Collecting money for resistance?

[A New Era]

Shouldn't we collect money to the Iraqi resistance? Or any other resistance that fights the U.S., with the exception of the unusually cruel ones (like the Taliban, who got enough money anyways)?


If so, how would collecting money for the resistance take place?

[An archist]

Wich resistance group were you thinking of exactly?

[Comrade B]

If you live in the US it is treason to give money to an anti-US armed force. I am not up for the idea of spending 10 to 30 to my life in prison

[Holden Caulfield]

Shouldn't we collect money to the Iraqi resistance? Or any other resistance that fights the U.S., with the exception of the unusually cruel ones (like the Taliban, who got enough money anyways)?


If so, how would collecting money for the resistance take place?

i dont think we would make a differance or get it over there, and make sure it went to the right people even if we did,

we can help fund antifascists world wide and particularly in Russia for hospital bills (they are getting a hard time of everybody) and lawyers etc.

check out the antifa forum for the thread

[Magdalen]

Shouldn't we collect money to the Iraqi resistance? Or any other resistance that fights the U.S., with the exception of the unusually cruel ones (like the Taliban, who got enough money anyways)?


If so, how would collecting money for the resistance take place?

I'll admit the idea sounds interesting on paper, but organising such an exercise would be next to impossible.

Firstly, we could be charged with treason for holding such a collection. (Technically we could be charged with conspiracy to commit treason for even discussing one) Secondly, we would have to overcome the difficulty of transferring the money to these faraway countries, without alerting any law enforcement agencies in the process, and thirdly, we would have to come to a decision as to which resistance organisations deserved our support and which didn't.

A possible safer alternative at this time would be to financially support these organisations indirectly, by acquiring products which are produced by their supporters. (Such as Palestinian dates etc.)

[Sam_b]

The Iraqi resistance is fragmented and abstract so it would be exceptionally difficult.

[Red_or_Dead]

Shouldn't we collect money to the Iraqi resistance? Or any other resistance that fights the U.S., with the exception of the unusually cruel ones (like the Taliban, who got enough money anyways)?


No. The enemy of my enemy is not necesarily my friend. Iraqi resistance may be anti-imperialist, but these guys are reactionary as hell. Maybe, maybe PKK, but not the Shiite or Sunni militias, or anyone remotely similar to them.

And of course, there is the problem of getting the money to them and the possibility of ending up in prison. Needles to say, I dont fancy serving 30 years behind bars, just so that a fundametalist can get his new Kalashnikov.

[Winter]

No. The enemy of my enemy is not necesarily my friend. Iraqi resistance may be anti-imperialist, but these guys are reactionary as hell.

You're right. They shouldn't be friends to socialists, but they can be helpful.


You have to consider that the Iraqi people see these reactionaries as their only hope of freedom from U.S. imperialism. Iraqi socialists ought to see the strength and support these militants have obtained and use them just for the mere function of ousting invaders, an external conflict.

First things first, they want the imperialist gone asap. I'm willing to bet most supporters of these militants do not neccesarilly agree with %100 of their dogmas. Just because these groups get rid of invaders does not mean they are going to gain control of the country and make the place into a theocracy. Once the imperialists would be defeated, an internal power struggle between multiple groups, socialists included, would occur. So long as the U.S. is spreading "democracy" in Iraq, socialism has absolutely no chance their.

[Red_or_Dead]

You have to consider that the Iraqi people see these reactionaries as their only hope of freedom from U.S. imperialism. Iraqi socialists ought to see the strength and support these militants have obtained and use them just for the mere function of ousting invaders, an external conflict.

First things first, they want the imperialist gone asap. I'm willing to bet most supporters of these militants do not neccesarilly agree with %100 of their dogmas. Just because these groups get rid of invaders does not mean they are going to gain control of the country and make the place into a theocracy. Once the imperialists would be defeated, an internal power struggle between multiple groups, socialists included, would occur. So long as the U.S. is spreading "democracy" in Iraq, socialism has absolutely no chance their.

While I understand and agree with the use of those militias to end an external invasion, I must say I am very doubtfull that an internal conflict will take place if the coalition is driven out.

Basicly, I think that regardless of how much do the fighters believe or not believe in those dogmas, if they win, Iraq will become a theocracy. The state apparatus will be highly reactionary, resembling that of Iran. I dont support that, and Im sure that no leftist would seriously support a theocratic dictatorship.

I guess the involvment of socialists in post-liberation Iraq is somewhat debatable. I dont see it as an important movement.

[Ismail]

Waste of time if not impractical The Iraqi resistance is doing fine on its own. If the Iraqis don't like US troops in their nation, they will drive them out and show their own strength. Use that money towards building a vanguard party or Marxist books for people or something.

[Saorsa]

This reminds me of the famous Che quote. A group of American Marxist students had come to Cuba and were meeting with him, and one of them asked "what can we do to help the revolution in Latin america?"

To which Che replied "Make a revolution in the USA".

That money would be better put towards supporting you're own socialist organisation in you're own country.

[Colonello Buendia]

sending supplies to the taleban/iraqi resistance is just like what the yanks did. and look how that turned out. in other words no

[dez]

This reminds me of the famous Che quote. A group of American Marxist students had come to Cuba and were meeting with him, and one of them asked "what can we do to help the revolution in Latin america?"

To which Che replied "Make a revolution in the USA".

That money would be better put towards supporting you're own socialist organisation in you're own country.

Oh yes, Che Guevara, one of the icons of internationalism in the whole world would support this "socialism in your own country" bullcrap.
You misinterpret him.
Che Guevara traveled through africa and latin america to spread socialism and was highly critical of the socialist authorities of the time because of the lack of enthusiasm on that task.
This quote was due to the belief that there should be a revolution in the imperialist countries in order to really promote socialism worldwide.
Like a domino effect, a revolution in the US and EU would make the world follow.

[Chapter 24]

Oh yes, Che Guevara, one of the icons of internationalism in the whole world would support this "socialism in your own country" bullcrap.
You misinterpret him.
Che Guevara traveled through africa and latin america to spread socialism and was highly critical of the socialist authorities of the time because of the lack of enthusiasm on that task.
This quote was due to the belief that there should be a revolution in the imperialist countries in order to really promote socialism worldwide.
Like a domino effect, a revolution in the US and EU would make the world follow.

So you disagree with the theory that if first world imperialist nations were to have their own revolutions that the rest of the world would follow in turn? So the idea that if the U.S. had its own revolution then the brougeois regimes of the U.K., Japan, and other states would subsequently fall is ludicrous? What's more like: a revolution in Guatemala that in turn results in a full-scale Latin American revolution; or a revolution in Brazil that does this same thing?

[dez]

So you disagree with the theory that if first world imperialist nations were to have their own revolutions that the rest of the world would follow in turn? So the idea that if the U.S. had its own revolution then the brougeois regimes of the U.K., Japan, and other states would subsequently fall is ludicrous? What's more like: a revolution in Guatemala that in turn results in a full-scale Latin American revolution; or a revolution in Brazil that does this same thing?

No, I pretty much agree with that.

Read my post again.

[KrazyRabidSheep]

No. The enemy of my enemy is not necesarily my friend.This (you beat me to it since I haven't frequented "Politics" recently)

[JimmyJazz]

I can't tell if the op is under the impression that we have to take a side in every conflict ever, or if (s)he genuinely thinks there are reasons the Iraqi resistance is worth supporting.

In any case, the Left has its own representatives in Iraq:

US Labor Against the War's "Iraq Labor Solidarity Fund" (http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?list=type&type=77)

If RevLeft started raising money for this fund, I would definitely give. Related stuff:

May Day 2008 Statement from the Iraqi Labour Movement To the Workers and All Peace Loving People of the World (http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=15826)

(http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-Iraq-Communist-Movements/dp/1931859140/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218949006&sr=1-2)A People's History of Iraq: The Iraqi Communist Party, Workers' Movements and the Left 1924-2004 (Paperback) (http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-Iraq-Communist-Movements/dp/1931859140/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218949006&sr=1-2)

I mean, the political struggle is necessary, but let's not get so caught up in the political struggle that we forget its economic basis: workers vs. capitalists.