Month: September 2014

Find the reasons in the predictable results

The US has started another aggressive military campaign in the Muslim world; airstrikes against Syria and Iraq with no defined end.

As usual, we can immediately dispense with the stated rationale for the attacks, particularly the glaringly hypocritical moral indignation; and we can know the genuine reasons by considering the predictable results.

One of the reasons is already being achieved, as ISIS has seen a dramatic increase in enlistment.  Another reason is also being achieved, the flooding of Turkey and Syria’s other neighbors with yet more refugees.  Among other factors, these two objectives serve to enable the US to achieve the basic aim that underlies all its military invasions : to cause and prolong disruption and chaos as long as needed until the state of economic and political ruin is irreversible, and resistance to domination is impossible.

The US response to the 9/11 attacks in 2001 successfully expanded the Al-Qaida franchise into places it had never existed.  It even led to the creation of new, more brutal competitors dedicated to achieving a vision of an Islamic state never really imagined by any Islamic scholars other than Islamohphobic neo-Orientalists like Daniel Pipes.

So yes; we know what results we can expect.  They are the results we have been getting thus far.  The mushrooming of ISIS into any other region the US desires to devastate; and the further destabilization of the region, particularly Turkey.

Power has nothing to fear from extremists; it subsidizes and promotes them.  Power benefits from them, and profits from their activities.

Authentic Islam, not Islam as defined by non-Muslims,  is the only ideology, the only belief system, the only lifestyle, that poses any challenge against the worship of the ruling class, against rabid materialism, and against the reigning order of the corporate elite.  It is the only hope for overcoming the inhuman global order that is bent on enslaving 99% of the population for the obscene private profit of  the top 1%.It is the only way to liberate society from the worship of the super rich and their neoliberal capitalist orthodoxy.

Army Divestment

It would be a far more useful demand of the opposition in Egypt to demand the divestment of the military from the economy than to call for an end to the regime of El-Sisi.

If the army relinquished its stake in the private economy, and sufficed itself on State military funding, it would immediately mean an end to the Coup; while without such divestment, there is no foreseeable scenario in which the army would ever accept an independent civilian government.

Calling for the divestment of the army from the economy is also not something global corporate power is likely to oppose.

There is no question that, while under the corporate imperial system, Sisi is not so much a dictator as he is someone who takes dictation; however, the character of his regime,  clearly is impacting the religious life of the Mu’mineen in Egypt.  Whatever latent hostility there has been among the Munafiqeen and secularists, it is now free to publicly manifest itself on the streets against our sisters and families.

Even if the overall policies being imposed on Egypt by the global power structure will not be changed by ending the Coup, at least the boldness of the wicked will be restricted in public life, insha’Allah.

Dissolving the state is not the same as independence

I would really like to know what is the strategic logic of this? Is it supposed to inspire others to “rise up” against the regime with homemade bombs? Or is it possible that they believe this action by itself damages the regime?

Understand that whatever you do to weaken the state, it only accelerates the process of conquest. Neoliberalism is all about dissolving the state. Under the imperial system the state has only 2 prime functions. First, to subsidize corporate profit-making enterprises with public money; and second, to terrorize the population and keep them as excluded as possible from participating within the power structure. When you target the limbs of the state, you do nothing against power; you only provide the rationale for sweeping repressive measures which power wants to see imposed anyway.

Do not confuse the regime with the power structure. Sisi is simply fulfilling his institutional role within what is essentially an imperial system. He does not control policy, and probably does not even understand the policies it is his job to impose. The maximum that can be achieved by the sort of action we saw today in Cairo, is possibly, after a great deal of blood and destruction, the power structure will opt to replace Sisi with someone more capable of imposing order

Preemptive Counter-Revolution

French farmers protested in Brittany last night against taxation, bureaucracy, and the drop in vegetable prices. They set fire to the MSA agricultural mutual insurance building, and torched the local tax office.  And they prevented firefighters from intervening.

If you are wondering about the increasing militarization of the police in the West, that is to say, their transformation into Third World-style security services, the reason is simple: Disparity.

The US understood many years ago, in the early days of what is called Globalization, that the trajectory of this program would lead to massive social unrest within victimized countries where the Neoliberal policies are being imposed.

As those policies are being imposed more and more within Western countries, the tendency for resistance is even greater because the people are not accustomed to the same kinds of economically brutal programs which the developing world has been suffering for decades. This is one of the underlying reasons, if not the primary one, for the Global War on Terror; to establish a pretext for repression under the banner of security.

The militarization, the surveillance, the suspension of civil liberties; none of it has to do with terror.  It has to do with quelling popular dissent.  It has to do with preemptive counter-revolution

Un-Capitalist Capitalism

Anti-Globalization is an inaccurate term, because Globalization is an inaccurate term. Anti-Capitalist is not accurate either because Neoliberalism is not really Capitalism; it’s an extreme mutation creating enslaved markets, rather than free markets.

The pyramid economy has become an obelisk, in which a tiny number of billionaires own approximately twice the total value of currency in circulation on the Earth.

This obscene level of disparity has not been achieved by free market principles.  It is being achieved by radical regulation of vulnerable markets to favor huge multinational corporations and their shareholders.

We call it deregulation because it apparently removes the state from control of the economy; but that abdication of control is essentially a deliberate regulation officially conferring power to multinationals. The state is regulating against its own population, against its small businesses and its workers. That is not free market capitalism.  It is highly discriminatory and undermining to the principles of a competitive market.

Authoritarian Interventionism. It’s the new Progressive

I was listening yesterday to a Democracy Now interview with Congressman Jim McDermott, described as a progressive liberal democrat, discussing the possibility of the US sending ground troops into Iraq.  A couple things stood out for me because of what they illustrate about the needle-thin narrowness of the political spectrum in the US.

While discussing some of the mistakes he thought were made in US policy towards Iraq, McDermott said :

“Maliki should have been gone a long time ago. The United States government, from time to time, picks the wrong person to be the leader of a country and involves themselves in the election and the whole selection process”

This passed without any comment.  The congressman is acknowledging that the US picks who will lead other countries, and interfere with the integrity of the election process to that end.  He has not qualms about that.  His regret is only that the US picked the wrong person for the job.  There is no hint that he understands the illegality of the entire process of installing regimes abroad.

When asked to compare the atrocious record of Obama with that of his predecessor, McDermott said:

“…(I)  abhor, as an American, that we were torturing people and that we had these secret prisons all over the place and that we were waterboarding and all of that—and to no effect”

Torture, rendition, waterboarding, are abhorrent, apparently, because they didn’t achieve the desired results.  Not because they are illegal and morally wrong.  The means did not lead to the ends that would justify them.  And that is the liberal, progressive position; aired on a liberal, progressive broadcast, without comment.

Political Change or Economic Change?

Is it possible to achieve economic change without achieving political change first?

When political institutions are dominated by the power of the private economy, by multinational corporations and foreign investors, or even domestic private business interests, they become impervious to popular influence.

You cannot achieve economic change through political institutions when those institutions are controlled by private economic interests. So, achieving economic change, and indeed, achieving political change, should not be sought through these institutions, but rather through the entities which control them.

You need to go directly to the corporations and foreign investors and convince them to recognize your economic sovereignty and political independence. You convince them by imposing consequences on their profitability and operational efficiency. Once you liberate your political institutions from corporate occupation, you will be in a position to implement progressive economic reforms.