The REDSTAR2000 Papers

Listen to the worm of doubt, for it speaks truth. - Leftist Discussion

The Evolving Iraqi Resistance April 23, 2005 by RedStar2000

As the Iraqi resistance settles in for "the long haul", it's instructive to observe the behavior of various segments of the U.S. "left".

Many American liberals have "lost interest" in the war and turned to other concerns. So have some who consider themselves "revolutionaries".

The former don't have to offer reasons for their defection; the latter are under some constraint to do so.

A "good reason" is that the Iraqi resistance "has become reactionary".



Well, it seems that "the verdict of history" on the Iraqi resistance has been formally pronounced. (Trotskyists like to do that sort of thing).


And the resistance does not come from "people from all types of various different political, ethnic, religious, etc. backgrounds". It is made up of Sunni Arabs who kill people for being Shi'a or Kurdish.


That's the social base of the resistance speaking. The resistance say it themselves: it's not an anti-imperialist movement, it's a Sunni-Arab-supremacist movement.

Consider the implications of these statements...

1. A whole "new" justification for the U.S. invasion and occupation -- "we're" there to stop "Sunni supremacism.

2. The anti-war movement in the U.S. has no further justification for its own existence; Bush was "right"...and even "progressive".

3. The next step for the Iraqi resistance is to unconditionally surrender to the quisling regime...and get to work building a real Trotskyist party.

It's "what they should have done" all along. *laughs*
First posted at RevLeft on March 29, 2005


Increasing numbers of "leftists" are operating solely on opposition to U.S. imperialism...This tends to lead towards enlisting in the global anti-American coalition....headed by French and German imperialism, Chirac and Shroeder, the Bourse and the Deutschebank.

Yeah, you'd think we'd have the patriotic decency to support "our own imperialists" against those French & German bastards, wouldn't you!

First posted at RevLeft on March 29, 2005

Now that the Trotskyist has rendered his official verdict that the Iraqi resistance is "Sunni Supremacism", perhaps you might be curious as to "the next step" for Iraq.

Well here's an idea that the American ruling class is kicking around: partition.

The Way Out of Iraq: Decentralizing the Iraqi Government

The idea seems to be to concede the "Sunni triangle" to the oil-less Sunni while setting up Kurdish and Shi'ite mini-states in reliable hands (quislings) who will place no obstacles in the way of western plundering.

The intransigent Sunni can simply be left to rot while Kurdish Kirkuk and Shi'ite Basra become the sparkling capitals of the new oil-rich mini-states...much like Kuwait or the Gulf emirates. Those "states" have been "successful" because of their on-going docility in the face of American oil-lust.

The beauty of the "dismember-Iraq project" is that it can be presented to the world as "self-determination"...and who could be against that?

Surely not the Trotskyist. *laughs*
First posted at RevLeft on March 29, 2005


Numerous posters seem to be making a false assumption: that you must support U.S. imperialism or else the Ba'athist-Wahhabi resistance.

For a very good reason. No matter how "reactionary" the Iraqi resistance is, its victory will constitute a major blow to American imperial ambitions.

On the other hand, a victory by U.S. imperialism in Iraq will demoralize resistance everywhere...especially in the United States.

We need the U.S. to lose this war!

Otherwise, things are going to get much worse for us everywhere.


In Iraq, the occupation and the "resistance" are not the only forces. There is also the Iraqi working class, which has taken advantage of certain postwar openings to expand its organization and fight for its rights.

But who are the people in the resistance, if not mostly Iraqi workers?

quote (Union of the Unemployed):

The backbone of this "resistance" (despite denials by many on the left) is made up of groups of political Islamists and Baathists. This "resistance" is extremely reactionary, backward and right wing. It is a bourgeois resistance which has nothing to do with the interests of the Iraqi people. When we classify this "resistance" as a right wing, as bourgeois, we do not mean, as many leftist groups claim, that the individuals involved in it are not workers or deprived people. What we do mean is that the organised, armed "resistance" as a social and political movement is a bourgeois movement. It pursues extremely reactionary objectives, it offers a very reactionary alternative to the current bourgeois authority and uses very reactionary methods to realize its objectives.
-- emphasis added.

Would it be unreasonable to conclude that these folks -- however "proletarian" they claim to be -- reject "organized armed resistance" to the occupation?

Would it be unreasonable to conclude that they prefer the existing occupation to a victory by the "reactionary" resistance?

Would it be unreasonable to conclude that they favor "peaceful forms of struggle" against the occupation (strikes, occupations, conferences, etc.) as opposed to armed resistance? (To their credit, they did call for workers not to participate in the occupation's fake "elections".)

Let's face it...these people have formed "quasi-legal" unions and are obviously "tolerated" by the occupation -- whose attention is elsewhere at the moment.

If the resistance were defeated, what do you think would happen next? Would not these unions either be co-opted by the usual suspects or simply crushed? What happens to unions in other countries where U.S. hegemony is uncontested?

I'm certainly not "opposed" to these folks...but they are not yet serious players -- their national newspaper circulation is not much larger than this board's membership (around 10,000).

It would not surprise me to learn that many employed Iraqi workers are, at one and the same time, members of some "quasi-legal" trade union and also part-timers in the armed resistance.


Revolutionary Marxists reject lining up with the US or EU in their increasing rivalry for world domination. (That's part of how you can tell who can be accurately described as revolutionary.)

No one here has suggested that besides yourself; supporting the victory of the Iraqi resistance is hardly the same as handing over a blank check to European imperialism.

On the other hand, suppose World War III is an inter-imperialist war between the U.S. and the E.U.?

If we have the resources, then we can and should follow Lenin's advice: turn the imperialist war into a civil war!

But if we can't manage that, then by all means, victory to the E.U.!

Unconditional opposition to U.S. imperialism trumps all other considerations in the present era.

The world's fortress of reaction must fall!

(And that's how you tell "who can be accurately described as a revolutionary" at this time.)
First posted at RevLeft on March 30, 2005


Sunnis urged to join Iraqi police

Senior Sunni Muslim clerics in Iraq have urged their followers to join the country's security forces.

Sunnis form the bulk of the anti-US insurgency, which frequently attacks the police and army.

Until recently, many Sunni clerics had branded the security forces as US collaborators.

The army and police are largely dominated by Shias and Kurds.

Ahmed Abdul Ghafour al-Samarrai of the Association of Muslim Scholars said Sunni membership was necessary to prevent the forces falling into "the hands of those who have caused chaos, destruction and violated the sanctities".

This is not just a good illustration of the slimy opportunism of all religious figures everywhere...but I think it will also greatly strengthen the secular forces in the resistance.
First posted at RevLeft on April 2, 2005

With all the mindless yapping about "Sunni Supremacism", how about a look at what the U.S.-British quislings are up to these days...


Death at 'immoral' picnic in the park

Students are beaten to death for playing music as Shia militiamen run amok

The students had begun to lay out their picnic in the spring sunshine when the men attacked.

“There were dozens of them, armed with guns, and they poured into the park,” Ali al-Azawi, 21, the engineering student who had organised the gathering in Basra, said.

“They started shouting at us that we were immoral, that we were meeting boys and girls together and playing music and that this was against Islam.

“They began shooting in the air and people screamed. Then, with one order, they began beating us with their sticks and rifle butts.” Two students were said to have been killed.

Standing over them as the blows rained down was the man who gave the order, dressed in dark clerical garb and wearing a black turban. Ali recognised him immediately as a follower of Hojatoleslam Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shia cleric. Ali realised then that the armed men were members of Hojatoleslam al-Sadr’s Mehdi Army, a private militia that fought American forces last year and is now enforcing its own firebrand version of Islam.

The picnic had run foul of the Islamist powers that increasingly hold sway in the fly-blown southern city, where religious militias rule the streets, forcing women to don the veil and closing down shops that sell alcohol or music.

Far from disavowing the attack, senior al-Sadr loyalists said that they had a duty to stop the students’ “dancing, sexy dress and corruption”.

“We beat them because we are authorised by Allah to do so and that is our duty,” Sheik Ahmed al-Basri said after the attack. “It is we who should deal with such disobedience and not the police.”,,7374-1537512,00.html

As the resistance continues, I expect the secular forces will move to the forefront of the struggle. And if that means "mostly Sunnis", then so be it!
First posted at RevLeft on April 3, 2005
· Welcome
· Theory
· Guest Book
· Hype
· Additional Reading
· Links

· Contact
Latest Theory Collections
· Communists Against Religion -- Part 19 June 6, 2006
· Conversations with Capitalists May 21, 2006
· Vegetable Morality April 17, 2006
· Parents and Children April 11, 2006
· The Curse of Lenin's Mummy April 3, 2006
Defining Theory Collections
· What Did Marx "Get Wrong"? September 13, 2004
· Class in Post-Revolutionary Society - Part 1 July 9, 2004
· Demarchy and a New Revolutionary Communist Movement November 13, 2003
· A New Type of Communist Organization October 5, 2003
· The "Tools" of Marxism July 19, 2003
· Marxism Without the Crap July 3, 2003
· What is Socialism? An Attempt at a Brief Definition June 19, 2003
· What is Communism? A Brief Definition June 19, 2003
· A New Communist Paradigm for the 21st Century May 8, 2003
· On "Dialectics" -- The Heresy Posts May 8, 2003
Random Quote
Marx and Engels are on record as dismissing the efforts of "small groups" who imagine that they "can do for the proletariat" what the proletariat must do for itself.  

Search Internet
Search Website
· There have been 3 users active in the past 15 minutes.

Copyright © 2003-2006 -- Some rights reserved.