|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As MIM reported before the Bush Jr. land invasion of Iraq started, the oppressed nationalities within u.$. borders oppose the war while the whites are for it. To this day, a majority of whites supports the war; although that support is a lot more iffy today, thanks to the armed struggle of the Iraqi people--the best teacher we have right now.
61.8% of Latinos say the war against Iraq was not worth fighting while less than 6% have a favorable view of Hugo Chavez and 5% of Castro--which goes to show the anti-war position of Latinos is not some kind of generic liberalism. Only 31.4% said the war was worth fighting. The negative views of the war on Iraq are not mostly on account of suspicions about race in the military. Only 28.7% said Latinos suffer disproportionate casualties in the u.$. military.(1) As MIM has said all along, Blacks, Latinos and other oppressed nationalities, even within u.$. borders have a higher consciousness of international issues than whites do.
The white nationalists dominating the anti-war movement are constantly talking about an integrated class struggle of all colors simultaneously. Their sinister purpose is to take the Blacks, Latinos and other oppressed nationalities and water down their consciousness to undermine the anti-war movement. As the Iraq war started, only 20% of u.$. whites opposed it.(2) In contrast, prior to the Bu$h Jr. land invasion of Iraq in 2003, 35% of U.$. "non-whites" supported the invasion of Iraq.(3) Right now these imperialist lackeys are on the defensive in the oppressed nationality communities, but if oppressed nationality communities become anymore like whites, there won't be a bastion of anti-war support anywhere within u.$. borders. When the white nationalists succeed, there will be no social basis or backbone opposing future invasions by Uncle $am.
True, there are some white nationalists who just cannot work with Blacks, Latinos or any particular oppressed nationality; although since the 1930s, the KKK has proved to be willing on occasion to work with Blacks who share their views. Yet, we must recognize that the white nationalists have two tactical prongs. One is for the dumber crackers who simply do not want contact with oppressed nationality people. The other tactics focus on buying out the consciousness of the oppressed nationality people. For this purpose white liberals, post-modernists and pseudo-Marxists excel. They go to the marches against the war, but their real purpose is to water down the struggle against the empire--give it a stifling embrace.
The white nationalist left is reliable in counting Kanada as a country while not seeing Boricua and Aztlán as separate nations. That right there should impugn the white nationalist left's judgement abilities. They want the brown peoples to integrate while they let Kanada have their own country.
Whatever it is these whites are using to inform themselves, whatever games they play as children to learn to become like Lynndie England and whatever bribes they are getting to lie and spin while killing Third World peoples--we do not want oppressed nationality people to turn out the same way.
This year, a few more Blacks than usual may vote for George W. Bush, but still less than 20%. If we want to know what the typical dumb white is thinking we need only look at Bu$h supporters, because this year the majorities of Blacks, Latinos, Jews, Arabs, Asian-descended and First Nation peoples are going to vote for Kerry or stay home.
At first glance, current polls (and they are backed by previous ones in history) tend to show that liberal Democrats are right about Bu$h-supporters, that they are just dumb, and in need bourgeois educational influence. First of all, it has become the consistent trend that more educated people support Democrats while less-educated people support Republicans. The exception within the most educated people is those who own their own businesses and those who are mega-rich. The majority of college and grad school-educated people is neither and supports Democrats. Bu$h White House official Karl Rove put it this way: "As people do better, they start voting like Republicans... unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."(4)
According to a University of Maryland study of Bu$h and Kerry supporters, "majorities [of Bu$h supporters--ed.] incorrectly assume that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues--the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%)--and for addressing the problem of global warming: 51% incorrectly assume he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty. After he denounced the International Criminal Court in the debates, the perception that he favored it dropped from 66%, but still 53% continue to believe that he favors it. An overwhelming 74% incorrectly assumes that he favors including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements."(5) That's important information and we credit the University of Maryland while we discredit any arrogant, war-mongering ignoramuses who think such information is not worth knowing.
Yet, as we look closer at the facts, we see that there is nothing that can sway these typical Bu$h supporters from wars on Iraq and the like and that is where liberal Democrats and the left-wing of the white nationalist movement goes wrong. Despite media and Congress reports, majorities of Bu$h supporters still believe there were major weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. "Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%)."(5) The poll-takers themselves suggest the question is more emotional than one of facts. The major media have explained the WMD situation and have discussed the reasons Bu$h gave for the war, but Bu$h supporters still hold fast. We would say it's emotion induced by bribery, the belief in war for cheap gas. It's not that Bu$h supporters are so incredibly dumb: they just lie and spin to get what they want.
That right there is an example why there is a relationship between armed struggle and truth. Because these Bu$h-supporters have not had to unseat the Bu$h regime with their own hands, there is nothing in practical life that forces them to adopt and put forward any truth. Only total military catastrophe would necessarily force different conclusions about these matters. The Bu$h supporters are able to lie, spin and evade the truth otherwise. Sadly, the most educational thing that ever happens for them is military defeat of their beloved Bu$h. Meanwhile, because they are the underdog, the Iraqi liberation fighters will have to learn all kinds of truths to unseat the occupiers. That's an example why the international proletariat is the progressive class.
It's very important to understand that this is not the fault of the communists. We have nothing to do with the Bu$h supporters. That's just how they think or do not think. Amerikan whites got themselves into the same pickle before the u.$. Civil War, no thanks to Karl Marx. It's quite obvious that a majority of whites is susceptible to arrogant ideas that only utter catastrophe would change, and in fact, even in death itself, probably many would not realize it.
"Only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world opposes the US having gone to war with Iraq. Forty-two percent assume that views are evenly divided, and 26% assume that the majority approves. Among Kerry supporters, 74% assume that the majority of the world is opposed."(5)
Kerry supporters are guilty in this matter by participating in a system that alternates power with Republicans. Democrats also offer more complicated, Bu$h-lite convolutions for example that do not point out that it was Clinton who started the whole misleading of the public on WMD in Iraq.
The sinister misleaders of the anti-war movement always object when MIM points out that international polls show that Amerikan whites are out-of-step. The pure white nationalists among them have fantasies about the greatness of the white people. The cynical politicians among them calculate that they cannot get Democrats elected or themselves to power by telling the unpopular truth like MIM does; yet, there is no tactically cheap way to get the Amerikkkan minority in line with the global majority.
Notes:
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/latinos_102704.pdf ;
57% of whites support Bu$h; 40% support Kerry. The reason the race is close
is that all other known ethnic groups support Kerry.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=209187&page=2
Today, 42% of whites oppose the war according to Gallup, which means
that more than half of whites opposed to the war learned from the Iraqis, not their
fellow U.$. citizens.
As of an October 22-24 poll, only 29% of "non-whites" approved of Bush's performance as president.
2. http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030328.asp ; see also, http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030314-022023-3781r
3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2827367.stm
4. http://www.republicanresearch.com/Pages/quotes.html
5. http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html#1
Lately, the public is frustrated with pollsters. The most legitimate gripe against pollsters is their lack of proletarian creativity in asking questions. They always ask the same old questions.
Another legitimate gripe is that it is difficult to figure out how to conduct a poll that is truly representative. People who do not use telephones may be fundamentally different from people who do and so on. As MIM stresses in its teachings on materialism, we should not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Most of the gripes about polls we hear are wrong. Certain philistine misleaders want us of the anti-war movement to be uninformed so that we cannot fight for what we want. They don't want whites to know where they stand relative to the rest of the world--just how far out of wack they are. After all, white nationalism depends on illusions.
Bush "won" in 2000 by 537 votes in Florida. There is no poll that is going to help with that except to say that the race is close. As someone pointed out, a couple ice cream socials or people staying home to read MIM Notes could affect that.
It's wrong to ask too much of polls. Having an approximate grip on reality is incredibly important. Anyone who thinks s/he has a perfect grip on reality has a different problem completely unconnected to polls--the messiah complex. The rest probably just do not use a materialist method to defeat the messiah complex.
The Kerry/Bush polls are now tied and frustrating people with all science. The fact that people change their minds and the fact that polls are guaranteed to be off a few points at least some times even when carried out correctly--this frustrates too many people who should get used to it. If this presidential race were a blow-out it would come out. If the opposition to the Iraq War were blowing out the support for it, we would know that too--by polls from the imperialists. The example of the University of Maryland poll shows that it is possible for the bourgeoisie to ask both about U.$. public opinion and global public opinion and that IS important except to philistines, ostriches and some more recalcitrant sections of the KKK.
The sinister purpose of white nationalists in opposing polls is to join up with the ignorant crackers who want an excuse for not knowing anything while simultaneously allowing any fantasy about the political positions and actions of white people. Many of these self-same people in denial about whites claim to hate Bu$h: well, since a majority of whites supports Bu$h, it's past time to draw a conclusion about whites. Bu$h has taken action and a majority of whites is actively supporting that action. The majority of the world disagrees, so we should all know that whites have made themselves the enemy of the world and take action.