Shame on you "leftists" denouncing the protests in Iran!

[ArabRASH]

I've noticed a number of people criticizing the protests. Oh they're not "proletarian" enough. Ahmadinejad is "anti-imperialist" so we should support him. Shame on you!

We, the leftists, are the ones who call for revolts against tyranny. WE are the ones who call for the people's revolutions. Then when it comes, you lazy fuckers can't wait to denounce it. And then your excuses start, that mousavi is bourgeois, that it doesn't matter, it still won't be a worker's revolution.

All you do all day is sit around and theorize about revolutions, about whats the best type of revolution, who should lead the revolution. Well guess what, while you were doing all that, these people took action into their own hands and took to the streets against dictatorship and tyranny. Will the protests lead to socialism? Probably not. But, if succesful, will these people gain more freedom after living for 30 years(and even before that) under an oppressive regime? YES! And just because it's not what YOU want, doesn't mean it's not right. And the way some people support a reactionary dictator like ahmadinejad is digusting! I'm extremely pro-palestinian, but Ahmadinejad does not help my movement! he makes it seem like all the palestinian sympathizers are holocaust denying idiots, which de-legitimizes my movement.

So for all you lazy people who would rather sit at home and compile a list of reasons for why the revolution in Iran isn't "adequate" enough for you while you sit in your comfortable home in the USA, sod off! In the meantime the Iranians are fighting for freedom against tyranny and an oppressive theocratic regime, and I for one am giving them my full support and hope they are successful in their endeavors, whatever they may be(wheter its removing the Islamic theocratic system altogether, or simply getting Mousavi in power as opposed to Nejad). For all you reactionary tools who don't, I have NO respect for you, and would like to see you living in an oppressive place like Iran and sit around and call for communist revolutions comfortably. Peace!

[black magick hustla]

thats only dumb american tankies, dont listen to them

[redguard2009]

I thought Left Commies were supposed to atleast act as if they were more intelligent than everyone else?

I haven't denounced the protests. What I have denounced are the left's pick-and-choose attitude when deciding which causes to support and which to pathologically ignore and how the factors which determine their choice seem to be focused around public opinion and ideological indoctrination.

I'm also not getting my hopes up. Many around here (many of the same people infact) were just as excited about the "Pakistani" uprising of a few months ago which turned out to be little more than a political fart that we all forgot about a couple of weeks later, though granted there was no Pakistani Uprising forum made at the time.

Also, tankie isn't much of a pejorative. I actually like the term as it denotes a sense of strength and resolve many lack. Yes, my vision of the revolution is clear and I will run your ass over with a tank if you get in my way. We're all like that anyway -- atleast I have the guts to admit it.

Anyway, what I DO agree with you on is the handful of those people who, as you say, seem to prefer the extenuation of the current theocratic regime on the grounds of its anti-imperialist, anti-american stance. That's stupidity. These are often the same people who express support for the Taliban and silently ignore the fundamentalist principles of various terrorist organizations on the grounds that they're fighting a common enemy. The enemy of my enemy isn't always a friend, y'know.

But as the majority of the protests in Iran seem to be about getting Mousavi into power, I would like to see/know relevent revolutionary perspectives from radical youth inside Iran as opposed to the more popular liberal college student perspective.

[Led Zeppelin]

Don't worry comrade, they are going to be restricted soon!

The reason they are supporting it is because they believe us "brown people" in the Middle-East and elsewhere do not have the right to rise up against governments which they consider to be "anti-Imperialist".

And the reason they believe that is because they have to compensate for their white liberal guilt.

But as I said, do not worry, will be restricted soon!

[khad]

Don't worry comrade, they are going to be restricted soon!

The reason they are supporting it is because they believe us "brown people" in the Middle-East and elsewhere do not have the right to rise up against governments which they consider to be "anti-Imperialist".

And the reason they believe that is because they have to compensate for their white liberal guilt.

But as I said, do not worry, will be restricted soon!
Is your new tactic resorting to petty threats? Most of the people who are of mixed opinion on the protests have not denounced the movement or the people involved. You've been prattling on, pointing your fingers and insinuating all manner of character-assassinating bs.

Before you start pointing your finger again at "whitey whitey whitey!" take a look at the revlefters sitting in your camp. And no, I'm not white, nor are a number of the people you've labeled "white liberal trash."

If there were people here demanding that the protesters be put down and crying "Hail Ahmadinejad," they deserve the criticism that they will get. As it stands, though, your methods are just bullying.

[Led Zeppelin]

Before you start pointing your finger again at "whitey whitey whitey!" take a look at the revlefters sitting in your camp.Ok, but I'll also take a look at the Iranian communists in my camp, which is all of them.

Every member on Revleft who is from the Middle-East is also "in my camp", by the way, as is every member who is from a "third world country" I believe, so that says enough.


If there were people here demanding that the protesters be put down and crying "Hail Ahmadinejad," they deserve the criticism that they will get. As it stands, though, your methods are just bullying.Do you need me to quote you the posts by people saying that? If you had bothered to pay attention to those posts instead of simply foaming at the mouth over my responses to them (I know it must've hurt you deep inside when I denounced them as white liberal trash) you would have known that I only replied to those people in such a manner.

It is of course clear where your sympathies lie. The posts you have thanked say enough, and also the stuff you have been spewing here. I know you don't want to go all out "Hail Ahmadinejad" crazy because you don't want to have any action taken against you, but that doesn't change the facts.

Facts which are enforced by your above post, which is a defense of those people posted in a thread made by a comrade from the Middle-East who is shocked to find these people supporting the Iranian state on this forum.

[REDSOX]

Led Zeppilin there are many of us on these boards if not all of us who despise the cleric regime in Iran and do not support the regime and never have. But at the same time i do wonder if the lefts hatred for the regime which i share does not sometimes blind them to the nature of this movement. Its not that i seek perfection in any movement you will never get that but there has to be some basic questions asked as far as i am concerned before unqualified support can be lend to it. Three i can think of

1. Who is leading the movement
2. What are its demands
3. Is there a proletarian element in the movement

[AvanteRedGarde]

A revolution is about overthrowing one class by another, specifically through taking the reigns of state power and the productive forces in a society. This isn't a revolution; they're protests. To say otherwise is stupid hyperbole.

Revolutions to some degree require revolutionary leadership, and I'm sorry, but I don't see that developing around support for someone who has vowed to push through neo-liberal reforms.

What is really disgusting is how without much basis the so called "left" has been drawn into doing half the propaganda work for imperialism, Israel and the corporate establishment.

[Led Zeppelin]

Led Zeppilin there are many of us on these boards if not all of us who despise the cleric regime in Iran and do not support the regime and never have. But at the same time i do wonder if the lefts hatred for the regime which i share does not sometimes blind them to the nature of this movement. Its not that i seek perfection in any movement you will never get that but there has to be some basic questions asked as far as i am concerned before unqualified support can be lend to it. Three i can think of

1. Who is leading the movement
2. What are its demands
3. Is there a proletarian element in the movement

I agree with you entirely, and never have I attacked anyone who has posted the same views as you just did.

Check my articles on this here: Link (http://riseoftheiranianpeople.com/2009/06/17/the-uprising-in-iran-and-the-lessons-to-be-learned-2-the-nature-of-the-peoples-movement-and-why-we-support-it/), Link (http://riseoftheiranianpeople.com/2009/06/13/the-elections-in-iran-and-the-lessons-to-be-learned-1-the-context-of-recent-events/), Link (http://riseoftheiranianpeople.com/2009/06/12/hello-world/)


What is really disgusting is how without much basis the so called "left" has been drawn into doing half the propaganda work for imperialism, Israel and the corporate establishment.

Or so the "lazy person who would rather sit at home and compile a list of reasons for why the revolution in Iran isn't "adequate" enough for him while he sits in his comfortable home in the USA" says.

[black magick hustla]

A revolution is about overthrowing one class by another, specifically through taking the reigns of state power and the productive forces in a society. This isn't a revolution; they're protests. To say otherwise is stupid hyperbole.

Revolutions to some degree require revolutionary leadership, and I'm sorry, but I don't see that developing around support for someone who has vowed to push through neo-liberal reforms.

What is really disgusting is how without much basis the so called "left" has been drawn into doing half the propaganda work for imperialism, Israel and the corporate establishment.

There are a bunch of iranian "communist" blogs talking about this shit and this is where I get most of my info. This is not a revolution, its an uprising. However to say that communists who were exiled, murdered, tortured, etc are doing corporate propaganda just because you are a miopic stalinist is really condescending and insulting..

[BobKKKindle$]

Revolutions to some degree require revolutionary leadership, and I'm sorry, but I don't see that developing around support for someone who has vowed to push through neo-liberal reforms.Do you see revolutions developing around, say, a priest, named Father Gapon, who was later revealed to be a spy for the Okhrana, but led workers on a protest march asking the Tsar to protect them from exploitation? An unlikely starting-point for a revolution, you would think. It's a good thing Lenin and Trotsky didn't take the same position as you.

[AvanteRedGarde]

First, i think its reasonable to assume that anyone who is posting here regularly is doing so from the comfort of there home, so i don't even think this should be a valid question.

Second, Under this logic, one would assume that to not be lazy one would need to, from the comfort of there home cheerlead for a color revolution instigated by U.S. imperialism and Israel.

To me it seems like a form of pathological substitution. In lieu have being effective in instigating any sort of radicalism around oneself, self-identified revolutionaries just jump on board with any 'insurrection.'

It's extremely telling that instead of devoting any significant attention to Nepal, India, the Philippines, Peru, Niger, etc, so-called 'leftists' here somehow find themselves championing the same cause as the U.S. State Department.

[REDSOX]

I for one cannot see the proletariat entering the arena to defend either of these bourgeois fucks otherwise they would surely have done it by now. Both factions of the clerical bourgeois to one degree or other supports neo liberalism although ahmadinejad is more the populist of the two. Because of the energy released by moussavi through these protests it just could encourage the proletariat to enter the arena and make its demands which i am confident wont be about alleged ballot fiddling which like others on these boards i couldnt be that bothered about, although if there has been cheating then the cheater should stand down in utter shame.

[khad]

Every member on Revleft who is from the Middle-East is also "in my camp", by the way, as is every member who is from a "third world country" I believe, so that says enough.
I don't know whether to sit here in shock or laugh at your asspullery.

I myself am proof enough that your "belief" is wrong.

[black magick hustla]

It's extremely telling that instead of devoting any significant attention to Nepal, India, the Philippines, Peru, Niger, etc, so-called 'leftists' here somehow find themselves championing the same cause as the U.S. State Department.

1)There are a ton of threads about The Naxalites, nepalese maoists, phillipines etc.

2) Voluntarist guerrillas with perhaps a few thousand professional murderers at most are not the same as 3 million people in the streets of tehran confronting the state apparatus.

3) You would fuckin support the devil if he were against Washington.

[pastradamus]

Is it just me or do other people here feel there is a large aspect of nasty mud-slinging going on between comrades in the Iranian Uprising thread?

[black magick hustla]

Is it just me or do other people here feel there is a large aspect of nasty mud-slinging going on between comrades in the Iranian Uprising thread?


I never flame people. Its just that it is something happening right now, something, due to personal reasons, that I find really sentimental about. I just find absolutely disgusting the attitude of first world stalinists with their cookie cutter revolutionary defendism, global class war, or whatever other garbage ideological gimmick they claim to adhere to when supporting a state that grew partly from white anti-communist reaction.

[REDSOX]

I also think in this equation there is the issue of imperialism to look at in this. I dont as things stand see the hand of imperialism in these protests unlike some and judging by Obama's reaction and the lack of a color revolution reference by the imperialists i can well believe it, but imperialist involvement in these protests if it does happen must be denounced immediately by everyone. The proletarian revolution in Iran if it happens must be by the proletariat of Iran without one drop of help from that filth. It would also be of interest to see if the moussavi clique and their supporters denounce imperialst interference as well.

[Led Zeppelin]

First, i think its reasonable to assume that anyone who is posting here regularly is doing so from the comfort of there home, so i don't even think this should be a valid question.

There's a difference between someone sitting in a home in Beirut and one sitting in a home in a suburb of Canada or the United States.

[pastradamus]

I never flame people. Its just that it is something happening right now, something, due to personal reasons, that I find really sentimental about. I just find absolutely disgusting the attitude of first world stalinists with their cookie cutter revolutionary defendism, global class war, or whatever other garbage ideological gimmick they claim to adhere to when supporting a state that grew partly from white anti-communist reaction.


I dont believe that anyone who is critical of whats going on out in Iran right now is a "first world stalinist". I feel as a leftist I have the right to criticize whats happening out there right now. My sympathies lie with the protesters on the street, especially the dead ones.

[Coggeh]

To the OP: How can you expect leftists to support Mousavi ? We support the right of Iranians to rise up against the government which is corrupt and has shown a complete disregard for human rights in Iran . But that doesn't mean we have to support the Mousavi camp either .We are communists/anarchists at the end of the day and we don't believe the choice in Iran is just between Achmedinijad and Achmedinijad lite.

Many rioters are organising in Iran not because they believe Mousavi is some sort of saviour but because they feel and know that the regime in Iran effectivily silenced them by rigging the elections and man are they pissed (and quite rightly so) . I've never supported Achmedinijad or defended him but that doesn't mean im going to support someone who is just as reactionary .

[Led Zeppelin]

To the OP: How can you expect leftists to support Mousavi ? We support the right of Iranians to rise up against the government which is corrupt and has shown a complete disregard for human rights in Iran . But that doesn't mean we have to support the Mousavi camp either .We are communists/anarchists at the end of the day and we don't believe the choice in Iran is just between Achmedinijad and Achmedinijad lite.

He never expected leftists to support Mousavi, and he never said he did himself, he just said he supports their struggles regardless of any "if", "buts" or "whens".

Also Mousavi isn't really a lite version of Ahmadinejad. He's actually arguably worse. Look up his record as prime-minister (not on wikipedia though, his supporters edited that to take out all the bad stuff).

[hugsandmarxism]

Wow, people are really at one another's throats over this, and this talk of "first world stalinists/tankies" is symptomatic of a discussion going to the dogs. :thumbdown:

I think the self determination of the Iranian people against Amedinijad should take priority over the hand-wringing about bourgeois sharks smelling blood in the water (though neither of these things should be ignored, IMO). I also think our discussions on the matter should avoid the petty tendency-flaming two-step. We would all like to see progressive revolution in the region. The western bourgeois would also love to take advantage of the situation in anyway they can, spread some hegemony and pocket some of the fruits of workers labor, but that doesn't mean that the only way to oppose the bourgeois is to back a reactionary capitalist like Amedinijad, and nor does it mean that those who remain wary to the specter of western imperialism support such a person or his regime.

I say that solidarity with our comrades in the region is in order. I also say that criticism of certain goings on need to be met with less fire and more civility.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1527

Love thy comrade, people.

[ArabRASH]

It's exactly what Led Zeppelin said. I don't support Mousavi, and don't expect you too. All I'm saying is I'm with the people's struggle in Iran. Do you know what's better for Iranians than 3 million Iranians?

If you can't find it in you to support the Iranians because of Mousavi, then fine, so be it. But don't sit around and diss the protesters in their struggle because they don't meet your standards. Who are you to judge?

For the guy who said we shouldn't support it because we'd be on the same side of the US State dept. I don't know about you, but as a leftist, i side with the truth. I don't simply look up the US state dept's policies and go against everything they do. This is NOT the US's fight, this is the Iranians'. It doesn't matter who supports it or who backs it, and don't let that effect you.

For all of you living in the first world and calling support for Ahmadinejad under the guise of anti-imperialism, you have no right to speak. You have not lived in the oppressive conditions that they have lived. How much should people have to bear from their government in the name of anti-imperialism? Do you think people in Iran are saying to themselves "ok i have no freedom, i live in a dictatorial theocracy, but it's ok, at least we're anti-imperialist." Do not pass judgement on what's best for them from your first world homes.

And not that it matters, but to those questioning the "proletarian" features of this uprising, maybe you'll gain some consolation when you see this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpEqxxxE8LM
Garbagemen joining the anti ahmadinejad protests. Just trying to appease you, I'm NOT making a statement that this video proves this is a proletarian revolution, so please none of those ridiculous accusations.

Solidarity with the Iranian people!

[bleh]

Here's a good basic article from the american business press about the divisions in the Iranian ruling class which are opening the space for the campaign in Tehran to happen

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aUP5_LZHG1js

[AvanteRedGarde]

Led Zeppelin,

I just checked. Since the beginning of 2008, you've started

6 threads about Iran

2 about Iraq

1 about Gaza

a few about music from various places

and one "question for Turkish ICC member"

I guess my question is, what's they deal. Why the extreme one-sidedness?

[Led Zeppelin]

You are such a moron.

First of all, starting threads is not the same as posting in them or on those subjects.

Second of all, over 90% of your posts are about how no working-class exists in the west.

And, last but not least, I have already explained the what you perceive to be "extreme one-sidedness":


And the reason I am doing so more than I did with Nepal is because I am Iranian myself and know more about that movement and country than I do about Nepal.

That means that I am writing more on this and doing more on this because I know more about the movement and the country because I am Iranian myself, it doesn't mean that I care more about it than I do about Nepal because I'm Iranian and not Nepalese.

How many posts have you made about workers being exploiters in the "first world" versus the oppression of people in Nepal or the aborigines in Australia? Oh, zero? Well I'm going to do a search and post it so that it can take the place of a coherent argument which I am unable to present because I'm stupid.

Idiot.

Seriously, just go away already. Stop replying to me. You are trash and are taking up my time.

[Niccolò Rossi]

I think ArabRASH needs to be more careful with what they are saying in the OP and later in this thread. A few points I'd like to take up.

Basically you seem to be saying that communists should not criticise protest movements (I am speaking generally here and not only with regard to the movement in Iran). People are actually out there on the streets and communists have no right to criticise the movement from their 'armchairs'.

My question to you is, since when did communists become unprincipled populist cheerleaders?

The fact that people are on the streets does not mean communists automatically support them for 'revolting against tyranny' and most certainly does not mean they have 'no right' to analyse, criticise and put forward perspectives for the movement.

Marxists do not merely jump to the support of a movement when it has popular support. They analyse the situation - what is happening, what it means, what is it's potential - and they draw from this certain conclusions - what is the significance of the movement, what it means for the working class, what are the perspectives for the struggle, how do revolutionaries relate to the movement etc.

The fact that the current movement is still one that is off the terrain of the working class and that the proletariat is not asserting itself positively as a class are important facts! If you want to throw these out the window to chase the masses uncritically then why bother calling yourself a Marxist?

Saying all this however I don't want to give the wrong impression. I am not among the ranks of the political bankrupt 'communists' who support Ahmadinejad and the Iranian state against the demostrators and the working class. However we need to be more careful in how we approach the movement. No support for the sake of support. Communists are supposed to be the political vanguard of the proletariat, the most intransigent, militant and politically advance section of the working class, not populist cheerleaders tailing 'the people'.

[Led Zeppelin]

Saying all this however I don't want to give the wrong impression. I am not among the ranks of the political bankrupt 'communists' who support Ahmadinejad and the Iranian state against the demostrators and the working class. However we need to be more careful in how we approach the movement. No support for the sake of support. Communists are supposed to be the political vanguard of the proletariat, the most intransigent, militant and politically advance section of the working class, not populist cheerleaders tailing 'the people'.

I don't think he ever called on tailing the people. He has already said that he doesn't support Mousavi.

I think you need to consider where he's coming from with this thread and his posts in here. He came on the forum, looked into this specific one on the Iranian uprising, and saw some people supporting Ahmadinejad and his reaction against this movement. He understandably became annoyed at this and derided them for criticizing a movement from their comfortable seats in first world countries.

He's also very annoyed at people who are refusing to support this because "it is not socialist", as if a movement has to start out as socialist or it is reactionary to the core. As I said before, such movements are not static, they develop and regress. It's pure pedantry to call it "reactionary" or whatever else nonsense term these people use when in fact that is not the point at all. No one ever claimed that this movement was a socialist one or a proletarian one at the moment, ArabRASH didn't either, but we are claiming that it could become one and we shouldn't denounce it, especially not when you don't know anything about it to begin with.

So I think it is a bit unfair to jump on ArabRASH's comments there since he was understandbly trying to "bend the stick" to counter the reactionary side on this issue.

I applaud that, I think that is necessary here actually. It is especially meaningful given his location and his understanding of these issues.

[RHIZOMES]

thats only dumb american tankies, dont listen to them

I know a couple of people on the NZ left who are denoucing it as Western media astroturfing, which is complete bullshit imho.

[Il Medico]

Led Zeppelin,

I just checked. Since the beginning of 2008, you've started

6 threads about Iran

2 about Iraq

1 about Gaza

a few about music from various places

and one "question for Turkish ICC member"

I guess my question is, what's they deal. Why the extreme one-sidedness?
:confused: Are you thick or something? He is Iranian, thus he has more vested interest in the goings on in the middle east. People post what directly effect them or interest them. There is no one sidedness. He just post threads and post on things he knows and can give in useful input on... Much unlike your useless post above.

[RHIZOMES]

I never flame people. Its just that it is something happening right now, something, due to personal reasons, that I find really sentimental about. I just find absolutely disgusting the attitude of first world stalinists with their cookie cutter revolutionary defendism, global class war, or whatever other garbage ideological gimmick they claim to adhere to when supporting a state that grew partly from white anti-communist reaction.

Many people consider me a "Stalinist" (i.e. Marxist-Leninist) and I support the Iranian uprisings... cool generalization bro

[RHIZOMES]

Led Zeppelin,

I just checked. Since the beginning of 2008, you've started

6 threads about Iran

2 about Iraq

1 about Gaza

a few about music from various places

and one "question for Turkish ICC member"

I guess my question is, what's they deal. Why the extreme one-sidedness?

Because that's what he's passionate about you dunce. You have extreme one-sidedness on issues on "third worldism", I don't care about your one-sidedness because that's your fucking opinion so of course you're gonna be one-sided to it. I more care about the fact your opinions are retarded.

[Sean]

Also Mousavi isn't really a lite version of Ahmadinejad. He's actually arguably worse. Look up his record as prime-minister (not on wikipedia though, his supporters edited that to take out all the bad stuff).
I thought I was the only one who noticed that, you'd think he'd just fallen from outerspace if you read that (locked) article. This is why I hate people who blindly follow anything written in wikipedia. Perhaps if someone particularly knowledgeable on him could make a short, truthful profile on him and put it up on our own wiki we could refer people to it rather than explaining this guy over and over. Just a suggestion.

[El Rojo]

Communists are supposed to be the political vanguard of the proletariat, the most intransigent, militant and politically advance section of the working class, not populist cheerleaders tailing 'the people'.

This is a very well put point (in my almost entirely unqualified opinion) and is entirely correct in stating neither of these groups directly represent the working class. however, the greens are a pro democratic faction fighting tyranny. surely an outcome that strengthened democracy would be favourable?

[Chambered Word]

The protests in Iran are definately better than having Ahmedinejad continue ruling, but Mousavi isn't going to be a whole lot better. He'll still be burgeois, but nevertheless I support the protests. No, it's not a revolution, but I don't really care.

I think some of you are getting too riled up over something fairly small, but only time will tell.


the attitude of first world stalinists with their cookie cutter revolutionary defendism, global class war

Stalinists supporting global class war? Stalin supported socialism in one country. Nevertheless I agree with you.