On May 19 2008, MIM Lite will retire from politics.

In a materialist spirit, we have pointed to various people who have the inherent position to take over from us. The judgments of those we have pointed to for more tasks may be somewhat different than ours, but the required awareness is available.

At this time, the international proletariat has earned the greatest flattery we have seen since 1980. To cool down the struggle, the imperialists found it necessary to prop up Barack Obama and even pay for his attempt to win over the reactionary elements of society found in the white “working class.” There is no greater dust to throw in the eyes of the oppressed than this multi-millionaire trained in all the counter-insurgency arts of the left-wing of parasitism.

Up to now, it was the Clinton family who had studied communism the most to defeat it. They did not fear an intellectual image. Now the imperialists are closer to selecting as president a member of the Kennedy wing of finance capital than they have been since 1968.

The lurch toward the Kennedy wing would not have occurred without the fighting by the Islamic Resistance and anti-Amerikan organization of the national bourgeoisie globally. As long as the revolutionaries remember that there are not five people with revolutionary judgment ability in the united $tates, they will be fine. We only try to report the situation.

The Kennedy mystique connected to two assassinations is useful knowledge for the international working class, to dispell illusions. Yes, “they” out there can assassinate even the U.$. president and a senator from the leading family. This shows that there are various forces at work in society, that those at the top are not totally in control. However, what is most important about the Kennedy family is its advancement of intelligence techiques in class struggle against the globally exploited. The role of the Kennedys is to befuddle the oppressed and exploited with psy-war and covert operations. Despite this, the fact that this is so is not hidden from view. A visit to the public museum near Fort Bragg will demonstrate the leading role of the Kennedys in oppression.

The McCain wing of imperialism is active at this time, because U.$. imperialism has decided at the collective level that it must move somewhere at least somewhat to avoid being a sitting duck for anti-Amerikan fire. According to the State Department, the race between Clinton and Obama has been good for five points in global opinion polls of U.$. image. Likewise, the Obama vs. McCain contest will serve in an attempt to blame all of Amerikan imperialism’s ills on George W. Bush.  This trick is something that the globally oppressed should not fall for. The problem is that Amerikans are bourgeoisified and the plurality of the world’s exploiters without much concrete everyday sense of the world’s majority of exploited.

Obama also campaigned in West Virginia to expand the military. He will no doubt attempt to shoe-horn more oppressed nationality people into the empire, especially as cannon fodder. His overall view is to confuse the distribution of super-profits to privileged minorities inside U.$. borders with a progressive dynamism he attributes to the white working class. His road is that of Martin Luther King super-profit re-distribution. The upside is that we can always hope that Obama’s success will siphon off the last of the phony Marxists and make them come out in the open for their true party leader–Howard Dean.

The Democrats are likely to add some Bo Weevils to their southern contingent in the Congress. The public may decide with Democrats in charge in Congress, they want McCain as president. No one can say for sure at this point. The Republicans will have to offer some changes to be “competitive.”

International readers will note that even with an approval rating of Congress in the teens and Bush in the twenties, with over 80% saying the country is “off track,” there is no raucous presence in the streets as there would be in many countries with a younger and more exploited profile. Even at this time, the changes the united $tates will go through will be minimal, more image than substance, because there is no white proletariat.

When forced, we will respond to noteworthy political events through imperialist channels. We forfeit any leadership role going forward.

Retreat

April 13, 2008

Mao said that the first thing we have to do is separate our friends and enemies.

At this moment, MIM Lite is unable to separate friends from enemies and as a result our ground game is in tatters. So we need to underscore what we said in the last posting.

We are used to operating in a stable environment. Now we have many more friends than usual, but we treat them as enemies and that has to be frustrating for them.

Our only defense is that to grind us down to this point of disorientation, the enemy had to spend much in resources and then suffer major blowback. Though we are not in position to win by having a revolution right now, a few people can cost the enemy quite a bit.

Some of the people now appearing as friends may be new secret enemies and we just do not have the ability to discern at the moment.

We are going to coast without giving up our strategic position. Our apologies go to those we have wronged during this new period for us.

We would say to our international friends that we are in strong position which is why we are trying to emphasize conserving it and not making more mistakes. Even as we retreat, we hold the ability to deal new setbacks to the enemy.

With much swirling about us, our international friends should avoid public association with us. It’s possible that we will be discredited with a new campaign of calumny. With MIM Lite on vacation, and card initiation in others’ hands we minimize risks. MIM Lite’s ground and public Internet game will pause, except as necessary for counter-attacks. We may continue to operate in the background.

The original MIM website was good, and that is another reason we need to admit to disorientation and an inability to sort out enemies and friends in the new situation. It’s a kind of cross-time accountability.

 

Disorder under Heaven

April 12, 2008

MIM Lite is having a little turbulence in the battle to defend itself. We urge our international allies to consider taking the biggest card or at least the initiation of the cards from our hands.  Of course it should be the people most directly playing.

MIM Lite will continue to evaluate the international situation, but we find it responsible and accountable at this point to admit we may simplify our game further. One difficulty of being out of state power is that it may be difficult sometimes to evaluate accurately who is in the best position to lead.

We are considering a vacation till September except for defensive operations. We will start a review of defensive operations April 16.

On April 1, the New York Times published another article along the lines that Hamas in the Gaza Strip is still preparing war and is unprepared for peace–”In Gaza, Hamas’s Insults to Jews Complicate Peace.”(1) MIM Lite would like to point out the hidden bourgeois diversion in this sort of article.

In I$rael there is a bourgeoisified Palestinian population. For a campaign of calumny against Palestinians to occur would violate norms of political correctness. In contrast, in Gaza there is no economic reason for Jews to clamor to live there, quite the contrary with the economic blockade I$rael has in place. We can say that the reason Palestinian society is not integrated is a lack of imperialism, a lack of super-profits to redistribute.

Palestinian homogeneity with regard to Jews is a hidden class struggle. The Palestinians inside I$rael’s borders are the disproportionate share of the Palestinian bourgeoisie. I$rael would be spreading war propaganda against its own people if it adopted Hamas’s ways in parallel.

Yet despite the lack of some kinds of war propaganda against Arabs in I$rael, I$rael always kills a multiple of Arabs relative to Jews killed by Palestinians.(2) Hence, the question of war propaganda itself is an unequal one.

Hamas considers itself at war with I$rael. The Oslo process failed to deliver as far as ordinary Palestinians are concerned. Pointing out Hamas’s war footing is a strange attempt to equate I$raeli and Gaza society, especially given that Hamas’s popularity arose thanks to the failures of Fatah’s involvement in the Oslo process.

The search for easy parallelisms in Mideast peace will frustrate the creation of peace. The classic approach to easy parallelism is a search for an underlying unified working class. Noam Chomsky and the late Edward Said suggested a straight-forward class-oriented binational socialism to solve the Mideast’s problems. They both ignored that I$rael has been bourgeoisified in its entirety for a long time.

What we must know is that the Barack Obamas of the world are the minority of the minority. Their vision of integrationist cooperation with class underyling only works where there is an economic resource to share. The economic conditions of Gaza and I$rael diverge by a factor of 20. That is the norm for the world, not the Black petty-bourgeoisie of the united $tates which is a tiny subsection of a thin stratum of the world called Amerikans.

The Chomsky-Said road is closed but still fogs the minds of many. Likewise, a Mao arising to lead occupied Palestinians to victory over colonial occupiers seems unlikely at this moment. The oppressed Palestinians and oppressor I$raelis are too evenly matched for Mideast peace to occur via a classic anti-colonial liberation. This leaves the possibility of an imperialist-brokered peace as the only available option of this moment.

One possibility in the Mideast would be analagous to South Africa where the whites finally agreed to give Blacks the vote. It was a case of a rich white minority agreeing to rule by representatives of the exploited Blacks. However, this would mean the end of Zionism, a nationalism that thus far seems unwilling to give up. The whites in South Africa faced a declining economy and management shortage that a rigid economic system would not allow correction of. In contrast, I$rael thus far seems convinced that it can go on economically without the consent of the occupied Palestinians.

This leaves the possibility of an imperialist-brokered two-state solution. However, these two states are not parallel. An ironic effect of the New York Times article will be to priortize the interests of the Palestinian bourgeoisie inside I$raeli borders. Integrationist norms of political correctness serve the class interests of Arab-I$raelis. However, if there is to be a two-state solution, the Arab-I$raelis’ interests will have to be subordinate to those of the far more down-trodden occupied Palestinians. What the occupied Palestinians need will have to come first, not what the Arabs inside I$raeli borders need.

This raises the next point. While Arab-I$raelis do not face quite the equivalent propaganda that Jews face from Hamas, it is Hamas that must represent the Palestinians, not the integrationist Palestinians. Yet when we examine the question, we find that I$rael does not negotiate with Hamas, even while articles appear criticizing Hamas’s failure to end war-time propaganda.

In the history of war, war-time propaganda ends when wars do. The exploited Palestinians see no reason to end the war yet. Even Fatah-affiliated Palestinians cannot look at Oslo as a great victory. Economic conditions will have to change first, as they did for Germans under Allied occupation for instance. Obsessing on the current political stance of Hamas is missing that if the imperialists want to broker a peace, they are going to have to change economic conditions first. The interests of political correctness will have to be run over roughshod. Pretending as if the war could end without a peace agreement or steps satisfying the Palestinian population is missing the lack of parallelism in the Mideast conflict.

Notes:

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/world/middleeast/01hamas.html?em&ex=1207195200&en=563e0fff71052510&ei=5087%0A ; see also, http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSL01467374

2. http://www.africasia.com/services/news/newsitem.php?area=mideast&item=080401035730.ujhucrt1.php

As we promised you our readers, we have added MIM Theory 14 to the old MIM etext website. We still owe you issues 1-13.

MIM Theory 14 is here (large file over a megabyte)

MIM Theory 14 earned a wide readership and frequent academic citation. Perhaps when we find the other issues, they will obtain as much interest. 

An I$raeli paper reported on a March statement by Osama Bin Laden. Most reports left out too much material from the Osama Bin Laden statement.

The paper explained:

“Among what Al-Jazeera newscasters said were excerpts from a new recording, Bin-Laden said: ‘My speech is about the Gaza siege and the way to retrieve it and the rest of Palestine from the hands of the Zionist enemy. Our enemies did not take it by negotiations and dialog, but with fire and iron. And this is the way to get it back.’

“The Saudi-born Islamic fundamentalist linked the jihad against Israel with the Iraqi insurgency: ‘The nearest field of jihad today to support our people in Palestine is the Iraqi field.’

“Bin-Laden added that those of ‘our brothers in Palestine who could not join the jihad in the land of Al-Quds [Jerusalem]‘ should ‘get rid of illusions of political parties and groups which are mired in trickery of the blasphemous democracy and to take their positions among the ranks of the mujahideen in Iraq.’”(1)

We do not want anyone to offer services to Al Qaeda in the united $tates, because it will turn out to be an undercover FBI agent. However, we should understand that Osama Bin Laden’s message is an example of internationalism.

The neo-Nazis including “National Bolsheviks” do not understand this message, because they are hung up over borders. In contrast, Osama Bin Laden says to show up in ungovernable Iraq to advance the cause of Palestinians.

There is a slowly growing recognition among Western communists that the more radical Muslims are in fact offering internationalism that makes the Western communist movement look bad.  Some of MIM’s fiercest critics are slowly tacking for a different line.

Osama Bin Laden has also tried to explain to us the local conditions. What we in the West do not know for instance is that there has been no Shiite government in an Arab country for 800 years.(2) Now there is one in Iraq thanks to the U.$. occupation. So, when we suddenly see a Shiite government, then we have to wonder if that is on account of lackey service to the united $tates or Great Satan as Iran rightly calls it. Such thoughts will cause many in Iraq distress.

The Iraqi Shiites themselves will not be happy being thought of as Great Satan’s lackeys. So there is civil war brewing. One analyst has said it will be “Lebanon on steroids.”(3)

As we wrote this article, the New York Times reported on U.$. airstrikes on a portion of Iraq’s Shiites.(4) This will prove to Shiites that some among them depend on Great Satan for support.

If Iraq goes into civil war to oust all U.$. lackeys, it will be on account of a lack of proletariat in the united $tates. Even though the Amerikan people are not thrilled with the Iraq War, they are not mobilized enough to prevent a civil war in Iraq. It comes down to the conscience of Amerikan politicians.

Senator McCain can go on pretending that U.$. troops will prevent the civil war, because there is no on-fire proletariat here to make him pay for that politically. Likewise, among our supposed Marxists there is rampant confusion which amounts to a sectarian attitude toward the Iraqi people. These Trotskyist and Trotsky-influenced organizations see nothing worth assisting with, because they see only the names of the mosques the Iraqi people attend, and they do not say, “4th International.”

Even if some leaders in Iraq would like to wait on the question of civil war till after U.$. elections, there is no guarantee that a hugely destructive civil war to oust U.$. influence will not occur in the meantime. The people of Iraq are not like Amerikans–well-fed, with good clothing and a roof over their heads and expecting their politicians to entertain them a la Mark Spitzer. The people of Iraq have much more serious questions on their mind, including the status of the Palestinians.

Notes:

1. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125643

2. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/29/arts/IDLEDE1.php

3. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/03/27/basra.analysis/

4. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Putting aside MIM Lite’s disappointments with the Western communist movement and its failed united front with the Third World, MIM Lite should acknowledge being part of an impressive domestic united front. It’s not that we have failed to notice.

There is a substantial libertarian impulse in the united $tates, but most of the time it fails to overcome its obstacles. For historical reasons MIM became inserted into a very unusual united front. We can see the people dug in in the trenches with us. Some of the people at the heavier pieces of artillery are going so far as to dare the enemy to attack.

In 2008, even the astrological patriotic organization copied others on how to dig in beside us. The present writer is still not sure the astrologists knew what they were copying. Also digging in with us were some writers at a patriotic youth organization that MIM Lite usually criticizes for its pretensions. There has been a widespread recognition that a certain kind of attack should not go down. Many had the sense to think of the larger implications of what would happen if MIM ended up flushed down the toilet in a certain manner. Usually the question would slip through the cracks, but this time circumstances and struggle intervened on the side of a solid united front like MIM Lite has not seen before.

Non-communists should probably ignore MIM Lite’s bile in connection to the communist movement. MIM Lite is indeed already tasting better.

What the non-communists know about MIM’s secrets is impressive. Most of the time we have suffered from declassifications that our enemies took advantage of. On the other hand, it is clear that some non-communists can fill in for MIM Lite in key struggles in a pinch. That is the extent of existing knowledge of MIM’s situation.

Good news at Alexa

March 27, 2008

A corporation dedicated to measuring web traffic, Alexa.com unceremoniously dumped the original MIM from political categorization at a very intimidating moment last year. We checked today and found the original MIM website back. Despite ceasing new work six weeks ago, the MIM website is ranked third in the world communist category, down from second place behind the Communist Party of China website before the closure.

The MIM website was taking in over 100,000 readers a month. We did not have much by way of recruiting to show for it, because we lack a critical mass of intellectuals trained and willing to lead with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

One of the obstinate labor aristocracy criticisms of MIM on the third cardinal principle is that income is not assets and Marxism is about control of the means of production, so therefore MIM’s analysis of so-called workers is wrong. This sort of argument is prevalent because of the ebb of the communist movement which has reduced the pool of possible leaders to draw from. These critics did not read what MIM actually said and also lack in many ways indicative of general communist problems today.

In the first place, in the real world, income and assets overlap. That is a factual matter and MIM Lite only regrets not stealing proprietary data when it had the chance to prove it in public. People experienced with social data would not really question this point, but our poorly attended communist movement does question it, as if the top 10% by income in the world were not mostly the same 10% holding the most assets.

The problem in our ranks is especially disconcerting because the leading section of imperialism, the finance capitalists know better. For the finance capitalists, income and assets are converted into each other all the time. Plebians can think about putting money in a certificate of deposit in a bank and obtaining an interest rate. If a capitalist puts $1 million in the bank certificate and the interest rate is 5% and inflation is 0%, then the capitalist receives $50,000 income a year for that certificate of deposit.

The finance capitalists have gone a step further, because they get used to forgetting about the initial $1 million and simply evaluating how much income comes in each year and figuring out what it would take to boost that income. So a typical business student learns concepts such as “present value,” while our would-be communists learn how to say, “the workers should have overthrown the Stalinists and instituted free pizza and beer.”

Here is an example from the Wikipedia about what business students might learn.

“Present value is the value on a given date of a future payment or series of future payments, discounted to reflect the time value of money and other factors such as investment risk. Present value calculations are widely used in business and economics to provide a means to compare cash flows at different times on a meaningful ‘like to like’ basis.”

That could be a difficult web page to read. However, if one can guarantee an income now and into the future, say $X payment every month for Y years, that figure can be converted into an asset a finance capitalist would be willing to exchange for right now. That figure is not $X times 12 times Y, but there is some figure such that a finance capitalist would be willing to exchange an asset now in order to obtain the steady income later. In other words, income flows are assets already in the minds of the finance capitalists.

MIM’s philistine critics dogmatically repeated something they read somewhere about how a worker making double what another worker makes might still be exploited, which is true. One worker could earn subsistence wages while another earns less than subsistence. A subsistence worker “eats” his income and would have nothing leftover to provide guaranteed income to anyone else.

Yet in the u.$. case, what we are usually handling is income above and beyond the means of subsistence–luxury goods and means of production. Year after year, the Amerikan petty-bourgeoisie enjoys a living standard above the means of subsistence and thus it is meaningful to covert its income into assets for calculation sake. In the finance capitalist’s world, whether those with income convert their income to assets in an actual market or not may be irrelevant. For proletarian theoretical purposes, we can also deduce that a steady flow of income IMPLIES social access to capital and can be calculated per business school procedures, the likes of which Wikipedia explains.

By looking at the income or cash flow of the Amerikan petty-bourgeoisie historically or into the future, we can, if we have to, calculate its implied assets. We can even do so after we subtract out income that really goes to subsistence. The remainder will be capital–the appropriation of labor from other countries’ labor. Sheer luxury consumption funded by collecting interest on a $1 million certificate of deposit and luxury consumption by the Amerikan population generally are the same thing in terms of the studies suggested by the labor theory of value.

MIM’s critics who simply make up their economic analyses in order to obtain 51% of voters–most likely for the Democratic Party or Labour in England–are bourgeois democrats. They are political analysts with no anchor in Marxist political economy.

Those who make up their economic analyses in order to flatter 90% of a country such as the united $tates are bourgeois populists.

Those who like Marx uphold the labor theory of value look at the cost of subsistence, luxury consumption and matters such as total profits. Marxist scientists will perform the calculations necessary to learn how much exploitation is happening or not happening. Marxism has nothing to do with bourgeois democratic or bourgeois populist political formulas unless capitalism has not fully established itself and the bourgeoisie is playing a progressive role.

McCarthyism

March 26, 2008

There is a five page posting in a patriotic youth group on the Internet about apologizing to MIM. The responses will serve as excellent material for history. They demonstrate exactly how far out to lunch the left-wing of parasitism is and has been for several years. There is no prophylaxis at work, while even MIM Lite accepts that it is impossible to keep everyone in a patriotic youth group informed. The point is that protective concepts have to be formed and applied to keep the unconscious from anti-communism. In contrast, Michelle Malkin at least gives reasons for her attacks.
Now we have McCarthyism debated by Clinton and Obama camps: “‘I think given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor,’ Clinton said in a news conference in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.”(1) Hillary Clinton said this in connection to Obama’s pastor Wright. In saying that one cannot choose family but one can choose one’s pastor, Clinton echoes Michelle Malkin, who said it before her.
Bill Clinton kicked off a discussion of McCarthyism by indirectly questioning Obama’s patriotism. “Mr. Clinton, in a speech to voters on Friday in North Carolina, said ‘it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country.’”(2) A retired Air Force general replied for Obama: “‘I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors,’ General McPeak said, ‘so I’ve had enough of it.’”(2) McPeak has probably done his share of travelling the world with the Air Force. Now we have a passport scandal in the news as well.(3) There are those who point out that Joe McCarthy was building his party and really believed in what he was doing. Bill Clinton is attacking Obama and revealing cynicism with his McCarthyism. CNN is calling the situation a discussion of “21st century McCarthyism.”
Especially now that there has been an all-volunteer military for over a generation, Amerikans can consider a Jeffersonian approach to patriotism. In that case, patriotism is just making sacrifices to engage in the public affairs of one’s country. Such a definition does not prejudge whether one should be in the minority or majority and nor does it hold that patriotism requires a willingness to die to kill people in other countries.In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama points to a survey that showed that 66% of Amerikans believed that Saddam Hussein had a direct role in 9/11. The fatuous left-wing of parasitism is inclined to believe that such results are on account of poverty’s leading to a lack of political education. MIM believes the opposite that the situation stems from economic well-being which leads to carefree existence but also an occasional willingness to cover for one’s leaders and to invent vicious reasons covering for their actions–a whiteness solidarity.
Unlike Obama, we at MIM do not love the 66%. Of course, the mentally retarded should be excused, but taking such an approach to the 66% is unnecessarily elitist in its own way. Such a love of country is not love in our book, just condescension. The Amerikans knew they might be just covering for Bush in coming up with justifications to start the Iraq War. It is only now that they see the results–after the fact–that we see polls running in other directions. So if loving the 66% is a requirement of patriotism, MIM is not patriotic. We have seen evidence time and time again that the majority can be consciously and unlovably vicious. If one would not love a boyfriend or girlfriend who made up stories to carry out mass murder, then one should not love the 66% who made up stories about Saddam Hussein.The fact is that there was no one with any discernment in the patriotic youth group spreading private information about MIM over a period of many years. It readily sided with the imperialist state against MIM again and again and ended up comparing unfavorably with many in the state itself not 100% enthralled with either Clinton or Bush, especially once they discovered that neither Clinton nor Bush could 100% protect them.On a related note, a “counterterrorism blog” has already compared the McCarthyism situation to Watergate. The blogger said that Deep Throat should have appealed to the “Left” for help. Deep Throat was a source in the Watergate stories that brought down Nixon. The counterterrorism blog says that once FBI leaders realized they were on questionable legal ground, they started playing both sides–Nixon’s and that of his opponents.This is unfortunately a point well beyond our would-be “Left.” There would not be five people anywhere who would understand it in the activist groups. Moreover, when Putin or his underlings talk about “counterterrorism cooperation” and “continuity” there is no one here outside the state to understand what he is talking about. We would tell our counterterrorism blogger that there is nothing to worry about because there is no “Left.” What there is is a bunch of people unable to reason independently from the state, unable to stand by themselves and unable to contribute anything except regurgitation of the state–except with their own racist pornographic modifications and axes to grind thrown in. With a would-be “Left” easily bought off with trinkets, there is only Deep Throat, nothing else. It were as if there did not have to be a Democratic Party office to break into in Watergate.To obtain an apology from MIM’s Internet critics would be pointless, because the same thing would happen again, if not to MIM, then to future communists. A meaningful apology would have to come with a policy against using the good ole’ boys’ network, and that is not going to happen in a white nationalist Internet organization. Clinton may be the one offering the theory right now, but patriotic youth groups will be delivering the practice as they have in the last several years.The accusations levelled over years by leaders of the patriotic youth association against MIM stem from myopic pragmatism. The hope is to hurl enough charges of an uninvestigated nature that some stick. If sufficiently embarrassed, the pragmatists then apologize but only for an individual instance. To do otherwise would require a method in
one’s madness and that is not possible for the pragmatist Liberals. The inability to reason from ideological principle and the inability to put facts in scientific categories are the same underlying problem. One unable to reason from ideological principle is also unable to see the point of scientific endeavor. For pre-scientific people there is only the case-by-case approach.

Both the patriotic youth group and the astrological patriotic
association would have been better off following MIM orders. They have ended up as crude tools of Bush and Clinton. That’s a tough concept to swallow with Leninism so unpopular in the imperialist countries. On the other hand, it will also be tough to swallow how little evidence there is for a “Left” in the imperialist countries if certain MIM struggles are examined carefully.

It is imperative to dispense with ultra-democratic and pseudo-
anarchist ideas that the leaders are abusing followers even before the
leaders have state power. Quite the contrary, the “live wires” always
attract a disproportionate response from the state. Lenin got that
right and the bourgeois Liberalism masquerading as some kind of
radicalism, whether anarchist, ultra-democratic or other exotic “ism”
got it wrong. Getting it wrong is not just academic but leads directly
to counterrevolutionary activity. If the patriotic youth group had any
integrity, it would admit that. The lack of ability to discuss that
point proves again why MIM’s emphasis on quality and raising the bar
is correct. It is unfortunate that Lenin is correct, but he is correct.
If he were not correct, the anarchists and ultra-left would have already
mobilized the “masses” to rebuff the new Watergate and McCarthyism. Their lack of accurate understanding of the strategic balance of forces ends up delivering youth to militant anti-communist tendencies.

Unfavorable comparisons between a would-be “Left” and Deep Throats arise because MIM’s third cardinal principle is correct in spectacular fashion. What would be a “Left” is really just a pornographic transmission belt for the imperialist state.

Notes:
1. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/clinton.wright/
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/us/politics/23obama.html?ref=politics
3. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/justice.passport/
4. “Of Telecoms, and “Twisting Slowly, Slowly in the Wind”: Watergate Reprised,” By Jeffrey Breinholt, http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/03/of_telecoms_and_twisting_slowl.php

The first paragraph of this article is factually false, because FISA does spell out exactly that authority for spying on Amerikans does not exist elsewhere. However, the article is mostly about analogies to Watergate in the current day and is thus useful.

[I apologize for the formatting problems in this article over the last few days, problems which seem to change without my doing anything. MIM Lite is unfamiliar with wordpress.com formatting at this time, but we will get up to speed eventually.]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.