[Greg A. Young]

Quote:

Aren't almost all national/local bourgeois settlers/imperialists?

Not even close.

In the U.S., you have the Black bourgeoisie. In the third world countries you have the patriotic bourgeoisie that want to develop their own industries to compete with the imperialist countries. Also you have the local comprador bourgeoisie who get a slice of the imperialist profits in exchange for acting as agents of industrialized nations capitalists, etc.

[TheRussianLord]

And MTW happens to like some bourgeousie more then others.

[redkuze]

Red Rebel wrote:

Aren't almost all national/local bourgeois settlers/imperialists?

Greg A. Young answered this one better than I could.

TheRussianLord wrote:

And MTW happens to like some bourgeousie more then others.

When under imperialist attack yes. I would rather temporarily side with the anti-imperialist patriotic bourgeoisie when amerika attacks the 3rd world than fight them and amerika at the same time.

Red Rebel wrote:

The British would have done the same thing the Americans did just not as quickly.

True enough, but hindsight is 20/20. And sometimes your stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you gotta take a side.

Red Rebel wrote:

So it was Bennies fault for being born a settler in the United States? That because his faimly immigrated to the United States he is at fault because of who he was born to? That he had any control over this?

It wasn't his fault he was born a settler, but he chose to fight for the settlers.

This is why John Brown is a hero of National Liberation and Benjamin Franklin is not. It was not John Brown's fault he was born to an oppressor/settler nation (the same nation Benjamin Franklin belonged to), but he chose to fight for the oppressed. Franklin chose to fight for the oppressor.

Red Rebel wrote:

We want more? The AFL-CIO just wanted "more." I'd much rather prefer what James Connolly said, "Our demands most moderate are - We only want the earth!"

And materially, more for the 1st world means more super-exploitation of the 3rd world.

Red Rebel wrote:

Marx 101: more developed societies overthow underdeveloped societies.

Slave societies overthrow communal societies-
Feudal societies overthrow slave ones-
Capitalists overthrew feudal societies-
Socialists overthrow capitalists-

And Maoist-Third Worldists overthrow settler societies. It sucks sometimes, it's bloody, it may require deportation, but that's what happens.

[Kirov]

Hey redkuze, is Osama bin Laden a national liberation hero?

[Greg A. Young]

Quote:

And MTW happens to like some bourgeousie more then others.

Is this supposed to be scandalous? This is an orthodox Leninist position. Orthodox Leninist strategy calls for supporting those bourgeois movements that are in the crosshairs of imperialism. This is why Marxist-Leninists find the treachery of the I"C"P so repulsive.

[TheRussianLord]

I'm just pointing out his hypocrisy in first blasting me for advocating playing the imperialists off each other as opportunism, and then advocating similar things himself.

[redkuze]

TheRussianLord wrote:

I'm just pointing out his hypocrisy in first blasting me for advocating playing the imperialists off each other as opportunism, and then advocating similar things himself.

What I "blasted" you for is when you said that you would be willing to support the imperialists over the patriotic bourgeoisie. Which as Greg A. Young pointed out is exactly what the Iraqi "Communist" Party did, and are rightly hated as imperialist lackeys. He correctly called it treachery.

Just one more revision of his line from TheRussianLord.

Here is the example:

TheRussianLord wrote:

From the very beginning I have said that as communists we can support either nationalists or imperialists...

[TheRussianLord]

Quote mining. Awesome. Why do you never bother to contextualize what people say?

[Rabble Rouser]

Ahmed Ben Bella, FLN guerrilla fighter against the French and first President of Algeria

He launched much-needed land reforms and was a supporter of autogestion, or workers' self-mangement (as opposed to top-down central government control). He was overthrown in a coup by Minister of Defence Houari Boumédienne, who had been one of his close friends and allies. Boumédienne proceeded to abolish the constitution and political institutions of Algeria, shifting the centre of power from the National Liberation Front (FLN) to the army. He abandoned autogestion in favour of a programme of state-driven industrialisation (which inevitably took on a top-down, regimented flavour consistent with military rule).