Open Letter to
Michael Ignatieff
posted to www.marxmail.org on March 24, 2003
Dear
Professor Ignatieff,
In
today's NY Times Magazine section, you write: "Back in the 60's, when I marched
against the war in Vietnam, I learned that it is a mistake to judge a cause by
the company it makes you keep. I slogged through the streets with Trotskyites
who thought America was an evil empire, and I chanted slogans under banners
that called for socialist revolution in Brooklyn. I stood arm in arm with
pacifists, who made me wonder whether they would have fought Hitler."
Just
a few comments on this idiotic statement.
Since
I was one of those "Trotskyites" (did you pick up this term of abuse
from your aunt Gertie in the Furriers Union, I wonder? Interesting how the
discourse of the Stalinists and American liberalism overlaps on occasion), let
me first of all explain that without those pacifists and reds you sneer at, you
probably would never had found yourself marching to begin with. It was they who
risked arrest and persecution for taking the first steps against the Vietnam
war, not the liberal pundits like Max Lerner who supported the war and in whose
careerist footsteps you are tracing.
Secondly,
as I am sure you are aware, the pacifists would not have fought Hitler. One of
them, Lew Hill, spent time in a detention camp for opposing the war. He later
went on to launch the Pacifica Network, the only alternative to the commercial
networks that are now spewing out a polluted river of lies. If there is any
justice in the world, these networks, and the generals and politicians they are
subservient to, will someday be found guilty of war crimes and spend time
behind bars. They should also reserve a place there for you, Paul Berman,
Christopher Hitchens and the rest of the liberal warmongering crew.
Thirdly,
as you well know, nobody carried banners calling for "socialist revolution
in Brooklyn." While this might be a joke, it is also entirely possible that
you were so unschooled in Marxism that you believe that a socialist revolution
can take place in the borough of a city. The real joke, however, is that you go
on to say that the Bush administration is "right on the issue" and that
supporting the war does not make you "a Cheney conservative or an
apologist for American imperialism." Now, Professor Ignatieff, nobody
believes that you are a "Cheney conservative." We understand that you
are a Democratic Party ideologue who is following the lead of people like
Joseph Lieberman and Hillary Clinton. But, on the other hand, there is little
question that you are an apologist for American imperialism.
The
war against Iraq is virtually identical to the war that the British fought in
1921, when Winston Churchill urged the use of poison gas against the upstart
Kurds, just as the US has openly stated that it will now use tear
gas--illegally--if the need arises. The British were always quite open about
their war aims, at least within their own elite circles. In a 1919 letter to a
British foreign service functionary Alan Dawnay, T.E. Lawrence wrote:
"The
future is ours, as long as the Arabs of Mesopotamia [Iraq] back us, for the
population of Syria is never to be more than 5,000,000 (no metals no fuel . .
.no industry; and little arable land) and Mesopotamia has thrice the acreage of
Egypt (Egypt 13,000,000 / Mesopotamia = 39,000,000) and besides agriculture it
has more petrol than any place on earth (cheap fuel = industry) and about it,
in Persia and the Kurdish hills, are copper, lead and iron."
Do
you seriously think that the calculations of people with long-standing ties to
the oil industry like Cheney, Bush and company are any different? Do you
believe that this war is about anything except oil and other geopolitical
interests? If so, it is very difficult to understand why the USA has not
invaded Israel, which routinely ignores UN resolutions, builds nuclear weapons,
tortures political prisoners, and bulldozes peace activists to death within the
context of building an apartheid state.
In
any case, I wouldn't worry that much about whether or not the 14,000 academics
who signed a petition against the war think that your hands are dripping with
blood. The career path to becoming a big-time liberal imperialist spokesman is
strewn with obstacles, not the least of which is moral qualms. I am quite sure
that in the course of rising to the top of this garbage heap, you will find it
easy to dispense with them.