Pacifism for Whom? An Ode to the God of War

NR_STARBy: Gustavo Aguiar – translated by Jafe Arnold 

Pacifism for Whom? An Ode to the God of War

italian-priest-communion-english-soldiers

“Only the dead have seen the end of war” – Plato 

502377n the 1960’s, at the height of the hippie movement and amidst protests against the Vietnam War, a new type of man emerged: the pacifist man whose anti-militant, progressive and social democratic spirit (with crisp Trotskyists tears) served as the cement for consolidating a redefinition of the revolutionary status established by the old proletarian left of the 19th century. Far from intending to justify the war crimes perpetrated by Yankee detachments in North Vietnamese villages and towns, or the negligible goals that led Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon to deploy tanks and helicopters on the plains of Indo-China, this paper aims to show the way in which the mentality of the New Left eventually engenders thought that is diametrically opposite to the slogans that adorn the signs in the subversive scenario of protests. Today, the same slogans are used as instruments of destabilization around the globe in service of the neocolonialist hyper-powers. Continue reading

Posted in Theory, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Tragedy & Farce: Reconsidering Marxian Superstructural Analysis of Heterodox Social Movements

Small Logo By: Jafe Arnold 

Tragedy & Farce: Reconsidering Marxian Superstructural Analysis of Heterodox Social Movements 

  • Part II: A Heuristic Reconsideration of Marxism and Modernity in Eurasia 

12476003_923782057657004_192987156_n

502377n the introduction to this series, we presented and provided some cursory remarks on the general topic of our investigation. We drew attention to the problematic application of Marx’s thesis concerning the “poetry of the past” (as presented in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte) and the overriding confusion of the relationship between the superstructure (ideology, the “poetry”) and the base (objective class forces) which manifests itself when Marxists analyze and attempt to identify the trajectory of socio-political movements, particularly those syncretic ones in the late modern and post-modern era which often defy normative stereotypes of aesthetics, presenting apparently “unorthodox,” and perhaps contradictory superstructural “cues,” the latter of which, given the faulty precedent set by Marx in contradiction to this own framework, confuses Marxists in their analyses and more often than not leads to erroneous categorizations of otherwise “progressive” movements or states as “reactionary.”

In this installment, we will delve deeper into the theoretical underpinnings of Marxism as an ideology of Modernity with the aim of uncovering the paradoxes which underly the precedent set by Marx in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. We will then proceed to present the general contours along which our study will unfold as we examine Marxism itself through its own lens, reconsider its perception of heterodox socio-political movements and the theoretical and practical implications therein, and trace the trajectory of Marxism’s paradoxical hermeneutics in the direction of a syncretic political ideology.

Marxism, the 20th Century, and the Fourth Political Theory

It has long since become clear that the First Political Theory (1PT), Liberalism, emerged from the 20th century as the victorious ideology of Modernity. This unavoidable fact and its practical implications have been analyzed by a number of scholars in a wide variety of fields. The other two main socio-political theories, Marxism (with its various offshoots) and Fascism (along with its various strains), were played against each other, demonized from all directions, and dealt decisive defeats in crucial spheres at different times by the massive ideological, political-economic, and military complex of the 1PT which since the 1990’s became the nightmarish norm for massive swathes of the world’s population. Now, however, as this “End of History” has revealed itself to become increasingly untenable, intolerable, and undesirable, growing attention has been turned towards the various anti-liberal ideologies of Modernity with an eye towards scavenging and critically analyzing their nominal as well as paradoxical anti-Liberal and anti-Modern elements.[1] Continue reading

Posted in Theory, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The “Polish Question” at a Crossroads

Small Logo By: Jafe Arnold

The “Polish Question” at a Crossroads

Polish-Nationalists

printable-letter-holyunion-over the past several months, the geopolitical role of Poland in relation to the war in Ukraine and Eurasian and European integration projects has once again become an increasingly frequently visited topic. On the one hand, recent presidential and parliamentary elections in Poland have reshuffled the posts of the ruling Atlanticist oligarchy, thereby compelling prominent political issues to be revisited by representatives of the political elite in public debates, PR campaigns, policy deliberations, etc. This has once again brought the acute problems facing Polish statehood and the Atlanticist domination of Poland’s political, economic, cultural, and information spheres into the spotlight.

On the other hand, in addition to a mere rehashing and repetitive exposure of Atlanticism in Poland, recent political developments including the final electoral defeat of the post-socialist Left, the ascent of the Law and Justice party to power, the rise and entanglement of new oppositional forces, the reemergence of nationalism, and the steady but sure growth of anti-Atlanticist initiatives in various spheres, have threatened to transform the framework of Polish political and geopolitical discourse. In short, the crucial questions of Polish statehood, geopolitics, and civilizational identity are once again up for debate, and their reemergence within the context of the heightened confrontation between the Eurasian and Atlanticist projects present various new opportunities, paradigms, paradoxes, and questions which deserve analysis.

Continue reading

Posted in Theory, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Changing Turkish-Russian Relations

Small Logo By: Paul Antonopoulos

Changing Turkish-Russian Relations

Turkey appears unable to grasp Russia’s resolve and long-term planning 

putinerdogandec2014

printable-letter-englishtowne-november 24 2015 will forever mark the turning in Turkish and Russian relations. The Russian Sukhoi Su-24M tactical bomber jet was shot down by two Turkish F-16 Fighting Falcon jets. The Russian bomber was conducting sorties upon the request from Damascus. Despite Putin immediately calling for Turkey’s military attaché in Moscow, Ankara had refused to apologise for the downing of the jet. The attack resulted in a pilot being shot down by Turkmen Islamists who was parachuting to land, and a Russian commando also killed in the rescue operation for the second pilot. Putin in speaking with the Hashemite King Abdullah II of Jordan, described the attack as a ‘stab in the back, carried out against us by accomplices of terrorists.’

su-25-sbit

Continue reading

Posted in Strategy & Tactics | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Rise and Transformation of American Militarism and Imperialism after World War Two

Small Logo  By:  Andrés Barrera González, – PhD in Political Science and Sociology, Profesor Titular at the University Complutense of Madrid.

Edited by: Joaquin Flores

The Rise and Transformation of American Militarism and Imperialism after World War Two

us-Imperialism_osu.edu_

Part I:  Europe After World War Two

old-english-calligraphy-alphabet-throughout the 19th century world affairs were dominated by Europe’s great colonial and imperial powers: Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, and the Ottomans on the south-eastern fringes of the continent.  Rivalry and competition for the world’s resources between the European ‘great powers’ and colonial metropolises reached a peak at the end of the century. And this was the background setting that brought Europe to war and catastrophe during 1914-18.  It was the first act in the dramatic demise of Europe’s world hegemony.  The second and final act of the fall of Europe as the axis of global power took place during the 1939-45 war, which again had the continent as its main theatre of operations. World War Two caused unprecedented material destruction, and it took an appalling toll in human life. It also led to the first nuclear holocaust, triggered by the arbitrary decision of the government of the United States to test-drop recently built atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 [i].

As a consequence of the war, most of Europe (including the Soviet Union) was left thoroughly devastated and worn out; which set the ground for the uncontested hegemony of the United States, given that its territory and economy remained untouched by the disasters of the war.  Thus Western Europe became fully dependent, and increasingly subordinated to the United States in all fundamental dimensions: economic, political, and military.  A turn of events that was reinforced with the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1949; namely to counter the perceived-stated threat coming from a former war ally, the Soviet Union, unwilling to yield to the emerging world power configuration headed by the United States. The USA, its Western European ‘allies’ stalking along, thus raised the stakes in its confrontation with the Soviet Union, declaring the inauguration of the Cold War.

Continue reading

Posted in Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments