Class struggle in Pakistan

The New York Times has made a backhanded admission that the Taliban is in position to carry out successful class struggle in Pakistan. However, the New York Times then blunders into mandatory-pc-Liberal-graduate seminar language:

“But Pakistan is more complicated than that. Its politics and economics are far more local than national; regional, ethnic and cultural differences are very deep. The mullahs of Swat may be calling for the downtrodden masses to unite, but here in Punjab, religious leaders are still firmly tied to the upper crust.”(1)

The clear message is to give up on uniting class and overcoming U.$.-backed feudal oppression. The clear effect is to point out that which divides the exploited. Such is the goal of all Liberalism, to get lost in all details, promote individualism and hence the upper classes facing off against lower classes divided by individualism. The follow-through will be post-modernism and amorality.

And this graduate seminar talk has polluted Western Marxism to such an extent that Imam Khomeini’s writings show more influence from Lenin and Mao than “Kasama,” Bob Avakian or others of a thin-crust of labor bureaucrats and counterinsurgency experts educated by tuition-ticket-sellers and Fort Bragg. Naturally, the New York Times does some inclusive research to find some leftist tokens in Pakistan to say the religious leaders are tied into the state and landlords in Punjab province.(1)

The New York Times did the right thing by looking at Pakistan, the world’s sixth most populous country.(2) We will now use the New York Times as a whipping boy to demonstrate the linkage between the U.$. labor aristocracy and Liberalism.

If the mullahs in Punjab province were not just a local complication but a far more powerful actor and in fact commanded the entirety of the Pakistan economy and gave the exploited zero — all this for simplification’s sake and to humor our philistine critics — the mullahs would be in charge of at most a GDP of $ 167 billion a year.(3)

By contrast, MIM has already shown, that by just one avenue of exploitation, the dollar bubble –the United $tates gained $758.5 billion in goods and services for nothing in 2006.(4) That’s before addressing Marx’s theory of surplus-value — just straight-up “cashier’s privilege.”

It is in the interests of the imperialists and their various petty-bourgeois partners to turn Pakistan’s attention inward toward its own exploiters. Yet if we have to choose between these Western Liberal exploiters and the Third World, we should choose the Third World every time. The Western Liberals mask the far larger exploitation and sources of economic surplus.

The ideal revolutionary would figure out how to take down both feudalism and imperialism and successful social revolutions do not get led by the stupid. Yet Lenin’s Comintern said in the case of Turkey that attacks on imperialism have to come first, hence alliance with feudal lords. Today, Lenin is more than vindicated, because feudalism stays feudalism, because the imperialist countries suck out the economic surplus that could have destroyed feudalism. The surplus that could be schools and books in the Islamic world instead serves as new digital televisions for the American-Idol-watching beer-bellied Amerikkkan so-called worker. The money arrives borrowed from the Third World and distributed via federal government and trade deficits.

The correct response to complexity is often, “and it cancels out.” To grasp hold of that which can be grasped and advance a situation requires a knowledge of strong causes of social behavior, not knowledge of every last weak force; although, local leaders will not succeed without knowing more of the details than outsiders.

The least false consciousness in the world class-wise is among the Islamic-led forces at the moment. Even as the Islamists fail in uprooting their own feudalism, they make indirect contributions to uprooting that feudalism through correct geopolitics — diplomacy and warfare. It is Iran doing the most to preserve Iraq’s oil rights and attendant oil prices by aiding insurgents in Iraq, not any Western communist global party — sad but true. The most “extremist” Islamists are also the most internationalist and thereby creating the political conditions for successful struggle against the largest sources of exploitation.

1. “Where the Mullahs Are the Upper Crust,”
It was listed as $143.7 billion in another Wiki source pointing to 2007 IMF data.


Tags: , , ,

%d bloggers like this: