Comments on: The struggle for hegemony in the Muslim world

By: JCS

JCS — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:54:19 +0000

Beautiful article. I think the game now is imperialism, in the use of capital flow, and undermining Syria w/ forced imports, as well as opening up the Mediterranean ports. The Syrian leadership, along w/ many other protectionist Arab states, like Libya, still have the memory of French, British, Italian, etc… incursion, and employ measures, seen as extreme by the West, to protect themselves from such influences. We are definitely in the age of the New World Order. While I do think that some of the opinions held by those Ba’athists and others, of the West, are outdated, they still have an accurate line and understand that foreigners want to penetrate and begin selling off their country.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 02:36:59 +0000

The cited Trotsky quote equally applies to Richard Seymour and the ISO/Socialist Workers Party. Point being, they have significantly veered away from the perspective of international revolutionary socialism, which Trotsky supported until the end. Trotsky himself unequivocally opposed imperialism in its various forms. These groups only mention Trotsky here and there nowadays to conceal their own bourgeois liberal politics. Another Trotsky quote from 1939 highlights the huge gap between Trotsky himself and today’s so-called Socialists on the subject of imperialism “…in the struggle between a civilized, imperialist, democratic republic and a backward, barbaric monarchy in a colonial country, the socialists are completely on the side of the oppressed country notwithstanding its monarchy and against the oppressor country notwithstanding its “democracy.”

By: gowans

gowans — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 23:04:02 +0000

You’re assuming I was thinking of Tariq Ali. I wasn’t. I don’t think of him as a Trotskyist, and nor, I believe, does he think of himself in this way. Not any longer. I was thinking, instead, of such self-identified Trotskyists as Richard Seymour.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:43:47 +0000

I appreciate your writing and perspective, but why do you keep referring to people like Tariq Ali as “Trotskyists?” Tariq Ali, and other upper-middle class liberals like him long ago rejected the perspective of international revolutionary socialism (if they ever supported it at all). Trotsky’s opinion of bourgeois liberals who participated in imperialism aims was quite clear. While discussing the situation in Europe prior to WWII Trotsky stated “Those working class “leaders” who want to chain the proletariat to the war chariot of imperialism, covered by the mask of “democracy,” are now the worst enemies and the direct traitors of the toilers.”

By: Roger Milbrandt

Roger Milbrandt — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 04:28:41 +0000

Stephen,

I agree, as usual, with most of the claims you make in your article, but I am a bit surprised at your assumption that the attack in Benghazi was indeed carried out by Al Qaeda. Are you aware of the article by Finian Cunningham and Mark Robertson claiming that it was likely carried out by the Green Resistance? Their case, which includes evidence on the probability that the attackers were Green Resistance and also some considerations which make it improbable the perpetrators were Al Qaeda, is quite convincing: at least I found it so.
i expect you have read their article. What do you think?