Jim Devine interpreted Wojtek "I think that Wojtek had a valid point: it's >important not to simply think of what's happening in the world outside the >US as only a result of US policies (so that ObL is simply a creation of the >US war against the USSR in Afghanistan), because that world has its own >class structures and struggles (so that ObL also reflects an ensemble of >social relations that promotes clerical fascism)."
Rakesh said in response: He ( bin Laden) spoke against the US occupation of Sa'udi Arabia, the sanctions on Iraq, and Israeli expansionism. We have no evidence that the terrorists engaged in horrific and nihilistic violence because the House of Sa'ud is too soft on the population, i.e., not sufficiently 'clerically fascist'; there is a lot of evidence that people oppose the US occupation of Sa'udi Arabia on religious (proximity of US troops to Medina and Mecca) and economic grounds (tens of thousands of US advisors getting the best jobs just as in Iran 25 years ago , US downstream companies getting the oil cheap through netback deals, US defense companies receiving enormous sums for unneeded and way overpriced weapons, etc.). -clip And it seems obvious that many people on the Arabian peninsula don't believe the US is there (or needed) to repel foreign aggression. That is, many seem to believe that the US occupation is meant to protect the House of Sa'ud from any kind of accountability in regards to how it disburses oil rent. %%%%% CB: The class struggle in Saudia Arabia and Afghanistan has its own elements, but all class struggles today must be analyzed in relation to a more closely interconnected imperialism. So, the U.S. role there is part of the class struggle there. bin Laden and the Saudi ruling class may be both fascists on social issues, but bin Laden's words , paraphrased by Rakesh, tend to the anti-imperialist side of the class struggle there. Removal of the U.S. troops, measures to cutback U.S. ripping off booty , etc. tend to aid the anti-imperialist direction of the countries. bin Laden's words would tend thereby to be objectively anti-imperialist, even as he is objectionably socially fascist. I don't know what bin Laden really wants to do, but his rhetoric may reflect the working class in the class struggle in this way, as superstructure reflects infrastructure ( :>)) Or maybe bin Laden's "clerical fascism" is a confused and distorted cry of the oppressed creature, afterall, to some extent. Is anybody saying that bin Laden represents the same "side" of the class struggle as the Saudi ruling class in this discussion ? Are the U.S. , the Saudi ruling class and bin Laden's group all on the same side of the class struggle , since we are looking at the class struggle ? The key thing on emphasizing "blowback", contra Wojtek , is to try to put somekind of halt on the U.S. war drive which is premised on the U.S. having no previous significant role in the area which contributed to the Sept. 11 events as a relatiation against U.S. warmaking and machinations "overthere". U.S. out of Afghanistan ! End the war overthere and start a new war on poverty here !
