On Syria: Use Your Principles, If You Have Any

100 Flamingos

This is an article about Syria. In it, I won’t be going into depth about who did what to whom and where and when and how. I won’t be analyzing the shadows in photographs or whether that dead child is actually from Gaza or Pakistan. Doing so as the basis of one’s arguments is stepping willfully into a carefully laid propaganda trap. This will primarily be a discussion of principles.

On the Left we’ve been bombarded with repetitive pleas to pay attention to and agitate for the Syrian “rebels.” This always takes the form of berating: we’re not doing enough, we’re not vocal enough. Never does it consider that a true Left stance must be anti-imperialist. This means our positions cannot coincide or dovetail with the grand designs of the West’s ruling classes.

The “do something” Left seems only capable of ignoring that something is always very much “being done,”…

View original post 137 more words

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to On Syria: Use Your Principles, If You Have Any

  1. No soy yo says:

    I loved so much about this post. I have a variation of face blindness and keep regretting I can’t really be sure about the various photos that prove this or that, but it’s a great point that this isn’t the big picture or principled argument. It’s just falling into their propaganda trap.

  2. “antfucky factoids”….LOL. Yeah, really, censor your selves, assholes! Thanks for reblogging.

  3. louisproyect says:

    You people are drooling imbeciles.

    • No soy yo says:

      As I said on 100 Flamingos (or will say once my comment is out of moderation), you’re both an asshole and a liar, since this is what you say on your pathetic blog:

      “I am not in the habit of commenting on blogs that I am hostile to and would expect those hostile to mine to look elsewhere to play Lenin to my Kautsky, or Trotsky to my Max Shachtman ”

      ‘play Lenin to my Kautsky’ and you call someone else an imbecile? Hahaha. No wonder the only reason for a pseudonym you can come up with is shame.

    • Atomsk says:

      And, applying your own “thinking” to yourself, you’re an imperial propagandist.

      You pretend that anti-imperialists, ie. people (Westerners, btw) who think it’s more important to keep the Western empire out of the issues of other countries, support the governments and dictatorships of those countries. You ignore imperial power and pretend that getting rid of the government would, instead of opening the doors towards Western imperial influence, empower local democracy.

      That. Is. A. Lie. A pretty fucking huge and disgusting lie.

      I’m a Hungarian. I remember the promises of freedom and liberty from the “communist dictatorship” we had, if only we become part of the West. Thing is, Western liberals (sorry, “socialists”, if you count as one) forgot to mention that the USSR’s power and influence is not even remotely comparable to that of the West, and that we wouldn’t get any kind of increased freedom and independence and autonomy and democracy. They did it in the exact same way you’re smearing the actual leftists.

      Considering that now half the country is poor and borderline starving or that all our best educated people leave (like, you know, many other Eastern European countries) to become waiters and porters and dishwashers in the rich West, that we have less democracy and more fascism and that our culture has become a bad carbon copy of American culture, all I can say to you and your kind is “fuck you”.

  4. Mardy says:

    Just had my first argument with a good friend about “The Russian Hack” and Syria.

    It really does feel like de-programming. Hes an Americanized black African. Lived here 2/3 his life and knows what real poverty looks like. I made an assumption about his politics that I shouldn’t have.

    Tribalism and mainstream narratives was rampant in his responses. They took “sophistication” in the form of “facts”, but it was obvious identity politics (loves Barack Obama) Democraric loyalty, and a hint of nationalism – all tribalistic bullshit- were the main drivers of his responses.

    I cut off from politics and haven’t debated consistently since about 2013. Felt there was no point. I was at a disadvantage. I have a relationship with this blog that resembles more of an addict/fix than concerned-citizen/source. I wasn’t even aware of the details of all these wars.

    I was once a feminist liberal democrat, but realized that shit was stupid.

    Got back in to get an idea of what the hell was going on with Hilary, the DNC and Jill Stein; my cynicism was only crystallized.

    I’m not that smart with this political shit, but I know a bias mainstream narrative when I see one and the weird non-sequiturs they ask when they realize I’m not apart of the tribe, “so you want trump to win??”” Shit like that.

    It’s fucking weird. Supporting sanctions on Russia – that could lead to a Cold War – because the government says it has evidence of hacking, but refuses to reveal it, yet you still believe them because they said so. I don’t know man, that seems so god damn irresponsible. That shit is ahistorical of what we know the American has done. You can’t argue with this shit. It isn’t rational. It’s tribal.

    Maybe it’s alway been this way; Maybe it’s not intentional. But it seems the most powerful lies we hear are the ones we tell ourselves.

    Also–

    Thanks for posting these blog posts. I’ve been meaning to ask you who read since you stopped.

    I hope you don’t stop.
    -Written from my iphone

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s