Revolutionarys are terrorsts now?

[xx_refused_xx]

Have anyone noticed that if a leftest force goes againts the government they are not terrorsts? i think thats just capitalist media bullshit, the FARCs are not terrorsts one bit, what do you people think?

[STI]

"Terrorists" are defined as any combatants not uniformed with a registered army (or something stupid like that). The definition is so broad that anybody would fit into it.

[jwijn]

Although I do sympathize with the FARC, it is simply not true to say they are not terrorists one bit. They have been known to make attacks upon civilian targets, and do fuel the drug trade. We must make an effort to not simply absolve a group or entity of all crimes simply because they espouse similar views.

[h&s]

As you say, denouncing all revolutionaries as terrorists (or 'terrsts' as Bush would say) is capitalist media bullshit. The borgeoise have cottoned on to the fact that no-one likes being bombed, and thus launched their war on terror as a cover for doing anything against anyone they want. When people question this they are told that the revolutionary groups in the countries involved (be they legitimate revolutionaries or not - it doesn't matter) are terrorists and a threat to security.
Bascially revolutionaries are being used as the terrorist bogeymen to wage wars against.

BTW,

Although I do sympathize with the FARC, it is simply not true to say they are not terrorists one bit. They have been known to make attacks upon civilian targets
Which would make them terrorists....

[Conghaileach]

An English journalist said that terrorism is simply the violence we don't like. I think that's a farily accurate way to describe the use of a term that has essentially become meaningless.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

But in reality it's everyone's who opposes (militantly) the dominating force.

[Kez]

Aight comrade,

Well, i think its important to recognise this is not a new phenomenon, governments have always singled out revolutionaries or rebels as terrorists in order to increase repression against them and other groups such as trade unions, eg in Columbia.

On the issue of FARC, we must look at how much support they have. We shouldnt simply denounce them as narco-terrorists however much we disagree with their methods (such as non-involvement with the labour movement).

We must analyse them carefully, and tell workers and peasants in Columbia that although FARC has certain positive aims, it would be better to use other methods, such as work inside the trade unions and, if there are, any mass workers based organisations (such as the Communist Party or Social Democratic Party for example).

It is secterian and counter-productive to simply denounce them as terrorists. When having discussions we should be careful who our audience is and what our aims are.

in struggle

[Kobbot 401]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 02:42 AM
Have anyone noticed that if a leftest force goes againts the government they are not terrorsts? i think thats just capitalist media bullshit, the FARCs are not terrorsts one bit, what do you people think?
You have to remember that we dont call people terrorists anymore, no that would be bad. We need to call them "insergents", makeing it seem even worese, that some one can go in and do something much more secreativly.

[bolshevik butcher]

FARC isn't that just a big drug gang with solitely socialist opinions?

[xx_refused_xx]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 18 2004, 06:22 PM
FARC isn't that just a big drug gang with solitely socialist opinions?
thanks for you're input and i'm always open to new opinions. :) but here's mine, i think the FARC's way of fighting is not the best way because it's making them self look bad, and about the drugs, i see it as the only way they can support there army, look our government gives the columbia righ-wingers 3 billion a year and give them weapons and supplys, now how would the FARC get money to buy there weapons? and knowing that coca is the richest plaint there so yeah why not use it to support them? feel free to reply and correct me as you wish:) thanks

[Conghaileach]

FARC impose a kind of 'revolutionary tax' on cocoa traffickers in areas under their control, in exchange for safe passage. This is more-or-less the extent of FARC's involvement with the Colombian drug trade. There are probably individual FARC members who play a bigger part in the business, but the FARC as an organisation can hardly be called narco-terrorist (unlike, for instance, Ronald Reagan).

[sin miedo]

Yes, the FARC organization does not (at least from what I've read) actually grow and involve iself in smuggling drugs. Like Congy said, they impose a tax on all transactions involving drugs. Since Cocaine is at such a high premium and the growing infrastructure is so cemented, most peasants in Colombia grow it. Most peasants, I think, would prefer to grow other kinds of crops, and return to a more sustainable growing pattern (as it is now, a disguting amount of rain-forest acearage is clear-cut annually to expose new soil. Rain forest soil is low in nutrients and can only sustain a few years of continuous plantings and harvesting).

While I understand the FARCs wariness of re-entering Colombian politics, they must take this route. The war in Colombia has already killed much too many innocents and has let right-wing paramilitaries all but take control of the government (although this is changing). The war cannot be won by either side and a peaceful alternative must be sought.

As for the term "terrorist," it is just a term. It is neither "bad" or "good." It denotes some individual or group that uses "terror" (violent or desructive acts used to intimidate people or governments) as a form of coercion to attempt to further their particular agenda. Depending on where your sympathies lay and the type of violent or destructive act you're willing to put up with, terrorism could be a good thing. The type of actions taken by the Irish republicans between 1916 and 1921 are all considered terrorist acts, but I personally would have condoned all of them.

[chebol]

Who would like volunteer to go tell the FARC-EP to "work inside trade unions" or in any mass organisations (as if this is the only style of "acceptable" struggle, while armed struggle is not)? Actually, if we knew anything about the history of Colombia, we wouldn't be making such silly statements, like condemning them for 'non-involvement' in the labour movement.

First, I'd ask why the FARC-EP ought to change their strategy just because a few western 'leftists' don't like it.

Second, and more importantly, a few points.
The FARC-EP arose out of the ashes of the civic left in colombia, when the right began to slaughter thousands upon thousands of communists, unionists (they still do- Colombia has the highest mortality rate for union leaders in the world), and anyone else who was slightly progressive.

The FARC-EP have tried repeatedly to work in electoral alliances with various parties and movements, however, during the associated ceasefires the Government has been responsible for slaughtering- again- anyone associated with the movement. Despite this, the FARC-EP do work with other organisations, especially peasant associations, and have relations (not all that cordial at the moment) with the union movement. Further, they have initiated the rebuilding of the Left in Colombia, with the creation of the Clandestine Communist Party of Colombia (clandestine because it would otherwise be illegal anyway). The PCCC is linked to, but not run by, the FARC-EP, and has an increasing and important presence in most cities and towns, usually in poorer neighbourhoods, which, like the territory controlled by the FARC-EP, are increasingly run autonomously from the Government. The FARC-EP has great (and organised) support in both the cities and the countryside. = Mass organisation.

Do I like some of the FARC-EP's tactics? No. I especially tend not to agree with killing civilians.
Do I still support the FARC-EP? Yes, if only in words, because the history of Colombia in the past half-century has left no other viable option for such a broad movement as the Bolivarian Movement of Colombia- it must fight to defend the territory and other gains it has made.
Nevertheless, the FARC-EP have made repeated calls to the Government to call a ceasefire (the FARC-EP and ELN called a unilateral ceasefire about a year ago, which has recently been called off). They have tried to negociate hostage exchanges- to no avail. The last time they tried, via Kofi Annan in Ecuador, their negociator, Simon Trinidad, was captured and now is being extradited to the US.

In short, the onus is NOT on the FARC-EP to try (again) to enter 'legitimate' politics, it is on the Government to safeguard the rights of all citizens to engage in the political process as they see fit. The Government has proven itself repeatedly unwilling to do so, and the likelihood is another massacre if the FARC-EP were to put their eggs entirely in that basket.

On the matter of Coca (NOT "Cocoa"). The inhabitants of much of the area controlled by the FARC-EP have no viable alternative crops other than Coca, due largely to the lack of infrastructure- the FARC-EP are working on this, creating roads, etc, but it takes time- and lack of a market for ANOTHER hundred thousand bananas. The FARC-EP, while ideologically against drug use and trade, regard the problem as one of survival for the people, and an issue for which the West must take responsibility, by removing the market, or helping to remove the constraints on the Colombian people. It is audacious for those of us in the West to expect that these Colombian people not produce the only viable crop they have to live off because we (our governments, etc) won't let them acheive a better economy independent of our meddling in their Sovereignty- because we are addicted to the substance!!! Let them starve so we don't have to deal with the drug problem and it's root cause in our own alienation!! Bollocks!
The FARC-EP collect a tax on the harvested LEAF only! The manufacturing or trade of any coca biproduct in FARC-EP territory is extremely illegal, and no revenue is accorded from it. In total, less than 4% of the profits from coca production in Colombia are retained by the FARC-EP. About 30-40% belongs to the AUC, Army, and associated producers and refiners, and the majority goes into the swiss pockets of the dealers.
The FARC-EP collect tax off other things too (anyone got shares in BHP/ Bluescope???????) that take place in their territory. So they neither need nor want drug money for their on-going struggle.