Date   

NPR - When climate change becomes more dramatic, what might DC look like?

Dennis Brasky
 


The Lincoln Memorial could be surrounded by water. 

The city’s baseball stadium could be flooded by the nearby river. 

The Pentagon may be accessible only by boat.

 

https://www.npr.org/local/305/2021/10/22/1048360444/this-is-what-climate-change-will-look-like-in-d-c



Capitalist Energy Crunch: Towards Dark Winter

RKOB
 

Capitalist Energy Crunch: Towards Dark Winter

On another important feature of the Great Depression of the capitalist world economy, its economic causes and its political consequences

An Essay (with 5 Figures and 1 Table) by Michael Pröbsting, 23 October 2021

https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/capitalist-energy-crunch-towards-dark-winter/


Journalists Misread Delayed Poll as Sticker Shock on Biden Bill |David W. Moore | FAIR

Kevin Lindemann and Cathy Campo
 


Inside a Uyghur internment camp (Darren Byler, in Globe&Mail)

Marv Gandall
 

Correction: The article referenced in the last line is by Claudio Katz, not Gilbert Achcar.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Marv Gandall <marvgand2@...>
Subject: Re: Inside a Uyghur internment camp (Darren Byler, in Globe&Mail)
Date: October 24, 2021 at 5:30:33 PM PDT
To: Socialist Project <sp-canada-discussion@...>, Marxmail <marxmail@groups.io>

This is the most comprehensive and balanced piece I’ve so far seen on the issue (h/t Greg Albo). 


I have little doubt that what is going on in Xinjiang is a process of forced assimilation by the state and ethnic discrimination against the Uyghurs from from within the Han majority. However, I don’t accept that China is “imperialist”, as Simon Gilbert and the British SWP have it, and am in agreement with the more nuanced view of the export of Chinese capital expressed by Gilbert Achcar in his article which Richard shared with these lists last month.



On Oct 23, 2021, at 7:34 PM, Michael Zaharuk <zaharuk@...> wrote:

Here’s an interesting video piece by The Greyzone (28 min) on China and US
propaganda, also mentions Iraq, Libya, Ukraine and US imperialism there.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qZkxaEC1xjY


---------- Original Message ----------
From: John Riddell <jriddell63@...>
Date: October 23, 2021 at 5:21 PM


Regarding the Darren Byler
<https://www.sfu.ca/internationalstudies/faculty/profiles/byler.html> blast
in the Globe and Mail, there’s nothing wrong with propaganda. But this
extremely long “Opinion” piece is unusual in other ways. The author appears
never to have visited China. A professor in the state of Washington, his
voluminous writings deal solely with the Uighur question.

Byler presents us with the uncorroborated testimony of a single political
refugee from China, a person who could well have a personal interest in
presenting a hostile vision. The central assertion is that the Chinese
regime is attempting to physically extinguish the Uighur people (forced
sterilization, etc.), yet no reference is made to population statistics,
which demonstrate the opposite.

The prominence the *Globe and Mail* has given to this article suggests – at
least in this case – an “anything goes” approach toward inciting hatred
against China and its government.

For contrast, we can read the testimony of our dear friend, the recently
deceased Omar Latif
<https://www.canadianpeacecongress.ca/uncategorized/china-the-west-and-the-uighurs-a-special-report/>,
based on his experiences in Xinjiang. Also worth reading: a defense of
Chinese policy in Xinjiang
<https://socialistchina.org/2021/09/25/carlos-martinez-lies-about-xinjiang-are-designed-to-build-public-support-for-the-new-cold-war/>
by British socialist Carlos Martinez, based on a personal visit.

And then there is the viewpoint of the Chinese government itself. I heard a
presentation on Xinjiang by the Chinese consul in Calgary, Lu Xu, who
stressed that there had been substantial disaffection in Xinjiang,
including among a minority who wanted independence. The government had
countered this, she said, with large-scale economic development in the
region and moves to open up economic opportunity for members of minority
national groups.

John Riddell

On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 10:55 AM Herman Rosenfeld <
hermanrosenfeld@...> wrote:

I'm sure that there will be folks working assiduously to argue that this
is nothing but propaganda.

Sent from Rogers Yahoo Mail on Android
<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>

On Sat., 23 Oct. 2021 at 10:24 a.m., rfidler@...
<rfidler@...> wrote:


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-chinas-internment-camps-in-xinjiang-are-a-horror-survivors-and/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/000001d7c819%24ad589400%240809bc00%24%40ncf.ca
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/000001d7c819%24ad589400%240809bc00%24%40ncf.ca?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1247868804.908771.1635000941843%40mail.yahoo.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1247868804.908771.1635000941843%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/CA%2Bcz-LGZuZmMTnPdotso0WW4bcVi8EcH8veAHiOh7neVKZcUxA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1951506227.1255511.1635042888125.JavaMail.open-xchange%40torgui08.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



DC branch of Sunrise Movement...withdraws from rally...due to participation of Zionist groups

Dayne Goodwin
 

Sunrise DC’s litmus test on Zionism shocks mainstream Jewish organizations
by Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, October 22, 2021
https://mondoweiss.net/2021/10/sunrise-dcs-litmus-test-on-zionism-shocks-mainstream-jewish-organizations/

You have surely read about the decision by the Washington DC branch of Sunrise Movement, the five-year-old group demanding action to stop climate change, to withdraw from a Freedom to Vote Rally in the capital tomorrow because of the participation of three Zionist groups in the coalition sponsoring the rally.

The decision shocked Jewish establishment organizations because it seems to portend a political future in which Zionism and progressivism are irreconcilable. Centrist Jewish groups accused Sunrise DC of antisemitism, while liberal Zionist organizations called the decision wrong. Many pro-Israel politicians have also condemned the decision, and the national Sunrise Movement distanced itself from its DC “hub”‘s decision though it did not condemn it.

Here’s an excerpt of Sunrise DC’s statement:
“Given our commitment to racial justice, self-governance and indigenous sovereignty, we oppose Zionism and any state that enforces its ideology… Israel, in its occupation of the land of Palestine and its people, has and continues to engage in violent oppressive tactics that go against the values we advocate for as a hub.”
 . . .




Re: Inside a Uyghur internment camp (Darren Byler, in Globe&Mail)

Marv Gandall
 

This is the most comprehensive and balanced piece I’ve so far seen on the issue (h/t Greg Albo). 


I have little doubt that what is going on in Xinjiang is a process of forced assimilation by the state and ethnic discrimination against the Uyghurs from from within the Han majority. However, I don’t accept that China is “imperialist”, as Simon Gilbert and the British SWP have it, and am in agreement with the more nuanced view of the export of Chinese capital expressed by Gilbert Achcar in his article which Richard shared with these lists last month.



On Oct 23, 2021, at 7:34 PM, Michael Zaharuk <zaharuk@...> wrote:

Here’s an interesting video piece by The Greyzone (28 min) on China and US
propaganda, also mentions Iraq, Libya, Ukraine and US imperialism there.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qZkxaEC1xjY


---------- Original Message ----------
From: John Riddell <jriddell63@...>
Date: October 23, 2021 at 5:21 PM


Regarding the Darren Byler
<https://www.sfu.ca/internationalstudies/faculty/profiles/byler.html> blast
in the Globe and Mail, there’s nothing wrong with propaganda. But this
extremely long “Opinion” piece is unusual in other ways. The author appears
never to have visited China. A professor in the state of Washington, his
voluminous writings deal solely with the Uighur question.

Byler presents us with the uncorroborated testimony of a single political
refugee from China, a person who could well have a personal interest in
presenting a hostile vision. The central assertion is that the Chinese
regime is attempting to physically extinguish the Uighur people (forced
sterilization, etc.), yet no reference is made to population statistics,
which demonstrate the opposite.

The prominence the *Globe and Mail* has given to this article suggests – at
least in this case – an “anything goes” approach toward inciting hatred
against China and its government.

For contrast, we can read the testimony of our dear friend, the recently
deceased Omar Latif
<https://www.canadianpeacecongress.ca/uncategorized/china-the-west-and-the-uighurs-a-special-report/>,
based on his experiences in Xinjiang. Also worth reading: a defense of
Chinese policy in Xinjiang
<https://socialistchina.org/2021/09/25/carlos-martinez-lies-about-xinjiang-are-designed-to-build-public-support-for-the-new-cold-war/>
by British socialist Carlos Martinez, based on a personal visit.

And then there is the viewpoint of the Chinese government itself. I heard a
presentation on Xinjiang by the Chinese consul in Calgary, Lu Xu, who
stressed that there had been substantial disaffection in Xinjiang,
including among a minority who wanted independence. The government had
countered this, she said, with large-scale economic development in the
region and moves to open up economic opportunity for members of minority
national groups.

John Riddell

On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 10:55 AM Herman Rosenfeld <
hermanrosenfeld@...> wrote:

I'm sure that there will be folks working assiduously to argue that this
is nothing but propaganda.

Sent from Rogers Yahoo Mail on Android
<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>

On Sat., 23 Oct. 2021 at 10:24 a.m., rfidler@...
<rfidler@...> wrote:


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-chinas-internment-camps-in-xinjiang-are-a-horror-survivors-and/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/000001d7c819%24ad589400%240809bc00%24%40ncf.ca
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/000001d7c819%24ad589400%240809bc00%24%40ncf.ca?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1247868804.908771.1635000941843%40mail.yahoo.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1247868804.908771.1635000941843%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/CA%2Bcz-LGZuZmMTnPdotso0WW4bcVi8EcH8veAHiOh7neVKZcUxA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sp-canada-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sp-canada-discussion+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sp-canada-discussion/1951506227.1255511.1635042888125.JavaMail.open-xchange%40torgui08.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


The U.S. flies Alex Saab out from Cabo Verde without court order or extradition treaty

Charles Keener
 

The U.S. flies Alex Saab out from Cabo Verde without court order or extradition treaty – COHA

On October 16, Colombian businessman and Venezuelan Special Envoy Alex Saab was in practical terms kidnapped for the second time, first by Cabo Verde under pressure from Washington, and now by the U.S., in flagrant violation of international law.
The capture of Saab was made without any proper legal basis. While Washington prevailed upon Cabo Verde to seize Saab based upon the pretext that the U.S. wanted to extradite him for alleged crimes, the United States has no extradition treaty with Cabo Verde.[3] Moreover, while Cabo Verde authorities claimed that Saab was detained pursuant to a valid Interpol notice, a regional court in Nigeria found that the detention took place before the Interpol notice was issued, raising huge concerns about the legal validity of Saab’s detention and imprisonment.

While the allegations against him are hotly disputed, what is not in doubt is that Washington is behind his persecution. And it is also clear that the U.S. is interested in Saab, not because of any alleged crimes but because he may hold the key to Venezuela’s ability to circumvent Washington’s deadly illegal unilateral sanctions. First and foremost, the allegations against Saab involve alleged embezzlement from food and housing programs in Venezuela. Given that the U.S. is sanctioning Venezuela in an attempt, inter alia, to undermine the ability of Venezuela to maintain such programs, it is patently obvious that Washington has no real, bona fide concerns about someone allegedly taking kickbacks from such programs. And moreover, under established U.S. judicial doctrines of comity and forum non conveniens, it is Venezuela which, in the first instance, has the right to try to prosecute such crimes committed within its own domestic jurisdiction.
It appears that Alex Saab’s very adeptness in helping Venezuela to get around these sanctions – sanctions which Alena Douhan notes are illegal under international law — is the real reason for Washington’s interest in having him detained and extradited.

The actions of the U.S. and Cabo Verde against Alex Saab have dealt a serious blow to international law and the security of diplomats worldwide. It sets the dangerous precedent that an individual, and especially a foreign diplomat, can be captured and detained without warrant and then “extradited” to the US without a valid extradition treaty and without an U.S. court authorization. This type of action undermines the rule of law, and indeed establishes “the rule of the jungle” wherein powerful countries like the US can simply ignore rights of individuals to due process and to freedom from arbitrary detention to bully developing countries such as Venezuela.


Implications of the "Rust" Movie Set Shooting Incident

Farans Kalosar
 


Re: Inside a Uyghur internment camp (Darren Byler, in Globe&Mail)

John Edmundson
 

"substantial disaffection in Xinjiang, including among a minority who wanted independence. The government had countered this, she said, with large-scale economic development in the region and moves to open up economic opportunity for members of minority national groups."

On the other hand, I remember reading quite some years ago about the fact that China's competitiveness as a low wage factory to the world was not sustainable given rising costs in the South East, where most of China's industrial production takes place. The so;ution was to open up China's western provinces to industrialisation, via improved transport and other infrastructure. Could it be that that is the real reason for "large scale economic development in the region" and that that development may go hand in hand with, rather than be counter to repression of "substantial disaffection" anda desire for independence?

Comradely,
John

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 10:34 PM Dayne Goodwin <daynegoodwin@...> wrote:
Thank you Richard for sharing this discussion, including your remarks (awaiting moderation) at John Riddell's blog/site and also John's response to the Globe and Mail article on the Chinese government's repression of the Uyghur people (which he must have posted elsewhere).  Of course you are describing social reality and John is defending his new ideological beliefs.

I also recently began reading The Communist Road to Capitalism: How Unrest and Containment Have Pushed China's (R)Evolution Since 1949, by Ralf Ruckus (PM Press, 2021).  I think it is a valuable resource. I won't be able to focus on and finish it right away because my reading agenda is established by a couple of local discussion groups alongside my disposition to always be in the midst of multiple books.  I did read introductory and concluding sections and study its graphic and reference information.

Dayne



On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 7:38 AM Richard Fidler <rfidler@...> wrote:

I have commented as follows on this website (“awaiting moderation”):

 

Riddell’s argument seems to rest on two key propositions: (1) The Chinese Communist Party is autonomous from the capitalists. “But in China – unlike in the imperialist countries – the billionaires do not give instructions to the government. On the contrary, the government gives instructions to the capitalists.” (2) The CCP rules in the interests of the Chinese workers and peasants. “Chinese society today rests on the heritage of a great socialist revolution 75 years ago … deepened and developed by the efforts of working people and the revolutionary government they established…. Surely what is most significant about China today is the degree to which, through its great revolution and subsequently, it has made headway in resisting the dehumanizing tendencies of colonialism and capitalism.”

 

John does not make a convincing argument in support of either proposition, in my opinion. For example, he does not consider the ample evidence that many of China’s millionaires, and even billionaires, are themselves members of the CCP, which agreed a few years ago to admit capitalists to party membership; many of them accepted the invitation, of course. The relation between the party and the capitalists is not fundamentally antagonistic, they collaborate closely in their economic and political roles notwithstanding many understandable tensions. The CCP’s current embrace of “common prosperity” as its theme is clearly designed to reinforce its legitimacy, especially important in a country where the party exercises monolithic authority and not only prohibits the formation of revolutionary groups critical of the government (the reason why “we do not see many reports of revolutionary anti-government groups,” as John notes) but severely restricts if not outlaws the functioning of independent trade unions and peasant organizations.

 

Of course, the social system has its unique features, call it “state capitalism,” “capitalism with Chinese characteristics,” or whatever. John seems to think that the CCP’s hegemony serves to counter the country’s growing social inequality. He acknowledges the “relatively frequent” workplace revolts by workers, but dismisses them as “a testimony to the health of Chinese society” – a beguiling way to describe class struggle. And he turns a blind eye to many other features of China’s class structure, such as the government’s longstanding persecution and repression of minority nationalities.

 

John states that “China’s future will surely be decisively influenced by the evolution of global politics.” Yes, and the global left must work to counter the massive and dangerous offensive against China being mounted by the imperialist powers, designed to counter its sovereign state independence won in 1949. But no less decisive to China’s future is the course of its internal class struggle. To recover their own leading role in the country’s evolution, the Chinese workers and peasants will have to contend with and ultimately overcome the autocratic, repressive opposition of the Chinese CP leadership and its capitalist allies.

 

Only in that sense will it be correct to say, as argued by the Manifesto recently published by the group in which John claims membership (see his note 6) that China  is “the indispensable nation in humankind’s struggle for socialism, offering aid and inspiration as a worthy example of a country pursuing socialism….”

 

Richard Fidler


On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 4:06 PM Richard Fidler <rfidler@...> wrote:

From an important book I am reading: The Communist Road to Capitalism, by Ralf Ruckus (PM Press, 2021):

 

“That the regime spends more funds on its domestic security apparatus than on its military shows how important it considers internal counterinsurgency and policing to be. In Xinjiang, it has even installed a kind of panoptical state in the past few years. This highly repressive system, allegedly directed against the spread of Islamist terror, includes measures to subjugate the Uyghur population and other Muslim groups: DNA mapping, obligatory spy apps on private smartphones, widespread video surveillance, regular body searches, mass detentions in reeducation camps, and forced labor. The repression in Xinjiang serves as a warning to oppositional movements and dissidents in other regions of the PRC.” (p. 156)

 

A footnote adds:

“For more information on the CCP regime’s strategies in Xinjiang to restructure

the province for its colonial rule and for capitalist exploitation, see Darren Byler,

“Spirit Breaking: Uyghur Dispossession, Culture Work and Terror Capitalism

in a Chinese Global City” (PhD diss., University of Washington, 2018), accessed

November 20, 2020, https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/

handle/1773/42946/Byler_washington_0250E_19242.pdf.”

Byler is the author of the Globe article.

 

Richard

 

From: Steve Maher <smaher85@...>
Sent: October 23, 2021 5:45 PM
To: John Riddell <jriddell63@...>
Cc: Herman Rosenfeld <hermanrosenfeld@...>; Richard Fidler <rfidler@...>; Socialist Project discussion <sp-canada-discussion@...>; marxmail <marxmail@groups.io>
Subject: Re: Inside a Uyghur internment camp (Darren Byler, in Globe&Mail)

 

And what of the extensive evidence gathered by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (amongst others), who have accused China of “crimes against humanity” – including mass detention and torture?

 

On one side, we have this extensive documentary evidence and direct testimonies of  survivors, and on the other side, we have the stories told by the Chinese government and a British tourist.

 

 

--
Stephen Maher, Ph.D.
647-741-0491 (mobile)
SMaher85@...



On Oct 23, 2021, at 3:21 PM, John Riddell <jriddell63@...> wrote:

 

Regarding the Darren Byler blast in the Globe and Mail, there’s nothing wrong with propaganda. But this extremely long “Opinion” piece is unusual in other ways. The author appears never to have visited China. A professor in the state of Washington, his voluminous writings deal solely with the Uighur question.

Byler presents us with the uncorroborated testimony of a single political refugee from China, a person who could well have a personal interest in presenting a hostile vision. The central assertion is that the Chinese regime is attempting to physically extinguish the Uighur people (forced sterilization, etc.), yet no reference is made to population statistics, which demonstrate the opposite.

The prominence the Globe and Mail has given to this article suggests – at least in this case – an “anything goes” approach toward inciting hatred against China and its government.

For contrast, we can read the testimony of our dear friend, the recently deceased Omar Latif, based on his experiences in Xinjiang. Also worth reading: a defense of Chinese policy in Xinjiang by British socialist Carlos Martinez, based on a personal visit.

And then there is the viewpoint of the Chinese government itself. I heard a presentation on Xinjiang by the Chinese consul in Calgary, Lu Xu, who stressed that there had been substantial disaffection in Xinjiang, including among a minority who wanted independence. The government had countered this, she said, with large-scale economic development in the region and moves to open up economic opportunity for members of minority national groups. 

John Riddell

 




--
"All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks."
Sarah Moore Grimke, abolitionist (1792-1873)


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Cort Greene
 

None of us and certainly not me on these lists have supported the extradition or called for it even though more are coming soon.

Sadly none of these people said anything when Venezuela and Colombia were involved in talking and working with one another when the foreign ministers ( Maduro and Santos at the time) started working with around the coup in Honduras, making sure the former president of Honduras who was overthrown could return to the country, that the OAS would welcome back Honduras into the fold and the status quo remained as is after the coup along with trade and other issues. 

And again not a word from any of these groups like Code Pink, PSL, WWP et all when several members of the FARC and ELN were extradited to Colombia from Venezuela years ago and in return Colombia extradition of supposed "drug lord" Walid Makled back to Venezuela, who was also wanted badly by Washington to face cocaine smuggling charges at the time

Many left wing groups in Venezuela especially groups from the January 23rd barrio and PCV questioned why this was happening to FARC members Guillermo Enrique Torres (aka Julián Conrado, or “The Singer”) and Joaquín Pérez Becerra – a Colombia-born media activist of the Unión Patriótica granted political asylum in Sweden in 2000.

What has been brought up are the many contradictions in the Saab story, the way it is being told/sold and I guess the moral of this story is if you are going to launder money don't do it through banks and groups in the US or countries in support of it. Saab started doing this and was also wanted in Colombia for actions in the early 2000-2010 for laundering for his own benefit and others for a decade before even having anything to do with making money in Venezuela.

But I still see Charles and the others have not spoken out about the repression against the workers, poor, women and left groups in Venezuela.

At least with Kevin Zeese before he died, I was able to have a few discussions about what was happening to groups in the APR ( he was at least somewhat sympathetic to their plight and hoped they did well in the elections last December), the tactics used and problems around the Embassy Protectors in DC and solidarity with the revolution.

3 days before his death he wrote a nice statement on an article on marxist.com on the world economy on a Green list...

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 2:53 PM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
Again, neither Saab nor those opposing/reporting the criminal actions by the U.S. need to be faultless/blameless/perfect in order for one
to oppose his extradition to the U.S. as well as U.S. actions prior to that. I oppose deadly criminal U.S. sanctions against Venezuela and 
support efforts by that nation's leaders to circumvent those sanctions and obtain things needed by their citizens. The U.S. targeted Saab
precisely because he was working to defy their sanctions (imperialist bullying/coercion). The idea that the U.S. actually cares about the 
stated charges given what else has gone on in the U.S. is laughable. And it is not the place of the U.S. to police the entire world and the
citizens of other nations according to its own whims and animosities - any more than the U.S. has a right to imprison, torture and try Julian
Assange. Saab should be released and returned to Venezuela.  Supporting, defending , justifying, running interference for the 
actions of the U.S. empire does not serve justice in my opinion.

Charles


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Steven L. Robinson
 

One thing that has neve been explained is the programmatic basis for the split off that led to PSL in the early 2000s.  On this list,  Louis Proyect kept asking that question (there were members of both groups on the list back then) and never got a real answer.  As far as I can tell, it seems that the Becker brothers chafed at being second fiddle to the WWP’s New York leadership but I am sure they had a political rationale.  One wonders why they kept it secret.

 

This behavior is in contrast to most small Socialist group behavior.  Usually when there are splits or expulsions, both sides are eager to tell their story and often do so ad nauseum, as was the case following the expulsions from U.S. SWP in the early 1980s (and there ae numerous examples both in the U.S. and elsewhere). 

 

SR

 

 

From: marxmail@groups.io <marxmail@groups.io> On Behalf Of Cort Greene
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:27 AM
To: marxmail@groups.io
Cc: PROGRESSIVE@groups.io
Subject: Re: [marxmail] The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now!

 

You are correct Steve and there is probably more to the stories than will ever know.

We have seen many articles recently written on Iraq and Afghanistan  but none about the anti war movement during those days, its problems and actions, strategy and tactics or lack thereof

about the players who co-opted it, distract and helped make it insignificant such as ANSWER, PSL,WWP, UFPJ, Code Pink et all...That could be several books.

 

I hope someday I will be able to relate ( if I am not jailed or past away) about similar and strange things that have been happening in the solidarity movement with the Bolivarian revolution in the US from 1999 on and the role of some of these same groups like Code Pink/ Global Exchange/VIO, people and the tendencies have played.

 

 

 


Does economic growth cause unemployment?

Tom Walker
 


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Charles Keener
 

Again, neither Saab nor those opposing/reporting the criminal actions by the U.S. need to be faultless/blameless/perfect in order for one
to oppose his extradition to the U.S. as well as U.S. actions prior to that. I oppose deadly criminal U.S. sanctions against Venezuela and 
support efforts by that nation's leaders to circumvent those sanctions and obtain things needed by their citizens. The U.S. targeted Saab
precisely because he was working to defy their sanctions (imperialist bullying/coercion). The idea that the U.S. actually cares about the 
stated charges given what else has gone on in the U.S. is laughable. And it is not the place of the U.S. to police the entire world and the
citizens of other nations according to its own whims and animosities - any more than the U.S. has a right to imprison, torture and try Julian
Assange. Saab should be released and returned to Venezuela.  Supporting, defending , justifying, running interference for the 
actions of the U.S. empire does not serve justice in my opinion.

Charles


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Cort Greene
 

You are correct Steve and there is probably more to the stories than will ever know.
We have seen many articles recently written on Iraq and Afghanistan  but none about the anti war movement during those days, its problems and actions, strategy and tactics or lack thereof
about the players who co-opted it, distract and helped make it insignificant such as ANSWER, PSL,WWP, UFPJ, Code Pink et all...That could be several books.

I hope someday I will be able to relate ( if I am not jailed or past away) about similar and strange things that have been happening in the solidarity movement with the Bolivarian revolution in the US from 1999 on and the role of some of these same groups like Code Pink/ Global Exchange/VIO, people and the tendencies have played.



On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 1:20 PM Steven L. Robinson <srobin21@...> wrote:
Cort 

What you fail to mention is the incredibly sectarian behavior of Workers World and also of the Beckers' PSL/Answer. 

Both in the run up to the Gulf War in 1991 and the Iraq War of 2003, they intentionally set up their own "coalitions" in competition to those organized by grassroots folks on the ground and other national orgamizations. The Marcyites scheduled demonstrations in direct competition (same day and time in the same city) with those organized by others. Overall, this caused much confusion among everyday people who were not usually involved in politics but felt motivated to become active in opposition to the impending war(s). This sectarian behavior caused incalcuable damage at the time.

It was not so much a question of political differences that guided the Marcyites but organizational aggrandizement. There was, for the most part, little disagreement with the overriding need to oppose the U.S. interventions. Even activists who might have agreed with the Marcyites positions on the war (such as, say, Medea Benjamin, for instance) found themselves in competition to the parallel organizations set up by the Marcyites.

THAT sectarian behavior is the major reason I and others so despise Workers World and Answer.

Having said that, the Marcyite cheerleading for the old Iraqi Baath regime and Slobo's Serbian regime after it embraced Serbian nationalism was always hard for me to stomach but those views were well within the spectrum- for good or ill - of the antiwar movements at the time and there was no good reason for the Marcyites not participating in the more inclusive organizations.

SR

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy , an AT&T LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: Cort Greene <cort.greene@...>
Date: 10/24/21 8:42 AM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [marxmail] The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now!

***I was wondering where Greg Butterfield has been, seems he is now a member of Struggle ★ La Lucha after leaving Workers World Party ( LA and Baltimore split) ; one of at least 4 parties in the US who adhere to the guiding light, ideas and world outlook of Sam (Ballard) Marcy... the others are Workers World Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation ( led by the Becker Boys)  and Communist Workers League ( Detroit and several other branches) . There could be a fifth or secret group in New Orleans also.

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 11:28 AM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! by Greg Butterfield – Dandelion Salad (wordpress.com)

The United Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, the African Bar Association, and governments around the world called on Cape Verdean authorities to release Saab and protested that there was absolutely no legal basis to extradite him to the U.S. More than 15,000 people signed an international petition to free the Venezuelan diplomat.
And there are more cases related to the fight against sanctions, where foreign nationals are charged with violating provisions of the (illegal) U.S.-imposed sanctions on countries it seeks to destroy. Such was the case of Meng Wanzhou, a Chinese businessperson who was detained in Canada for nearly three years before finally winning the right to return home to China in September. And of course, there was the Trump regime’s illegal seizure of the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., in 2019, including the arrest of four embassy defenders. Sanctions are an act of war. So are violations of the international and the universally recognized rights of diplomats. The U.S. empire’s political gangsters carry out these lawless and vile acts because, they laugh to themselves, “Who will dare to stop us?” We must dare — to struggle and to win. Free Alex Saab! Free all political prisoners of U.S. imperialism — domestic and international!


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Steven L. Robinson
 

Cort 

What you fail to mention is the incredibly sectarian behavior of Workers World and also of the Beckers' PSL/Answer. 

Both in the run up to the Gulf War in 1991 and the Iraq War of 2003, they intentionally set up their own "coalitions" in competition to those organized by grassroots folks on the ground and other national orgamizations. The Marcyites scheduled demonstrations in direct competition (same day and time in the same city) with those organized by others. Overall, this caused much confusion among everyday people who were not usually involved in politics but felt motivated to become active in opposition to the impending war(s). This sectarian behavior caused incalcuable damage at the time.

It was not so much a question of political differences that guided the Marcyites but organizational aggrandizement. There was, for the most part, little disagreement with the overriding need to oppose the U.S. interventions. Even activists who might have agreed with the Marcyites positions on the war (such as, say, Medea Benjamin, for instance) found themselves in competition to the parallel organizations set up by the Marcyites.

THAT sectarian behavior is the major reason I and others so despise Workers World and Answer.

Having said that, the Marcyite cheerleading for the old Iraqi Baath regime and Slobo's Serbian regime after it embraced Serbian nationalism was always hard for me to stomach but those views were well within the spectrum- for good or ill - of the antiwar movements at the time and there was no good reason for the Marcyites not participating in the more inclusive organizations.

SR

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy , an AT&T LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: Cort Greene <cort.greene@...>
Date: 10/24/21 8:42 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: marxmail@groups.io
Subject: Re: [marxmail] The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now!

***I was wondering where Greg Butterfield has been, seems he is now a member of Struggle ★ La Lucha after leaving Workers World Party ( LA and Baltimore split) ; one of at least 4 parties in the US who adhere to the guiding light, ideas and world outlook of Sam (Ballard) Marcy... the others are Workers World Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation ( led by the Becker Boys)  and Communist Workers League ( Detroit and several other branches) . There could be a fifth or secret group in New Orleans also.

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 11:28 AM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! by Greg Butterfield – Dandelion Salad (wordpress.com)

The United Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, the African Bar Association, and governments around the world called on Cape Verdean authorities to release Saab and protested that there was absolutely no legal basis to extradite him to the U.S. More than 15,000 people signed an international petition to free the Venezuelan diplomat.
And there are more cases related to the fight against sanctions, where foreign nationals are charged with violating provisions of the (illegal) U.S.-imposed sanctions on countries it seeks to destroy. Such was the case of Meng Wanzhou, a Chinese businessperson who was detained in Canada for nearly three years before finally winning the right to return home to China in September. And of course, there was the Trump regime’s illegal seizure of the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., in 2019, including the arrest of four embassy defenders. Sanctions are an act of war. So are violations of the international and the universally recognized rights of diplomats. The U.S. empire’s political gangsters carry out these lawless and vile acts because, they laugh to themselves, “Who will dare to stop us?” We must dare — to struggle and to win. Free Alex Saab! Free all political prisoners of U.S. imperialism — domestic and international!


The 2021 Toronto International Film Festival: ‘Attica’ revisited | Bill Meyer | People's World

Kevin Lindemann and Cathy Campo
 


H-Net Review [H-Diplo]: White on De Bruin, 'How to Prevent Coups d'État: Counterbalancing and Regime'

Andrew Stewart
 



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-review@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 9:52 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-Diplo]: White on De Bruin, 'How to Prevent Coups d'État: Counterbalancing and Regime'
To: <h-review@...>
Cc: H-Net Staff <revhelp@...>


Erica De Bruin.  How to Prevent Coups d'État: Counterbalancing and
Regime.  Ithaca  Cornell University Press, 2020.  xiv + 199 pp. 
$46.95 (cloth), ISBN 978-1-5017-5191-2.

Reviewed by Peter B. White (Auburn University)
Published on H-Diplo (October, 2021)
Commissioned by Seth Offenbach

The fundamental problem of civil-military relations remains how to
create armed forces powerful enough to defend the state but also to
ensure that a powerful military does not threaten the state
itself.[1] In non-democracies and many new or transitioning
democracies, the threat of an overt attempt by all or parts of the
military to seize the state in a coup is a very real one. It is not
surprising, then, that leaders in these regimes are preoccupied with
how to both have a military and be safe from it--that is, how to
"coup-proof" their regimes.

In _How to Prevent Coups d'État_, Erica De Bruin provides a
comprehensive examination of one of the most prevalent strategies of
coup-proofing, the creation of armed "counterweights" or
"counterbalances" to the military. De Bruin answers four vital
questions in this book: Do counterweights make coups less likely to
succeed? Do they reduce coup attempts? How do counterweights work?
And do counterweights make civil war more likely?

In the first chapter, De Bruin outlines a theory of counterbalancing
and coup making. This chapter is best read with some familiarity with
Naunihal Singh's 2014 _Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military
Coups_, which includes a theory of coups as coordination games, but
De Bruin does an able job of outlining Singh's argument for the
reader. De Bruin argues that counterbalancing affects the success of
coups through two possible mechanisms: by making it more difficult
for coup plotters to plan and coordinate or by offering armed
resistance to coups.

In the next section of this chapter, coup attempts--rather than their
success--are examined. De Bruin puts forward the possibility that
counterbalancing may either increase or decrease coup attempts,
depending on their effect on the motivation for coups. On the one
hand, counterweights may decrease tension in civil-military
relations: for example, if a newly created gendarmerie takes over
internal security or repression missions that harmed the military's
standing in society. On the other hand, the creation of a new
counterweight may decrease the military's standing and share of
resources, and this may serve to actually incite a coup attempt. De
Bruin also puts forward expectations for the effect of counterweights
on the likelihood that coups escalate to civil war. Here, she argues
that the presence of armed counterweights will increase the
likelihood. This is possible through two mechanisms: armed
counterweights putting up a significant fight against coup makers as
the coup unfolds or counterweights becoming the nucleus of armed
support for the incumbent even if the coup succeeds in ousting them,
setting the stage for civil war.

Having outlined this ambitious set of hypotheses, De Bruin goes about
systematically testing them in chapters 2-6. The approach here is
"nested analysis" in which the author combines large-N analyses of
coup attempts and counterbalancing with more in-depth case analysis
of narratives of coup attempts to parse out the causal mechanisms
behind the statistical associations demonstrated by the large-N
analyses (p. 35).

In chapter 2, De Bruin introduces the State Security Forces Data
(SSFD) and tests the hypotheses related to counterbalancing and coup
success. It is worth underscoring that an additional contribution of
this book--and De Bruin's work more generally--is the new data that
forms the basis for the book's empirical portion. De Bruin's SSFD
provides near-comprehensive coverage of state security sectors (110
countries randomly selected) from 1960 to 2010. These data provide
the user with not only a count of extra-military armed organizations
but also their role in the state, their potential as counterbalances
to the military, and their armament and threat orientation. The SSFD
addresses a long-standing weakness in data on state security sectors
and coup-proofing that were derived from imperfect and potentially
biased secondary sources. These new data in and of themselves make
the book noteworthy. Following a discussion of the data, chapter 2
demonstrates in a series of statistical analyses that
counterbalancing is significantly associated with a reduction in the
likelihood that a coup attempt succeeds in overthrowing the incumbent
state leader. These results are backed up by an array of alternative
model specifications and robustness checks that provide added
confidence in these results.

Chapter 3 shifts to qualitative analyses and examines in detail coup
attempts in Kenya in 1982, Morocco in 1971, and Panama in 1989. The
chapter also offers less-detailed discussion of an additional
thirteen coups--four successful and nine failed. The criteria for
selection of these cases is "most likely"--in that they are selected
on the basis that they are likely to reveal the mechanisms behind the
effect of counterbalancing on coup success, as demonstrated in
chapter 2. Counterbalancing was the causal factor driving the failure
of the three coups examined in detail, and this was through the
"resistance" mechanism--that is, violent action against the coup once
in motion was what insured its failure, not hindering coordination in
the planning stages.

Chapter 4 offers quantitative analysis of coup attempts and stands as
a useful complement to chapter 2. Here, De Bruin finds in line with
one of the hypotheses presented in chapter 1 that in the short term,
building counterbalances can actually increase the likelihood that
the state sees a coup attempt. Taken together, the large-N analyses
of chapters 2 and 4 demonstrate that while counterbalancing does what
it is supposed to do and makes coup attempts less likely to succeed,
it makes the attempts more likely.

Chapter 4 examines the mechanism behind the association between
counterbalancing and increased coup attempts, while chapter 5 unpacks
this and demonstrates through detailed case analyses of
civil-military relations in Ghana (1960-66), Sierra Leone (1968-74),
Mali (1960-68), and Cuba (1959-66) that where counterbalancing
provokes coup attempts, it is due to the military's perceived loss of
status and relative power in the regime as a new armed force is built
up. Where leaders combine the creation of a new counterweight with
other policies, such as budgetary increases and credible assurances
of an important mission and role in the regime, counterbalancing
needs not provoke a retaliatory coup attempt by the military.
Finally, chapter 5 examines the role that counterbalancing plays in
the escalation of coups to broader armed conflict and violence.
Indeed, this chapter--and the related article in the _Journal of
Peace Research_--has much to offer to scholars of civil war as well
as civil-military relations.[2] A non-trivial subset of civil wars
identified in commonly used quantitative datasets of armed conflict
are coups that escalate to high levels of violence between putschists
and defenders of the incumbent regime, and this is an under-explored
population of civil wars. As De Bruin notes, these have distinctive
causal pathways from civil wars that stem from challenges from
outside the state, which tends to be the focus of the civil wars
literature.

Chapter 5 demonstrates that counterbalancing can contribute to an
escalation of violence stemming from a coup attempt to civil war.
Both mechanisms proffered in chapter 1 are supported. De Bruin
illustrates that the presence of counterweights during the 1965 coup
attempt in the Dominican Republic led to immediate resistance and
violent escalation. In contrast, the 1962 coup in Yemen spiraled into
civil war because the deposed incumbent was able to turn to loyalist
counterweights that were stationed outside the capital and launch
longer-term resistance to the successful coup makers.

In _How to Prevent Coups d'É_tat, De Bruin provides a compelling
narrative of the role that counterweights to the military play in
civil-military relations and conflict processes more broadly.
Counterweights can make coup attempts more likely as they signal
decreased status for the regular military, but they do what they are
supposed to do in that they make coup attempts less likely to succeed
through the resistance that counterweights provide to a coup attempt.
This comes with a potential downside, though, in that the violence
that results from the resistance to a coup that counterweights
provide can spiral into broader violence and civil war.

The contributions of this book are significant. It exemplifies the
excellent work on civil-military relations produced by junior
scholars in the past decade, alongside Kristen Harkness's _When
Soldiers Rebel: Ethnic Armies and Political Instability in Africa
_(2018), Jason Lyall's _Divided Armies: Inequality and Battlefield
Performance in Modern War_ (2020), Singh's _Seizing Power _(2014),
and Caitlin Talmadge's _The Dictator's Army: Battlefield
Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes _(2015). The argument is
thorough and nuanced and the quantitative and qualitative analyses
rigorous and convincing. The structure of the book--the progression
through three related dependent variables (coup success, coup
incidence, and escalation to civil war)--is easy to follow and
logical. The ample attention to counterarguments and robustness
checks provides added confidence in the solidness of the argument and
results. In the quantitative chapters, the progression from simple
bivariate analyses to more complicated, multivariate models is
welcome, making the work accessible to a nontechnical audience and
providing added confidence that the patterns observed are not an
artifact of a specific model specification or constellation of
control variables.

De Bruin's fluid writing is peppered with anecdotes and examples in
addition to her well-researched case studies. This serves to add
confidence in the real-world grounding of her argument and makes her
work accessible to a broad range of readers. In addition to being a
must-have for scholars of civil-military relations and conflict
processes more broadly, the book, due to its accessibility, should
find a home in many upper-level undergraduate courses as well as
graduate seminars.

The potential weaknesses in this compelling book are few, and as with
any excellent work, they reveal avenues for further research for
scholars to build on rather than any fundamental flaw in the book's
argument or execution. One intriguing question raised by the
discussion of the Cuban case in chapter 5 is the role of threat
environment in conditioning the effect of counterweights on coup
attempts. De Bruin rightly indicates that various policies and
assurances made by the Fidel Castro regime served to stabilize
civil-military relations in the 1960s, and she discusses the role
played by the United States in providing an external threat. This
could be expanded. The coup reduction effect of external threats has
recently been noted in the literature, as well as their ability to
make credible the commitments that a regime makes to its military.[3]
An additional wrinkle to the story detailed in _How to Prevent Coups
d'État _may be that when combined with an external threat that makes
clear the role and status of the regular military, counterweights
need not pose the same threat to the civil-military bargain.
Similarly, the role of internal threats, such as an insurgency, may
exacerbate the effect of counterweights on coup attempts. Internal
threats can cause militaries to lose confidence in the commitments of
the regimes they serve and also make militaries more comfortable
taking a role in the administration of the state.[4] On the other
hand, the presence of an internal threat may ameliorate the effect of
counterweights on coup attempts, as the regular military may welcome
an opportunity to offload a distasteful counterinsurgency or
repression mandate, as suggested by De Bruin in chapter 1. Future
research should build on this book and unpack how threat environment
may condition the impact of counterweights on coup dynamics.

Future research may also explicitly engage with the idea--touched on
in this book and in related work by Jun Koga Sudduth[5]--that the
creation of counterweights creates a commitment problem for the
regime. When extra-military armed forces are created, they alter the
bargaining interaction between the military and the regime in favor
of the regime. The regime cannot credibly commit to not leverage its
decreased fear of coups to extract concessions from or marginalize
the military--thus potentially inspiring the pattern of coup attempts
identified by De Bruin. Other than international threats, how else
can a leader both protect themselves from a coup and credibly commit
to not marginalize the military? An intriguing linkage with the
literature on commitment problems in civil war is possible.

Another intriguing avenue that is unexplored in this book--and that
is admittedly beyond its scope--is counterweights as a dependent
variable. What structural, regime-specific, or leader-specific
characteristics lead to the creation of counterweights of various
types? What role does threat environment play--in addition to coup
risk? How does regime type condition the creation of counterweights?

These, however, are not critical concerns and stand rather as avenues
for future research stemming from this work. The book, and the data
it uses, should inspire many additional studies of civil-military
relations and vigorous discussion for years to come. It is highly
recommended for all serious students of civil-military relations,
security studies, and conflict processes more broadly.

Notes

[1]. Peter D. Feaver, "Civil-Military Relations," _Annual Review of
Political Science_ 2, no. 1 (1999): 211-41.

[2]. Erica De Bruin, "Will There Be Blood? Explaining Violence during
Coups d'État," _Journal of Peace Research_ 56, no. 6 (2019):
797-811.

[3]. Varun Piplani and Caitlin Talmadge, "When War Helps
Civil-Military Relations: Prolonged Interstate Conflict and the
Reduced Risk of Coups," _Journal of Conflict Resolution_ 60, no. 8
(2016): 1368-94; and Cemal Eren Arbatli and Ekim Arbatli, "External
Threats and Political Survival: Can Dispute Involvement Deter Coup
Attempts?" _Conflict Management and Peace Science_ 33, no. 2 (2016):
115-52.

[4]. Curtis Bell and Jun Koga Sudduth, "The Causes and Outcomes of
Coup during Civil War," _Journal of Conflict Resolution_ 61, no. 7
(2017): 1432-55; and Alfred C. Stepan, _The Military in Politics_
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015).

[5]. Jun Koga Sudduth, "Coup Risk, Coup-Proofing and Leader
Survival," _Journal of Peace Research_ 54, no. 1 (2017): 3-15.

_Peter White is an assistant professor in the Department of Political
Science at Auburn University._

Citation: Peter B. White. Review of De Bruin, Erica, _How to Prevent
Coups d'État: Counterbalancing and Regime_. H-Diplo, H-Net Reviews.
October, 2021.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=56538

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.




--
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart


Re: The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Cort Greene
 

***I was wondering where Greg Butterfield has been, seems he is now a member of Struggle ★ La Lucha after leaving Workers World Party ( LA and Baltimore split) ; one of at least 4 parties in the US who adhere to the guiding light, ideas and world outlook of Sam (Ballard) Marcy... the others are Workers World Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation ( led by the Becker Boys)  and Communist Workers League ( Detroit and several other branches) . There could be a fifth or secret group in New Orleans also.


On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 11:28 AM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! by Greg Butterfield – Dandelion Salad (wordpress.com)

The United Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, the African Bar Association, and governments around the world called on Cape Verdean authorities to release Saab and protested that there was absolutely no legal basis to extradite him to the U.S. More than 15,000 people signed an international petition to free the Venezuelan diplomat.
And there are more cases related to the fight against sanctions, where foreign nationals are charged with violating provisions of the (illegal) U.S.-imposed sanctions on countries it seeks to destroy. Such was the case of Meng Wanzhou, a Chinese businessperson who was detained in Canada for nearly three years before finally winning the right to return home to China in September. And of course, there was the Trump regime’s illegal seizure of the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., in 2019, including the arrest of four embassy defenders. Sanctions are an act of war. So are violations of the international and the universally recognized rights of diplomats. The U.S. empire’s political gangsters carry out these lawless and vile acts because, they laugh to themselves, “Who will dare to stop us?” We must dare — to struggle and to win. Free Alex Saab! Free all political prisoners of U.S. imperialism — domestic and international!


The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! #freealexsaab

Charles Keener
 

The Biden Administration Kidnaps Venezuelan Diplomat: #FreeAlexSaab Now! by Greg Butterfield – Dandelion Salad (wordpress.com)

The United Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, the African Bar Association, and governments around the world called on Cape Verdean authorities to release Saab and protested that there was absolutely no legal basis to extradite him to the U.S. More than 15,000 people signed an international petition to free the Venezuelan diplomat.
And there are more cases related to the fight against sanctions, where foreign nationals are charged with violating provisions of the (illegal) U.S.-imposed sanctions on countries it seeks to destroy. Such was the case of Meng Wanzhou, a Chinese businessperson who was detained in Canada for nearly three years before finally winning the right to return home to China in September. And of course, there was the Trump regime’s illegal seizure of the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., in 2019, including the arrest of four embassy defenders. Sanctions are an act of war. So are violations of the international and the universally recognized rights of diplomats. The U.S. empire’s political gangsters carry out these lawless and vile acts because, they laugh to themselves, “Who will dare to stop us?” We must dare — to struggle and to win. Free Alex Saab! Free all political prisoners of U.S. imperialism — domestic and international!


Re: Alex Saab's kidnapping is a travesty

Cort Greene
 

 I am sending this to the list because it is written by Oscar Heck who has written many articles and publish opinion pieces for almost 20 years on Venezuela and his support of the Bolivarian revolution and for President Chavez, first in Vheadline.com ( this was the forerunner for news on the revolution before there was a Venezuelanalysis and it does not exist today) in English, and then for the left wing news site Aporrea since 2011, in Spanish. 

I do not agree with it all but there is some truth and insight into what he says: 

abstracted :

Well, the reason I presented all this above is because many of the people who support:

- the current Venezuelan head of state,

- his collaborators (such as Diosdado Cabello for example), and

- his accomplices (such as Alex Saab for example),

... in my estimation they are being deceived by the things that the current Venezuelan head of state, his executive, his ministers, the national assembly, and his collaborators are saying ... that, for example, and in a few words, Alex Saab would be "a saint "or" a Robin Hood "or a" good person, "and things like that ...

... that Alex Saab filled his pockets with money from state coffers, but that he deserves it because he stood up for Venezuela while Venezuela was living the sanctions imposed by the US, and that counts for a lot, and that is why he could be excused or that for that reason his actions could be justified.

Yes Luis.

However, the truth is that:

Alex Saab is being prosecuted in the US for very serious crimes committed on US territory and in US jurisdiction, typified mainly in Title 18 of the US Penal Code (in this case, fraud, corruption, and money laundering).

See the court document:

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/file/1226501/download

See my translation of the same document (in three parts):

Part 1: https://www.aporrea.org/ international / a306225.html


Part 2: https://www.aporrea.org/contraloria/a306253.html


Part 3: https://www.aporrea.org/internacionales/a306290.html


Now ...

why did I present all this to you?

Well, because there is enough verifiable evidence to conclude that --- with a certainty of 99.99% --- Alex Saab would in fact be guilty of the very serious crimes of which he is being accused by the US justice, crimes that a almost worldwide level they are recognized as VERY SERIOUS CRIMES, which would classify Alex Saab as a criminal.

Now, what has affected me the most about this case, and what finally prompted me to write this article, is that I recently saw the following headlines in Aporrea:

Headline 1: AN approved an agreement to repudiate the "kidnapping of diplomat Alex Saab by from the US government "

Headline 2: (VIDEO) Diosdado Cabello: "Of course Alex Saab had business with Venezuela and was winning but he stood up for Venezuela"

Headline 3: (VIDEO) President Maduro reports international actions at all levels to do justice for the kidnapping of Alex Saab

I also saw a lot of op-ed here on Aporrea recently trying to exonerate Alex Saab, trying to protect him, and trying to justify his [alleged] criminal acts, as well as accusing the US government of all kinds of crazy things to deal with. to divert attention from the truth.

It is very sad.

Well, although I personally do not believe that the accusations against Alex Saab are wrong, and although I also believe that Alex Saab is in fact guilty, I still say that they are [alleged] criminal acts because until the judicial process against Alex Saab does not culminates, neither I, nor anyone else, can assume that Alex Saab was guilty (or innocent).

However, I will venture to predict that Alex Saab will pay the maximum penalty, or perhaps a penalty a little (but not much) reduced in such a case that he delivers enough information against the current Venezuelan head of state and all his accomplices that today they are being formally accused by the US justice for having committed criminal acts --- in US territory or under US jurisdiction --- related to drug trafficking, drug-terrorism, corruption, and money laundering, among other accusations.

....
De back to Alex Saab ...

There are some people who support Alex Saab with the totally FALSE and DECEPTIVE excuse that he was a victim of the US sanctions against the current Venezuelan State, and that is why he had to resort to evasion of US laws, however, of According to the formal accusations of the US against Alex Saab, the serious crimes of which Alex Saab is being accused, began to take shape with the internal complicity of the current Venezuelan State at the end of 2011 --- probably in secret and behind Chávez's back - - when Chávez was very ill and began to lose control of the operations of the Venezuelan State, that is, the conspiracy of Alex Saab and company, and its related serious crimes in US territory, began much earlier,at least 5 years before the US sanctions were imposed against the Venezuelan State, which were imposed from 2015-16, until the present.

This would mean that anyone who supports or tries to protect Alex Saab using sanctions as an excuse is lying.

But the worst of all this is the following:

How can the current Venezuelan head of state publicly support a person like Alex Saab who would most likely be one of the most important criminals in the entire history of Venezuela?

How can the Venezuelan national assembly publicly support a person like Alex Saab?

How can Diosdado Cabello, a supposed ally of Chávez, publicly support a person like Alex Saab?

That is …

How can a State, which has an intrinsic duty to responsibly represent the interests of its population and the Nation, support a probable criminal, in addition, a criminal of such magnitude that it would have possibly been responsible for the laundering of a gigantic amount of money that may have exceeded 2 billion dollars, money from the coffers of the Venezuelan State, our money, money that did not belong to him, nor to the Venezuelan head of state, nor to his collaborators or accomplices?

How does that happen?

I do not understand.

But you know what?

Perhaps there is an explanation.

The only people I have known in my life who would have at some point openly or publicly supported and tried to protect or exonerate criminals, have been mothers, girlfriends, children, sometimes relatives, and of course, accomplices of the criminal who would try to confuse and diverting attention so that they themselves are not suspected or blamed later, and no one else (that I see). In general, these would be the only people who would openly and publicly support criminals.

Truth?

(I don't know if this would always be true, but I think that in most cases, that would be the case.)

Well ...

To my knowledge, neither the current Venezuelan head of state who supports Alex Saab, nor the deputies of the national assembly who are trying to protect Alex Saab, nor Diosdado Cabello who is trying to exonerate Alex Saab, are mothers, girlfriends, children, or relatives of Alex Saab, so ...

Why would they be supporting Alex Saab openly and publicly?

There is the answer, in my appreciation of reality, of course.

They would be accomplices.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: From now on I can confidently say that the fact that the current Venezuelan State openly supports Alex Saab, confirms (for me) that the current Venezuelan State is, in fact, a deeply criminal State made up of criminals. And that's my opinion. Chávez must be crying.
 




On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 1:12 PM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
I am not clear that Alex Saab being less than a saint justifies the U.S. actions.
Do we know that he was not working to break through U.S. sanctions and provide
necessities to Venezuela ?  I can readily believe that such efforts to defy U.S. imperialism
would indeed cause the U.S. to go after him. Do you really believe the stated U.S.
claims are the real motivation any more than the endless lies that have been spun to 
defame Julian Assange and justify his torture and incarceration ? I oppose U.S.
sanctions and support  Venezuelan efforts to circumvent them. I am unclear what 
the motivation is here to discredit that opposition to  criminal , deadly sanctions.
The U.S. has no right to detain and imprison Saab.  This is a display of sheer
brutal imperialist power. I oppose his arrest and extradition - even if he is himself
less than holy. Conflating the two unrelated issues of Saab's character and illegal 
U.S. overreach does not serve justice in my view.

Charles


5661 - 5680 of 17817