Results 1 to 20 of 35
History of socialism as a force in the Middle East
What are some good books on this? It's to counter this bullshit I hear a lot from a few identity politics-crazed NZ Muslim anti-Zionist and anti-imperialist campaigners that socialists are just imposing their Western secular worldview on Middle Easterners, who are obviously all inherently theocratic (). Led Zeppelin has had a bit of experience arguing with one of them on my Facebook when the Iranian Uprisings were happening. Particularly I'm interested in learning about the rise of Islamic fundamentalism as a force that largely replaced secular Arab nationalist and socialist ideologies in terms of popularity.
And when Marx says, 'Hitherto the philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways', what that 'hitherto' means is not a renunciation of theory and that all we need to do is wade in with our fists and there will be no more need for thought. This idea is in fact fascist, and it would be grossly unjust to Marx to impute such views on him.
--Theodor Adorno, 'On Theory and Practice'
It is a bit of a difficult request if you don't speak Arabic, Farsi, or Turkish. One place that you could start looking is one the (very out of date)Asia and Occean page of Leftist Parties of the World. It lists about 100 left organisations in Turkey alone, at least proving they exist, gives website links, some of which have English pages.
Devrim
It's not so much that far left sects exist in the Middle East (there are far left sects in practically every country), i'm more looking for information about socialism as an actual political force in the Middle East and the possible historical influence/popularity of such groups.
And when Marx says, 'Hitherto the philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways', what that 'hitherto' means is not a renunciation of theory and that all we need to do is wade in with our fists and there will be no more need for thought. This idea is in fact fascist, and it would be grossly unjust to Marx to impute such views on him.
--Theodor Adorno, 'On Theory and Practice'
The TKPML is actually conducting a PPW in Turkey.
Which is one of the reasons that the research is difficult in English. Of course what you define as revolutionary depends on your political opinions, but if you take people's self description, the Confederation of Revolutionary Workers' Unions (DİSK)* in Turkey has 327,000 members, hardly a sect.
Maybe the best way to go about it would be to look at specific historical events, the period leading up to the 1980 coup here, the workers' councils in the Iranian revolution etc.
Devrim
*Actually just looking at their site when finding it, it seems they translate the name as 'progressive' not 'revolutionary' in English. It is 'revolutionary' in Turkish though.
With a few hundred people in basically a single city, that's all there is to that peoples war.
"Communism, as fully developed naturalism, equals humanism, and as fully developed humanism equals naturalism; it is the genuine resolution of the conflict between man and nature and between man and man – the true resolution of the strife between existence and essence, between objectification and self-confirmation, between freedom and necessity, between the individual and the species. Communism is the riddle of history solved, and it knows itself to be this solution." - Karl Marx
Pale Blue Jadal
As far as I know, it is certainly much bigger than that.
I take it that this is because you live in Tunceli, whereas the person who made that point lives in a city so far away from what is going. I also take in that in Tunceli every morning you read a large selection of the Turkish language press, and are really well informed about these issues.
Or could it actually be that what you actually know about this subject is based on a few of their own press releases that have been translated into English.
I know this group. Their armed wing is called TIKKO. I used to work with one of them on a building site in Istanbul. They used to be a big group. Now I doubt they have the hundred Leo credits them with.
Devrim
Yes, what I know about them is from their own press releases. Even a year ago they were doing quite well despite the martyrdom of quite a few CC members.
And I really prefer to trust their press releases rather than your claims, even though you live in Turkey... people from India have also come up with the theory that the Indian Maoists are actually engaging in a "phoney" war etc etc....
Devrim is right, the problem is that many works on the subject are written in the native language.What are some good books on this? It's to counter this bullshit I hear a lot from a few identity politics-crazed NZ Muslim anti-Zionist and anti-imperialist campaigners that socialists are just imposing their Western secular worldview on Middle Easterners, who are obviously all inherently theocratic (
Even though I don't agree with Mansoor Hekmat's politics there is some useful information you can find in some of his works, many of which are translated here: Mansoor Hekmat Works
It broke them as an organisation really.
You are free to believe what you like. I don't think that these sort of groups have anything to do with socialism, or working class politics. That doesn't mean that I lie about their size or influence. I think the Maoists in India are a reactionary anti-working class gang. There does seem to be a lot of them. This group on the other hand are nowhere near as big.
Devrim
Off topic(?)...
- Ten Days That Shook The World
I don't know what this is supposed to mean, does the Indian proletariat's opinion matter less than an Indian maoist press release?
Sorry for the ambiguity. I am not talking about the proletariat or any oppressed class. Just some individuals belonging to certain tendencies.
I presume that you were referring to me here. Actually not only myself, but our whole organisation believes that Maoist armed groups are anti-working class, including some of our militants who are ex-members of these sort of groups in India and the Philippines. Indeed all left communist groups, not just our own, take the same position.
On the point of the Jack Reed quote, I am not sure what you were trying to say there, but ironically, he was also a left communist. In addition if you are trying to compare people to those in the passage, I am a worker and have been for nearly three decades since leaving school at fifteen. Most, but not all, of the Maoists I have met have been students. Who is who in this excerpt?
Devrim
In what context are you using the word "militant" here? Does your organization have armed squads that actually wage war against the oppressive state?
Not only your tendency, all other tendencies call us anti-working class. We are in fact proud of this; the day organizations that do not try to make revolutions call us pro-working class, we will know that we have become revisionists.
As far as I know, left communism opposes both Leninism and Trotskyism. Reed's stand does not seem to be this.
The Maoists organizations we refer to here are revolutionary and hence mostly clandestine. The supporters who openly declare their affiliation to Maoism are the ones who can afford to do so. A student's family won't starve if he is arrested. Moreover, they engage mainly in the propaganda work etc. which are legal.
Well, there is a man who uses his gun against the state, and a self-proclaimed communist who is telling him that he is not fighting for socialism.
Having a gun, and a red flag doesn't make one a revolutionary. Gangsters shoot cops too. They are not revolutionaries either.
Classes make revolutions, not armed gangs.
Left communists oppose what Leninism and Trotskyism are today. In 1917 they were the probably the most enthusiastic supporters of the revolution, and over the next few years became the majority of significant minorities in most of the European CPS.Originally Posted by red cat
If you want to know Reed's positions read the minutes of the Second Congress of the Comintern. It is very clear.
The Turkish states statistics about arrested militants Maoist militants also show the social milieu, they are drawn from.
Devrim
Right. But not having or willing to use a gun definitely makes one a reformist.
First a few people start the armed struggle. Then more join. Ultimately the whole class steps in and makes the revolution.
He still seems pretty much a Leninist to me.
Won't believe in statistics provided by the state, sorry.
I don't have a gun. Does that make me a reformist? Lots of fascists do have them. Does that make them revolutionaries?
It is not how it actually works though. I don't think that a few Maoists shooting the occasional soldier, Gendarme, or policeman in the mountains has anything to do with increasing class consciousness at all.
In which case you didn't read it very well. He disagrees with Lenin and sides with the left on the major issues of the second congress, parliamentarianism, and trade unions.
I don't take every thing that the state says at face value. However, I don't have any reason to doubt there reports on the demographics of arrested militants of this organisation. When they say, for example, that '65 % of the members arrested were aged 14 to 25, and only 17.5% were over 30, it fits in with my personal experience, and I don't have any particular reason to doubt it. Of course, I don't think that that reflects the entire demographics of the organisation. There will be older people who are sending them out on missions.
In general though, most of the active militants of these sort of groups are people who are recruited at university, and very often people who drop out of politics after graduating. That is not to say that students can't be communists. We have people who are students in our organisation. In fact most of them come from family backgrounds similar to that mentioned above. This is though a general overview of the social composition of these types of groups throughout the Middle East.
Devrim
Not having a gun makes one a reformist? No offence, but that is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard from a 'leftist'.
