The 'Main-Streaming' of the 'Left' Opens Door for 'Gate-Keepers'
Nixakliel - 04/03/2011 - 12:23
At one time the so-called left was held more or less radical views & thus was non{so-called}main-stream. Since the 1970s what is called the left has gone main-stream. Today MLK would be considered as on the fringe of the main-stream [IE: far-left] & Malcom X would be called a extreme hard-core radical, but in their era & amongst their peers- MLK was considered a sincere & principled yet moderate [even main-stream] centrist & Malcolm views was considered at the very center of the revolutionary, Black Consciousness / Power, Pan African / Black Nationalist movement [in that era true radicals were totally rejecting the system or even calling for {or even actively attempting to}over-throwing the system]. BUT Now you hear FOX Noise types claim [falsely] that guys like O-bomb-em & Billary, John Kerry, etc are far-left liberals [or even socialists] when they-are actually corporate main-stream politicians at the so-called center-right - While guys like Joe Lieberman & John{bomb bomb}McCain are considered moderates. The fact is even guys like Kucinich, Nader, Feingold, etc- who are much more progressive than either Obama, Billary, & John Kerry - are much closer in position to MLK {IE: principled moderates} than true radicals - yet are portrayed as at the fringes of the main-stream.
This main-streaming of the so-called left while pulling the whole so-called main-stream debate toward an increasingly hard-core Corp, imperialist [military industrial intel security complex], anti-working class / working poor agenda - is also true for the media. I won't even talk about the MSNM News including so-called liberal -left news outlets like the NY / LA Times or even MSNBC [MS =MicroSoft = Bill Gates & NBC is owned by GE which is a big time weapons maker who built the Fukushima reactors]. I'm talking about Alternative news sources like The Real News & DemocracyNow!. One would expect to see a more balanced view of the events in Libya w both being unquestionably opposed to US / UK / French / NATO military [& covert] intervention there, but [particularly DemocracyNow! - The Real News has been a bit more even-handed] this has not been the case - though they haven't overtly supported it either. Neither of these sources have had a truly even-handed take on Khadaffi [let alone had anyone on to defend him] - all of their commentary begins w the idea of 'Khadaffi's a brutal tyrant' as a given - which of course logically leads to 'Khadaffi should go' [IE: regime change] whether said explictly or not. Thus their debate isn't about whether there should be a negotiated settlement & truce / power-sharing arrangements / elections, etc- but whether or not the US / UK / France / NATO should intervene militarily [which, certainly at this point, should be Obviously be NO].
Juan Cole was on DemocracyNow! a few days ago- essentially acting as a mouth piece for O-Bomb-em, Billary, & Rice{squared}& providing left-cover [a Left gate keeper] for them. In fact he wrote a piece specifically targeting the left justifying this attack on Libya [as he basically dismissed the assault of the Saudi / Bahrain regimes on truly un-armed protesters in those countries- as barely significant] & urging the so-called left to support the O-Bomb-em regime. Previously DemocracyNow! had on a Libyan who was obviously a US mouth-piece for the rebels. On this past Thursday Amy Goodman featured a piece on the alleged rape by some Khadaffi troops of a woman. Now I don't know if this poor woman was raped by some Khadaffi soldiers or by some guys falsely pretending to be Khadaffi's people. In fact- I don't know if this incident actually occurred at all [remember that the 1st war on Iraq led by Mr CIA Skull{duggery}& Bones Bush Sr- was hyped by accusations by a tearful Kuwaiti girl that Saddam's troops threw Kuwaiti infants out of their incubators & stomped them to death- which later was shown to be completely untrue {the girl was the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US daughter who was coached]. Of course this accusation could be totally true- & if so would certainly be a personal tragedy & the victim entitled to justice- BUT- one isolated rape case doesn't justify an invasion of - or bombing campaign of Libya. And the US' hands are too filthy w rape cases of its own - to judge someone else [IE: the rash of rapes of women in the US military & Black-water / Xe; Rapes of Iraqi & Afghan women, girls & boys in Abu Ghraib & Bagram, etc; - women & juvenile girls & boys in the US Prison Industrial Complex]. So why would DemocracyNow! hype this story? Could it be to demonize Khadaffi even more than he's been already? Amy Goodman's women viewers would be particularly outraged [IE: vulnerable] after watching this story. Whether that is the intent or not- the effect is to push those on the so-called left to- if not actively supporting this attack on Libya - at least not speaking out forcefully against it.
This main-streaming of the so-called left while pulling the whole so-called main-stream debate toward an increasingly hard-core Corp, imperialist [military industrial intel security complex], anti-working class / working poor agenda - is also true for the media. I won't even talk about the MSNM News including so-called liberal -left news outlets like the NY / LA Times or even MSNBC [MS =MicroSoft = Bill Gates & NBC is owned by GE which is a big time weapons maker who built the Fukushima reactors]. I'm talking about Alternative news sources like The Real News & DemocracyNow!. One would expect to see a more balanced view of the events in Libya w both being unquestionably opposed to US / UK / French / NATO military [& covert] intervention there, but [particularly DemocracyNow! - The Real News has been a bit more even-handed] this has not been the case - though they haven't overtly supported it either. Neither of these sources have had a truly even-handed take on Khadaffi [let alone had anyone on to defend him] - all of their commentary begins w the idea of 'Khadaffi's a brutal tyrant' as a given - which of course logically leads to 'Khadaffi should go' [IE: regime change] whether said explictly or not. Thus their debate isn't about whether there should be a negotiated settlement & truce / power-sharing arrangements / elections, etc- but whether or not the US / UK / France / NATO should intervene militarily [which, certainly at this point, should be Obviously be NO].
Juan Cole was on DemocracyNow! a few days ago- essentially acting as a mouth piece for O-Bomb-em, Billary, & Rice{squared}& providing left-cover [a Left gate keeper] for them. In fact he wrote a piece specifically targeting the left justifying this attack on Libya [as he basically dismissed the assault of the Saudi / Bahrain regimes on truly un-armed protesters in those countries- as barely significant] & urging the so-called left to support the O-Bomb-em regime. Previously DemocracyNow! had on a Libyan who was obviously a US mouth-piece for the rebels. On this past Thursday Amy Goodman featured a piece on the alleged rape by some Khadaffi troops of a woman. Now I don't know if this poor woman was raped by some Khadaffi soldiers or by some guys falsely pretending to be Khadaffi's people. In fact- I don't know if this incident actually occurred at all [remember that the 1st war on Iraq led by Mr CIA Skull{duggery}& Bones Bush Sr- was hyped by accusations by a tearful Kuwaiti girl that Saddam's troops threw Kuwaiti infants out of their incubators & stomped them to death- which later was shown to be completely untrue {the girl was the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US daughter who was coached]. Of course this accusation could be totally true- & if so would certainly be a personal tragedy & the victim entitled to justice- BUT- one isolated rape case doesn't justify an invasion of - or bombing campaign of Libya. And the US' hands are too filthy w rape cases of its own - to judge someone else [IE: the rash of rapes of women in the US military & Black-water / Xe; Rapes of Iraqi & Afghan women, girls & boys in Abu Ghraib & Bagram, etc; - women & juvenile girls & boys in the US Prison Industrial Complex]. So why would DemocracyNow! hype this story? Could it be to demonize Khadaffi even more than he's been already? Amy Goodman's women viewers would be particularly outraged [IE: vulnerable] after watching this story. Whether that is the intent or not- the effect is to push those on the so-called left to- if not actively supporting this attack on Libya - at least not speaking out forcefully against it.
Of much greater relative significance, as far as impeaching Khadaffi, is the report that he had some 1200 prisoners killed in 1996 - which didn't even get a mention in the west until this rebellion - because at that time the US & UK were too busy framing him for the sham PanAm 103 beef. The question is how valid is this accusation & under what circumstances? Does Khadaffi have a track record of this kind of thing [remember he seized power from a despotic western puppet king in 1969 in a BLOOD-LESS Coup]?
No comments:
Post a Comment