Ter wrote:The people I see demonstrating together with the Muslims are lefties, not rightists.
I addressed this in saying that any leftist I've ever seen demonstrating with Muslims tend to be addressing the root of the problems, not your personal feelings about Muslims. Perhaps you have other examples that you are keeping secret. Until you make these clear, there is nothing much to add.
Ter wrote:The rightists are demonstrating against the massive flows of undocumented economic migrants.
This has nothing specifically to do with Islam. This was true of any undocumented economic migrant. The right, however, tends to point panicked to the migrant him or herself. The left points out that this is a symptom and that the right's masters are the one laughing all the way to the bank about your panic.
Ter wrote: It is you and TIG who are ignoring what I have to say.
I'm trying my best to counter anything you say, but it seems to be mostly your feelings instead of any facts or figures.
Ter wrote:By the way I do not deny that Reagan used the mujahedin in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets but that does not suddenly explain the problems we have with Muslim populations both in their own countries and in the West.
What about Reagan as an example, one of many, that goes back to at least WWI when the British stirred up Islamic attacks against the Young Turks?
The Left policy, before and after, has been clear:
secularize and modernize the Islamic world. The right has been to fight that at every inch. This whole process was in no way something that, "suddenly" occurred, but part of a historic and material process that is well documented. If you think that well-armed Islamic extremists are something that, "suddenly," happened—surely you have some theory as to why it did. Would you care to explain what caused this, "sudden," change if it was not related to history?
Rugoz wrote:Posting pictures of scantily dressed women in Kabul proves absolutely nothing, TIG. What a few members of the elite do and rest of the population does are two entirely different things.
Oh, it wasn't like that. The Saur Revolution was the big step in Afghanistan. And before this, Afghanistan was still well in the Soviet sphere, conceded by the US in exchange for the Americans having their big friend of the radical Muslims Pakistan placated:
PBS wrote:After World War II, as both the United States and the Soviet Union competed for global power, Afghanistan increasingly turned to the Soviet Union for support after the United States established military ties with Pakistan in 1954, according to an October 2001 report from Human Rights Watch.
The Soviets in return used the strategic location of Afghanistan, at the juncture of Asia and the Middle East, to counter the U.S. alliance with Pakistan and the surrounding Persian Gulf states.
John Ryan via Hartford wrote:On April 27, 1978, to prevent the police from attacking a huge demonstration in front of the presidential palace, the army intervened, and after firing a single shot from a tank at the palace, the government resigned. The military officers then invited the Marxist party to form the government, under the leadership of Noor Mohammed Taraki, a university professor.
This is how a Marxist government came into office -- it was a totally indigenous happening -- not even the CIA blamed the U.S.S.R. for this. The government began to bring in much-needed reforms, but with restraint and prudence. Labour unions were legalized, a minimum wage was established, a progressive income tax was introduced, men and women were given equal rights, and girls were encouraged to go to school. On September 1, 1978, there was an abolition of all debts owed by farmers. A program was being developed for major land reform, and it was expected that all farm families (including landlords) would be given the equivalent of equal amounts of land.
Everywhere life seemed peaceful and there were few police and soldiers on the scene. This was a genuinely popular government and people looked forward to the future with great hope. Admittedly, the issue of women's rights and education for girls was controversial, and fundamentalist mullahs conducted campaigns against this. It was these people and their converts, along with landlords, who migrated to Pakistan, as refugees.
But there was a much more powerful opponent to the government -- that was the U.S., which objected to it because it was Marxist. The CIA, along with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, almost immediately began to provide military aid and training to the Muslim extremists.
Afghan Marxists have claimed that one of their countrymen, Hafizullah Amin, while on visits to the U.S., had been converted by the CIA and became their agent in the Taraki government. He worked his way to the top, and, as defence minister, in September, 1979, carried out a coup, took over the government, and had Taraki killed. All his loyal supporters were killed, jailed, or exiled. He then proceeded to undermine and discredit the Marxist government. He enacted draconian laws against the Muslim clergy, to purposefully further alienate them. Progressive reforms were halted and thousands of people were jailed.
Meanwhile, the CIA's trained and armed mujahedeen came in by the thousands to attack parts of the country. In a matter of three months, Amin had essentially destroyed the Marxist government and had planned to surrender to the mujahedeen, and become the president of a fundamentalist Islamic state. But at the end of December, 1979, Amin was overthrown by the remnants of Taraki supporters, and, under the leadership of Babrak Karmal (who had been in exile in the U.S.S.R.), they invited the U.S.S.R. to send in a contingent of troops to help ward off the well-armed mujahedeen invaders, many being foreign mercenaries.
The IMT, which is far from a Tanky organization, wrote:It would not be wrong to point out that Saur Revolution was imposed from the top in a revolutionary military uprising with organisational and political weaknesses - it was not a classical socialist revolution from a Marxist standpoint. However no other event in the history of South Asia struck such a blow to the region’s feudal drudgery, tribal primitiveness, religious oppression and exploitation by capitalism and imperialism. This was a revolution by decree, which was immediately supported by millions of oppressed Afghans. These decrees were directed at the most extreme forms of coercion that prevailed within society. Decree no. 6 cancelled debts, loans, mortgages and revenues due from peasants to the usurers and big landlords (in most cases this was debt inherited from generation to generation). The decree fully exempted “landless persons who work on a landowner’s land as a peasant or hireling [wage (day)-labourer]” from paying any dues and usury to the landowners and usurers. Decree no. 7 was “to ensure equality of rights between women and men in the domain of civil law, to eliminate unjust patriarchal feudal relations between wife and husband”. It also criminalized: 1- Girls’ marriage based on exchange for money and goods; 2-Forced marriage; 3- Acts that either prevent a widow, because of family or tribal kinship, from wilfully re-marrying or forcing them into an unwanted marriage. It further fixed the age for engagement and marriage at 16 for women and 18 for men, thus, effectively banning child marriage.
Decree no. 8 confiscated lands owned by the feudal lords and the deposed royal family without compensation and their redistributed it among landless peasants and peasants with small land holdings. The decree’s aim was first and foremost “to eliminate feudal and pre-feudal relations from the social and economic order of the country.”
Some of the other radical policies pursued by the Saur revolution were: cancellation of revenue dues, equitable distribution of water and the establishment of peasant cooperatives. Major literacy programs were launched (by 1984 one and half million people had finished literacy courses and in the same year 20,000 literacy courses were functioning throughout the country enrolling 377,000 people. The target was to eradicate illiteracy by the year 1986 in urban areas and by 1990 all over Afghanistan. In the period prior to the Saur Revolution, only 5,265 people had finished literacy courses. The leadership of PDPA (Khalq) initiated these decrees before the intervention of the Russian forces. They had to overthrow the system, the oligarchy of capital and the state to begin introducing reforms. The Saur revolution proved yet again that in the neo-colonial countries not even the basic tasks of the bourgeois democratic revolution can be commenced under the rule of the rotten colonial bourgeoisie.
Such radical measures sounded the death knell for imperialist interests and the capitalist/feudal system in the whole region. This sent tremors through the corridors of power from Islamabad to Riyadh, London and Washington.
Ter wrote:I am aware that it would be in the interest of the capitalists to let in huge numbers of people from poor countries so they could work for lower wages and in inhuman conditions.
So how come it is the "progressives" who are shielding those illegal immigrants in the US and it is Trump and company that wants them deported and the borders under control?
I have discussed this same paradox several times already.
I cannot speak for liberal progressives. My guess would be because it's a completely pointless battle to yell at illegal immigrants though. Like trying to yell at the spots on your hands instead of getting your liver taken care of should you have liver problems.
Trump wants them deported because he has a shit-ton of business in China, where all the labour will be spent to line his pockets:
Here's a bunch of sources from a bunch of different ideological orientations:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... hics-videohttps://www.bloomberg.com/politics/arti ... -for-visashttp://www.timesofisrael.com/family-of- ... nvestment/http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ing-comey/http://www.breitbart.com/news/sister-of ... nvestment/http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ng-plants/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/busi ... .html?_r=0https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartande ... 8da8e01dc8https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/07/busi ... visas.htmlIt's exactly what happened with the Chinese Exclusion Act—the businesses and jobs went to China. It doesn't matter a fig to your masters—they're going to get you all crying in fear and rage while they take your wallet. You yourself admit that it is in their interests to get this shit all made as cheaply as possible.
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh ár lá; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!