Left Wing of Imperialism

[AvanteRedGarde]

Since when did the self identified revolutionary left become merely mouthpieces in a U.S. inspired smeer job?

I know this is going to provoke all sorts of outrage, but doesn't anyone else find it strange that these so-called leftists hop on this one international issue, en masse and on the same side as the CIA. Seriously, whereas the Indian uprising special forum? Where's people coverage of Niger?

Why do people not care about the day to day struggles of people around the world? Why do they care so much about seeing the Iranian regime be toppled. How is it that the so-called revolutionary left lines up so easily with the U.S. govt?

Rather than the revolutionary left, much of those here seem like the 'left wing of imperialism.'

[KC]

Dude shut up.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Seriously, whereas the Indian uprising special forum? Where's people coverage of Niger?

Because this is topical and going to provoke a lot of discussion, chiefly because of the coverage it's getting in the mainstream media. RL tends to follow those kind of trends, the politics forum is a de facto current events forum.

A Niger forum, whilst not at all less pertinent, just wouldn't get the level of activity that is expected for a forum to have. This forum really just acts to siphon threads out of politics as not to distort discussion in there.

[Il Medico]

Yeah...no. You see the difference between Niger and IRAN (not India) is that they have a current on going people's revolution (or revolt at least) that actually has a chance to overthrow a reactionary bourgeois dictatorship and theocracy. That is why the left is all over it. Not because we support the imperialist intentions for Iran.

[AvanteRedGarde]

In indian state of Bengal, the rebels have just taken over huge swaths of area.

I guess my question is, why so much attention on Iran when there is plently of other stuff happening that doesn't coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

I guess my question is, why so much attention on Iran when there is plently of other stuff happening that doesn't coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1470784&postcount=3

[AvanteRedGarde]

Yeah...no. You see the difference between Niger and IRAN (not India) is that they have a current on going people's revolution (or revolt at least) that actually has a chance to overthrow a reactionary bourgeois dictatorship and theocracy. That is why the left is all over it. Not because we support the imperialist intentions for Iran.

Is this even true. It's pretty hard to contemplate an revolution against a bourgeios state when its leadership is merely a faction within that bourgeois state?

In Niger, an independent group, not tied to the Nigerian state, is leading a struggle in the Niger Delta against oil companies. Unlike a bunch of demonstrations, the Niger forces are actively engaged in conflict.

But apparently, people at Rev Left don't give a fuck about the people of Niger or their struggle. This must be true since noone is talking about it.

[Pogue]

Is this even true. It's pretty hard to contemplate an revolution against a bourgeios state when its leadership is merely a faction within that bourgeois state?

In Niger, an independent group, not tied to the Nigerian state, is leading a struggle in the Niger Delta against oil companies. Unlike a bunch of demonstrations, the Niger forces are actively engaged in conflict.

But apparently, people at Rev Left don't give a fuck about the people of Niger or their struggle. This must be true since noone is talking about it.

Yeh genius, I guess that makes us all a bunch of flaming imperialists, despite the fact we all oppose imperialism.

Your such a joke its unbelievable, fuck off. Your arguments are the sort of shit which draws rational people away from the left - self hating angry types like you need to get your head sout of your own trollish arses. Wanker.

[( R )evolution]

I guess my question is, why so much attention on Iran when there is plently of other stuff happening that doesn't coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism.
Coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism? We are not here advocating for Mousavi, if you read any of the threads in this forum you will find a strong voice of opposition to Mousavi and his bourgeois agenda. But what we are supporting is the Iranians people right to defy their government and protest, which we hope will turn revolutionary. We recognize at this moment it is still tied to Mousavi but the possibility of something greater is there. And that possibility is why there is so much attention being paid to the events not because they coincide with US interests.

[scarletghoul]

Yeh genius, I guess that makes us all a bunch of flaming imperialists, despite the fact we all oppose imperialism.

Your such a joke its unbelievable, fuck off. Your arguments are the sort of shit which draws rational people away from the left - self hating angry types like you need to get your head sout of your own trollish arses. Wanker.fuck you motherfucker, AvanteRedGarde (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=18629) is making a good point that i agree with.
wtf is up with having a seperate subforum for the iran riots? they are not revolutionary in nature, and anyway there are other uprisings going on all around the world, some of them genuinely revolutionary. But people dont pay half as much attention to them here, its stupid.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Yeh genius, I guess that makes us all a bunch of flaming imperialists, despite the fact we all oppose imperialism.

Your such a joke its unbelievable, fuck off. Your arguments are the sort of shit which draws rational people away from the left - self hating angry types like you need to get your head sout of your own trollish arses. Wanker.

Do you ever contribute something of substance to a conversation? EVER?

There are plenty of people who don't have anything to do with third-worldism that share his view.

[Robespierre2.0]

Do you see the difference between armed terrorists leading the take over areas (Indian naxalites) and an uprising of ordinary working class people (Iran)?

HAHAHAH oh wow.

So the Iranian demonstators are 'ordinary working class people', and the Naxalites are not? They're an 'armed terrorist' group (that presumably HATES OUR FREEDOM)?

Honestly, I'm still ambivalent about the Iranian 'Uprising' or whatever you may call it, because I'm getting mixed messages about what side the Iranian working class is on, but you sound like a White House spokesperson.

FYI, 'terrorist' is nothing but a buzzword used to label any armed group that is not a regular army that the U.S. doesn't like.

[Incendiarism]

Do you see the difference between armed terrorists leading the take over areas (Indian naxalites) and an uprising of ordinary working class people (Iran)?

Most of the people taking to the streets are of the middle and propertied classes...

I think most of you are misunderstanding the position entirely. It's not opposition on the basis of being bourgeois or what have you, but that there is no orientation on the working class, and at this juncture it seems highly unlikely there will be. Without any real role in this situation the workers are simply stagehands and I highly doubt that anything will materialize from any of this.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Do you see the difference between armed terrorists leading the take over areas (Indian naxalites) and an uprising of ordinary working class people (Iran)?

http://www.revleft.com/vb/india-popular-uprising-t111380/index.html?t=111380


What's very interesting about this is that all the media reports have admitted that the Maoists and the PCPA enjoy mass support in the area, and have thousands of poor villagers who will back them and help them fight the state.


Hundreds of Maoists backed by thousands of villagers have seized the ruling party's last stronghold in a troubled part of India's West Bengal state.



They formed the People’s Committee against Police Atrocities, which has extended its influence to 1,100 villages in the region. Led by the People’s Committee, the adivasis have driven the police and CPM cadre out of the area, burning down police camps and digging up roads to prevent the state authorities from re-entering. Activists of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) have played a leading role in the People’s Committee and in extending the struggle into new areas.

etc

That is not just some armed terrorists, and I have yet to see anything indicating that this movement in Iran is not drawing it's support from mainly the petty bourgeois, students, middle class, etc.

[scarletghoul]

Do you see the difference between armed terrorists leading the take over areas (Indian naxalites) and an uprising of ordinary working class people (Iran)?

Wow.... this could be the most reactionary sentence of the year so far

[KC]

Most of the people taking to the streets are of the middle and propertied classes...

This is either an incorrect statement based on ignorance or an outright lie.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Its not a question of which imperialist power (US, China) "likes" the Naxalites, but the naxals are people living in forests trying to take over the Indian state. They're "leading" the Indian peasantry by trying to gain political power and setting up a "New Democracy" which is nothing but a bourgeois state. As an Indian communist, I don't see that in any way related to communism.


Backed by the Maoist rebels, the Peoples Committee against Police Atrocities now acts as a defacto People's Government, and the Maoists are setting up village committees to give direct democratic power to the masses.

As if the movement in Iran isn't just trying to change the leadership of a bourgeois state or is in any way related to communism.


Do you have any proof for this?

Also have you seen: this (http://mikeely.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/strike-at-iran-khodo-autoworkers-solidarity-with-anti-govt-movement/)?

Those workers at that plant have gone on many strikes recently, they are only receiving attention now. Almost every article on the subject says the movement is drawing it's support from the middle class, which is why I've asked plenty of times in this forum for something indicating otherwise.

[Jimmie Higgins]

In indian state of Bengal, the rebels have just taken over huge swaths of area.

I guess my question is, why so much attention on Iran when there is plently of other stuff happening that doesn't coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism.

It is precisely because the US has an overt imperialist interest in Iran that the left in the US should talk about it. Also there is a mass uprising going on.

Your logic seems to be that since US imperialism would rather see a moderate in power in Iran, anyone supporting the popular protests is siding with US imperialism. Obama supported the Republic Doors and Windows factory occupation - are radicals pro-Obama by also supporting this factory occupation for very different reasons. Obviously no.

[redguard2009]

Whenever its a movement we like, we call it a sponteneous expression of the will of the people to shrug off for themselves the yoke of exploitation and tyranny.

When it's a movement we dislike, we say it's nothing but a band of thugs with dellusions of granduer manipulating people into following them.

As an Indian communist, you're an idiot, but that doesn't come as any surprise as you seem to be parroting the ideals of those supposed "communist" provincial leaders who have had their oppurtunist bullshit exposed by the likes of the Naxals and CPI(M). And while your elitist cadres hold closed-door meetings planning on stripping land from poverty-striken peasants to build roads while filling the pockets of rich local businessmen those "junglemen" Naxalites are composed of the most politically conscious elements of the peasant class, which just so happens to be the primary revolutionary class in the majority of the Indian state. So fuck off and go back to doing what you're good at -- arresting students, beating peasants and giving cash handouts to big businesses.

Sorry to derail topic. Back on post.

I'm sorry that some feel supporting protesting Iranians is a case of us leftists somehow being manipulated into playing into the hands of imperialist interests. Unfortunately the majority of us (presumably) feel that the rights of the people to protest their government is not something that should depend on who has interest in it.

Ahmedinajad's government is no ally of anti-imperialism; you can rest assured that if the Iranian economy and military were capable, they would be extending their own imperialist gains across the Middle East as we speak. He is merely a conveniently placed stopgap to our common enemy but he is in no way a friend of any victim of imperialism. He is just the latest in a long line of dictators who have used anti-imperiliasm and anti-american sentiments as an excuse to exact some of their own "domestic imperialism". How else could you refer to state police invading homes, schools and businesses, arresting and killing arbitrarily anyone they see as non-conformist to their government's views? Replace state police with state army and homes and schools with countries and cities and you've got your imperialism right there. Crude, but effective.

[ls]

Idiot idiot idiot idiot. Your fucking annoying third-worldist talk about first-world workers being parasites is more than enough for me to not pay any attention to you and contribute nothing but flames to your petty threads, you prove time and time again you aren't worth debating.

Do us all a favour and go the way of Peader.

[Chambered Word]

Since when did the self identified revolutionary left become merely mouthpieces in a U.S. inspired smeer job?

I know this is going to provoke all sorts of outrage, but doesn't anyone else find it strange that these so-called leftists hop on this one international issue, en masse and on the same side as the CIA. Seriously, whereas the Indian uprising special forum? Where's people coverage of Niger?

Why do people not care about the day to day struggles of people around the world? Why do they care so much about seeing the Iranian regime be toppled. How is it that the so-called revolutionary left lines up so easily with the U.S. govt?

Rather than the revolutionary left, much of those here seem like the 'left wing of imperialism.'

Before I go on I thoroughly laugh at your political tendency: 'Green Anarcho-Stalinist'. Stalin was a tyrant, he wasn't the representative of the working classes he made himself out to be. 'Anarcho-Stalinist' is an oxymoron: you can't have a totalitarian regime under anarchy. The green part only adds more hilarity and embarrasses yourself.

Ahmadinejad just uses the whole 'FUCK THE WEST!11' act to gain support from idiots who think they can be hip and cool by hating the US government (i.e you). Women are stoned to death for revealing their arms, Iran has sharia law courts where the testimony of two women is worth that of one man and women are hanged for their own rape because "it's their own fault" (and not even properly - I've heard they're lifted upwards by a rope on attached to a crane). I'm an anti-imperialist myself but Ahmadinejad being in power is the worst possible outcome, and I'd rather the US stopped Iran from having nuclear weapons. Incase you don't realize Iran has actually supported the US on seperate occasions, no matter how much lip service Ahmadouchejad pays to 'anti-imperialism'. To top it all off, the last thing I want besides burgeois US and Russian governments sitting behind a nuclear arsenal is a bunch of clinically insane Islamic extremists sitting behind a nuclear arsenal. It scares the shit out of me.

You sir are just an angry young Stalin-kiddie, enjoy your beat off sessions to framed photos of Pol-Pot.

[#FF0000]

In indian state of Bengal, the rebels have just taken over huge swaths of area.

I guess my question is, why so much attention on Iran when there is plently of other stuff happening that doesn't coincide with the interests of U.S. imperialism.

I don't know boyo. Why don't you start a thread about the other stuff, then?

[benhur]

Since when did the self identified revolutionary left become merely mouthpieces in a U.S. inspired smeer job?

I know this is going to provoke all sorts of outrage, but doesn't anyone else find it strange that these so-called leftists hop on this one international issue, en masse and on the same side as the CIA. Seriously, whereas the Indian uprising special forum? Where's people coverage of Niger?

Why do people not care about the day to day struggles of people around the world? Why do they care so much about seeing the Iranian regime be toppled. How is it that the so-called revolutionary left lines up so easily with the U.S. govt?

Rather than the revolutionary left, much of those here seem like the 'left wing of imperialism.'

True. And this is because most revlefters are liberals (rather than communists).

[mykittyhasaboner]

True. And this is because most revlefters are liberals (rather than communists).

Your one to talk.