[Debate] (Fwd) Here we go again (Zapiro)
critical.montages at gmail.com
Sun Jul 8 03:54:08 BST 2012
First of all, a revolution is a misnomer at least in the cases of
Libya and Syria, unless perhaps you define revolution as simply a
personnel change achieved by a lot of death and destruction bringing
about lawlessness. But if personnel change constitutes a revolution,
every free and fair election is a revolution, which is not the case.
Material support to the FSA has already been undertaken by the
Western, Gulf Arab, and Turkish ruling classes, and consequently a war
is already on in Syria. The question is whether the Left outside
Syria should "aid and abet" what the Western, Gulf Arab, and Turkish
ruling classes are already doing, or whether we should instead resist
them and give our political support, comparatively weak as we are, to
those Syrians, such as most Syrian third campers like Haytham Manna
of NCC (e.g. <https://twitter.com/sncexile>), Louay Hussein (e.g.
<https://twitter.com/HusseinLouay>) of BSS (e.g.
<https://twitter.com/TayyarSyria>), Syrian Communists, most Kurds
(esp. PYD <http://www.facebook.com/PYD.Rojava>), etc., who are arguing
for a ceasefire and a negotiated political solution the result of
which will be up to Syrians.
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Louis Thiemann <kiwiza at gmail.com> wrote:
> That generalization also doesn't convince me. It would include Franco
> because he was more anti-imperialist than the centre-left and centre-right
> governments that replaced him after a popular revolution. I don't see how
> there is a conclusive amount of evidence that the Libyan and Syrian people
> will loose all they won to a few hundred jihadists who smuggled themselves
> into the uprising. The FSA and MB in general are not such scary people, they
> seem to establish themselves as a moderate right, support elections etc.
> Anti-US imperialism can't be the only concern.
> Possible paths:
> 1. Material support to FSA, revolution wins with high burdens
> 2. No support to FSA, revolution looses, Assad stays or civil war
> 3. No support to FSA, non-violent revolution wins
> You argue that we should put our cards on 3., and what you are criticized
> for is not considering that 2. may well happen instead. That's reasonable,
> or are there other possible paths?
> Debate-list mailing list
> Debate-list at fahamu.org
More information about the Debate-list