Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:50:23 +1000
From: "-AT-ndy" <andy-AT-xchange.anarki.net>
Subject: Re: AUT: Taliban apologetics (bullshit)


Thomas Seay wrote:

> <<Many Western lefties are saying the Taliban is so
> bad we cannot defend Afghanistan against imperialism.>>
>
> I would like to dispute Scott's points and hear comments from others.

Are these actually Scott's points? I thought they was fwded by Scott
from some other source: "the Communist Workers’ Group, New
Zealand/Aotearoa section of the Liaison Committee of Militants for a
Revolutionary Communist International (LCMRCI or CEMICOR). CEMICOR has
sections in Peru, Bolivia, Colombia and New Zealand..."

Mao more than ever!

Anyways, I wonder: how do/should I/you/we 'oppose' both the Taliban and
US intervention? I think one problem with opposing the Taliban is that,
well, they're over there in Afghanistan, and I'm over here in Australia,
so it seems to me that opposing Australian support for the US
intervention is a more practical objective in the short-term at least.

What would be the most appropriate form for this opposition to take?
Should this opposition take the form of engaging in anti-war
rallies/marches? Might it be extended to (financial and other forms of)
support for RAWA? Are there other 'progressive'/revolutionary forces in
Afghanistan that are worthy of support?

> I oppose both the Taliban and US intervention.  I really dont see how
> defending the Taliban is a progressive act.

Neither do I. I wonder if that means I'm one of those Western lefties
the Communist Workers' Group refers to in their polemic? Oh well.
There's probably worse fates than being condemned by the New
Zealand/Aotearoa section of the Liaison Committee of Militants for a
Revolutionary Communist International (LCMRCI or CEMICOR).

-AT-ndy.



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---