If you look at Vox news you can see that, It is the progressive liberal and anarchist that mostly treat Rojava like this.
Advertisement
by Communal concils » Sat May 18, 2019 6:54 pm
by Torrocca » Sat May 18, 2019 6:57 pm
by Communal concils » Sat May 18, 2019 7:00 pm
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:Diopolis wrote:There are some accusations they're ethnically cleansing Assyrians, Arabs, and Chaldeans from the territories they've taken. Which might explain why those people are summoning in IS, considering that on the Ninevah plain they're all predominately Christians.
That I didn’t know. But like I said earlier, I don’t know much about Rojava as I hadn’t heard of it until this thread.
by Communal concils » Sat May 18, 2019 7:03 pm
Torrocca wrote:Critical? Yes.
Scathingly hateful of them to the point of entirely shitting on anything and everything they do - regardless of the goodness or badness of it - because they don't follow a very specific set of individually-held beliefs that dubiously count as "leftist", in order to shit on the vast majority of leftists who don't agree with that specific set of beliefs? No.
I fall into the former of these two things. You, OP, fall into the latter.
by Torrocca » Sat May 18, 2019 7:07 pm
Communal concils wrote:Torrocca wrote:Critical? Yes.
Scathingly hateful of them to the point of entirely shitting on anything and everything they do - regardless of the goodness or badness of it - because they don't follow a very specific set of individually-held beliefs that dubiously count as "leftist", in order to shit on the vast majority of leftists who don't agree with that specific set of beliefs? No.
I fall into the former of these two things. You, OP, fall into the latter.
well, Libertarian Socialist have been doing that to nearly every leftist movement. From the soviet union, too Burkina Faso.
It's all shit, because of State "Capitalism".
I'm just doing what the opposition has been doing for a longer time.
by Communal concils » Sat May 18, 2019 7:24 pm
Torrocca wrote:Communal concils wrote:
well, Libertarian Socialist have been doing that to nearly every leftist movement. From the soviet union, too Burkina Faso.
It's almost like those movements were actually shit that led to things like the Holodomor, whereas the only thing Rojava's done besides building its movement up is shooting the bastards in ISIS.It's all shit, because of State "Capitalism".
It's shit for way more than just that.I'm just doing what the opposition has been doing for a longer time.
You almost make it sound like something that's common for almost all tankies and the like to do is something you're championing all by yourself.
by Torrocca » Sat May 18, 2019 7:45 pm
Communal concils wrote:Torrocca wrote:
It's almost like those movements were actually shit that led to things like the Holodomor, whereas the only thing Rojava's done besides building its movement up is shooting the bastards in ISIS.
It's shit for way more than just that.
You almost make it sound like something that's common for almost all tankies and the like to do is something you're championing all by yourself.
1. So all this regimes did their own version of "Holodomer". Even Burkina Faso. I find it very foolish to claim that they were all the same.
"Holodomer".
They had the same economic system as the soviets, and follow similar rules, but these nations have increased living standards of their citizens. Somalia was great under Marxism-Leninism, at least they did not fight among each other, and they could make factories.
Also, You seem to forget that Rojava takes the oil from the Arabs it occupies. They are force to live under militants that they don't like. It is good that they kill ISIS, But it's dangerous to think they are perfect because of that one fact.
2. Well,there is the argument of state Capitalism and the argument that "Authoritarian=bad". I'll say that it was necessary to sometimes oppress opposition. If the leader use his resources wisely, and if he is pragmatic, then his society will prosper.
3. There are many like me. There are many Socialist that reject Rojava. Maoist, and Hoxhaist do agree with me, and even some typical Marxist-Leninist.
Though, the funniest part of this "Criticism" is that you call us this Childish name.
In return, we will call you a "Anarkiddie".
by Communal concils » Sat May 18, 2019 8:33 pm
Torrocca wrote:Communal concils wrote:
1. So all this regimes did their own version of "Holodomer". Even Burkina Faso. I find it very foolish to claim that they were all the same.
I pretty clearly never fucking said that. They all led to different atrocities."Holodomer".
Oh, so we're dying the Holodomor now. Awesome.They had the same economic system as the soviets, and follow similar rules, but these nations have increased living standards of their citizens. Somalia was great under Marxism-Leninism, at least they did not fight among each other, and they could make factories.
Increasing living standards doesn't change the fact that these regimes were atrocious and horrendous for a fuckton of people in a fuckton of different ways.Also, You seem to forget that Rojava takes the oil from the Arabs it occupies. They are force to live under militants that they don't like. It is good that they kill ISIS, But it's dangerous to think they are perfect because of that one fact.
I love how you're A) completely ignoring the fact that I've already said I'm critical of certain aspects of Rojava and don't find them perfect and B) acting like taking oil is equivalent to the USSR slaughtering Kulaks or whomever else the regime killed.2. Well,there is the argument of state Capitalism and the argument that "Authoritarian=bad". I'll say that it was necessary to sometimes oppress opposition. If the leader use his resources wisely, and if he is pragmatic, then his society will prosper.
"Oppression is okay if it's done for the right reasons!!1!" Yeah, no. Fuck that noise.3. There are many like me. There are many Socialist that reject Rojava. Maoist, and Hoxhaist do agree with me, and even some typical Marxist-Leninist.
Good for you. Enjoy your group's shitty little circlejerk of shitting on genuine leftist movements because they don't play into your authoritarian ideals.Though, the funniest part of this "Criticism" is that you call us this Childish name.
Tankie is a legitimate demonym for "leftist" authoritarians like yourself.In return, we will call you a "Anarkiddie".
I'm an Anarkitty. Get your terminology right >:c
by Heloin » Sat May 18, 2019 9:20 pm
Communal concils wrote:Torrocca wrote:
I pretty clearly never fucking said that. They all led to different atrocities.
Oh, so we're dying the Holodomor now. Awesome.
Increasing living standards doesn't change the fact that these regimes were atrocious and horrendous for a fuckton of people in a fuckton of different ways.
I love how you're A) completely ignoring the fact that I've already said I'm critical of certain aspects of Rojava and don't find them perfect and B) acting like taking oil is equivalent to the USSR slaughtering Kulaks or whomever else the regime killed.
"Oppression is okay if it's done for the right reasons!!1!" Yeah, no. Fuck that noise.
Good for you. Enjoy your group's shitty little circlejerk of shitting on genuine leftist movements because they don't play into your authoritarian ideals.
Tankie is a legitimate demonym for "leftist" authoritarians like yourself.
I'm an Anarkitty. Get your terminology right >:c
1. That really depends on what you mean by atrocity. Honestly, everything a state does is a atrocity to an anarchist. If we talking about the government just killing people, I'll say that it depends on the person being killed. Did they do anything wrong, did they have a motive? The Bolsheviks were right in suppression sympathies of the white Russians. The whites failed to have great victories in the great war, they failed to improve living conditions, and did not offer even basic concessions to the working class. For places for Cuba, it is even more meaningful. Especially when lot's of the dissidence are members of the Batista government. I guess the privilege rich that taked advantage of workers,shouldn't be beaten. Even non-socialist revolutions like the Islamic revolution of Iran were justified. The people of that regime toppled a leader that shove things into the backsides of people,and rise up against bad economic conditions.
2. Well, Famines in the USSR were of several factors. One is that Russia experience a world war and a civil war. Another is that the weather did not help, another is that their was economic miscalculations and the final main point is that the rich landlords burn their property(because if they can't have it, then one can).
3. It depends on the people being oppress. point 1 is all about that. Things are not bad for the sake of "Badness', but only the consequence are reason are the true factors.
4. So Rojava shouldn't seek out and kill ISIS sleeper cells? I see that as Oppression of ISIS, which is good in my opinion. It's good for ISIS members to be stripped of human rights.
5. Anarchist have been doing that. Marxist-Leninist have at least had gain popular support in various societies, and it still does. How come I barely see anarchist movements in the third world, and How come the anarchist have not created a society that has lasted more than 3 years. So It is the Libertarian socialist that are the true elitist.
6. There is only one Gender for anarchist, That is Anarkiddie. There is no such thing as AnarKitty.
by Bezkoshtovnya » Sat May 18, 2019 10:49 pm
Torrocca wrote:Critical? Yes.
Scathingly hateful of them to the point of entirely shitting on anything and everything they do - regardless of the goodness or badness of it - because they don't follow a very specific set of individually-held beliefs that dubiously count as "leftist", in order to shit on the vast majority of leftists who don't agree with that specific set of beliefs? No.
I fall into the former of these two things. You, OP, fall into the latter.
Dante Alighieri wrote:There is no greater sorrow than to recall happiness in times of misery
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Epicurustan » Sun May 19, 2019 4:07 am
Communal concils wrote:Epicurustan wrote:Rojava has nice ideals, their constitution is good and so forth. Generally speaking I think they would be the best party to make peace in Syria.
That said - they are too idealistic, little pragmatic. They refuse to trade and industrialize due to their ecological ideology. Which is noble, but not good in the long term. Rojava needs to centralize its economical coordination and industrialize to become as self sufficient as possible.
Aside of that, Rojava doesn't call itself anarchistic. Yes, there are anarchist groups there, but the State exists.
1.I agree with you. Most Leftist forget that the most successful societies are the ones with a command economy of mass production and industrialization.
2. I know that they are not anarchist, but their are officials of the YPG that say so. A significant number of left-Libertarians think it's anarchist.
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 4:17 am
Epicurustan wrote:Communal concils wrote:
1.I agree with you. Most Leftist forget that the most successful societies are the ones with a command economy of mass production and industrialization.
2. I know that they are not anarchist, but their are officials of the YPG that say so. A significant number of left-Libertarians think it's anarchist.
I wouldn't say that a command economy is per defintion better than a market economy, I'd even argue otherwise. Nevertheless, the means of producing should be improved in Rojava in both quality and quantity.
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 4:27 am
Heloin wrote:Communal concils wrote:
1. That really depends on what you mean by atrocity. Honestly, everything a state does is a atrocity to an anarchist. If we talking about the government just killing people, I'll say that it depends on the person being killed. Did they do anything wrong, did they have a motive? The Bolsheviks were right in suppression sympathies of the white Russians. The whites failed to have great victories in the great war, they failed to improve living conditions, and did not offer even basic concessions to the working class. For places for Cuba, it is even more meaningful. Especially when lot's of the dissidence are members of the Batista government. I guess the privilege rich that taked advantage of workers,shouldn't be beaten. Even non-socialist revolutions like the Islamic revolution of Iran were justified. The people of that regime toppled a leader that shove things into the backsides of people,and rise up against bad economic conditions.
2. Well, Famines in the USSR were of several factors. One is that Russia experience a world war and a civil war. Another is that the weather did not help, another is that their was economic miscalculations and the final main point is that the rich landlords burn their property(because if they can't have it, then one can).
3. It depends on the people being oppress. point 1 is all about that. Things are not bad for the sake of "Badness', but only the consequence are reason are the true factors.
4. So Rojava shouldn't seek out and kill ISIS sleeper cells? I see that as Oppression of ISIS, which is good in my opinion. It's good for ISIS members to be stripped of human rights.
5. Anarchist have been doing that. Marxist-Leninist have at least had gain popular support in various societies, and it still does. How come I barely see anarchist movements in the third world, and How come the anarchist have not created a society that has lasted more than 3 years. So It is the Libertarian socialist that are the true elitist.
6. There is only one Gender for anarchist, That is Anarkiddie. There is no such thing as AnarKitty.
Genocide denial is bad m'kay.
by Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum » Sun May 19, 2019 4:29 am
Badb Catha wrote:
Leftist militias are prone to committing acts of terrorism; it is intrinsic to the ideals of the Left-wing Revolution which is inherently violent by default. Recent notions of pacifism and peaceful change of government are just that: recent. Violent Revolution is what Communism and Socialism were born into - it is the natural state of both ideologies. Men like Trotsky were not radicals, they were the Vanguard. This is why these ideologies are inherently unstable and cannot exist outside of a state of war. The very nature of these ideologies necessitates the violent overthrow and subversion of lawful authority, and this is why they are ultimately a force for evil in the world by default. The world is a better place without the Eastern Bloc.
Do you have evidence that the YPG have killed babies?
How do you expect to defeat terrorists without going to war?
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 4:44 am
Bezkoshtovnya wrote:Communal concils wrote:
If you look at Vox news you can see that, It is the progressive liberal and anarchist that mostly treat Rojava like this.
Literally all Vox has is an article about Rojava and how it is an attempt at democracy for Kurds in the Middle East. Not really seeing how this is some sort of fanatical over-hype about utopia.
Regardless, Torr has already pretty much summed up exactly what I was going to say.
Torrocca wrote:Critical? Yes.
Scathingly hateful of them to the point of entirely shitting on anything and everything they do - regardless of the goodness or badness of it - because they don't follow a very specific set of individually-held beliefs that dubiously count as "leftist", in order to shit on the vast majority of leftists who don't agree with that specific set of beliefs? No.
I fall into the former of these two things. You, OP, fall into the latter.
by Badb Catha » Sun May 19, 2019 6:11 am
Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum wrote:Bezkoshtovnya wrote:Any proof of the YPG committing atrocities that involve slaughtering children?Badb Catha wrote:
Leftist militias are prone to committing acts of terrorism; it is intrinsic to the ideals of the Left-wing Revolution which is inherently violent by default. Recent notions of pacifism and peaceful change of government are just that: recent. Violent Revolution is what Communism and Socialism were born into - it is the natural state of both ideologies. Men like Trotsky were not radicals, they were the Vanguard. This is why these ideologies are inherently unstable and cannot exist outside of a state of war. The very nature of these ideologies necessitates the violent overthrow and subversion of lawful authority, and this is why they are ultimately a force for evil in the world by default. The world is a better place without the Eastern Bloc.
Do you have evidence that the YPG have killed babies?
How do you expect to defeat terrorists without going to war?
Evidence Is history ypg and pkk are the puppet of the imperialist states.
Where are you from ?
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/af ... gn/1095707
by Upper Saust Latiegebestica » Sun May 19, 2019 6:15 am
Communal concils wrote:Rojava is a unrecognized state that is located in northeastern Syria. The state was established in 2012 in the rojava revolution. The power vacuum of the civil war in Syria lead to the Kurdish militants to sieze a significant portion of the country. in 2014, the state gained western support. the evacuations of sinjar mountain, and the battle of Kobani gave them the image of being the brave souls of the middle east.
Progressives see them as hope for democracy, anarchist like that they declare themselves "not a state", and many insignificant leftist ideologues put lot's of faith into the revolution (even though, they serve as cannon fodder). along their crusade for liberation, the YPG and PKK have been accused of human right violations like Ethnic cleansing, child soldiers, displacement, and killings of dissidence. Rojava has also been accused of Kurdish chauvinism disguised as anarchism.
In my opinion, Rojava is a living contradiction. Claiming to be libertarian, but they rule over people that don't want to be ruled. Rojava is everything the social anarchist and other libertarian socialist have accused state socialist of doing, only that they are ineffective at making policies universally enforce. I find it funny that this "Anarchist" state depends on nations (like America ) for it's survival. In fact, it would be crushed by Assad without American aid. The YPG even allowed United States troops to be stationed there, which means that rojava is now a important part of Neo-Conservative imperialism.
What I want to know, is your reason for being against or for this state. It deserves the title state, The state is a "human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence within a given territory."
Sources: https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/18/syr ... n-enclaves
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... ar-crimes/
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini ... 43648.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKCN1S40RD
(Image)
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 7:29 am
Upper Saust Latiegebestica wrote:Communal concils wrote:Rojava is a unrecognized state that is located in northeastern Syria. The state was established in 2012 in the rojava revolution. The power vacuum of the civil war in Syria lead to the Kurdish militants to sieze a significant portion of the country. in 2014, the state gained western support. the evacuations of sinjar mountain, and the battle of Kobani gave them the image of being the brave souls of the middle east.
Progressives see them as hope for democracy, anarchist like that they declare themselves "not a state", and many insignificant leftist ideologues put lot's of faith into the revolution (even though, they serve as cannon fodder). along their crusade for liberation, the YPG and PKK have been accused of human right violations like Ethnic cleansing, child soldiers, displacement, and killings of dissidence. Rojava has also been accused of Kurdish chauvinism disguised as anarchism.
In my opinion, Rojava is a living contradiction. Claiming to be libertarian, but they rule over people that don't want to be ruled. Rojava is everything the social anarchist and other libertarian socialist have accused state socialist of doing, only that they are ineffective at making policies universally enforce. I find it funny that this "Anarchist" state depends on nations (like America ) for it's survival. In fact, it would be crushed by Assad without American aid. The YPG even allowed United States troops to be stationed there, which means that rojava is now a important part of Neo-Conservative imperialism.
What I want to know, is your reason for being against or for this state. It deserves the title state, The state is a "human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence within a given territory."
Sources: https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/18/syr ... n-enclaves
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... ar-crimes/
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini ... 43648.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKCN1S40RD
(Image)
"neo-conservative imperialism?" How does not getting into unnessicary wars be imperialist?
by Chan Island » Sun May 19, 2019 7:29 am
Conserative Morality wrote:"It's not time yet" is a tactic used by reactionaries in every era. "It's not time for democracy, it's not time for capitalism, it's not time for emancipation." Of course it's not time. It's never time, not on its own. You make it time. If you're under fire in the no-man's land of WW1, you start digging a foxhole even if the ideal time would be when you *aren't* being bombarded, because once you wait for it to be 'time', other situations will need your attention, assuming you survive that long. If the fields aren't furrowed, plow them. If the iron is not hot, make it so. If society is not ready, change it.
by Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum » Sun May 19, 2019 7:29 am
Badb Catha wrote:Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum wrote:
Evidence Is history ypg and pkk are the puppet of the imperialist states.
Where are you from ?
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/af ... gn/1095707
Why does my country of origin matter?
Forgive me if I do not trust Turkish sources on subjects concerning Kurdish rebels, but they have every excuse to be biased on the topic. Are there any non-Turkish sources to corroborate what is being said here?
by Heloin » Sun May 19, 2019 8:32 am
Communal concils wrote:Heloin wrote:Genocide denial is bad m'kay.
I didn't deny Genocide.
Genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race.
The event know as the Holodomer affected people across soviet society, including Russians. It was across the nation, and everyone was effected. It's a myth that the Ukrainians are the most mistreated People in the USSR. Ukraine uses the narrative the holodomer to justify it's current policies, and it tries to change the famines of the soviet union into a Ukrainian only tragedy.
by Torrocca » Sun May 19, 2019 9:43 am
Communal concils wrote:Torrocca wrote:
I pretty clearly never fucking said that. They all led to different atrocities.
Oh, so we're dying the Holodomor now. Awesome.
Increasing living standards doesn't change the fact that these regimes were atrocious and horrendous for a fuckton of people in a fuckton of different ways.
I love how you're A) completely ignoring the fact that I've already said I'm critical of certain aspects of Rojava and don't find them perfect and B) acting like taking oil is equivalent to the USSR slaughtering Kulaks or whomever else the regime killed.
"Oppression is okay if it's done for the right reasons!!1!" Yeah, no. Fuck that noise.
Good for you. Enjoy your group's shitty little circlejerk of shitting on genuine leftist movements because they don't play into your authoritarian ideals.
Tankie is a legitimate demonym for "leftist" authoritarians like yourself.
I'm an Anarkitty. Get your terminology right >:c
1. That really depends on what you mean by atrocity. Honestly, everything a state does is a atrocity to an anarchist.
If we talking about the government just killing people, I'll say that it depends on the person being killed. Did they do anything wrong, did they have a motive?
The Bolsheviks were right in suppression sympathies of the white Russians. The whites failed to have great victories in the great war, they failed to improve living conditions, and did not offer even basic concessions to the working class.
For places for Cuba, it is even more meaningful. Especially when lot's of the dissidence are members of the Batista government. I guess the privilege rich that taked advantage of workers,shouldn't be beaten.
Even non-socialist revolutions like the Islamic revolution of Iran were justified. The people of that regime toppled a leader that shove things into the backsides of people,and rise up against bad economic conditions.
2. Well, Famines in the USSR were of several factors. One is that Russia experience a world war and a civil war. Another is that the weather did not help, another is that their was economic miscalculations and the final main point is that the rich landlords burn their property(because if they can't have it, then one can).
3. It depends on the people being oppress. point 1 is all about that. Things are not bad for the sake of "Badness', but only the consequence are reason are the true factors.
4. So Rojava shouldn't seek out and kill ISIS sleeper cells?
I see that as Oppression of ISIS, which is good in my opinion.
It's good for ISIS members to be stripped of human rights.
5. Anarchist have been doing that. Marxist-Leninist have at least had gain popular support in various societies, and it still does. How come I barely see anarchist movements in the third world, and How come the anarchist have not created a society that has lasted more than 3 years. So It is the Libertarian socialist that are the true elitist.
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 10:34 am
Chan Island wrote:Rojava has mostly been alright. Very encouraging bright light in the darkness that is the middle east.
*Reads OP's contributions to the thread*
... but I see the object of this thread isn't actually to discuss Rojava, but just to diss them for every single little thing they have done. Including defending themselves from ISIS. In a civil war. Yawn.
by Communal concils » Sun May 19, 2019 10:42 am
Heloin wrote:Communal concils wrote:
I didn't deny Genocide.
Genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race.
The event know as the Holodomer affected people across soviet society, including Russians. It was across the nation, and everyone was effected. It's a myth that the Ukrainians are the most mistreated People in the USSR. Ukraine uses the narrative the holodomer to justify it's current policies, and it tries to change the famines of the soviet union into a Ukrainian only tragedy.
gen·o·cide
/ˈjenəˌsīd/
noun
the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.
Half the victims of the Holocaust were not Jewish, and the Cambodian Genocide wasn't targeting just any one group.
Genocide denial/apologism is bad.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bakivaland, Gorutimania, Kelsivor Akara, Kubra, Singaporen Empire, Southland, Statesburg, Stellar Colonies, The Astral Mandate, The Black Forrest, The Jamesian Republic
Advertisement