Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 16:43:43 -0400
From: Aaron Micheau <amaarchy-AT-compuserve.com>
Subject: For lack of any better ideas, anarchists support dictators...


Message text written by danceswithcarp

> Somalia and Haiti
>are real good examples of Aaron's knee-jerk pre-programed "If we didn't
>think of it, it must be a bad idea," ideology," or more plainly put, "If
>the liberal western states do it, the simplest, non-thinking out, is to
>oppose it."

>I can not think of two more hopeless causes to support than Haitian
>dictators and Somalian war lords.  

As to hopeless causes, i don't know- the Somali warlords survived the
Rangers, and Haiti may well  see more dictators in the future.  What's
hopeless?

As to my "knee-jerk, pre-programmed ideology" - i think it's a fabrication
of yours.  You must have a serious mental block if you think that
opposition to NATO automatically means support of whomever NATO's fighting.
That's pure nonsense, but apparently it's the only method of argument you
have at your disposal.  We've been through the good/evil, black/white
oversimplification issue haven't we? Oh yes, you assured me that you and
roger didn't do that, but somehow it just keeps coming up...  

>I've said it a million times, the kurds are getting fucked, so you
>mentioned one out of three that has some legitimacy.   But, aaron,
>tell me how the average Somalis and Haitians are wirse off because of
>interventions?  

As to the Somalis, the extent to which US forces alleviated suffering from
starvation is a question of some dispute.  i specified that the 'mowed
down'  Somalis were definitely not better off.  Contrary to what you said,
many of the Somalis killed by US troops were not armed thugs, but were
unarmed noncombatants.  You tend to find lots of those in cities.

As to Haiti, the summary is, they once had a popularly supported goverment,
and popular grassroots organizations.  Unfortunately, they chose a
leadership and social policies the US didn't like.  To think the CIA didn't
have a hand in Aristide's overthrow is stretching the boundaries of
credibility- an issue i'd be happy to discuss, but i think is tangential. 
After the US 'help', Haiti had newly suppressed popular groups, lots of
murdered activists, and a president who promised to do nothing the
population actually wanted.  Hence, Haiti was saved from democracy.

i haven't suggested that states, including western states, CAN'T do
beneficial things for people, at least in the short term.  Usually they
DON'T and an instance where they do hasn't come up in our discussions.  i
see, though, that its convenient for you to suggest that i've taken a
categorical position, unrelated to any particular facts, so i'll let you
just go with that, OK?

oh, i forgot to say, it took eight months, but i finally got my name on a
post title to the -AT--list!!!

i consider that a personal achievement.


the butcher-lover