Archive for June, 2009

Lyndon Johnson too

June 30, 2009

Lyndon Johnson 1964:


“‘In more than three decades of public life, I have seen first-hand how basic spiritual beliefs and deeds can shatter barriers of politics and bigotry. I have seen those barriers crumble in the presence of faith and hope, and from this experience I have drawn new hope that the seemingly insurmountable moral issues that we face at home and abroad today can be resolved by men of strong faith and men of brave deeds. . . . Great questions of war and peace, of civil rights and education, the elimination of poverty at home and abroad, are the concern of millions who see no difference in this regard between their beliefs and their social obligations.'”(1)

The above is one of those typical Amerikkkan quotes that does not include millions of Vietnamese as “men.” Statements of universal principle in U.$. history often hinge on who is excluded as not counting.

Diplomatic historian Randall B Woods explained how Johnson held this medley of views.


“Today I want to argue that LBJ and indeed the nation’s decision to go to war in Vietnam was intimately intertwined with their support for the Great Society, and especially their acceptance of the civil rights movement.”(1)

It was not only Johnson taking civil rights action at the legislative level in 1964 and 1965. In 1965, the University of Michigan abolished the administration position that informed white parents when their daughters dated Black men. The same year Johnson sent the first ground troops into Vietnam. Coincidence
— not according to Randall B. Woods. Later white backlash coincided with general acceptance that the Vietnam War deserved opposing.

The key was the radical Blacks like Huey Newton who saw more in common with Vietnamese than white so-called workers in the United $tates. The Black Panthers alienated the white liberals, who turned around to oppose the Vietnam War in order to preserve order at home. The “Great Society” went down the drain and Nixon’s “law and order” came into vogue.

The civil rights movement was a conscious product of Kennedy and Johnson who saw it as a means to fend off communist criticisms of the United $tates globally. It’s not that there was an overwhelming vote behind the civil rights movement, as Nixon(2) subsequently proved by taking the Republican Party’s strategy into the South. The Democrats’ conscious plan was why the civil rights legislation and Vietnam War happened simultaneously and that’s also why MIM has no patience for liberal integrationists uniting the “working class.”

It’s still the same thing today. The tepid liberals got their Martin Luther King dream while bombs still fall on Asia.

Notes:
1. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118503854/PDFSTART
2. http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-06-24-graham-tapes_N.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/us/politics/24nixon.html?scp=1&sq=nixon%20tapes&st=cse
Nixon in 1973 said it was wrong for President Truman to fire General MacArthur:


“MacArthur was right in saying bomb across the Yalu. That was the time to finish the goddamn left-wing, uh, Communists off but he didn’t do it.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/weekinreview/28savage.html?

Hint received

June 29, 2009

I received a hint about something I have not mentioned. I’m thinking about the implications.

On another subject, the people responsible for the different cards I have that belong at a certain table are in the Obama administration or campaigned for him. I had NOTHING to do with the creation of the cards or the fact that they belong at a certain table. So we should not persynalize it.

If there is too much persynalizing and motivational thinking, logical lapses start to occur. That works well for campaigns aimed at post-Baby-Boom slackers, but does not create a good international impression.

Stuck on motivations, the Bush and Obama administrations argued in court that a prisoner at Gitmo suffered torture at the hands of Al Qaeda and was yet Al Qaeda.(1) It leaves one wondering, exactly what evidence would be necessary to convince these folks. I suppose one could argue that everyone is Al Qaeda except the 9/11 victims, because the rest of us have less evidence of not being Al Qaeda than Abdul Rahim Abdul Razak al-Janko. Maybe anyone who ever said “God is great” should be counted as Al Qaeda too.

I suppose if I were MIM’s critics in India or the United $tates who fell for the neo-conservative line on religious extremism being the principal contradiction, I would now point out that Obama cites Jesus more often than Bush did,(2) as more evidence of irrationality stemming from individualism.

When one spends 20 years in denial of broad social truths such as that the white workers are not exploited, when one had to spend all one’s time coming up with rationalizations to oppose MIM, then it stands to reason when it comes time to govern, there are going to be problems.

Notes:
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/22/AR2009062201302.html?hpid=moreheadlines
2. http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_jesus_bush/2009/06/09/223230.html ;
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906090027 ;
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/06/09/obama-mentions-jesus-more-than-bush-but-acknowledges-the-godless-more-too.html

Prisoner dilemma

June 29, 2009

I’m not a fan of game theory. The classic prisoner’s dilemma is a metaphor ultimately based in a religiously rooted conception of the isolation of individuals that Anglo-Saxon individualists extend to all of society. The prisoner’s dilemma is about whether two prisoners should rat each other out or proclaim their mutual innocence to go free.

The Christian concept of hypocrisy is as much responsible as anything else for the false separation of the individual from society in analysis. Overused, the concept of hypocrisy criticizes any individual who wants a social existence that she does not already live as a lifestyle.

If we put a Catholic priest in a jail cell, but his freedom means that 1000 other Catholic priests go into jail, we see right away what the problem is with the prisoner’s dilemma. The essence of the individual is broken down to a simple question of material freedom. Yet the Catholic priest’s life goal is to save souls and he may have his goal set back if a thousand priests go to jail when he goes free.

Trading a lynching for a career as I have been asked leaves out the thousands of females who will receive the message, “maybe if I lynch my boyfriend, some day there’ll be other scandals and he’ll end up in a powerful position.”

Blinded by anti-social individualism, those of criminal mentality see only an exchange between two people. However, the truth is that lynching is the past. Attempting to frame lynching as a prisoner’s dilemma question cuts off its social connections.

If prisoner’s dilemma theory is true, then individualism will never end lynching. There will be an incentive to cooperate with even the boldest liars. That’s what we see in practice and it is what we see in history that Liberalism tolerates lynching.

Lynching can only end through solidarity and the action of people in similar conditions.

Currently the Democrats can create change without encouraging lynching and careerism. If they believe they have an alternative they are mistaken; although it won’t be the first time by any means.

On a different note, but a special and particular recommendation for this moment — Bill Ayers moderated by natural means and became a dues-paying Democrat if he wasn’t his whole life. What is going on with me is an attack on my integrity, a form of psy-war that reduces my political output contrary to the First Amendment. If the government could mature and place Bill Ayers, Bob Avakian, Oglesby, Davidson etc. in high posts, the incentive to lynch would be cut back. This would be especially the case with Bill Ayers because the public already knows who he is. It would not be so much a reward for lynching that elected Obama as the public’s acceptance of something it already sort of knows.

Already I have been told by indirect means that action has been taken to redress specific parts of my life that amounted to lynching. I have heard of scholarships and jobs for Asian-Amerikans. Amerikans already have pragmatic (unprincipled) flexibility to redress individual circumstances. My recommendation about Bill Ayers cuts to the whole incentive structure in a principled way and would reduce lynching. The restorative actions people have taken to make things up to Asian-Amerikans cannot reduce the example and incentive to lynch. For that, pro-active measures have to be taken such as putting Bill Ayers in the government.

One of the reasons for third party infiltration gambits aiming at guys like me is that people figure that in 20 years people moderate too much compared with their youth and so infiltrators have to start with a super-radical to end up with anything different 20 years later. What it means is that for 20 years secret services and white supremacist organizations muck with a persyn’s life before the real reason becomes clear. If Obama just appointed Ayers, Avakian, Klonsky, Davidson etc. to high posts, the world would get the message that the old tactics are not necessary for the Democratic Party.

Credit where credit is due

June 28, 2009

This time Democrats deserve credit where credit is due. Bob Herbert said: “Policies that were wrong under George W. Bush are no less wrong because Barack Obama is in the White House.”(1) This is saying people are going to notice if Obama is doing the same thing as before, the same old, same old.

Gail Collins also asked Republicans for an apology for the Lewinsky scandal(2) and Charles Blow raised the Christian line against Christianity. This is a subject of another column to come.

Notes:
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/opinion/23herbert.html?_r=1
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/opinion/27collins.html

Media standards for U.$. and Iranian elections

June 27, 2009

On November 1, 1972, George McGovern held a rally in New York City in his campaign for the presidency. McGovern ended up with 37.5% of the vote,(1) but he carried New York City,(1) Massachusetts and DC.

In the lead up to the Iranian election of June 14, 2009, Mir Hossein Mousavi held large rallies.(2) The Iranian regime reports he won 33.75% of the vote and carried Tehran.(3)

If one were to judge U.$. elections by the votes or rallies in New York City, Democrats would rarely lose. A candidate such as Walter Mondale clobbers Reagan in places such as New York and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

In the Western media we do see admissions that perhaps the incumbent bought the rural poor vote with potato distribution.


“‘Death to potatoes’ doesn’t roll off the tongue like, ‘yes we can,’ or ‘are you better off today than you were four years ago.’ But potatoes is the campaign slogan of the day in Iran. Presidential elections there are set for Friday. Anti-government students say President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is trying to buy votes by giving out free vegetables to the poor, hence the potato thing.”(4)

Now that the Western media is saying the anti-government protests are about lipstick and showing ankle, I’ll take the free vegetables, thank you.

That’s not to say that I support the current president or oppose the opposition candidate. We internationalists in the imperialist countries are only saying this is not such an unusual or freakish result that it merits some kind of non-stop television coverage as a scandal.

While the media sells papers and tv commercials with talk of bared ankle and dead 27-year-old females, the real story is class. Yes, class is the question, and it is connected with province and education privileges. The opposition carried Tehran. In a pattern not unlike much of the Third World, Tehran has 17.8% of the population but 25.9% of Iran’s income.(5) That’s in a country with a per capita income of $2400 a year. So, I’ll take the free vegetables thank you. The importation of Western bromides of political correctness can and should wait, indefinitely.

Notes:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_1972
2. http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html
3. http://www.iran-daily.com/1388/3423/html/
4. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/06/10/pm_iran_elections/
5. http://www.payvand.com/news/05/oct/1254.html

U.$. role in Iran becomes clearer

June 26, 2009

On June 26 in the Internet edition, USA Today explained more in depth the U.$. role in funding Iranian dissidents. A phony communist front in the united $tates participated in those dissident actions, as MIM started to stress in 2006. The original U.$. role did not receive much publicity, partly because of a non-existent Left in the United $tates.

Now we learn more details:


“After Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a major expansion of the program in 2006 — Congress eventually approved $66 million — the Iranian government arrested activists and closed down their organizations. Several Iranian dissidents, including former political prisoner Akbar Ganji, denounced the U.S. funding as counterproductive.”(1)

Republican David Denehy and ex-Democrat Joe Lieberman both support the program, which Obama is continuing. Despite this fact, there was no Amerikan Left available to demarcate against CIA and State Department activities.

For a partly functional copy of MIM’s original Iran page, go here.

In coordination with Rice and her new program for wimmin’s rights in Iran, the fake communist “RCP” jumped into action. Ever since Lenin’s day, the main tactic of the imperialists in fighting Islam is to take advantage of cultural differences on sex.

Every day the “Jerusalem Post” takes advantage of fears of Islam. With the death of 27-year-old Neda Agha Soltan in Iran protests, we hear:


“It took the tragic killing of Neda Soltan in Iran for the world to realize that the lives – and deaths – of women are at the center of the struggle for human rights against religious extremism.

“The astounding protests taking place in Iran over the past week, since the fraudulent victory of Islamic extremist Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over Mir Hossein Mousavi, is really a story about women.”(2)

This is an example of the commonplace political appropriation tactics of parasitism. Typically, there is no substance to the argument, just a battle over place, questions of what belongs under what rubric. In this example, we are told that the Iranian turmoil is really over the status of wimmin.

The only hard evidence we hear in the whole article that there is some gender contradiction going on to drive the Iranian social movement we see these past few days is as follows:


“Women are the ones arrested in Iran for having an ankle showing or for wearing lipstick. After three such arrests, women go to prison. At the fourth arrest, they get a public lashing.”(2)

No doubt some Iranian wimmin are indeed afraid of their own Muslim culture. Yet there is no proof that the portion of Iranian wimmin so afraid is higher than the portion of Amerikan wimmin afraid of sexual harassment on the street if they show ankle or wear obvious lipstick. There is also no doubt that large portions of wimmin in both Iran and the united $tates are completely comfortable with the culture they display when walking down the street.

Comparing the conditions of wimmin is not the object of the articles in the U.$. and I$raeli media — or indeed, the entire academic establishment of the imperialist countries. Political appropriation is the objective through a simplified code of political correctness taught by lazy tuition-ticket-sellers known as professors.

The idea that Neda is typical of gender repression is also laughable, because there is no proof that the violence in the social movement whether from among the people or by the state is directed more against females. Such political violence directed at females is the exception not the norm in political violence. The article leaves out killings and beatings of males. The reason again is that the substance of the argument is not what matters, just the politeness code that the article writer demonstrates.

In the olden days, we would have said Elana Stokman and like writers went to finishing school to learn proper manners. However, MIM finds emotional arguments about attacks on wimmin such as Neda boorish, because they end up in national chauvinism and warmongering. These emotional sorts of red herrings and lack of comparison arise most frequently in gender-related questions, because politeness codes permit it instead of demanding rigorous internationalism.

We are still lacking a vanguard party of a critical mass of scientists able to put forward concrete arguments about the social road forward. One cannot adopt a gender line spontaneously from the existing code of political correctness and expect to have forward progress.

Notes:
1. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-06-25-iran-money_N.htm
2. Elana Stokman, “It’s about the women,” 23June09, Jerusalem Post

More cards

June 26, 2009

Let me add my amazement at some cards being added to the table.

Some of the cards from the Third World international united front have been downright chilling.

I hope that my readers can discern some here in the united $tates too. Amerikans fight their way.

What is enough and what will happen, I don’t know.

Aesopian junk update

June 24, 2009

English news has been interesting.

Varying editions of news on Henry VIII’s divorce have appeared in British and Amerikkkan presses. Current interpreters say Henry VIII paved the way for English skepticism of the Pope and Europe in general.(1)

Then we heard about the upcoming “show trials” in England.(2) And we wondered if Gordon Brown did not know the expenses scandal was the worst in 300 years, not 200.

Yesterday, the “Guardian” backpedalled.


“In a setback for Brown, who had hoped the inquiry would be held in private, Sir John Chilcot has ruled that all witnesses will be expected to give evidence in public. This will apply across the board unless there are “compelling reasons” in a small number of cases for evidence to be heard in private. This would be if evidence could jeopardise national security or upset allies.”(3) (emphasis ours)

The BBC reports the question as open still.(4)

Tony Blair says a Mideast peace deal could be reached in a year.(5) Somehow the imperialists always need another year. I would say you play a hand of cards, show the cards and then assemble another hand for the next round. Fayyad can have his two years and others can see what is a losing hand.

English aesopian exchange was fun while it lasted.

Notes:
1. Marta Falconi, AP, “Replica of letter on Henry VIII divorce unveiled,” 23June09.
2. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/5599565/Be-open-about-Iraq.html 22June09.
3. Nicholas Watt, “Public grilling for Gordon Brown and Tony Blair in Iraq inquiry,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/23/public-iraq-inquiry-blair-brown
4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8115870.stm
5. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hp8w-675MIYu9YUBYFG1Y8zUAyTA

I$rael backs Obama on Iran

June 22, 2009

See our previous article on the counter-insurgency approach of Kennedy, Kerry, Avakian and Obama

Inside the United $tates, there is clamor for Obama to speak evermore harshly of Iran. To be blunt, the typical Republican Party voter is the less-than-average white who needs kill-the-gook instructions or risk falling into “American Idol” stupor. Such an outlook is good for the Army — simple foreign policy instructions.

Yet I$rael supports Obama on Iran. Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke on NBC.(1) I$rael is Iran’s harshest critic.

The difference of Republicans with Obama is like the difference between the Army and the CIA. It is Obama and RCP’s documented allies Phyllis Chesler and Ray McGovern who recruit to the CIA.

In other Mideast news, the New York Times ran an unusually strong editorial against settlements by a half million I$raelis. All the clamor and dispute is really about getting something on the order of half a million people to move.(2) Yet settler societies are the most difficult to deal with among the exploiter countries and the United $tates is one big one supporting the small one, I$rael — a politically most-difficult situation.

The editorial came as I$rael was appropriating $250 million to expand settlements in the next two years.(3)

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda reportedly offered a truce of ten years if the united $tates withdraws from the Muslim world and stops supporting I$rael. Al Qaeda is seeking Pakistan’s nuclear weapons to use against the united $tates.(4)

Upcoming dates in the Mideast of importance are a forthcoming Hamas speech, the withdrawal of U.$. troops from Iraqi cities and an Egyptian deadline of July 7 set to establish a Palestinian unity government.

Notes:
1. “Netanyahu declines to second-guess Obama on Iran,”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hM3YY58zOf2Iee8g-eFFvZspbAWAD98V3IJO0
2. Tony Judt, “Fictions on the Ground,” 22June09, New York Times.
3. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/98666.htm?sectionid=351020202
4. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/06/2009622112724339957.html

Gook-killer generation unity: politicians and media both

June 21, 2009

Bob Dole and George Bush Sr. are World War II veterans and retired. So too are the Korean War veterans generally out of the political picture. What we have is the rule of the Vietnam killers, the open ones and the remnants of an anti-war movement that obsessed more about five digits of Amerikans dying than the seven digit figure of Vietnamese Amerikkkans killed in the 1960s.

Today Vietnam War vet John McCain backed war on Korea. He has called for boarding northern Korean ships;(1) even though, he knows that northern Korea has promised a military response for a military response. It makes one wonder why China allowed McCain’s pick of ambassador from the United $tates.

This was not the first new war suggested by the Obama administration, which is provocatively following Korean ships around in the ocean. There was also the suggestion to go “onshore” in Somalia to chase down pirates.(2)

That’s not to mention the ongoing bombing in Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. The Yankees used to tell us communism was the reason for these wars. Now there is no Soviet Union, so Islam is the new excuse for imperialism.

It is no accident that MIM’s website got taken down by Democrats when it turned to expanding its articles and section on anti-Asian racism and spying on MIM. The stupid ones will say that when I write about everything else it’s OK, but when I write about Asians it’s “identity politics.” Fuck them: I am long on record saying that those of Korean ethnicity born only because of the U.$. intervention in Korea should not be for identity politics, because it would have been better not to have the Korean War than to have various identities to defend.


Notes:

1. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/21/mccain-board-n-korean-ship-if-we-know-it-has-banned-cargo/
2. http://www.presstv.com/classic/detail.aspx?id=93604&sectionid=351020501