How is it in stating the facts, one is being dogmatic. Islamists are widely used merceneries, period. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32967202 Quoting: Marxist
However, to suggest that capital goes out of its way to keep its market in barbarian dullness is probably the stupidest thing I have read. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32967202
The facts speak for themselves. The masses, even the most dull, still drink Coca Cola and brush with Crest.
Look I am not going to argue with you as to which is better. Capitalism for all its faults has some modicum of meritocracy and due process. In contrast, its predecessor, feudalism (in our age, Islam) was downright brutal.
We all know how capitalism has invaded and brutalised peoples in the span of its age, however, it seeks to globalise and impose its hegemony, consumerism.
The Arab Empire similarly conquers but for territorial reasons.
The former has to default to modernism and due process in order to develop the necessary market. The latter has to default to barbarism and brutality in order to protect the fixed wealths consolidation in the hands of a few.
You can take your pick.
Again, you are not addressing my comments (or arguing them, if you prefer). Syria, Libya and Iraq are not good examples of what you are saying. Libya now is, of course. An Islamic Republic, sharia law, and Coca Cola.
and btw who else besides the West et al. uses aka Al Queda Wahabbis foreign mercenary trained killers? You say "everybody" uses them, implying so should the West in their inevitable role as "planters of the seeds of their own destruction". Jeez. Dogmatic much?
I asked about the highly trained, heavily armed, ideologically hardened militants with hoards of battle experience. aka Al Queda Wahhabis. Who "else" uses them? (your dogmatism is but one variety of Marxism -- he went through several stages himself and wasnt as dogmatic as you,,, re the right tactic should fit the circumstance). Syria, Libya and Iraq were Islamic states with secular features. They all sat at the table of the Islamic Conference headed by gatekeeper of the empire, Saudi Arabia. They all followed the basic thrust of Arabist territorialism, for example in their support, in its various forms, of territorial struggles in faraway places such as Chechnya and Kashmir. Turkey treads a careful path due to its desire to enter the EU.
Saudi Arabia and the Emirates were playing that game -- ideological (Islamic) purity in their eyes,,, Useful idiots spreading chaos for US geopolitic gain in the eyes of the West. Not saying that Chechnya and Kashmir dont have legitimate grievances,,,, but they were coopted early. Your complaint? Syria, Libya and Iraq sat at the table with Saudi Arabia. So? I see no evidence that they bankrolled or provided fighters or expressed solidarity to those faraway causes. Show me SOMETHING which says they did.These states had ample opportunity to strike partnerships outside the Arab Empire and chose not to. They engaged in opportunistic relationships with America and periodically marched to Jeddah to meet with their imperial overlords. They brought their fate upon themselves.
Like Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, India, Brazil and China? They had lots of contact with these countries. What makes you think they didnt? And who else did you have in mind?In contrast Cuba right beside America has stood its ground. China, Maoist extremist, has comfortably slipped into the flow of capital. Vietnam, which defeated the US, now trades robustly with it.
Yeah, but Cuba supports Venezuela, and Venezuela has Mercosur and ALBA and OPEC (non Western orgs), and traded and supported Ghaddafi's NAfrica vision, Assad's social democratic Baathism and pro Palestinian stance. Basically Marxist, what used to be called the non aligned movement still finds common cause with others who believe in non interventionist policies, and against the big elephant in the room you prefer to ignore: the Imperial global Dragon gobbling up national self determination and ever expanding its sphere of control and influence.
And lastly China and Vietnam..., Well, according to your thesis they should be progressing on the path to socialism, Rejecting the "socialism in one country, peasant backwardness" model and adopting robust capitalist modes of production. Marx can sleep well, Right?Sometimes, you people look too hard for bogeymen. Too hard.
Us people? And then there's too smart you, way up there in the clouds.