Yoshie had written:
> > Were Omar Mukhtar alive today and leading resistance anywhere, it > > would be unlikely for him to receive much sympathy in the West. That > > he was a Muslim religious teacher alone would stand in the way. > > > > Truth be told, there are some in the Iraqi resistance with whom one > > cannot possibly sympathize, given their treatment of their POWs and > > hostages, which stands in stark contrast with the film's portrayal of > > Mukhtar's stance toward his prisoners (whether that's truth or > > idealization, I do not know):
me:
> there's no reason why the "West" should sympathize with him. What's > worth sympathizing with is the _struggle_ against colonialism and > imperialism, not the _individuals_ who may temporarily lead that > struggle.
Yoshie, now:
Struggles are composed of individuals who lead and join struggles in various capacities. It seems to me to be impossible to separate the two in the sympathy department, though it is possible to do so in the analysis department. While one can never base politics on feelings alone, feelings are part of politics. Abstractions minus feelings -- including feelings about individuals involved in struggles -- seldom move people.
In which case, it's the _masses_ who we should sympathize with, not the self-appointed leaders. me:
> People make errors, believe in conflicting ideals, etc.
Yoshie:
Yes, but errors, contradictory ideas, etc. don't necessarily contradict sympathy for people who make them.
the left is _against_ oppression. It's true that the masses who are subject to oppression often make mistakes, believe in conflicting ideas, etc. when fighting against their oppression. They often follow the wrong leaders, who then take advantage of them. However, without the mass movement, liberation is impossible. And to quote Chairman ;-) Mike (whose initials are ML, by the way): "Rosa Luxemburg said the working class demands the right to make its own mistakes and learn in the dialectic of history. If they're going to be prevented from making mistakes, you won't have the continuing advance of the revolutionary process." The leaders are typically surfers on the wave of history, trying to exploit the mass movement to empower themselves. I think I get what Yoshie is talking about with this "Western Leftists" crap. EG, >Were Omar Mukhtar alive today and leading resistance anywhere, it would be unlikely for him to receive much sympathy in the West.< I think she's saying that the "WL" is infected with racism, so we would reject Omar Mukhtar even though we support Hugo Chavez. There are too many fallacies involved in that argument to count. -- Jim Devine / "That's free enterprise, friends: freedom to gamble, freedom to lose. And the great thing -- the truly democratic thing about it -- is that you don't even have to be a player to lose." -- Barbara Ehrenreich.
