Regan’s news was published on December 8 , 2006 and I recommend
” google ” - ing it.

Timothy R. Anderson

this news article is from my local newspaper, page A - 16

” Private Saudi citizens are giving millions
of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq,
and much of the money is used to buy weapons,
including shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles,
according to key Iraqi officials and others
familiar with the flow of cash. ”

” Saudi government officials deny that any
money from their country is being sent to Iraqis
fighting Iraq’s government and the U.S.-led
coalition . But the Iraq Study Group report said
Saudis are a big source of funding for Sunni
insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by
the Associated Press described carrying boxes
of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq,
money they said was headed for insurgents. ”

source: news article written by Salah Nasrawi .

source: David Wallechinsky.

That is to say, brutality to women and racism both still exist, but they used to be a social norm. They no longer are officially acceptable, though they persist. Advancing overall social thought seems like an evolutionary project, not a political one. —”Gary Goodman”

I’ll call bullsh*t on this one since nobody else has. Gary, take the time to read through previous articles and discussions before you throw crap like this against the wall.
Especially when you say something like this:

I know there are women who are bullies too. One of my close friends is such a victim periodically. She even told the cops SHE beat HIM. (Please do not think I am arguing against rights and equality for women, or promoting some neanderthal attitude.)

When we men fall back to defending OUR equality with women all we’re doing is protecting our place at the top of the power chain. We need to fight against that tendency at every opportunity.

Randy

To me, that’s beyond foolish / reckless.
To me, that’s a level of
absurdity I cannot attach words of the English language to.

Timothy R. Anderson

There, I said it. Sorry if I broke the anti-troll rule.

TIM: Did YOU not know that the Saudi Royalty is PROTECTED by America and by American military services? You didn’t know that the Pentagon ‘SELLS’ military services to whomever can pay? You did not know the Saudi leaders can afford to pay?

You did not know that Binladen Construction builds a lot of their buildings as well US military bases and OIL rigs? In short, tell me YOU did not know that WE “own” them? You never heard that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were *conduits* for cash and weapons for the Mujahideen, according to Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard plan?

Yet now the semi-official story is that the CIA NEVER no NEVER backed Al-Qaeda. Look up “Ali Muhamed” some time. I call him a “catch-and-release” terrorist.

Your Saudi obsession is a combo of Michael Moore and Richard Perle, as well as decades-old Pentagon planning called “Seizing Arab Oil”. Google that.

I’m quite sure that for some Saudi residents, “regime change” would be desireable. For other Saudis, who look up to their rulers like so many Tube-fed look up to Bush, or who believe that the SA Royals are descendants from Mohammed, they would NOT approve of regime change.

Regardless, regime change (or beyond) starts here at home.

But BLAMING *our* agents in SA is a giant floppy red herring in white cream sauce.

***
I’m LESS familiar with the terminology here, but it seems that gender repression is mostly a vestige of physical power differentials, and so as society becomes more *civilized* and liberalized overall, gender repression declines.

That is to say, brutality to women and racism both still exist, but they used to be a social norm. They no longer are officially acceptable, though they persist. Advancing overall social thought seems like an evolutionary project, not a political one.

Are MOST men mean bastards to women? Are SOME men bastards because … they are strong cowards? I know there are women who are bullies too. One of my close friends is such a victim periodically. She even told the cops SHE beat HIM. (Please do not think I am arguing against rights and equality for women, or promoting some neanderthal attitude.)

I should at least mention — in terms of psyops and “false consciousness” — that just as there has been an entire structure of “false consciousness” created around terrorism (Arabs) and the War on Terror, there was also a “false consciousness” created around feminism. I read that a rad feminist group called Red Stockings noticed that Gloria Steinem seemed to be saying some weird things which did not fit, and RS eventually uncovered some documentation that proved that Steinem had been on payroll of the CIA, spying on radical left student groups in Europe.

After that gig, “uncle CIA” helped her become a famous feminist. She denied any CIA connection or links to Katherine Graham (WAPO) for years. Why would CIA ‘create’ and fund a ‘radical feminist’ author and lecturer?

Suggested reasons were that it was meant to
a) dilute and misdirect the more radical antiwar movement
b) create splits and discontent in the antiwar movement and Black nationalism
c) possibly a point of infiltration
d) inject false arguments into society to confuse and subvert power (Gloria became mainstreamed)
e) have Steinem and allies push for nonsense or hostile or unworkable feminist ideas virtually guaranteed to create widespread dissension and acrimony in the general public and amongst men, who may not have been threatened by feminism other than Steinem’s version of it.

In other words, not merely powerful feminism, but a feminist mindfuck.

Myself and a group of friends began to see the same phenomena with the “9-11 Truthiness” movement. Hard Facts, undeniable gaping holes, mixed with Illuminati tales and crop circles and extreme Christian Right insanity.

Loose Change — truth, half-truth, fiction, unsupported assertions. All in a stew.

At the same time, idolized beacons on the Left like Zmag seemingly decided immediately to reject all such questions of conspiracy — whether based on evidence or crap.

Frustratingly, a Mr. M. Parenti, who has written and spoken on “Conspiracy AND Class Power”, and derisively discussed his peers’ aversion to considering that wealthy and powerful conspire to obtain and maintain wealth and power, became a rejectionist with regards to the LARGEST power play for the Western ruling class since Hitler or Stalin.

This rejected despite the fact that one of Parenti’s peers - Chossudovsky - a Left-Soc-Economist who would be a natural peer of Chomsky and others as well, has painstakingly outlined the connections between Bin Laden and the CIA, and between the War on Terror and Imperial Globalization.

“It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America’s power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts.
Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization.“ —from The Grand Chessboard
http://www.takeoverworld.info/brzezinski_quotes.html
Straussians are on
/conquest.html

I’m not saying that the *problem* is limited to these imperialist groups, but they are a mechanism and I seem to get mileage out of using or paraphrasing some their quotes to smash the false consciousness, a mindset which they BRAG about promoting via “magnetic personalities” in the media.

Elaina
Granddaughter of two housekeepers, one aluminum plant worker and one moonshining hillbilly body mechanich, who was also a decorated WWII vet and and abuser.

as the descendant of an abused and alcoholic grandmother and an abused and alcoholic great-grandmother, i am curious why it is relevant that you are the grandson of a farmer and even moreso what it is that puzzles you.

Puzzled. Timothy R. Anderson,
grandson of a farmer.

***

It’s not my argument. If we look for some version of purity in allies, then no mass movement can ever take hold.

My argument is that explicitly Marxist people and organizations need to get rectified under the terms of their own method.

Marx violated his own method with his naturalization of women. He did so because he still suffered from the myopia of male power. I love Marx. Marx saved my life in a sense. But he made this error. The error was reproduced as a direct result of turning his work into “teachings,” and his ideas into doctrine.

My appeal is to Marxists, especially Marxist men, to go give a close look to MacKinnon’s “Toward a Feminist Theory of the State,” a close look at Merchant’s “The Death of Nature,” a close look at Mies’ “Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale,” a close look at Dworkin’s “Right Wing Women,” a close look at Kimberly Crenshaw and Chandra Mohanty and D. A. Clarke, etc etc etc. These women are applying the best Marxist interpretive instruments to the issue of gendered power, and we are still largely AWOL.

We argue about them without having even bothered to read them, and continue to treat gender as a “woman’s issue.” It’s not. It’s our issue; and we’ve absented ourselves for decades while we go on and on about the proletarian revolution… The Woman Question served as a side-dish.

I argue for the rapproachement of Marxism and radical feminism; and I argue that the fault in this divorce was overwhelmingly (male led, and male privileged) Marxist hostility to feminism.

I will say that until this division is healed, in any circumstance where I am forced to choose between Marxism and radical feminism, I will choose the latter. I do believe that the disruption of patriarchal power is as important and far-reaching as the disruption of class power… probably more far-reaching.

I will never again turn my back on our sisters.