New Events

International

no events posted in last week

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

Anti-Empire

offsite link Ukraine Buys Huge Amounts of Russian Fue... Fri Jan 20, 2023 08:34 | Antonia Kotseva

offsite link Turkey Has Sent Ukraine Cluster Munition... Thu Jan 12, 2023 00:26 | Jack Detsch

offsite link New Israeli Government Promises to Talk ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 21:13 | Al Majadeen

offsite link Russia Training Iranian Pilots Ahead of ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:19 | The Times of Israel

offsite link Lukashenko Abolishes Copyright Protectio... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:05 | Nikki Main

Anti-Empire >>

The Saker
A bird's eye view of the vineyard

offsite link Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
Alternative site: https://thesaker.si/saker-a... Site was created using the downloads provided Regards Herb

offsite link The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
Dear friends As I have previously announced, we are now “freezing” the blog.  We are also making archives of the blog available for free download in various formats (see below). 

offsite link What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
by Mr. Allen for the Saker blog Over the last few years, we hear leaders from both Russia and China pronouncing that they have formed a relationship where there are

offsite link Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
2023/02/27 19:00:02Welcome to the ‘Moveable Feast Cafe’. The ‘Moveable Feast’ is an open thread where readers can post wide ranging observations, articles, rants, off topic and have animate discussions of

offsite link The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Pepe Escobar for the Saker blog A powerful feeling rhythms your skin and drums up your soul as you?re immersed in a long walk under persistent snow flurries, pinpointed by

The Saker >>

Public Inquiry
Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005

offsite link RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony

offsite link Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony

offsite link Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony

offsite link RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony

offsite link Waiting for SIPO Anthony

Public Inquiry >>

Voltaire Network
Voltaire, international edition

offsite link The European Union against farmers, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Feb 27, 2024 06:58 | en

offsite link The Silence of the Guilty, by Manlio Dinucci Mon Feb 26, 2024 13:24 | en

offsite link Thierry Meyssan's interview with the Serbian daily Ve?ernje Novosti, by Thierry ... Mon Feb 26, 2024 05:29 | en

offsite link Ukraine at the heart of the Munich Security Conference Sat Feb 24, 2024 03:57 | en

offsite link Voltaire, International Newsletter N°75 Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:31 | en

Voltaire Network >>

In the footsteps of Kropotkin

category international | anti-war / imperialism | other press author Friday December 16, 2011 17:14author by David Douglas Report this post to the editors

How did self-declared anarchists come to support the Nato bombing of Libya?

David Douglass reports on how some English Anarchists slid down a slippery slope with their support for Islamic rebels in Libya. Full text at link.

On Sunday November 6 I was confronted out of the blue by a political development in anarchism which knocked me off my feet. Surrounded by comrades in a fairly well attended meeting of the Northern Anarchist Network and the North East Anarchists at the Bridge Hotel in Newcastle, I listened with jaw dropping to the item on the agenda marked ‘Libyan Solidarity Campaign’.

The ‘Support Nato bombing tendency’ is how I would roughly designate it. I subsequently traced back this disturbing development to Ian Bone’s blog. Ian, a long standing comrade of mine, founder of Class War and many great initiatives, surely could not be the origin of this absurd and reactionary viewpoint?

This is what he wrote in March: “The left, anarchists, myself and all of us are against western military intervention and a no-fly zone. Some of those arguments are worn out already - ‘We did it because we wanted Libya’s oil’. But political positions have real consequences … without such intervention we shall watch thousands die in Benghazi and the triumph of a nutter which will set back uprisings in other Arab dictatorships. We will have maintained our impeccable anti-imperialist integrity against the cries of soon-to-be-annihilated rebels now asking for a no-fly zone.”[1]

Here we have Ian deliberating with himself basically on not wanting to see the anti-Gaddafi rebels go down in blood, but realising the consequences of western military intervention. This is fair enough as thinking out loud, but how many thoughts did Ian have as to the nature of what was being proposed against the Gaddafi regime? The rebels were not just living their lives or minding their own business, but posing a military and political challenge. What were they offering? This is crucial in any discussion, not whether my enemy’s enemy is my friend, but is my enemy’s enemy worse than my enemy or the same? The Benghazi-based rebellion was rooted in Islamist and monarchist opposition to Gaddafi. Does this effort further the struggle of the working class to gain power for itself? Can we take a side in a war which always ultimately may be against us and people of our political stance, and the working class as a class acting in its own interests? Can Nato ever spearhead a progressive revolution? Really?

Related Link: http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004663
author by Tpublication date Sat Dec 17, 2011 01:39author address author phone Report this post to the editors

This is typical of the Left in general. It is a measure of how navie they can be because in general they totally refuse to believe in any Machevellian motives of the Capitalist powers because that implies a conspiracy and they are totally scared of the consipiracey label and outright refuse to believe in any of any kind.

It is quite simple to manipulate the consensus of the Left because the Capitalist powers just have to use their propaganda machinery -i.e. the state and corporate media to suggest that thinking in a certain way is consipatorial. The Left then immediately falls into line by taking a stance that is opposite.

A really good example is the fact that the Western powers had planned the Libyan campaign at least a year well in advance. In general most of the Left totally denies this. In fact General Wesley Clarke (of NATO) gave an interview at least 5 years ago, in which he outlined the planned theatre of operations and laid out that these would be Libya, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Somilia and Sudan. Funny enough he was spot on. The current rhethoric in the media is to impose a no-fly zone in Syrira and once they bomb the shit out of that, then they have a clear run to Iran, where covert operations have already been extensively under way, including two terrorists attacks recently with explosions at their nuclear facilities.

But returning to the main point, it is the way that the Left goes out of their way to avoid the consipiracy word that they fall into the trap of the Capitalists and thus become their tool and they are then able to use them to convince the fairly large liberal section of the Middle Class that indeed bombing the crap out of various places is in fact the correct and just course of action to take.

Since 2001 the Left has abdicated its moral authority and totally handed it over to the PR machinery of the war-mongers by refusing to address head on the issue of conspiracies.

It should be plain office that all the wars and all the fake terrorists attacks are part and parcel of the whole package. The War on Terror which should be called the War Of Terror is simply a new form of the Class War. The Financial Crisis is really just a Financial Coup d'Etat. This is what the West has done on the Third World since the late 70s and early 80s. It is now been done this us. Yes it has all been planned. Yes it is a conspiracy. And yes the wars, every one of them were planned, and the Arab uprisings were things they were able to tap into and use.

The Left is just too busy trying to make things fit into their theory of the World and how events unfold. One thing they hate to think is that the masses can be manipulated because in all Left theories the masses rise up in revolution. This is the purity of thinking of the Left and while I wish it was true, the fact is that the Capitalist understand the grievances of the masses and are able to foresee and use this and thereby direct these movements to their own needs quite easily. For the Left though this is a sacrosant and really upsets them and they cannot accept that the central feature of where all the hopes and desires lie has been inflitrated and manipulated.

author by JoeMcpublication date Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:28author address author phone Report this post to the editors

The anonymous introduction to this Other Press article gives the impression that Douglass' piece concerns “some English anarchists’ .......support for Islamic rebels in Libya". From my reading of it ,this is quite the opposite of what the article is supposed to be about . It's almost as if the author of the introduction hadn't read what Dave Douglas had to say beyond the first paragraph .

That first paragraph does indeed talk about ……“ Libyan rebels, many of whom are trying to impose some form of fundamentalist, theocratic Islamic state. ” But Douglass immediately insists in the second paragraph that this should not be the main issue .He wants readers to be “quite clear” that the support given by the "rebels" ,and the likes of anarchist Ian Bone ,to NATO’s military agenda should be the main concern . For Douglass , the Islamic nature and goals of the “rebels” is “almost unimportant” :

“However, let us be quite clear here. The nature of the forces involved and their goals is almost unimportant, compared to the main issue: that of calling for and supporting Nato’s military agenda in Libya”.

author by Orthodox-Trotwatchpublication date Mon Dec 19, 2011 07:33author address author phone Report this post to the editors

Joe you must have some eel DNA. The support for the rebels is mentioned in six other paragraphs of the story. You are relying on people not going to the link to check. Trouble with that is now no one believes a word that you post here.

author by Atheistpublication date Mon Dec 19, 2011 19:39author address author phone Report this post to the editors

joe has a specific agenda on this site
to attack imperialism in muslim countries
while defending Islam from "Islamophobes"

I have no problem with the first part but when will joe see that Islam is just another oppressive religion that is actually being used a lot lately by imperialists to achieve their goals.

How did the imperialists topple gadaffi? by sending in their religious nutjob al qaeda operative to lead the "rebels"and arming them and promising to turn a blind eye to the imposition of an islamic state and sharia law in Libya if they play ball regarding the oil.

Useful idiots dying to make the imperialists rich. No gods or masters!

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Tue Dec 20, 2011 14:04author address author phone Report this post to the editors

Religion is not necessarily the demon you paint. Its when it goes fundamentalist dogmatic it becomes toxic..whether Christian, Judaic, Muslim ot Hindu..the four that seem most rancid at present. The founders of the universalist religions were trying to elevate the consciousness of their followers beyond local tribal gods and initiate a bigger mindframe, and human perspective. The problem is when the exclusive priesthoods get cemented into place and feel they have a monopoly on the 'one true church'. Atheism itself can lead to a dogmatic rejection of the healthy impulses still exercised and practised by many honest religious individuals, who use their belief systems to understand the world, and particularly to form ethical foundations in what otherwise can be a moral desert of commerce and animal competion. I agree blind belief is psychologically pathological, but most believers, whatever their codes, are not so naive. And the really dangerous fundamentalism at present is the combo of 'muscular Christianity' and Zionist Judaism, which with its imperial crusading totalitarian 'vision' is largely reponsible(along with the Wahabbi Saudis)for driving the reactionary Muslim variety. I've travelled in Islamic countries, and never once encountered anything but tolerance, which is not surprising when you realise Muslims accept the Judaic and Christian theologies as precursors of their own creed. Most people, whatever their overt beliefs, will return respect for respect. And then you have the religious belief in the 'invisible hand of the market', possibly the most fundamentalist and toxic blinder of them all.

 
© 2001-2024 Independent Media Centre Ireland. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Independent Media Centre Ireland. Disclaimer | Privacy