Log in

View Full Version : Nasser ?



Rafiko Bingo
27th April 2013, 05:16
Hey Comrades,

I've been wondering what was the Marxist's point of view on Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egyptian 'Revolutionary'. I know that he was disliked by the Western Powers and by the Islamist. He advocated an anti-imperialist agenda, along with a Pan-Arabic unity. I would rather not base myself on Wikipedia, so that's why I ask you.

Thank you.

Rusty Shackleford
27th April 2013, 05:31
Bourgeois left-nationalist who advocated Arab Socialism and opposed reactionary forms of nationalism. Wasnt a pro-communist and had some anti-communist policies.

Comrade Nasser
27th April 2013, 07:12
Love him. He sort of looks like me. He was my profile picture for the longest time. IMO probably one of the best prez us egyptians have had.

Poison Frog
27th April 2013, 07:16
I think pan-Arab nationalism is a flawed concept. As you say, a good thing about Nasser was his opposition to Islamism. I don't really go along with the 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' idea though.

Comrade Nasser
27th April 2013, 07:29
I think pan-Arab nationalism is a flawed concept. As you say, a good thing about Nasser was his opposition to Islamism. I don't really go along with the 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' idea though.

One things sure he's better than the Islamic Brotherhood piece of crap we have in Egypt now. And yes, Nasser was anti-Muslim brotherhood.

Poison Frog
27th April 2013, 07:31
Agree with that, no doubt.

Sidagma
27th April 2013, 08:40
I don't know a whole lot about this subject, but I do know that there was a thriving Greek community in Egypt that was exploited and eventually persecuted by Nasser. Here's a documentary about them. (http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/aljazeeraworld/2012/04/20124212646347121.html)

I imagine that the results of pan-Arab nationalism were similar for non-Arab minorities throughout the Middle East, although I stress that I really know very little, and would welcome more information or correction on the subject.

TheEmancipator
27th April 2013, 11:20
Much like Tito, if you look at his policies in difficult times, then he is a commendable statesman. Otherwise, his contribution to a revolutionary cause is minimal.

Sinister Cultural Marxist
28th April 2013, 06:30
Well, he was good at giving Egyptians and Arabs a sense of agency and independence after 500 years of Turkish and Anglo-French domination. He also stood up to the Brits, Israelis and French on numerous occasions.

That said, he endorsed a lot of loopy ideas. Apparently, he thought the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were legitimate, which was an absurd hoax that contributed to antisemitism in Europe. I don't think a real revolution can come from someone whose analysis is based on the idea that Jews, not Capitalists, are responsible for the world's problems.

Os Cangaceiros
28th April 2013, 09:37
Nasser's treatment of suspected Islamists kind of exacerbated Islamism's more deranged tendencies...namely the Egyptian state's torture and execution of political prisoners, with the help of the CIA. Or at least that's what "The Power of Nightmares" seemed to argue, in regards to the torture and execution of Sayyid Qutb. But then again Qutb's doctrine was both militant and anti-modernist, so perhaps that's how radical Islam as a political current would've evolved anyway.

Poison Frog
28th April 2013, 14:08
Yeah I think although Qutb is vital to the movement, in terms of how ideologies have developed, he was still one of many. Thinking of how Jamat developed in Bangladesh for example, and how Wahhabism started the whole literalist approach in the 19th C. I agree Nasser would have excacerbated things by use of torture but I think ultimately we would have Islamism the same anyway.

I'd say a perceived failure of communism is equally contributory, actually. They think capitalism failed but so has communism, and that they have a third political ideology competing with those two.