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

Muammar al-Gaddafi

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4465
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Mar 2010, 01:20
Ideology: None
Forum Commissar
Post 21 Sep 2010, 03:37
soviet78 wrote:
What is the likelyhood of a breakup of the US though, Order? My conception of the US has always been one of systemic stability -separation of powers, federalism, and most importantly: status as a nation-state.
I think Order's statement about the dissolution of The U.S. was a response to my statement that:
Shigalyov wrote:
It seems like the hegemony of the U.S. may be reaching its long awaited decline and I fear that what follows will not be as pretty as some people would like to imagine (in the short term at any rate).
I suspect he was just contemplating what would ensue from this possibility. It may take a while yet, but I think there are strong suggestions that it is heading down this path.
(If he means something different, I'm sure he'll not be shy in coming forward to answer.)
soviet78 wrote:
His regime has been progressive in comparison with other countries in the region, and his revolution has had positive consequences for the people of Libya. Conditioning support for a regime on the basis of explicit adherence to communist goals is simplistic, and impossible if you're in the foreign ministry of a socialist country -i.e. a power broker in the real world. As mere proponents of an ideology, whether we tell people to support non-socialist states opposed to Western imperialism or not makes little difference, because we practically have little influence in most countries, especially in the West.
This makes plenty of sense. Sometimes the best one can hope for is for things to not get worse. I just thought that some on the Left seem to simplify things too much. The sentiment seems to be basically that: West is ALWAYS Bad and that Anti-West is ALWAYS Progressive.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 21 Sep 2010, 04:07
Shigalyov wrote:
I suspect he was just contemplating what would ensue from this possibility. It may take a while yet, but I think there are strong suggestions that it is heading down this path.

American hegemony is far from finished at this point. It will require some major catastrophe (a major terrorist cyber-attack on America's defense systems, a nuclear showdown with unforeseen results, maybe even a massive tsunami unleashed by the melting of the polar ice caps) to end it at one blow. Unfortunately, the impact of a catastrophe large enough to "end" a superpower such as the US would certainly not end there.

If China and Russia evolve "naturally" to superpower status, then the US would still be one among relative "equals". However, American hegemony would be severely reduced, just as Byzantium in the post-Roman era was still a major power, but the Mediterranean was now shared with the Slavs and Muslims.
Shigalyov wrote:
The sentiment seems to be basically that: West is ALWAYS Bad and that Anti-West is ALWAYS Progressive.

If that were historically true, the West would never have seized preeminence in the world. We Socialists sometimes have a tendency to moralize the past. We do have to remember to keep our moralizing to a minimum when dealing with historical and material realities.
Last edited by Comrade Gulper on 21 Sep 2010, 12:35, edited 1 time in total.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4465
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Mar 2010, 01:20
Ideology: None
Forum Commissar
Post 21 Sep 2010, 10:52
(That second quote was me too actually)
I wasn't saying that it was my opinion though, just that it seemed to a sentiment I had noticed on the Left.
I'm not holding my breath for the fall of the U.S., but it still seems to be in a period of decline to me.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 716
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Aug 2007, 23:25
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 21 Sep 2010, 11:15
Shigalyov wrote:
Quote:
There seems to be a popular conception on the Far-Left that as long as you are Anti-Western everything else is acceptable. Whilst Western Capitalism certainly is a highly unjust system which exploits enormous numbers of people, I still think that there may be worse ways for the world to be run. I am far from convinced that all we need to is overthrow Western Capitalism and everything else will be perfect. I'm not sure if any of America's serious rivals at the moment would be all that much more benevolent in their treatment of the world. I really hope that Socialists realize this before it is too late.
It would be very foolish for Socialists to make the same mistake which the U.S.A did in Afghanistan in thinking that the Taliban were their allies, heroes and freedom fighters just because they were Anti-Communists


Well yes, this statement would be in order if I were defending Al-Qaeda or Iran or anything like that. But I was speaking about the Islamic Socialist Jamahirya system. Completely condemning and bashing Libya just because it does not fit entirely in the defenition of Communism is a simplistic and counterproductive attitude, which isn't much different from some mistakes by Maoist movements in regards to the post-1953 USSR.
Image

"Communism is more about love for mankind than about politics."
Me
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 22 Sep 2010, 01:08
Gaddafi is most likely an atheist, and is simply utilizing portions of the "local culture" which harmonize somewhat with his own conceptions of what is living and what is dead in Marxism. He understands that the people of the Middle East/Africa aren't ready for atheism, but also comprehends the dangers of extreme Islamic radicalism. So he compromises by promoting a localized (and sanitized) "Islamic republic" based on the ideals of charity and mutual aid rather than jihad. He also keeps them busy in all sorts of local councils and "town hall" discussion groups, which gives them the impression (illusory? hard to tell) of participating in political affairs. This keeps them from feeling shut out of decisions, which removes the threat of popular resentment being stoked and channeled by the mullahs in a bid for theocratic power. All in all, Gaddafi is probably the model of the "ideal" Middle Eastern ruler, or at least, the best that region will see while Capitalism prevails in the "first" world and calls the shots.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 716
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Aug 2007, 23:25
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 22 Sep 2010, 10:19
Quote:
Gaddafi is most likely an atheist, and is simply utilizing portions of the "local culture" which harmonize somewhat with his own conceptions of what is living and what is dead in Marxism. He understands that the people of the Middle East/Africa aren't ready for atheism, but also comprehends the dangers of extreme Islamic radicalism. So he compromises by promoting a localized (and sanitized) "Islamic republic" based on the ideals of charity and mutual aid rather than jihad. He also keeps them busy in all sorts of local councils and "town hall" discussion groups, which gives them the impression (illusory? hard to tell) of participating in political affairs. This keeps them from feeling shut out of decisions, which removes the threat of popular resentment being stoked and channeled by the mullahs in a bid for theocratic power. All in all, Gaddafi is probably the model of the "ideal" Middle Eastern ruler, or at least, the best that region will see while Capitalism prevails in the "first" world and calls the shots.

Which is why I believe he deserves the support of the Communist community.
People like Chávez and Morales aren't "pure" Communists either, but still deserve the support of the revolutionary left.
Image

"Communism is more about love for mankind than about politics."
Me
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1537
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jan 2010, 05:46
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 05 Oct 2010, 03:32
Gaddafi is not an atheist but he's not a fundamental Islamist. He dose use some asspects of Islam to rule the government and to get the support of the people. He may not be over obssesed with his religion but he is defiantly not an atheist.
Image

"Those who do not move, do not notice their chains." - Rosa Luxemburg
Long Live The Bolivarian Revolution!
RIP Muamar Qadafi
RIP Hugo Chavez
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 14 Oct 2010, 23:01
Red Brigade wrote:
Gaddafi is not an atheist but he's not a fundamental Islamist. He dose use some asspects of Islam to rule the government and to get the support of the people. He may not be over obssesed with his religion but he is defiantly not an atheist.

For all I know, you may be right. It doesn't change the fact that Gadaffi has always been the kind of guy that I would like to see in charge everywhere in the Muslim world. He's exotic in that indefinable "African" manner, yet as modern and practical in his political and social dealings as his people and culture will allow him to be.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Soviet cogitations: 200
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Sep 2010, 04:15
Pioneer
Post 29 Oct 2010, 05:30
Yeah, he's not an atheist. I have a Koran that proudly bears the description "Jamahirya Arab Libyan Popular Socialist"- what ever that means.

He has of a brand of self-styled Islamic Socialism- different from that of the People's Mujahaddin of Iran however- one that became particularly pronounced after he became disillusioned with the turn Arab Socialism was taking with the Ba'ath party. Not similar to the Islamic extremist groups however.

He's an amusing person though. When he goes to Europe and other places he tends to rent out extravagant properties, but to troll people and get the media angry he pitches up a tent in front of the place.

If you guys are interested this is essentially his professed ideology- http://www.mathaba.net/gci/theory/gb.htm
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 716
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Aug 2007, 23:25
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 01 Nov 2010, 12:01
Does anyone know if one can actually buy the Green Book in Europe?
Image

"Communism is more about love for mankind than about politics."
Me
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 01 Nov 2010, 16:51
You can buy The Green Book right here, directly from Amazon UK. Just click on the URL I've put here, and Muammar is yours for the paying!
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1782
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2009, 20:08
Resident Artist
Post 01 Nov 2010, 21:23
If you want to read the Green Book online, feel free to do so. It's quite short and the message is sound but in reality, Gaddafi fails to implement the policies mentioned in the Green Book.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 01 Nov 2010, 21:39
The thing is, I'm not sure that's actually the whole of the Green Book there. It's so short that it looks more like a digest of the main themes rather than the work itself. It doesn't look like it would occupy more than twenty pages of paperback text. I could be completely wrong, however, as I've never actually held the actual Green Book in my hands.

Edit: well, actually on second look, it does really seem to be that short. More of a lengthy pamphlet than a long-winded tome, and all the better for it.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Soviet cogitations: 200
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Sep 2010, 04:15
Pioneer
Post 02 Nov 2010, 02:53
Yeah, the Green Book is supposed to be a fairly condensed version of what he thinks is the guiding principles of the Libyan state. Of course I think that it's different in reality in some parts, but you get an idea of his mindset and his idea of Islamic Socialism that he advanced after breaking with the traditional form of "Arab Socialism".
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 02 Nov 2010, 04:55
There's no question that a lot of what is expounded in Ye Greene Olde Tome amounts to an ideological smokescreen for Gadaffi's purely dictatorial (or to use a euphemism, tutelary) overlordship of the Libyan state. Still, it could be the case that what Gadaffi intends is that the principles expounded in said book become the guiding scriptures of Libya after he passes on, and that Gadaffi himself is simply holding the state together in readiness for that great "transcendent" moment. Regardless of his intentions, Gadaffi remains for me the most fascinating and intriguing helmsman in Africa, certainly in the Muslim world. And a damn sight more personable than a reclusive nonentity like Wonder Kims I-III!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 52
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Feb 2011, 01:18
Pioneer
Post 12 Mar 2011, 21:08
Wow, I figured you guys would hate Gaddafi. He's a tolitarian dictator. Also I wouldn't like him in power even if he was a Marxist, the son of a bitch is like bi-polar. He shows all sorts of signs of poor judgement and he's completly full of himself.

P.S. He does dress REALLY awesome though
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 12 Mar 2011, 21:46
Well, a lifetime seems to have passed between the above posts and today. I'm not sure how I feel about him in the light of recent developments. When the entire country rises up against you, you must be doing something wrong, whatever it may be.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4494
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 13 Mar 2011, 01:56
Quote:
Well, a lifetime seems to have passed between the above posts and today. I'm not sure how I feel about him in the light of recent developments. When the entire country rises up against you, you must be doing something wrong, whatever it may be.


But since when is it the entire country? The news media has been turning every skirmish into an epic battle and every protest into a revolution, not to mention their outrageous coverage of the counterattack by pro-Gaddafi forces. The regime appears to have suffered quite a bit of stagnation, probably as a result of the length of Gaddafi's rule. This is evidenced by the large number of opportunist rats who fled the ship of state as soon as it appeared that it was sinking. Much of the instability can also be attributed to the neoliberal reforms being carried out in Libya since 2004. Nevertheless, I am convinced that the vast majority of people are neither seriously anti-Gaddafi or pro-Gaddafi. As in most revolutionary situations, most people are probably just waiting to see which way the cat will jump.
"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: 40
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Dec 2010, 17:54
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 12 Apr 2011, 22:51
"These people...they are not my people. They come from the outside! They al queda. They aqueda!"
-Muammar Ghadafi in an interview with the BBC recently

These people come from outside and are Mossad/CIA agents hell bent on eliminating Jamahirya as Ghadafi was about to nationalize the oil. No way Exxon or Shell would let that happen!
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 22
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Jul 2011, 06:02
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Pioneer
Post 28 Jul 2011, 15:29
Red Brigade wrote:
Did Gaddafi design the flag? I know that green is an Islamist color but their flag is a little borring.

Image


The solid red flag was boring too until people across the world started waving it. Solid color flags represent an international solidarity, so the notion of a single country using such symbolism is beyond ludicrous. The red flag (or black flag, for that matter) represents people of all countries. The booger-green flag represents a few idiots in Libya.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.