Radical media, politics and culture.

Analysis & Polemic

"In the US, Dreaming of Iraq:

The Political Economy of the 'War on Terrorism' "

George Caffentzis

"I am not a criminal.
I am new to Cairo. I live in Baghdad." He told the story
of his dream and the buried treasure,
and he was so believable in the telling that
the night patrolman began to cry. Always,
the fragrance of truth has that effect.
-- Rumi, "In Baghdad, Dreaming of Cairo:
In Cairo, Dreaming of Baghdad"(1260-1273)
(Rumi 1996: 210)

Preface, 2002: The Political Economy of "the War on Terrorism"

I wrote the following essay in March 1998, during the last major political-military confrontation of the US government with the Baathist regime of Iraq. It might be useful to review it now when the Bush Administration is preparing for an attack on Iraq to bring about a "regime change."

In it is an analysis of the political economic thinking that is at the basis of Bush's "war on terrorism" (stage two: "The Axis of Evil"). The key argument of this doctrine is very simple:

(1) Almost any advanced technological production process can be used to create "weapons of mass destruction."

(2) Any such production process not directly controlled by a multinational corporation (MNC) headquartered in the US (or Japan or Western Europe) can be used by a government to create weapons of mass destruction.

(3) No goverment outside a list agreed upon by the US government ought to have the capacity to build weapons of mass destruction. Hence,

No government (whether democratically elected or not) outside of the agreed list whose advanced technology is not controlled by an acceptable MNC can be allowed to exist.

The Return of Dr. Strangelove

By Jack A. Smith

The pro-war national political consensus that emerged after the Sept. 11 attack on the United States has produced one more big dividend for George W. Bush, in addition to bipartisan backing for his open-ended, ill-defined wars on terrorism, support for his decision to terminate the ABM treaty, and the impending passage of his astronomical defense budget, among other right-wing initiatives.

Anonymous Comrade writes "Johan Soderberg has a fine essay called "Copyleft vs. Copyright: A Marxist Critique". Here is the Abstract and Table of Contents. You can find the whole piece at soderberg.

Copyright was invented by and for early capitalism, and its importance to that system has grown ever since. To oppose copyright is to oppose capitalism. Thus, Marxism is a natural starting point when challenging copyright. Marx's concept of a 'general intellect', suggesting that at some point a collective learning process will surpass physical labour as a productive force, offers a promising backdrop to understand the accomplishments of the free software community. Furthermore, the chief concerns of hacker philosophy, creativity and technological empowerment, closely correspond to key Marxist concepts of alienation, the division of labour, deskilling, and commodification. At the end of my inquiry, I will suggest that the development of free software provides an early model of the contradictions inherent to information capitalism, and that free software development has a wider relevance to all future production of information.

full story is here"

Phuq Hedd writes "There's a really good, detailed review of Hardt & Negri's "Empire" tome by a member of the Workers Solidarity Movement. Central points in the review include:

1. Criticism of Empire's assertion that empire isn't really more of the same old US Imperialism dressed up in fancy new clothes (paras 18-25)

2. Commentary on the use of Foucauldian inspired ideas about "the multitude" as a replacement for Marxist ideas about the proletariat. The impetus to create this new terminology is noted to arise solely out of the problem of Marx's elitist rejection of lumpenproletarians and peasants. (circa para. 35)

3. Criticism (circa para. 38) of Hardt & Negri's denial of something that they take to be anarchist because it is "not materialist"!

4. A call for empirical evidence to prove some of Empire's claims, for example that Capitalism has lost its ability to use Imperialism to harvest 3rd World labor to the detriment of 1st World labor.

Anyway, read the rest of the review for yourselves. It's very clear and attempts to be positive where that is justified.

Phuq Hedd"

Sakhra-l'Assal Interviews Peter Lamborn Wilson

SA: Can you tell us something about the current state of affairs in the
USA? What do you make of this general idea that the "world will never be
the same"?

PLW: That's practically the first thing I heard on Sept. 11th --
"Everything has changed -- now, everything's going to be different."
Everyone was saying that (except me, I wasn't saying that...) I'm still
not convinced that that's true. I mean obviously, in some way it's true,
it has to be, it's a big event, so things change. But in a broader
s ense, a philosophical sense, if you want to put it that way, in a
philosophy of history sense, is anything different? Has anything
changed? It's not clear to me that it has. For example we can say that
in 1989 and '91, with the fall of Communism, that history came to a
stop. This is the expression of people both on the left and the right
who saw the dialectic of the social as essentially synonymous with
history. So when that came to an end, history came to an end. Alright,
let's accept this for a moment as a hypothesis and ask -- I mean,
obviously there's some truth to it, whether you take it literally or
not, some sort of history came to an end -- so, let's look at the event
of 09/11 and ask whether history begins again. As someone said to me,
'Oh, I guess you'll agree that history has started up again.' No, I'm not
sure I do agree.

Steven Duane Wilson writes " In the course of human evolution, an event takes place that awakens all senses to realize that the next step is to be taken now. In the past year things have taken place all around the world that leads me to believe now is the time for the next evolutionary step. If you are looking for truth and freedom, the only way to achieve those things is through anarchy. No longer can mankind ignore the evils of civilized existence.

We must acknowledge the fact that this society is too dangerous for it's own good. We must put down the weights of past glories and climb higher beyond dreams. The human needs change, because if things do not, our being will end with a war over oil or economy or religion or political agenda. The call for intellectual anarchy that I am making is for all to move towards a better day. To understand what is wrong with man and to see how man can change. We need revolution to keep ourselves alive.

The government must go and let man be a world of self-rule, where responsibility isn't a curse but a challenge, and logic and reason will lead. Compassion and peace will be our new world order, and no one will deny us this claim, that I will not fight for Uncle Sam, I will not pay taxes to support a war I do not believe in, I will not vote for federal or state offices to be filled by puppets of pain, I will not obey the lady of justice, and I will not live in this world anymore! Revolution is a piece of evolution, and it is a natural thing. We must think ourselves free, and then move to change a world that was never meant to be. Freedom must be absolute, or it does not exist at all. If your destination is truth and freedom, the road you travel is called anarchy."

"Twentieth Century Most Murderous in History"

Eric Hobsbawm, Guardian [UK], Saturday February 23, 2002

The 20th century was the most murderous in recorded history.
The total number of deaths caused by or associated with its
wars has been estimated at 187m, the equivalent of more than
10% of the world's population in 1913. Taken as having begun
in 1914, it was a century of almost unbroken war, with few
and brief periods without organised armed conflict
somewhere. It was dominated by world wars: that is to say,
by wars between territorial states or alliances of states.

Anonymous Comrade writes

Footprints in the Dust:

Signs of Connections between the CIA and the WTC Attack

Sunday, March 10, 2002 @ 08:47:39 EST

By John Chuckman, YellowTimes.org Columnist (Canada)

One of the most fascinating snippets on the latest Nixon Watergate-era tape to be released to the public, the same tape that contains an 18-minute erasure and anti-Semitic remarks, was a brief, unexplained comment by Nixon on what a fraud the Warren Commission had been.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but as part of a lifelong interest in history, I've read most of the worthwhile books analyzing Kennedy's assassination, and I am left only with the certainty that we've never been told the whole truth.

Edward Said, "Thoughts About America"

Counterpunch

I don't know a single Arab or Muslim American who does not now feel that he or she belongs to the enemy camp, and that being in the United States at this moment provides us with an especially unpleasant experience of alienation and widespread, quite specifically targeted hostility. For despite the occasional official statements saying that Islam and Muslims and Arabs are not enemies of the United States, everything else about the current situation argues the exact opposite.

Hundreds of young Arab and Muslim men have been picked up for questioning and, in far too many cases, detained by the police or the FBI. Anyone with an Arab or Muslim name is usually made to stand aside for special attention during airport security checks. There have been many reported instances of discriminatory behaviour against Arabs, so that speaking Arabic or even reading an Arabic document in public is likely to draw unwelcome attention. And of course, the media have run far too many "experts" and "commentators" on terrorism, Islam, and the Arabs whose endlessly repetitious and reductive line is so hostile and so misrepresents our history, society and culture that the media itself has become little more than an arm of the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere, as now seems to be the case with the projected attack to "end" Iraq.

Full story continues at: said america

Ben Grosscup writes "Why Organize A Town Meeting Campaign On Genetic Engineering?

Summary:
This piece explores the exciting prospects of using a town meeting campaign to realize the directly democratic potential of the town meeting. The piece is immediately relevant to activists in Vermont who are currently working on such a campaign against genetic engineering, but it may also be useful to people in other parts of New England who have town meetings and people all over the world who have no town meeting in their community.

Pages

Subscribe to Analysis & Polemic