Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Reflecting on Conflict in Syria

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2298
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 22 May 2013, 08:23
18+
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO98OtXS4sY

I hope they will die soon.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1400
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Party Member
Post 22 May 2013, 09:06
I think the guy in the first video who executed the twelve men has been killed in battle already. That last video actually made me twitch that my neck hurt a little bit. What a waste.
Image


The great art of life is sensation, to feel that you exist, even in pain.
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 22 May 2013, 11:23
At this point the "opposition" ( Kurds not included ) is pretty much completely Islamist.
Assad is a freedom-fighter.
Even the Western media now admit that the rebels are for all intents and purposes terrorists, and the Syrian people are clearly winning against foreign mujj rats.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4479
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 22 May 2013, 15:32
If the West doesn't intervene militarily and Assad wins, he will become the greatest progressive secular nationalist hero of the Arab world since Nasser. I sincerely hope everything turns out for him!
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5159
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 22 May 2013, 19:26
No he won't, the civil war will fade into obscurity like all the other conflicts. Baathists fighting fundamentalists isn't a new thing and it isn't applaudable. What an impulse some people have to find a faction and side with it. Is that how communists are supposed to be relevant?

He isn't even remotely progressive compared to Nasser. He's just another saddam and an imperialist like him too.

It just goes to show how degenerated your kind are to compare him to a pan-arab socialist, and the antiquated progressive bourgeoisie in general. Assas is neither pan-arab, socialist, nor anti-imperialist.

I truly wonder why so many comrades here have a special hatred for islamists. There's really no reason other than chauvinism.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 2051
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 24 Jun 2011, 08:37
Party Bureaucrat
Post 22 May 2013, 19:44
Communists being against religious fundamentalists? I don't know it's so shocking.

Im more concerned about christian fundamentalism since that's the threat where I live, but I see no particular reason to "support" fundamentalists anywhere
Soviet America is Free America!

Under communism, there is no freedom; you are not free to live in poverty, be homeless, to be without an education, to starve, or to be without a job
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5159
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 22 May 2013, 20:03
Communists critically supporting anti-communist nationalists, baathists no less, because their enemy is x hated group rather is. It's going as far as to describe Assad as a freedom fighter and a 'progressive' figure. It's laughable and ignorant. I sincerely hope these kind of people don't poison their local parties with a focus on this crap. It's basically wallowing in irrelevance.

Communists made the mistake of finding lesser evils and greater enemies before, like in Germany or China, to disastrous results.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2298
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 22 May 2013, 22:06
Al Nusra isn't a simple "islamist" organization, it's the most reactionary kind of islamism. My video is sufficient to prove that Bachar al-Assad is 100 times more progressive or less reactionary than this terrorist scum.

Yes, communists shall support "anti-communist nationalists" when they are opposing reactionary terrorists and murderers, to protect the life of the people, to protect democracy, because democracy is important if we want to bring about socialism, because there can be no revolution under Al-Nusra's rule.

In the history of communism, the main mistakes were made by those who never made any revolution, the blanquists, especially of the trotskyist kind, those who like revolutionary phraseology, refuse any sort of compromises. Those guys made much greater mistakes, such as the revolt in Barcelona in 1937, the opposition to the Resistance to nazism. Opposing the Kuomintang while China was under direct Japanese threat would have been the most stupid mistake ever made, and had this policy been followed, there would have been no revolution in China at all.

While you Conscript are concerned with the ideological purity of "local parties", we Communists struggle for the mere survival of those political parties.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5159
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 23 May 2013, 03:17
OP-Bagration wrote:
Al Nusra isn't a simple "islamist" organization, it's the most reactionary kind of islamism. My video is sufficient to prove that Bachar al-Assad is 100 times more progressive or less reactionary than this terrorist scum.


Too bad communists aren't the progressiveness police.

Quote:
Yes, communists shall support "anti-communist nationalists" when they are opposing reactionary terrorists and murderers, to protect the life of the people, to protect democracy, because democracy is important if we want to bring about socialism, because there can be no revolution under Al-Nusra's rule.


This is just a bunch of meaningless rhetoric that can also be applied to Assad. I mean, terror and murder, really? Is the state not capable of such to you, or do its atrocities go by another name? Your argument of needing democracy for socialism is bullshit unless you're trying to tell me Assad represents a democratic system (
) that communists can use to make Syria socialist (
).

Your point about Al-Nusra's rule exemplifies your warped view of revolution. There is as much of a chance of a revolution under the islamists as their is under the reactionary Baathists. There is still a state, there is still capitalism, and still workers in chains. If anything, we should hope this civil war weakens the Syrian nation-state, it's the best conditions for expropriation.

What's your opinion of Iran in 1979? It must be awfully conflicted considering the victors were islamist, yet anti-imperialist and nationalist (therefore progressive), but also murderers of workers and communists.

Quote:
In the history of communism, the main mistakes were made by those who never made any revolution, the blanquists, especially of the trotskyist kind, those who like revolutionary phraseology, refuse any sort of compromises. Those guys made much greater mistakes, such as the revolt in Barcelona in 1937, the opposition to the Resistance to nazism. Opposing the Kuomintang while China was under direct Japanese threat would have been the most stupid mistake ever made, and had this policy been followed, there would have been no revolution in China at all.


I can assure you the 'main mistakes' of communists in the past will never be the ones out of state power, let alone the ones that used it to protect their own counter-revolutionary interests. No 'blanquist' (I'm not so sure it means what you think it does) had as much of an impact on the worldwide communist movement as the stalinist USSR and its comintern.

If you want compromise, become a reformist and work within the state, then you'll actually be compromising with constituents not deciding what's best for them in your ideological bubble.

Nobody said anything about opposing the KMT while under Japanese threat (only you have), not that such a thing would have needed to be considered if Stalin was not so averse to a chinese revolution and considered the nationalists a lesser evil compared to the imperialists. Subsequently there was no revolution until Mao did so himself after he achieved an upper hand in the civil war, and then there's the fate of those chinese communists in 1927 slain by the KMT.

Quote:
While you Conscript are concerned with the ideological purity of "local parties", we Communists struggle for the mere survival of those political parties.


I don't know why you bother calling yourself a communist if you're going to rant about ideological purity, it's nothing more than an excuse to be opposed to revolutionary theory. You're either wrong or right, no use complaining about rigidity.

But you fight for nobody's survival, just the involvement of communists in affairs which have nothing to do with revolution, instead a rivalry between political factions of the bourgeoisie. Not only that, you support the slaughter of workers in the name of nation by supporting a side in this struggle, you are little better than the patriotic social-democrats of the WW1 era (and you sound like them too). You give the excuse it's for the survival of local parties, which means nothing if there's no mass movement to make a vanguard of, and the party's resources are spent trying to influence the outcome of the struggle. You pretty much want to put communists on an eternal treadmill.
Last edited by Conscript on 23 May 2013, 03:23, edited 3 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10785
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2004, 23:53
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 23 May 2013, 03:21
Conscript wrote:
He's just another saddam and an imperialist like him too.


So the USA, France, and the UK along with the rest of NATO and their client states have been funding and arming the opposition. They have been waiting for a chance to intervene directly, despite widespread opposition to intervention. And your response is that Syria is imperialist?
Image

"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" - Walter Rodney
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5159
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 23 May 2013, 03:28
Quote:
And your response is that Syria is imperialist? :?:


Syria is imperialist, the state is yet another antagonist in the middle east trying to push its agenda, bringing it into conflict with other nations and spreading its influence others like Lebanon. It is part of the reaction against Israel and western alignment, a reaction that includes and gladly works with Islamists. In fact, it is pretty much led by one, Iran! The same state the PSL so direly wants the US away from, so it can have its way in the middle east.

Let's not pretend Syria is some innocent victim the evil westerners et al decided to ravage. There are no random targets.

Conflicts like these are natural to world capitalism, which drives nations against each other.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 100
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 24 May 2012, 00:32
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 23 May 2013, 10:48
SYRIA WILL NOT KNEEL DOWN!


The Israeli aggression won't shock the national steadfastness will

Statement of the Syrian Communist Party

On the night of 4th – 5th May 2013, sites in the countryside of Damascus, the Syrian capital, had been targeted by the Zionist enemy, but obviously, the main goal was to support the enemies of the homeland, which is regressing in front of courageous Syrian Arab Army and to rise the morals of the gangs members.

The criminal aggression of the Zionist enemy is another evidence to the clear truth that the all kinds of the armed gangs are beast flocks carrying out the will of the world gangs, imperialist, Zionists and their dirty pimps including the kingdoms and sheikhdoms of gulf and Turkey the agent of NATO.

The experience of the past proves that the Syrian people is deep rooted patriot and unifies in front of external imperialist aggression. No compromise with the imperialists and their agents. No dialogue with the homeland enemies who carry out the imperialist will.

In the great national battle, we confirm that our people will be steadfast regardless the painful and big losses as the people of Vietnam, people of Iraq and the Lebanese national resistance, these peoples who fought against the huge imperialist war machine that so called non-defeating but it was defeated because of the peoples resistance.

The victory is for the peoples' will that confirm: It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees! and the Syrian people is one of them.

We say with free people in our homeland and world: together we'll win! Syria won't kneel down.

Damascus, May 5, 2013

The central Committee of Syrian Communist Party

General Secretary
Ammar Bagdache
The Paris Communards struggled and died in the defense of their ideas. The banners of the revolution and of socialism are not surrendered without a fight. Only cowards and the demoralized surrender — never Communists and other revolutionaries.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1400
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Party Member
Post 23 May 2013, 13:03
The Free Syrian Army and their Islamist allies are fighting a war they can not win. Their struggle is completely futile. Anyone who thinks that these people will one day rule the whole of Syria is living in a dream world. They are not united. The groups fighting inside Syria are just scattered mobs of undisciplined and untrained so called fighters who don't have any means of communication or coordination between each other. They don't even have a common ideology. Each group dreams of ruling Syria in their own way after the regime falls. They are just as likely to fight amongst each other as they are to fight the regime. They extort the civilians that live under the areas they occupy in order to fund their war. They recruit children to fight for them. They brainwash children to fight for their so called Allah. They take money from the most ideologically backward country in the whole world Saudi Arabia. The Zionist entity helps them by bombing another sovereign country over and over. They loot and pillage homes and villages under their control. They use the homes and apartment buildings of ordinary civilians to take cover and shield themselves. They chop off heads and say that Allah told them to. They can't even decide on a leader to represent them neither inside nor outside of Syria. Each one of their little groups is fighting for their own personal interests instead of the interests of the country. No single country is willing to give them heavy weaponry because no one country is even sure who the FSA really is. They are led by individual warlords each governing their own sector and each commanding their own small group of fools who actually think that they have a chance of achieving something by shooting at government forces. If the regime were to fall this moment the only thing that would happen would be the disintegration of Syrian society with all the religious and ethnic minorities being massacred or at best being forced to flee the country while the different surviving warlords fight each other for control of he country. Syria under the Assad family was the only time in Syria's history since its independence that it actually functioned as a secular country with a solid government and stable economy. The Baathist party also guaranteed the safety of religious and ethnic minorities. This whole war has been a waste of lives and resources. It has accomplished nothing and will accomplish nothing.
Image


The great art of life is sensation, to feel that you exist, even in pain.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2298
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 23 May 2013, 13:21
Quote:
This is just a bunch of meaningless rhetoric that can also be applied to Assad. I mean, terror and murder, really? Is the state not capable of such to you, or do its atrocities go by another name? Your argument of needing democracy for socialism is bullshit unless you're trying to tell me Assad represents a democratic system ( ) that communists can use to make Syria socialist ( ).

This is just facts. The Syrian state doesn't eat or behead people, or give weapons to children. The Syrian government protects religious minorities. The Syrian government supports democracy, not charia. And the Syrian government opposes imperialism. If this doesn't mean anything to you, then I can't take you seriously.


Quote:
Your point about Al-Nusra's rule exemplifies your warped view of revolution. There is as much of a chance of a revolution under the islamists as their is under the reactionary Baathists.

What a great dialectician you are. No differences between two different things...


Quote:
There is still a state, there is still capitalism, and still workers in chains.

What a great analysis! So particular circumstances don't matter as long as there is "a state", "still capitalism" and "still workers in chains", which is true for almost every country on earth. Your Communism looks more like a religion to me.


Quote:
If anything, we should hope this civil war weakens the Syrian nation-state, it's the best conditions for expropriation.

This is totally leftist, you are like an anarchist there, focusing not on class struggle (the position of each class and actor on the battlefield) but an idealization of "the state", as if the state was the alpha and omega of strategy, as if it was the main enemy and not a class. Communists aim at the conquest of state power, but for that you still need state power. If your state disappears in sectarian strife, like it did in Lebanon, you fail. If Damascus falls to the rebels, then the progressive left will be crushed, and your imaginary revolution is doomed.

Quote:
Not only that, you support the slaughter of workers in the name of nation by supporting a side in this struggle, you are little better than the patriotic social-democrats of the WW1 era (and you sound like them too).

And you behave like a trotskyite during WWII condemning the Resistance to nazism because they didn't understood the difference between nazism and democracy, between nazism and its democratic enemie, thus the difference between WWI and WWII. The trotskyist thought (if there is one) is stucked in old patterns that can be summarized like this:

- Don't make compromises with any other class, don't make any differences between classes other than the proletariat.
- Prepare immediately the revolution, alone and without support from the population, hoping that because you are so bright, and the purest of revolutionaries, they will finally join you.
- When you fail (and you fail), accuse the others, especially the Communists, of being responsible for the failure. When other Communists do greats things, just tell that they are "degenerated" while you are the purest.
- Apply those methods in any circumstance, without looking at the historical conditions.

Quote:
You're either wrong or right, no use complaining about rigidity.

You can be wrong and right, this is dialectics.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1400
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Party Member
Post 23 May 2013, 14:37
I just love your satirical analysis of Trotskyist thought OP-Bagration! It's very nice and so very true. It made me laugh more than once.
Image


The great art of life is sensation, to feel that you exist, even in pain.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10785
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2004, 23:53
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 24 May 2013, 04:35
Conscript wrote:
Syria is imperialist


Imperialism is an advanced stage of capitalism. Syria does not fit that description.

Conscript wrote:
Let's not pretend Syria is some innocent victim the evil westerners et al decided to ravage. There are no random targets.


When you can see the difference between a people wanting sovereignty over themselves vs. being a defacto client state, you gotta rethink some things..

@blasroca, thanks for the article.
@Yeqon, you mentioned a lot of good things but missed the obvious. It has become clearer as the conflict has evolved that the opposition (like in Libya) exists primarily because of foreign backing.
Image

"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" - Walter Rodney
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 24 May 2013, 09:44
Quote:
Syria is imperialist, the state is yet another antagonist in the middle east trying to push its agenda, bringing it into conflict with other nations and spreading its influence others like Lebanon. It is part of the reaction against Israel and western alignment, a reaction that includes and gladly works with Islamists. In fact, it is pretty much led by one, Iran! The same state the PSL so direly wants the US away from, so it can have its way in the middle east.

Pushing agendas and projecting influence abroad doesn't necessarily make a country imperialist, otherwise pretty much every country in the world, from the Dominican Rep. to Albania to Burma could be called imperialist.
It's a good thing that Syria is spreading its influence in Libanon, because the Zionists and the Islamists are vying for control over there, threatening peace and democracy.
And Iran isn't financing terrorist rebellions in other countries.

Quote:
Let's not pretend Syria is some innocent victim the evil westerners et al decided to ravage. There are no random targets.

Of course no country is "innocent" but that doesn't mean Syria isn't under attack by imperialists and their accomplices, who happen to be rabid terrorist murderers.

Quote:
Conflicts like these are natural to world capitalism, which drives nations against each other.

If terrorist uprisings and Islamism are natural to world capitalism, which is debatable, then they have to be fought against, which is what the Syrian people are doing.
Soviet cogitations: 2408
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 24 May 2013, 10:02
Just out of interest, to what extent are the Free Syrian Army secular or religious? From what I have read they seem to have a mix of secular and religious elements within them.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 24 May 2013, 14:34
The FSA is a joke. Al-Nusra runs near-on everything and FSA commanders and fighters have been defecting to al-nusra in large numbers over the past few months. The only representative of secular rule in Syria is Assad.

And as islamism is a perversion of Islam utilized frequently for western imperialist benefit it becomes clear that these rats in Syria must be crushed and Muslims of the world must support Bashar al-Assad. It's the only reasonable course of action to prevent bigots and chauvinists from maligning the name of Islam.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2298
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 25 May 2013, 19:03
Quote:
that the opposition (like in Libya) exists primarily because of foreign backing.

We mustn't call them "opposition". There is an opposition, progressive, national and secular, based in Damascus. But this opposition has refused to take arms. Those are no opposition. We shall call them rebels, jihadists, salafi wahabi, takfiri or terrorists.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.