans above? Has Markin been in a time warp and gone back to the spring and summer of 1917 in Russia to appropriate the day-to-day slogans that the Bolsheviks grafted onto their program and which led to their success in the October revolution? No, Markin is not senile nor has he gone back in a time machine to the glory days of 1917. Markin has just taken a glance at some recent daily headlines and ‘creatively’ encapsulated those stories. Hear me out.

Bread- In Russia in 1917 the initial sparks that set off the February revolution that overthrew the Czar were the demonstrations of working women, housewives and soldiers’ wives for bread. Literally. A look, on any given day, today at the worldwide rise in prices of basic foodstuffs due to a myriad of factors but mainly caused by the anarchy of the “free” market place brings that old fight against starvation in stark relief. Literally. Add to that food crisis the lunatic increase in the price of fossil fuels [even if temporarily abated at present] and other forms of energy needed to produce the world’s goods and the situation cries out today for a fundamental change in the way the world’s finite resources are apportioned. Conclusion: propaganda centered on the need for a rationalization of the world economy through centralized planning under workers’ control is on the order of the day.

Land- In Russia in 1917 the peasants cried out for resolution of their land hunger after centuries of near starvation tilling of their tiny plots and their serf-like subservience to the landed interests. Today that land hunger has taken a different form, at least in America- ownership of single family homes. The current and ongoing housing, crisis with its foreclosures and steep declines of prices in the housing market, has placed working people up against the wall. Whether working people were right or wrong in their desire for private home ownership they are the ones taking it in the neck today. An immediate long moratorium on foreclosures and restructuring of mortgages is called for. No evictions for those renters affected by the turmoil. Conclusion: Again, fighting propaganda on the question of rationalization of the housing market under the central planning principal through local workers councils is called for.

Peace- In Russia in 1917 the slaughter of World War I had finally hit home and the peasant-based army was falling apart under the direct military thrust of German imperialism, the inane goading of the Western imperialist powers, especially Britain and France, and the sheer madness of continuing the war by a broken army. Today Iraq and Afghanistan, to speak nothing of a plethora of other localized wars and disputes like the still far from resolved Palestinian question, have made the world an extremely dangerous place where war-like conditions can set off an explosion in an instant. [Most dramatically, President-elect Obama had made it clear from the beginning of his candidacy and since the elections has taken actions to ensure that Afghanistan is HIS war. I have mentioned elsewhere in this space that that he has taken a very calculated risk to, above all other issues, stake his presidency on this question.] Conclusion: Short and sweet- it is time to make class war on the warmongers, and in the first instance, the American military goliath. The beginning of wisdom for today’s propaganda fight is the immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all American/ Allied troops and their mercenaries from Iraq and Afghanistan!

These three slogans point to the more general conclusion implicit in their exposition. All of this is merely a pipe dream or a Markin delusion if the fight does not include the fight for an independent working class party of our own that fights for a workers government so we can begin to fight like hell to turn things around. In short, and here is where the 1917 analogy really comes into focus- we have to start talking Russian, circa 1917, to the bosses. Pronto!

*From The Pages Of "Workers Vanguard"- Not One Penny, Not One Person For Imperialist War- A Guest Article

Click on the title to link to an important article about the position of communists on the questions of funding imperialist wars and other forms of struggle against those wars by youth, pro-labor militants and others from the pages of "Workers Vanguard".

*Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By- The Doors- "The Unknown Soldier"

In this series, presented under the headline “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By”, I will post some songs that I think will help us get through the “dog days” of the struggle for our communist future. I do not vouch for the political thrust of the songs; for the most part they are done by pacifists, social democrats, hell, even just plain old ordinary democrats. And, occasionally, a communist, although hard communist musicians have historically been scarce on the ground. Thus, here we have a regular "popular front" on the music scene. While this would not be acceptable for our political prospects, it will suffice for our purposes here.

The Unknown Soldier Lyrics
The Doors

Wait until the war is over
And we're both a little older
The unknown soldier

Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Unborn living, living, dead
Bullet strikes the helmet's head

And it's all over
For the unknown soldier
It's all over
For the unknown soldier

Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Comp'nee
Halt
Preeee-zent!
Arms!

Make a grave for the unknown soldier
Nestled in your hollow shoulder
The unknown soldier

Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Bullet strikes the helmet's head

And, it's all over
The war is over
It's all over
The war is over
Well, all over, baby
All over, baby
Oh, over, yeah
All over, baby
Wooooo, hah-hah
All over
All over, baby
Oh, woa-yeah
All over
All over
Heeeeyyyy

*Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By-Stepphenwolf's "The Monster"

Click On Title To Link To A "YouTube" Film Clip Of Stepphenwolf Performing "Monster". Ah, Those Were The Days.

In this series, presented under the headline “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By”, I will post some songs that I think will help us get through the “dog days” of the struggle for our communist future. I do not vouch for the political thrust of the songs; for the most part they are done by pacifists, social democrats, hell, even just plain old ordinary democrats. And, occasionally, a communist, although hard communist musicians have historically been scarce on the ground. Thus, here we have a regular "popular front" on the music scene. While this would not be acceptable for our political prospects, it will suffice for our purposes here.

Markin comment:

Some of the entries in this series have seen life in other earlier blog entries. That is the case here as we amp up in our opposition to Obama's wars. The lyrics here still make a powerful point.

Words and music by John Kay, Jerry Edmonton, Nick St. Nicholas and Larry Byrom

(Monster)

Once the religious, the hunted and weary
Chasing the promise of freedom and hope
Came to this country to build a new vision
Far from the reaches of kingdom and pope
Like good Christians, some would burn the witches
Later some got slaves to gather riches

But still from near and far to seek America
They came by thousands to court the wild
And she just patiently smiled and bore a child
To be their spirit and guiding light

And once the ties with the crown had been broken
Westward in saddle and wagon it went
And 'til the railroad linked ocean to ocean
Many the lives which had come to an end
While we bullied, stole and bought our a homeland
We began the slaughter of the red man

But still from near and far to seek America
They came by thousands to court the wild
And she just patiently smiled and bore a child
To be their spirit and guiding light

The blue and grey they stomped it
They kicked it just like a dog
And when the war over
They stuffed it just like a hog

And though the past has it's share of injustice
Kind was the spirit in many a way
But it's protectors and friends have been sleeping
Now it's a monster and will not obey

(Suicide)

The spirit was freedom and justice
And it's keepers seem generous and kind
It's leaders were supposed to serve the country
But now they won't pay it no mind
'Cause the people grew fat and got lazy
And now their vote is a meaningless joke
They babble about law and order
But it's all just an echo of what they've been told
Yeah, there's a monster on the loose
It's got our heads into a noose
And it just sits there watchin'

Our cities have turned into jungles
And corruption is stranglin' the land
The police force is watching the people
And the people just can't understand
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
'Cause there's a monster on the loose
It's got our heads into a noose
And it just sits there watching

(America)

America where are you now?
Don't you care about your sons and daughters?
Don't you know we need you now
We can't fight alone against the monster

© Copyright MCA Music (BMI)
All rights for the USA controlled and administered by
MCA Corporation of America, INC

--Used with permission--

On The 10th (Count 'Em) Anniversary Of The Afghanistan Occupation-*Opinion Polls And The Question Of Peace- A Short Note ( Repost)-Enough-Immediate Unconditional Withdrawal From Afghanistan

Reposted from American Left History-Thursday, September 02, 2010

*Opinion Polls And The Question Of Peace- A Short Note

Markin comment:

Recently there have been a number of polls that have come out from various media sources indicating that the majority of American people have, in some form, turned against Obama's Afghan adventure. Every anti-war militant and leftist should take that as good news, at least in the sense that this gives us fertile ground to work in as we fight for out program of immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all American/Allied troops and mercenaries from Afghanistan.

Of course, polls in themselves can only give a very broad and , sometimes misleading, sense of the pulse of the populace at any given time. That is a given, but this short note is motivated by more than that concern. I want to make my point on this not by some high theoretical, high Marxist, high Trotskyist formulation but by a small piece of anecdotal evidence.

In the aftermath of 9/11 tensions, angers, and hatreds were running high, some of it natural under the circumstances some of it not. In any case at that time I was on the listen for any hint that cooler voices might appear that would , frankly, make it easier for we of the anti-war left to get a hearing for our anti-imperialist message. As I have mentioned before previously in this space that period was one of the few time in my long political street career that I feared being on the American protest streets, day or night. Along that line I started listening to a local call-in radio talk show. Now this was not some flaming, fire-red Fox Network/Rush Limbaugh operation but the very soul of discretion, a National Public Radio-like (NPR) talk show. Such shows if you are at all familiar with their format are noted more for long-windedness among the irate than venomous "red meat" statements, and tempers rarely flare up if at all.

On this particular day, this post 9/11, post-Afghan invasion, pre-Iraq invasion day the subject of the program turned on the question of individual callers' "peace strategies" for the Middle East (and, maybe, world peace as well although the focus was on the Middle East). The general tenor of the responses, for the most part, as was to be expected were long on the brotherhood of man (or some such hood) and short of breaking the back of Islamic fundamentalism in a way that would serve our interests (the interest of the anti-war left). Mainly the strategies were drive by proposals from policy wonks who submitted their plans in a manner befitting those who see themselves as policy-makers in exile (remember this was in Boston and and during the Bush administration when such types were around by the bushel full).

The call that drew my attention, however, and has made me even more skeptical and wary of these vaunted opinion polls was one woman caller, a mother of two, a worried distraught mother of two, a self-proclaimed pacifist along Quaker lines (and who articulated the Quaker "inner light" line very well), who solely in the interest of well-being of those two children you understand, proposed that perhaps a couple of surgical tactical nuclear strikes in the heart of the Middle East wouldn't make those two winsome children's future just a bit more secure.

Now I will not get into the little, the tiny little problem of those other mothers, those Middle Eastern mothers with their own two little winsome children and their fates under this program. I will merely speculate here, that, assuming this concerned mother did not personally have a couple of extra tactical nuclear weapons around the house (for the safety of those kids, remember) that this job, practically speaking would, of necessity, have to be detailed to the American imperial state.

But here is the kicker- when asked if she supported the furious rush to war by the Bush Administration in Iraq she quickly and unequivocally said no. I assume those quick strike nukes on behalf of Johnny and Jimmy were enough for her. So the next time you get really hung up and all excited about increased opposition to Obama's Afghan fiasco remember this little tale, this little cautionary tale, about the vagaries of peace-the peace of the graveyard. And organize, organize like crazy to get those troops out of Afghanistan before that 'concerned' mother steps into the breach.

*All Out On October 2nd To End The Afghan And Iraq Wars And Struggle For Economic And Social Justice

Click on the headline to link to the Majority Agenda Report website for information on the aims of sponsors of the One Nation October 2, 2010 March and Rally in Washington, D.C.

Markin comment:

I have already argued in previous entries about the continuing importance of massing in Washington, D.C. on October 2nd for this event. (See, On The Question Of Organizing Anti-War Contingents For The October 2, 2010 "One Nation" Demonstrations In Washington, D.C., originally dated September 7, 2010.) Bring your own slogans and banners, but be there to really start building the long-delayed and needed divorce from one Barack Obama who has been given a pass on war issues- for no known rational reason. We anti-war militants knew, because he made it clear from the beginning what his priorities were in 2008, and he rubbed our noses in it last year. Now we need to get our priorities clear along with all the other issues. Obama- Troops Out Now!

*On The Question Of Organizing Anti-War Contingents For The October 2, 2010 "One Nation" Demonstrations In Washington, D.C.

Click on the headline to link to the Majority Agenda Report website for information on the aims of sponsors of the One Nation October 2, 2010 March and Rally in Washington, D.C.

Markin comment:

Last winter I went out of my way to argue, and argue strongly, for organizing our anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist forces as best we could for the March 20th anti-war rally in Washington, D.C. (See, On The Question Of Organizing For A Major National Anti-War Rally This Spring – A Commentary, dated January 30, 2010.) My motivation at that time was to stir up opposition to President Barack Obama’s then recent troop escalations in Afghanistan with a show of anti-war forces in the streets if for nothing else than to see who we really had on board, and to stick a thumb in Obama’s false anti-war credentialed eye. As I noted after the event the turnout was not as large, not nearly as large, as we could have used in order to create an effective battering ram against the Obama war policies. I believed, and argued so shortly after that rally to the effect, that it was still a worthwhile effort.

Now comes the inevitable fall campaign season, no, not the electoral sideshow 2010 Congressional elections but a labor-centered rally in Washington, D.C. on October 2nd being pushed by the NAACP, SEIU, AFL-CIO and the usual other suspects . (See the call to action from the Majority Agenda Project website below). As a perusal of the call indicates this is about jobs and other economic issues (all important, no question) but has no, none, nada, point on the struggle against Obama’s imperial war policies. I assume the sponsors, given their almost unanimous 2008 support to his candidacy, believed that they were being very “radical” by merely advocating the idea of a rally in Obama’s Washington during election time. Well, as the saying use to go back in the day, the 1960s day, a Maoist favorite aphorism as well, that is THEIR contradiction.

That, however, still begs the question of what leftists and other anti-war militants should do about the war issue at this rally. Or, for that matter, about whether we should be marching in this thing at all. I believe on that second point, which also will incorporate the first point, that we should attend as anti-war contingents linking the opposition to the Obama war policies with the one thousand and one other things that need fixing and that his Administration is patently incapable of fixing, even if it knew how to do so is which is very much up an open question these days.

As motivation for this position I would offer up most of the arguments that I made for participation in the March rally and will repost the pertinent sections below:

“In a recent blog entry, As The 2010 Anti-War Season Heats Up- A Note On "The Three Whales" For A Class Struggle Fight Against Obama’s Wars, dated January 19, 2010, I put forth a few ideas, particularly around the concept of forming anti-war soldiers and sailors solidarity committees, that the circle of anti-war militants that I work with locally are committed to pursuing this year as the struggle against War-monger-in-Chief Obama’s Afghan war policies takes shape. The elephant in the room that was missing in that laundry list of tasks enumerated in the entry was any notion of supporting a national mass anti-war rally in Washington, D.C. this spring, now scheduled, as usual, for the anniversary of the start of the Iraq war in 2003, March 20th. And there is a good and sufficient reason for that omission. The circle is split on an orientation toward that event. Thus, the comment that follows in favor of organizing for and building such an endeavor and putting some resources and energy into the event is my own personal take on the question, fair or foul.

Certainly, given the priorities listed in that previous blog entry mentioned above, it would be quite easy to walk away from serious organizing for, getting transportation for, making housing arrangements for, and the thousand and one details that go into providing a contingent for a national march or rally. Moreover, as has been argued in the circle by a number of militants, to do so for just one more garden variety of a seemingly endless (and fruitless) series of mass marches over the past several years. And normally I would agree with that analysis, especially once it became clear that the main strategy of those groups who call such national marches is to make such events the main, and exclusive, point of extra-parliamentary opposition to the war. Or worst, see these things as an effective political tool for “pressuring” politicians, especially “progressive” Democrats (if there are any left, as of late). Pleassee...

Hear me out on this one though. President Obama made his dramatic announcement for a major Afghan troop escalation on December 1, 2009. That, along with a less publicized build-up in February 2009, and the odd brigade deployed here or there since has meant that the troop totals-I will not even bother to count “contractors”, for the simple reason that who knows what those numbers really are. I don’t, do you? - are almost double those that ex-President Bush nearly had his head handed to him on a platter for in the notorious troop “surge” of 2007. And the response to Obama’s chest-thumping war-mongering. Nada. Or almost nothing, except a small demonstration in Washington on December 12th with the “usual cast of suspects” (Kucinich, McKinney, et. al) and a few hundred attendees and small local demonstrations around the country.

Now this might seem like a slam-dunk argument for wasting no more time on the spring rally tactic. And that argument is enticing. But, as a veteran of way too many of these demos, and as a militant who has spilled no small amount of ink arguing against the endless rally strategy on many previous occasions, I still like the idea of a spring march. First, because Obama needs to know that those on his left, particularly those who supported him in the 2008 election cycle are more than just passively angry at him for the Afghan troop escalation. And that is important even if the numbers do not match those of the Bush era. Secondly, those of us on the extra-parliamentary left need to see who those disenchanted Obamians are. If we are going to be successful we have to get our fair share of these left-liberals before they ditch politics altogether. And lastly, as the bikers and gang members say- “we have to show our colors”. Large or small we need to see what we look like. All those may not be individually, in the end, sufficient reasons but I will say this to finish up. Unless you plan to have an anti-war demonstration outside the gates of places like the military bases at Fort Bragg, Fort Hood, Fort Drum, and Fort Lewis in which case I will be more than happy to mark you present and accounted for you should be in Washington on March 20th. And ready to fight around the slogan – Obama- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal of all U.S./Allied Troops and Mercenaries from Iraq and Afghanistan!”

And on October 2nd too! More later.



***************


Published on Majority Agenda Project (http://majorityagendaproject.org/go)

Home > A Call to all sectors of our movements for justice and peace to mobilize for October 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Call to all sectors of our movements for justice and peace to mobilize for October 2
signatories [1] || what you can do [2] || transportation [3]

The NAACP, SEIU 1199, United for Peace and Justice, the AFL-CIO, Green for All, and a broad range of civil rights, labor, peace and social justice organizations around the country are calling upon us to join them on October 2 in Washington. Leading with a demand for jobs, this will be a massive demonstration to blunt the attack from the right and to unify a majority of Americans around a hopeful and inspiring vision of our nation based on social justice, mutual respect and common values.

Come to Washington DC on October 2 for an emergency mobilization of all our forces at this critical moment before the fall elections!

•Take our government back from big oil and the banks.
•Stand up for the well-being and economic security of all our families.
•Stand up against hatred, intolerance and immigrant-bashing.
•Stand up for a society that works for all of us.
•Demand the change that we voted for in 2008.

Dear Friends,
Our country is at a crossroads. Big oil, big banks, big pharmaceuticals, the military-industrial complex and big money of all types have a stranglehold on our government and our society. Their corporate agenda has led us into an unparalleled social crisis marked by economic distress, environmental danger, unsustainable military spending and endless war.

But this is also a time of opportunity for comprehensive, mutually-reinforcing and effective solutions: building a green economy cuts harmful emissions and creates millions of desperately needed jobs; national security based on international cooperation and negotiation rather than war frees up the resources needed to keep our teachers in the classroom and maintain all essential local services; sustainable economic policies protect our environment and foster grassroots economic development. All of these goals are within our grasp and are supported by a growing majority. Together they save lives, dollars and the planet that sustains us.

Yet instead of positive solutions we see the media dominance of an aggressive, energized and reactionary movement of the right fostered by Fox News and an out-of-control talk radio establishment. Intolerance, hatred and immigrant-bashing will be the big story this fall--grabbing national attention and electing extremist candidates who will ride the coattails of that mobilization to make big gains in November and beyond. Unless …

…we all come together to create a vibrant, viable grassroots mobilization built on a vision that inspires action and commitment. That galvanizes the majority for justice and fair play. That builds a movement that involves everyone in dealing effectively with the multiple crises confronting the country.

Now is the time to give visibility to effective policies that actually address our crises of employment, health care, environmental catastrophe and a deepening war in Afghanistan and Pakistan that is draining our resources, undermining out security and killing scores of people every day.

It is critical that our social movements join together with labor and major African-American and Latino organizations to make a broad-based showing of strength.

Fortunately, the NAACP in Washington and SEIU 1199 in New York have initiated “One Nation Working Together.” Exciting meetings in New York and Washington brought together the AFL-CIO, many other labor unions, United for Peace and Justice, Green For All and over one hundred other major social change organizations. They are building a mobilization that can unify the majority around a hopeful and inspiring vision of our nation based on social justice.

The signature event of One Nation is a massive march on Washington on October 2, 2010.

They have asked all of us to join them in this major effort to move us off the sidelines of the national debate and out, onto the playing field where we can participate in the fight for the future, starting with the fall elections.

This mobilization addresses only some of the key issues that deeply concern us. But without such a mobilization, all of our efforts will be set back years if the right-wing mobilization is allowed to go unchallenged.

We call on all parts of our social movements to mobilize for the October 2 demonstration and participate in the One Nation Campaign and bring your priorities to D.C.

- The Majority Agenda Project
August 4, 2010