Mousavi's "movement" is a hodge-podge of student-mandarins & borgeois soap opera addicts pining for the Pax Americana

by: Andrew Taylor

Mousavi is a 'holy fool' and a demagogue, that is, a politician who woos power by appealing to the prejudices, emotions, fears and expectations of the people via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda using populist themes. If he prevails...you won't need to hold your breath long waiting for US imperialist penetration. Think again.

If anyone thinks the Iranian struggle is headed for woman's emancipation, democracy, or socialism, they ought to think seriously about how middle and even working class mass movements are co-opted into US satellite status. I was in the Parti Communiste du Quebec during the "Solidarity" struggles in Poland in mid-late 80s. The Trotskyists said over and over again at that time that the Polish revolution was headed for socialism. I pointed out that given the counter-revolutionary tide in E Europe and the so-called "Third World" - it was much more likely that Poland was headed for full incorporation into the imperialist camp and a perilous decline in living standards for the Working Class.

If there is one lesson I have learned on the left over decades, it is that the ultra-left is detached from the mass movements and yet misleads many in proportion to its numbers. Mass marchers do not of necessity equal a left turn. The EU electorate has just swung right. Think again about the social-location of populist 'reformers' before assenting to an illusory "mass line". Why is Mousavi both 'favored' and shunned by the US and Israeli governments? It is because he is a dupe, a toy, who usefully demonizes Iranian anti-imperialism, while remaining garbage in the estimate of Imperialist ambitions. If he prevails in Iran, he will assent to the US Script or be trashed for a real imperial puppet.

It is Iran's anti-imperialist foreign policy that is and will remain the enemy of Israel and the US and EU. Mousavi is a useful strutting puppet character in their drama - whether or not his subjective intentions are patriotic or egoistical.

Guns and Butter: For How Long? Stagnation in Iraq/Expansion in Afghanistan and a Decent/Progressive Domestic Policy: Can Both Survive?

Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Source: Political Affairs Editors Blog
http://paeditorsblog.blogspot.com/

by Phil E. Benjamin

The "guns v. butter" era has begun again. Ever wonder why this debate doesn't take place during Republican periods? Simple. During the Reagan/Bush and Bush periods there was only guns and more guns. There was no butter, translated that meant no social programs to fund; a double negative.

Now that the Democrats are back in power, all three branches, that debate, it was hoped would not take place. Voters in 2008 were hoping for a far less guns department and a far larger butter, creamery. The worldwide financial crisis has thrown a monkey wrench into that equation. In fact, the significant amount of money that the Democrats have put into the economy to save capitalism has masked that argument. But, that debate is coming.

In fact, the health care debate is moving more and more around the issue of financing health care options. The robustness of the Public Option Plan will be largely determined by ideological issues, but if the right wing, corporate interests loses that argument they will recede to the cost and lack of money.

There looks like a growing resentment in the anti-war, anti-imperialist movements; and, bewilderment in the general peace movement with each escalation of the war in Afghanistan, [nuclear armed] Pakistan and further stagnation in Iraq. The military budget moves up, albeit at a lower rate. While the Blackwater gang of mercenaries, thugs and criminals was dumped a reportedly equally repugnant mercenary company, Triple Canopy, has replaced it. There are other hot button items that are deeply worrying people about the direction of the new Administration.

It must be kept in mind that this movement switched from Clinton to Obama mostly over the issue of foreign policy. They are not a happy crew. They may not be organized into one group or one organization, but they do have a unity of thought. They share the basics of a foreign policy that promotes peace that they feel is not taking place to the extent they anticipated.

Clearly, some important domestic policy moves has bolstered public support for the Administration and blunted foreign policy disappointments. A revitalized Labor Department is on the way. Decent people being placed in energy, environmental and health areas. Pro woman Administration statements and actions have take place. Changes at the United Nations have brought an international optimism that has not been seen for decades. And, the reversal of the some of the egregious right wing, anti-people policies of the Reagan/Bush/Bush also has kept people firmly behind the Administration.

How long will this last? We shall see. The best solution would be a rapid de-escalation of the Iraq and Afghan wars.

Stay Tuned