As usual, my respected Brother عمرو البحيري offers an important and informed analysis. The experience in Latin America is extremely important for us to study, as it was the original laboratory of Neoliberalism.
It is absolutely correct that multinationals and investors are ready to support a compliant dictator with millions of dollars, because this support ensures their long-term profitability.He mentions the particularly relevant examples of Mercedes-Benz and Ford Motor Company in Argentina. I think it is entirely appropriate to compare Sisi to Pinochet, and the Argentinian experience with what is currently underway in Egypt; and it is crucial for us to learn from that horrific period in Latin American history.
In fact, the struggle against the Pinochet coup, together with realistic evaluation of the present situation in Egypt, is precisely the reasons why I do not advocate the notion of following “many tracks” to liberation. The idea that system disruption of corporate operations and profitability should be combined with many other tactics and strategies, including confrontation with the military, and that any and all types of opposition efforts should be encouraged, in my view, is a mistake. In my opinion, what is needed is absolute, persistent focus on the specific targets of corporate power.
The Montoneros guerrillas in Argentina carried out several successful operations against corporate interests, primarily the automotive industry. However, they did not focus on that, instead, combining this strategy with attacks against the security forces. Over an approximately 10 year period, they only executed approximately 40 operations against corporate targets. They diversified their strategy, as many revolutionary leaders are calling for in Egypt today, and this diversity undermined the effectiveness of their efforts. They were not consistent, and did not channel all their resources into a concentrated strategy.
Furthermore, their attacks against corporate targets, while highly disruptive, did not have an accompanying message demanding that they withdraw support from the Pinochet coup in exchange for an end to disruptive activity.
In my opinion, the experience of Latin America argues against the proposal to diversify targets. Tactics can be as diverse as possible, but the strategy should be focused and concentrated on the disruption of corporate interests. This is particularly true when rebel resources are limited