Results 1 to 20 of 377
Solidarity with Rojava
Solidarity with Rojava. Who else if not us? When if not now?
In the mostly Kurdish area of northern Syria (which is called “Rojava”) a political system of democratic self-government arises since the last three years. The people organise themselves by holding meetings in councils to shape their lives beyond ethnic or religious differences. Women play a key role at this: they organise themselves independently in all domains and are significantly involved in the design of community.
This democratic self-government is protected by the Self-Defence Forces of Rojava, which consists of the YPG and the female brigade the YPJ. It was these brigades together with the PKK who rescued êzidian Kurds from the Sinjar Mountains in September from the inhuman organisation “Islamic State” (IS).
The Democratic Autonomy of cities and municipalities in Rojava has become a symbol of hope for many people in the Near and Middle East. It proves that a peaceful coexistence as well as a just and democratic society will be possible. This particular progressive ideas are hated by the IS. The people of Rojava are willing to offer up their lives for a common defence in the face of IS terrorism.
Turkey tries to eliminate the democratic self-government of Rojava by imposing a blockade against the self-governing territories, bloodily oppressing actions of solidarity in Turkey and tolerating or even supporting the activities of the IS. But also Germany, the EU and the NATO – regardless of their position on IS – are not willing to support the struggle for life in Rojava as the battle for Kobanê shows. Instead the Kurdish organisations are as yet criminalised. The Governments are talking about help but pursuing their own geopolitical self-interests. With that said it’s clear that we must not rely on the states.
It is high time, for putting solidarity to the people in Rojava into practice and not only talk about it. The municipality of Rojava must be maintained – this can only be achieved by Self-defence.
With our signature we make donations to the Self-Defence Forces of Rojava – YPG / YPJ – and call on everybody to do the same. Don’t leave the people in Rojava all by themselves but show your solidarity!
We back the democratic self-government of Rojava by supporting the Self-Defence Force in this current situation.
The Association of students from Kurdistan – YXK
Interventionist Left – IL
Sign the call
Please donate and sign the call via email or online form.
Source: http://rojava-solidaritaet.net/aufruf/call/
"The proletariat, when it seizes power [...] should and must at once undertake socialist measures in the most energetic, unyielding and unhesitant fashion, in other words, exercise a dictatorship, but a dictatorship of the CLASS, not of a party or of a clique -- dictatorship of the class, that means in the broadest possible form on the basis of the most active, unlimited participation of the mass of the people, of unlimited democracy." - Rosa Luxemburg
"An Rhein und Ruhr marschieren wir. / Für unsere Freiheit kämpfen wir! / Den Streifendienst, schlagt ihn entzwei! / Edelweiß marschiert – Achtung – die Straße frei!"
Support RevLeft! Donate now!
Did you read AFed's "analysis" on this?
Last edited by The Feral Underclass; 11th December 2014 at 16:24.
AFed's analysis is not informed by romanticism and wishful thinking.
pew pew pew
Or the facts for that matter.
Anarchists are going full Stalinoid over Rojava. When Stalinists look at revolutions they want to succeed or have succeeded they filter information according to this bias (Gadaffi is mentioned by Afed as well -- there were those whom seriously believed Libya was run through direct participatory democracy). The product of this being historical revisionism. Anarchists, when it concerns Spain 1936, and now Rojava are doing something very similar: trivialising grave errors and overemphasising success to produce a distorted view of reality, and one that in many ways does not conform to or diverges from reality. It was quite refreshing to see a dissident sound come from Afed.
If we look objectively at Rojava it should temper enthusiasm. I'm not sure which "facts" you are talking, but here's what's both crucial and factual:
"it should be pointed out that this [adopting of democratic confederalism] came not from the grassroots of the PKK but was handed down by Ocalan through the PKK command structure"
"As to any change in the structure of the PKK from an extremely centralised structure with Ocalan at the tip of the pyramid into a libertarian federalist organisation controlled by the membership, there is no evidence whatsoever that this has happened. The PKK’s “Democratic Confederalism” is described by Ocalan as “a system which takes into consideration the religious, ethnic and class differences in society", in other words the class system is not being questioned at all."
But the practice of the PYD and TEV-DEM diverges even from Öcalan's watered down 'socialism'. Öcalan's concept is explicitly stateless, the PYD promises a democratic republic instead. If we look at the constitution then it's clear that they are pursuing, on paper, a liberal democracy with parliamentary politics and protecting private individual ownership except in natural resources and such. In practice, even this is a stretch. It's been well reported that the police has fired on unarmed opposition protesters killing a number of them. A crime certainly more severe than US police action. Of course, this is being denied, supposedly they were armed and threatened the police (and of course this is the typical defence used by authoritarian leaders to excuse massacres). This can be downplayed as incident, but more structurally, the PYD and TEV-DEM are imprisoning political opponents without trial or access to legal representation.
So in other words, what emerges in Rojava is a dysfunctional liberal democracy and there's droves of anarchists giving zealous support to this.
What should we conclude?
".Argue for fully open borders for refugees and aid to these refugees. Highlight the conditions in the refugee camps and of Syrian refugees in Turkish cities forced to beg or to turn to petty criminal activities in order to live.
2. Provide humanitarian aid to Rojava via IFA, which has direct contact with DAF.
3. Encourage and support any independent action of workers and peasants in the Rojava region. Argue against any nationalist agitation and for the unity of Kurdish, Arab, Muslim, Christian and Yezidi workers and peasants. Any such independent initiatives must free themselves from PKK/PYD control, and equally from aid by the Western allies, from their clients like the Free Syrian Army, Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the Turkish state."
Additionally, when socialism is out of reach, I would support liberal democracy insofar that political freedom is guaranteed so independent working class parties and movements can operate freely.
pew pew pew
A few years from now I think people will unfortunately realize they had been taken in by some PR shenanigans on the part of the PKK. What they're offering sounds an awful lot better than what Assad is willing to and is no doubt worlds apart from life under daesh. But conscription and a lack of political Independence has come along with it, and that shouldn't be ignored. We should keep our politics and our knee jerk emotional responses separate in this case.
Man is but a goat in the hands of butchers
Erm, they said pretty much the same thing about the Zapatistas. The AFed line is just the same purist, oppositional stuff -- "If it's not pure anarchism we must oppose it!" It was the same thing with the August Riots.
Last edited by The Feral Underclass; 11th December 2014 at 16:25.
Here is an initial response from Andrew Flood of the WSM. It's nothing substantial, but I think it gives the potential for some good counter-balance to the AFed statement, and I look forward to their more substantial article.
I was just looking for that post TFU, thanx...
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
Well to respond to some points raised by the WSM. I'd say the WSM misrepresents what Afed is doing.
"it treats the YPG / PKK as the main enemy to be exposed ... There is almost nothing on ISIS, nothing on Turkey, nothing on the Syrian revolution & civil war, nothing on the actual economic conditions in Rojava"
Because it's a piece about the PYD. No one in anarchist milieus is cheer leading on ISIS, so there's no need for a critical evaluation of them. The statement indeed serves to put the PYD in more accurate light.
"It even compares the YPJ to 'ISIS .. all-female brigades'"
I can't say what the intent was but people tend to always conflate comparisons and equations. Not entirely relevant but I've commented elsewhere on Anarchist Meme's horrid cheer leading of tribal groups' use of women combatants, framing it as some spontaneous popular uprising of sorts. In other words, Anarchist Memes is taking sides with tribal groups in a highly sectarian war, deeply disturbing I'd say. In a similar vain shouldn't we cheer on Iranian regime woman combatants if they were send to fight ISIS? Class independence is thrown out the window, which is very reminiscent of social-chauvinism (social-tribalism? social-sectarianism?) when World War I knocked on the world's doors.
"All this to build up to the demand that "Any such independent initiatives must free themselves from PKK/PYD control, and equally from aid by the Western allies, from their clients like the Free Syrian Army, Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the Turkish state."
In other words the almost non existent anarchist movement in the region must pretend that everyone is equally terrible and fight them all simultaneously."
Independent initiatives, independence based on social class, independent from nationalists, independent from political clans, independent from imperialist powers. God forbid! Incidentally, retaining class independence of proletarian groups and clubs is not the same as fighting. An independent proletarian group can oppose and fight one group or actor (e.g. Da'esh/ISIS), and monetarily their efforts would coincide with the efforts of other groups (e.g. YPG and Syriac Military Council) that fight the same enemy without clashing. It means refraining from entering into coalitions with them, retaining independence, refraining from coming under class alien control.
"That while the PYD is indeed not an anarchist formation its feminist, direct democratic, social democratic environmentalism is worth defending against the assault of the above mentioned forces."
Feminist? Shallowly. Direct democracy? Dysfunctional bourgeois democracy. It may be worth defending (may be) but not by surrendering class independence.
pew pew pew
Just to clarify, it's not the WSM who wrote this, it's Andrew Flood.
Yawn. Taking this purist line is impractical and naive. No one is saying this is perfect, they're saying this is what it is. Do you move beyond it by being this oppositional? I mean, what practical purpose are you serving? Fair enough if you don't think there is anything to move beyond, but then you're just an idiot and not worth even talking to.
I'm not sure how to even respond to this type of argument. Apparently, advocating class independence is "impractical", "naive", "puritan" -- and this in response to class independence yet still striving for a functional liberal democracy. The appropriate communist position is apparently surrendering class independence by willingly subjecting ourselves to bourgeois powers and enabling a dysfunctional liberal democracy (a competitive authoritarian system) because it is not perfect but it "is what it is".
This is functionally no different than anarchists surrendering their independence to the Stalinist-lead Republican government in the Spanish Civil War; no different than the SACP backing the ANC against independent workers' organisations; no different than 'communists' entering into electoral and ruling coalition blocs with centre-left parties; no different than Chomsky saying we need to vote Obama because McCain/Palin would be worse.
I'm not sure how solid a foundation revolutionary politics has when it goes out the window at the first obstacle where it is deemed 'impractical'. Certainly, those agreeing with TFU's positions and himself are crossing the class line, and seem to be betraying communist politics. We certainly wouldn't regard the KPRF as communist because of its 'practical alliance' to the patriotic bourgeoisie. A difference being that it is a pillar of the KPRF and not the anarcho-tankies (yes), but still.
pew pew pew
Well not responding to it would be one option...
Am I or Andrew Flood or WSM or any other anarchist or communist that doesn't share AFed and your view not advocating this? Are we not advocating it by default of not agreeing with your assessment?
It is purist and impractical and naive to reject involvement in something that has a revolutionary character/potential simply because it doesn't conform to your specific criteria. Of course, you can argue that there is nothing there that would set it apart of anything else but that's where we differ, isn't it. The situation in Rojava has the ingredients to take on more revolutionary politics. There is no tactical or strategic reason to refuse engagement with what is happening there. Your ideological purism is not a legitimate excuse I'm afraid.
Sigh. The option isn't defend Rojava or surrender class independence.
Except only one of those examples is actually comparable to the situation in Rojova and that was fundamentally a different situation since class politics was developed. The anarchist surrender to the Stalinists in Spain was defeat of the anarchist revolution. No such revolution exists in Rojava, so how are these two things comparable?
Revolutionary politics isn't a one size fits all kinda thing and anyone who thinks it is is either a child or a moron.
Last edited by The Feral Underclass; 7th December 2014 at 16:21.
Who would have thought that I could out-ultra left the ultra left
Man is but a goat in the hands of butchers
What is the tactical or strategic point of refusing engagement in Rojava? Are you saying that there exists no basis and absolutely no possibility for the situation in Rojava to become transformative?
There is this possibility in Colombia and Venezuela. Why not support FARC or ELN and Bolivarian circles?
"We have seen: a social revolution possesses a total point of view because – even if it is confined to only one factory district – it represents a protest by man against a dehumanized life" - Marx
"But to push ahead to the victory of socialism we need a strong, activist, educated proletariat, and masses whose power lies in intellectual culture as well as numbers." - Luxemburg
fka the greatest Czech player of all time, aka Pavel Nedved
You think you have it bad? I find myself in agreement with Tim Cornelis of all people. People who point to "Rojava" (I wonder how people would respond if someone on RevLeft talked about "Luban" or "as-Suriyah") as "transformative" (what does that even mean?) apparently think that some token verbiage about feminism and "democratic confederalism" means that one nationalist group (the PKK) is on the side of the proletariat.
I wonder if people would be willing to use the same criteria to support, for example, the People's Mujahedin of Iran, or other such outfits.
in b4 the ICC writes lengthy praise of AFED....
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
No there isn't.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Transform
verb
1. to change in form, appearance, or structure; metamorphose.
2. to change in condition, nature, or character; convert.
3. to change into another substance; transmute.
http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...rmative%20?s=t
