Melvin, I think you hit the nail on the head.
I sometimes get the feeling that what some people want to see is the dismantling of the Russian Federation into a dozen or so quasi-feudal failed "states" with deeply impoverished populations, which is what would happen in at least the North Caucasus if the extremists had their way.
It reminds me nothing so much of deranged Trotskyist (and not only Trotskyist) support for a "free socialist Soviet Moldova" or "immediate independence for Armenia" in the 1980s. Nowadays such calls seem like sick jokes.
That's my final post on the subject, I am using too much bandwidth.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 6/20/2004 12:51:51 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, sartesian wrote:
> One mo' time:
>
> Looking for that thing called specificity, Mr. Proyect. And that would be
> a social specificity, analyzing the material forces at work driving the
> contending forces.
>
The same thing that is driving Putin is driving Bush: control over oil.
You can't get more material than that. And both capitalist politicians use
the same excuse, they are trying to defeat Islamic fundamentalism and
spread democracy.CommentI could hardly locate Chechnya on the map, which is why I keep several maps of the world within reach. Having followed and studied in a general way the evolution of the Russian state, and Soviet history and the breakup of the Soviet Union into more or less warring bourgeois capitalist type states/fiefdom - and the political leaders in Chechnya are not trying to found a Soviet type antyhing or socialist state, it seems to me that the motivation of a Putin and Bush are radically different and not reducible to profit motive or oil.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
