[np] An open letter from Alain Badiou to Jean-Luc Nancy

[Michael Bailey]

>I had no idea that Badiou was so...content free.  Easier to be against
>the US and NATO than for the Libyan rebels, j'suppose.

great gosh-amighty...content free?  Lots of rhetoric, sure, but we got
some content, didn't we?

I'm unfamiliar with Alice (unless it's our alice) or Bourdieu, so all
I can do is examine the letter for anything that might be called
"content", removing the rest.


------------
    Yes, dear Jean-Luc, the position you adopt in favour of ‘Western'
intervention in Libya was indeed a sorry surprise for me.

(rhetoric, but it did establish his position right away - this is
content of a sort...)
----------------

    Didn't you notice right from the start the palpable difference
between what is happening in Libya and what is happening elsewhere?
How in both Tunisia and Egypt we really did see massive popular
gatherings, whereas in Libya there is nothing of the kind?

(content, and provocative - no figures or links, it's hard to prove an
assertion like this, but I must say I've not seen any stuff like that
either)
-----------------

 An Arabist friend of mind has concentrated in the last few weeks on
translating the placards, banners, posters and flags that were such a
feature of the Tunisian and Egyptian demonstrations: he couldn't find
a single example of these in Libya, not even in Benghazi.

(anonymous source, but - depending on the credibility of this Bourdieu
character - compelling.  Also interesting.)
-----------------------

 One very striking fact about the Libyan ‘rebels', which I'm surprised
you didn't note, is that you don't see a single woman, whereas in
Tunisia and Egypt women are very visible.

(assertion, no source, but easily checkable.  If true, supporting
these dudes is probably as nasty a bit of business as supporting the
Afghan rebels against the Soviet Union)
-----------------

Didn't you know that the French and British secret services have been
organising the fall of Gaddafi since last autumn?

(no source, but all too credible.  Thought-provoking, but not clinching.)
----------------------

 in contrast to all the other Arab uprisings, weapons of unknown
origin emerged in Libya?

(alas, no source, no details, frustrating, but "content" of a sort)
------------------------------

That bands of young people immediately began firing volleys in the
air, something inconceivable elsewhere?

(actually doesn't that happen at a lot of wedding parties? but I digress)
------------------

Weren't you struck by the emergence of a supposed ‘revolutionary
council' led by a former accomplice of Gaddafi, whereas nowhere else
was there any question of the masses who had risen up appointing some
people as a replacement government?

(this specifies a '68 nature of the other "good" risings vs the
top-down, immediately violent character of the Libyan one - again
revealing M Bourdieu's stance and starting point for analysis)
--------------------

    Don't you realise how all these details, and many more, chime with
the fact that here, and nowhere else, the great powers were called in
to support?

(ok, pretty light, and implicit in the preceding bits...)
-------------------

That such riffraff as Sarkozy and Cameron, whose aims are
transparently sordid, were applauded and worshipped—and you suddenly
give them support.

(right-wing gov'ts take away goodies and channel the anger toward
foreign enemies - what's new about that?)
------------------------

However, from this point on we descend (or ascend, if you're in accord
with his thought patterns) into rhetoric.

Hardly content-free, I'd state, but certainly not content-rich!

How about this article for content:
http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/72004
It's by an African-American professor from Syracuse University in New York


highlight:

"By Saturday 20 March, it was clear that the bombing campaign of the
imperial forces went far beyond the letter and spirit of the United
Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 whose mandate was to protect
civilians. For this reason, even some of those states that voted for
the UN resolution now oppose the bombings. All progressive persons
must be opposed to any form of Western military intervention in Africa
in this revolutionary moment."

and a bit lower down:
"n the same vein, it is not too late for those who organise the
uprising in Libya to organise a clear political front to be able to
build a strong internal political force to resist and remove Gaddafi
without imperial complications. The UN resolution that authorised the
use of force also explicitly authorised all necessary means to protect
civilians and civilian-populated areas, except for a ‘foreign
occupation force.’ The West is using the formulation of ‘all necessary
means’ to give themselves the right to establish a new military
foothold in Africa when revolution is sweeping Africa and the Middle
East."