Mardoniush [she/her]

  • 10 Posts
  • 1.46K Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 29th, 2020

help-circle





  • Beautiful. And it illustrates a point I often like to make.

    The purpose of the critique part of critical support isn’t to get the “revisionists” to do what you want. They aren’t a party member with some bad takes they’re a dictatorship of the Proletariat trying to navigate their own contradictions. They will fuck up. They will appear to fuck up, but actually successfully navigate a crisis in an annoying way.

    If you’re a successful AES party, dialogue on tactics is important, but on the question of working together for success not on calling each other revisionists or ultras.

    And of course there’s the point at which a party like the Khmer Rouge becomes so distorted that it becomes impossible to support, but this should be vanishingly rare.

    The purpose for those of us who are still revolutionaries and not general secretary is to take our analysis and critique on board for own own situations. Even takes on foreign policy, while they must be grounded in socialist theory and basic human compassion, must be viewed on how they are useful for our own conditions.

    How can we use this to help organise? How can we use this to modify our own theory to resolve internal and external contradictions? How can we use this as an ideological brickbat on the ruling classes and their support?









  • You can critically support the existence of Rojava while also recognising that ultimately accommodation with Assad is the only viable option and that the alliance with the USA was a stunningly bad idea in the long run.

    I mean that’s what critical support is, you critique the dumb shit AES does, not to dunk on them but so you and others don’t make those errors should your turn come around. The Soviets also supported Israel in the beginning, before the true nature of the state became clear and the atrocities couldn’t be sweeped away as the “excesses” of a traumatized people.

    Do I think that China should have made detente with Nixon instead of mending the split with the Soviets? No. I think it was fucking stupid despite the Soviets being in the wrong. Do I still think China are comrades acting in good faith. Yes.


  • They’re good and cool and Marxist Communists (though not perfect, their beliefs are not dissimilar to the EZLN, as are their flaws) but were put in a shitty situation where they wanted to protect their full autonomy against Assad and also fight off Turkey. After they held off Turkey (heroically), and a bunch of Feds in the area started realising that they were the only sane people in the area except Assad, the US offered them a poisoned chalice of support. Given the choice of full autonomy under USA or partial under Assad, they took the dumb guy option.

    Of course the moment Syria became a lost cause and ISIS was crushed the USA threw them under the bus for mild concessions from Erdogan. Now they’ve taken a worse deal from Assad and Turkey still threatens them. But at least something of the project survives.

    As for their project itself. It’s probably the second or third most successful Libertarian Marxist project, after the KPAM and the EZLN. But it had major issues with co-ordination, and Kurdish dominance caused power imbalances despite attempts by the KPG to bring minority groups into power as much as possible. Kurdish nationalists also formed their own parties and fuckery from Iraqi Kurdistan (Which is shockingly corrupt, and has gone from being run by two corrupt families (one right wing and the other essentially the Union leaders from Disco Elysium) to one (the right wing one) worsened matters. The KPG should have kept more tight ideological control over the area but their ideology itself made this difficult.

    Nevertheless, critical support to our comrades, and there’s a lot of good things to learn from them.