this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
66 points (100.0% liked)
GenZedong
4322 readers
33 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
in the global class war, they served the purpose of desestabilizing Syria, which like it or not was struggling against US imperialism.
But they didn't destabilise Syria. They fought ISIS who threatened their existance. They created an autonomous region to govern themselves because there was no SAA or Syrian government presence. SAA was not able to defend people in that region from ISIS.
DAANES (they were formerly AANES) had always stated that their goal is to preserve the integrity and sovereignty of Syria. They wanted to be an autonomous region under the Syrian constitution. They didn't want to separate or declare independence.
Syrian government and SDF were in negotiations (slow and rocky) but they did have a dialogue and limited cooperation.
As graineater said, they collaborated with the US to steal Syria's oil. This group is completely backed by the US and wouldn't exist without their support, like it can't get more blatantly obvious.
Their internal policies are irrelevant, they are US stooges and their funds come from imperialism.
So what should happen to Rojava and the Kurds and minorities in it? If DAANES disappears, the HTS and SNA will genocide/ethnically cleanse the Kurds.
What would be the communist and anti-imperialist thing to do in their situation?
Which is exactly what the usa wants to happen. This is exactly why the usa supported both ISIS, and the SDF. The suffering is their goal. Keep everyone fighting so they can keep oil prices low.
Revolutionary defeatism. Don't pick any side in the fight between the imperialists and the local bourgeois ruling class. Wait to see if the local government will fail while organizing a communist (not ethnic or religious) resistance to whom ever wins the fight. Save energy to fight when the victor is weakest instead of weakening themselves fighting for promises from the great satan that will undoubtibly be broken.
Not doing the US dirty work?
And that means not defending themselves against ISIS.
Is ideological purity more important than survival?
why are you talking about "ideological purity" ? I don't support US stooges, regardless of their ideology, this does not mean i support ISIS either which is also an US stooge, they very well could be getting training in the US bases the SDF hosts or getting weapons through them.
You can't just say things like that without evidence. If you claim ISIS is training on DAANES territory, then you should back that claim up.
I have a problem with the "US stooge" label. We can recognise Rojava cooperates with the US, we can say they receive help, money, training, weapons... but we don't have to rob Rojava of agency. Why can't cooperation with the US be a temporary, necessary measure on their part, rather than an essential quality?
I have red lines, and working with the US to destabilize a country is one of them. If that's not a red line for you, what is?
You have to first realise that "red lines, and working with the US to destabilize a country is one of them." is a construct. Because for example my construction of what's happening over there is not the same as yours. You say "working with the US to destabilise a country" and I say that the country was already destabilised, and that the people of Rojava saw an opportunity.
I don't like the implication that Kurds have no agency. They do and they choose to work with the US instead of the alternative of being genocided.