Anti-Imperialism and the support for it

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

I recently became interested in the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), and it seems they are willing to put everything against a nation and support it as long as they are against Imperialism. Would any Marxist-Leninists able to clarify why a group, or MLs in general, would be willing to support nations such as Zimbabwe, headed by the heavily racist and homophobic Robert Mugabe, or Syria, lead by the far-right theocrat Bashir al-Assad? It seems to be a huge conflict of interest.

[RedKobra]

Its really sad but you're either going to be completely ignored or subject to a shitstorm of abuse. The CPGB-ML are a bunch of wierdo, nutjobs for sure but it'd be nice if we could convince you of that in a calm and constructive way. I fear that is not what will happen. So try not to take it too personally.

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

It wouldn't he hard to convince me of that. They don't appear to be all that great considering some of their questionable stances. Any parties you'd suggest instead?

[RedKobra]

I wish there was. At times like this you just want to do something, anything, even if that is only being around like minded people who you can talk to and develop your politics with. Personally, The CPGB-ML aren't the sort of people I'd want to be hanging around with. As you say they have some questionable, if not down right appalling views.

[Yung Trev]

Maybe you could not be a part of any party, if the parties closest to you are MLs. Just stay away from that, and just believe in communism at the same time.

[Sasha]

PMLI (maoist idiots from italy) take the cake;


Scuderi: Let us support the Islamic State against the imperialist holy alliance


An imperialist holy alliance is born to fight and destroy the Islamic State fighting against imperialism. Of course, the PMLI cannot be part of it. Our natural stand point is together with those who fight against imperialism, that is the common enemy of all the peoples of the world.
The Islamic State does not want imperialism to be the master of Iraq, Syria, Middle East, North and Central Africa, Afghanistan and Yemen. We do not want it either, therefore we cannot but support it. As said again by the Political Bureau in its historic document issued on 10 January, “Every people has the right to self-determination, to independence, and to settle their internal contradictions by themselves.”
An immense gulf divides us from the Islamic State in the spheres of ideology, culture, tactics and strategy, and we do not agree with all its fighting methods, actions and goals. But we have an essential point in common—the unwavering struggle against imperialism. This point at the moment transcends any other difference that may exist, and it is the pivot of our de facto anti-imperialist alliance.
Alliances are made with the forces currently on the field, regardless of their characteristics, ideologies and strategies. These forces are as they are, we cannot shape them as we see fit, after abstract models. They depend on existing circumstances and on the main contradictions in a certain moment.
Just as Stalin allied with US and British imperialists to defeat Germany’s aggressive imperialism, just as Mao allied with the Kuomintang nationalists to force Japanese imperialist aggressors out of China, so we must necessarily ally with the Islamic State, otherwise we will side with imperialist aggressors. There is no other anti-imperialist alternative, including neutrality. Moreover, this is happening in a moment when inter-imperialist contradictions are sharpening over the control of Syria and Iraq, possibly leading to a world war that we oppose with all our strength.
We are on the side of all the peoples fighting for national liberation, starting from the Palestinian people who fight against Israel’s Zionist, Nazi and imperialist invaders. And we support their ongoing Intifada. At the same time, we condemn the state massacre in Ankara against the Kurdish people.
New Duce Renzi’s Italy is part of the imperialist holy alliance, it has a military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is ready to use Tornado fighters to bomb the Islamic State in the territory it has taken away from Iraq. It is only waiting to have in return the prize it is longing for—the leadership of the military mission in Libya.
We must oppose it in any possible way, denouncing it on “Il Bolscevico”, in workplaces, schools, universities, cities and squares. We must convince our people to refuse to be cannon fodder for Italian imperialism. In case Italy should take part at a possible world war, we must convince our people to rise in arms, if necessary, to prevent it.
Imperialism is showing all its claws, it is right for people who do not want to be dominated by imperialism to do the same.
Down with imperialism and imperialist wars!
Long live the struggles for liberation and the struggles of oppressed peoples and nations!
Let us support anti-imperialist Islamic movements!
Long live proletarian internationalism!
Let us overthrow New Duce Renzi’s imperialist and interventionist government!
United, filled with fighting spirit, with the Teachers and the PMLI we shall win!

(Excerpts from the opening speech by Giovanni Scuderi, General Secretary of the Italian Marxist-Leninist Party, at the 5th Plenary Session of the 5th Party Central Committee, held in Florence on 11 October 2015)

15 ottobre 2015



http://pmli.it/articoli/2015/20151015_scuderiletussupporttheislamicstate.html


apparently they got roughed up over this when they tried to join a demo recently.

[Tim Cornelis]

Maybe you could not be a part of any party, if the parties closest to you are MLs. Just stay away from that, and just believe in communism at the same time.

Hello, welcome. This post could well be considered tendency (flame) baiting. Be careful with that. It's against the rules.

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

I don't consider it flame baiting, if you were directing in relation to me, Tim.

I don't even know if I align myself with Marxism-Leninism, Yung Trev. There are so many communist ideologies that interest me out there, and hell even anarchism has piqued my interest. There are certain things I am unsure of within the ideologies, such as the idea of a vanguard party. I am actually a fan of the anarchist idea of worker's self-management, but I do not attribute everything to the state and its capitalism; I understand historical and dialectical materialism, and that the capitalist economic system in tandem with the undemocratic oligarchical rule of western society to be a problem (as well as the lack of class consciousness).

I guess the closest thing to that would Automonist Marxism? Even so, there don't appear to be any active groups with that tendency. I want to change something, or at least try to.

[RedKobra]

I don't consider it flame baiting, if you were directing in relation to me, Tim.

I don't even know if I align myself with Marxism-Leninism, Yung Trev. There are so many communist ideologies that interest me out there, and hell even anarchism has piqued my interest. There are certain things I am unsure of within the ideologies, such as the idea of a vanguard party. I am actually a fan of the anarchist idea of worker's self-management, but I do not attribute everything to the state and its capitalism; I understand historical and dialectical materialism, and that the capitalist economic system in tandem with the undemocratic oligarchical rule of western society to be a problem (as well as the lack of class consciousness).

I guess the closest thing to that would Automonist Marxism? Even so, there don't appear to be any active groups with that tendency. I want to change something, or at least try to.

I'm pretty sure Tim was talking to Yung Trev. I totally get what you're saying. One thing I would say and it may sound boring but you really can't do better than to educate yourself first and foremost. There is an abundance of Marxist literature available online for free. Start with Marx & Engels and then see where that takes you. In terms of organisation, I wish I could suggest something but there really is nothing out there. But, again, nothing beats actually understanding the theory.

[Fourth Internationalist]

It is more important to first find out what exactly it is you believe in before joining any party simply for the sake of "doing something." Of course, I would definitely recommend contacting these organizations and talking to them about their politics if you are interested, but being active in a party won't do you much good if you merely have vaguely leftist beliefs (which is not your fault, everyone who gets into far-left politics starts out like this) that don't point towards a real way of organizing the fight for socialism and revolution. The different tendencies of the far-left have fundamentally different viewpoints about how to organize and how to fight for revolution. You can't just join one of the many parties/groups thinking it will do good when they may or may not be doing any meaningful action that you would support (or, in some cases, actions that you would explicitly not support). That would just waste your time when you should first learn about what you truly believe about communism. :)

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

I meant he was referring to me being flame bated by Yung Trev. But regardless, I will take your advice and get to reading Marx and Engels' works, or more of them should I say. I just want to know where I stand; not for the sake of labeling, but so I know who my allies are.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

PMLI (maoist idiots from italy) take the cake;



http://pmli.it/articoli/2015/20151015_scuderiletussupporttheislamicstate.html


apparently they got roughed up over this when they tried to join a demo recently.

Their point of view is very close to the neo-fascist ideas first propagated by the likes of the BNP, that they don't have a problem with non-whites (lol) but that they should live over in their place with their own culture. This idea that somehow we should do nothing at all as Syrians kill each other in a brutal civil war is a little archaic; even for the most ardently anti-war position I don't think 'doing nothing' holds true.

[The Idler]

In your intro topic you said 'Although I align myself with Individualist Anarchism, I sympathise with Syndicalism, Council Communism and Libertarian Socialism'

It sounds like you've already put some thought into politics which is more than various others who join whatever party their friends are in, but you need to do some more thinking to arrive at a really good decision.

You say the CPGB-ML has interested you perhaps because you say "I must admit to being a bit of a "Sovietphile"

I spoke to a couple of them for an extended amount of time at Wigan Diggers Festival, it was frustrating and I found them patronising blaming everything wrong on Khrushchev and revisionism as if workers could have no independent agency.

I also don't think any M-L groups are going to drop "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" anytime soon as it is just too appealing to simple minds.

So personally I think it would be a waste of time with the CPGB-ML but by all means speak or meet with them. How much time do you want to spend going through all the parties? Do you know all the parties? A not completely current list is here
http://eng.anarchopedia.org/List_of_Left-Wing_Parties_in_the_United_Kingdom
If you're a syndicalist join SolFed
If you're a Council Communism join ICC or CWO or Free Communist
If you're a libertarian socialist join SPGB

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

This idea that somehow we should do nothing at all as Syrians kill each other in a brutal civil war is a little archaic; even for the most ardently anti-war position I don't think 'doing nothing' holds true.

The civil war started when the US and EU imperialist bourgeoisie "did something", i.e. started arming the Syrian opposition (which, incidentally, has absolutely nothing to do with Daesh, I'm sure). As someone who is quite close to a number of people from the region, I can tell you they all wish that the US and EU would, for once, do nothing. The US and UK "left" in particular needs to drop the saviour complex because all it does is lead to cheerleading for imperialists.

[Yung Trev]

I wasn't trying to start a tendency war or anything. I was just trying to help him out. Sorry if it came across that way

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

In your intro topic you said 'Although I align myself with Individualist Anarchism, I sympathise with Syndicalism, Council Communism and Libertarian Socialism'

It sounds like you've already put some thought into politics which is more than various others who join whatever party their friends are in, but you need to do some more thinking to arrive at a really good decision.

You say the CPGB-ML has interested you perhaps because you say "I must admit to being a bit of a "Sovietphile"

I spoke to a couple of them for an extended amount of time at Wigan Diggers Festival, it was frustrating and I found them patronising blaming everything wrong on Khrushchev and revisionism as if workers could have no independent agency.

I also don't think any M-L groups are going to drop "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" anytime soon as it is just too appealing to simple minds.

So personally I think it would be a waste of time with the CPGB-ML but by all means speak or meet with them. How much time do you want to spend going through all the parties? Do you know all the parties? A not completely current list is here

If you're a syndicalist join SolFed
If you're a Council Communism join ICC or CWO or Free Communist
If you're a libertarian socialist join SPGB

When I put "individualist anarchist" I didn't understand the term or the alignment very well. I think I actually edited the post from what I originally said, which was that I aligned with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. I was even more confused then then I am now, but I appear to be approaching some kind of conclusion... slowly.

[John Nada]

[
I recently became interested in the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), and it seems they are willing to put everything against a nation and support it as long as they are against Imperialism. Would any Marxist-Leninists able to clarify why a group, or MLs in general, would be willing to support nations such as Zimbabwe, headed by the heavily racist and homophobic Robert Mugabe, or Syria, lead by the far-right theocrat Bashir al-Assad? It seems to be a huge conflict of interest.It's based on Lenin's theories on imperialism: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm At the 1907 Stuggart Conference of the Second International, a resolution was passed that the Social-Democratic parties would oppose any imperialist war and even go to civil war if it happens. Most the parties broke that agreement and voted for war credits except the Bolsheviks and a few others.They use excuses like,"The Tsar is worse than the Kaiser," "German imperialism is oppressing poor Belgium", "The Middle East needs to be freed from the Ottoman empire," "The enemy has killed hundreds of thousands of our troops! We must support these workers!" ect.

All the nations involved in WWI were pretty fucked up, one way or another. Germany treated the Poles and Africans like shit, the Ottoman Empire was oppressive to it subjugated nations and national minorities like the Armenians were subjected to genocide. Yet Russia wasn't better, it treated its subjugated nations like shit too and massacred national minorities like the Jews. And Britain, France, Belgium, Netherlands, the US and Japan were also just as bad as any of the Central powers, if not worse.

Colonialism and this land-grab by the bourgeoisie wouldn't help the proletariat and poor peasantry. Acquiring new colonies or "liberating" them from a rival who's supposedly worse than "your own" country, makes thing worse, not better. For superprofits the imperialists keep the subjugated nations underdeveloped. They prop up extremely reactionary comprador-bourgeoisie and feudal classes like the landowners and clergy to facilitate this oppression of the proletariat and poor peasantry. And a small stratum of workers gets "bribed" in a sense with a share of the imperialist booty to go against the proletariat, as well as promoting chauvinism and racism which divides the workers. This also maintains profitability and helps keep capitalism alive.

Imperialist domination makes it harder for both the oppressor and oppressed nations' workers and peasantry to have a revolution, like what Marx said about England's domination of Ireland keeping both chained together. The supposed humanitarian excuses are merely cover for destroying the oppressed nations' productive forces, thwarting progressive movements and installing a new comprador leadership who'll only wants to enrich themselves at the expense of the colonized people. As bad as each autocrat and rebel group may be, the worse, the most oppressive misrulers are the despots that survive off helping imperialist siphon off wealth and impoverishing the oppressed peoples in the process. And many people who's only sin is being in the wrong country will get brutally killed and maimed by the imperialist invaders and their comprador allies, as well as thrown into poverty and driven from their home country.

The bourgeois media will play up the "enemy's" atrocities for support and to whip "their" country's workers into a toxic jingoist frenzy. Everyone's pretty fucked up, but imperialist countries like the US will downplay any of their atrocities that's usually the worst in the war. Really countries like the US would give anyone a run for its money in terms of brutality. This is all to misled you to war and take pressure off the oppressors at home.

In the case of Mugabe and Assad, the UK and the US don't care about the people of Syria and Zimbabwe, otherwise they wouldn't be backing even worse oppositions forces, placing sanctions that hurt everyone, and killing those people supposedly being liberated. It's never black and white like the media pretends.

Zimbabwe was fighting the US and UK backed Rwanda-Uganda alliance's invasion of the Congo. It was getting too close to a rival imperialist China. Mugabe's land reform was long delayed due to the UK refusing to pay the white landowners in violation of an agreement after Zimbabwe's war of liberation. These settler-colonialist owned much of the best land and oppressed their black workers. So his supporters took it back. And they slapped Zimbabwe with sanctions, as well as supported a corrupt opposition. This hurt all of Zimbabwe, even the white Zimbabweans.

With Syria, there was at first some legit grievances against the state and Assad, who's a reactionary comprador but not a theocrat. However, imperialists like the US, France and the UK, as well as their expansionist sub-imperialist allies the GCC, Israel and Turkey, saw an opportunity to strike at a Russian neo-colony and the sub-imperialist Iran. Rather than a progressive movement taking the lead, genocidal Salafi-Jihadists took control of the opposition with the support of the US, France and UK.

They don't want a progressive government looking out for the Syrian people, but semi-feudal compradors who'll bend to their will. This will hold back Syria in a semi-feudal, semi-colonial state and place the workers and peasantry in a more precarious position. If the US-UK-French backed rebels win, it's likely there will be a genocide of people who're not Salafi such as Shia, Christians and Druze, even Sunnis of other schools of thought. Yet the people fleeing this bloodbath the imperialist countries created are then demonized by the very same politicians who support destroying their homes. Now thousands are dying at sea and fascism is gaining ground. The imperialist intervention is clearly not about helping Syria, or Kurdistan and Iraq for that matter.

Except for possible that Italian Maoist group mentioned above(which other Maoist parties criticized), I don't think a lot of these parties 100% support these type of governments' systems. Rather, they don't live in the country and there's not much they can do except try to change things at home, to help the oppressed peoples abroad. Joining in on the jingoistic shit won't help. Primary objective is to oppose "their own" government who's actively making it worse.

Although the CPGB(ML) supporting Russia bombing Syria is absurd, WTF. It's bad imperialism when the US does it, but anyone opposed to the US gets a free pass? I know some dispute Russia as an imperialist because it supposed doesn't export enough capital, but it's definately not semi-colonial and clearly expansionist.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

The civil war started when the US and EU imperialist bourgeoisie "did something", i.e. started arming the Syrian opposition (which, incidentally, has absolutely nothing to do with Daesh, I'm sure). As someone who is quite close to a number of people from the region, I can tell you they all wish that the US and EU would, for once, do nothing. The US and UK "left" in particular needs to drop the saviour complex because all it does is lead to cheerleading for imperialists.

I was under the impression that the Kurds want to be armed by the Americans, and that one of the actual positive actions we could take is to pressure the government to put diplomatic pressure on Turkey to stop giving IS an easy ride. After all, if Turkey really wanted to, it could relieve a lot of pressure on the Kurds and cut off some of IS' supply lines, making military defeat of IS by the Syrian State and Kurdistan a more likely outcome.

If Assad's regime, the Kurds, IS and Turkey are just left to their own devices then the current stalemate will continue, with the associated horrors and loss of life that accompany civil war.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I was under the impression that the Kurds want to be armed by the Americans, and that one of the actual positive actions we could take is to pressure the government to put diplomatic pressure on Turkey to stop giving IS an easy ride. After all, if Turkey really wanted to, it could relieve a lot of pressure on the Kurds and cut off some of IS' supply lines, making military defeat of IS by the Syrian State and Kurdistan a more likely outcome.

If Assad's regime, the Kurds, IS and Turkey are just left to their own devices then the current stalemate will continue, with the associated horrors and loss of life that accompany civil war.

The PKK and its many front groups certainly do want to be armed by the US, and have recently issued a craven appeal for French bombing in the region. That is hardly surprising. They're simply one of the sides in this sectarian slaughter. For the PKK leadership, US or French bombing means they can set up their own statelet. For the people on the ground it means they die. That's what bombs do, they don't help people, they don't liberate people, they kill them. Civilians, usually. And if they survive, they can experience the joys of imperialist-provoked war again, at some indefinite point in the future, because imperialist intervention is the gift that keeps on giving. Daesh itself was formed by forces backed by the US in its imperialist intervention into Afghanistan, and later Iraq and Syria. Oh, and remember Libya, where much of the Western "left" begged Obama to save the glorious democratic opposition from the evil Qaddafi? Oh yeah, they've been in a constant state of civil war since, but that's not convenient so most media keep quiet about it.

This is why I say the US left has a saviour complex; you can't save the people in Syria, except by pushing for citizenship rights for those who come to the US. The most you can do is fight against further US intervention.

[Emmett Till]

[It's based on Lenin's theories on imperialism: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm

....
Although the CPGB(ML) supporting Russia bombing Syria is absurd, WTF. It's bad imperialism when the US does it, but anyone opposed to the US gets a free pass? I know some dispute Russia as an imperialist because it supposed doesn't export enough capital, but it's definately not semi-colonial and clearly expansionist.

Russia is hardly expansionist, hell, they don't even want to incorporate Eastern Ukraine, with a mostly Russian population and indeed three hundred years of Russians not Ukrainians as the dominant population. And the Eastern Ukrainians almost unanimously wanting that at this point.

Russia isn't semi-colonial, it's a somewhat unique capitalist country, which doesn't export any significant amounts of capital and where imported capital hardly plays a dominant role. That's because it came about in a fashion Lenin would not have wanted to foresee, namely a capitalist state created on the ruins of a workers state.

But indeed, supporting Russia bombing and killing civilians is no better really than supporting US imperialism bombing and killing civilians. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran aren't imperialist powers either, but that doesn't mean we should support it when they kill Syrians.