I can not bear to hear the pro-Russian propagandist on Greek television say that the Russian attack on a pediatric hospital was a "provocation" by the Ukrainian nationalists.
The same was said by Assad's criminals and their Russian alies when they dropped chemical bombs on the innocent people of Syria, blaming the "Islamists" alone, the same Ba'athist and Russian lies.
I free myself from any ideological prejudice, and my heart beats to the rhythm of the city besieged by the conquerors.
---
I
react when the critique of the double Western (imperialist) criteria is
used to justify and legitimize the savagery of the "eastern"
imperialism (as the left-wing cartoonist Latuff continues to do), but
these double western criteria exist.
---
The geopolitical "look" is a "look" that expresses the perverted view of modern states, capitalist empires, military rulers and imperialist capitalist robbers on the planet's natural resources and on the living workers.
"Geoculturalists" see people through their maps, add up and multiply living entities that ''function'' for them as if they were dead points in a flat and fragmented space.
---
Geopolitics is a capitalist and authoritarian pseudoscience.
The ''space'' is determined by the struggles within the sovereignty and by the struggles between the sovereigns and peoples.
---
I think it is necessary to realize the strangeness of this historical era we live in.
Every historical phase is strange, but today's historical phase is the strangest one can imagine.
But in order to be able to imagine it as it really is, he must understand that we are "stuck".
One should not imagine an "escape forward".
Understand please that we are stuck in a mud.
---
In today's reactionary historical age, there is the possibility of developing a heroic but reactionary nationalist resistance against an occupier. It's not the situation I prefer or can idealize, but it is a given situation, yet.
Any occupation is unacceptable, and when it is fought by a conservative or reactionary national movement you can not justify it as an occupation.
You will keep a distance, you will not be absorbed by the nationalist resistance movement against to the occupation, but you will not be able to keep an equal distance between the occupying forces and the conservative resistance.
I describe a situation that is the most possible after the expected domination of the Russian imperialists in Ukraine (we hope that something will be done and not achieved).
I describe a situation which, however, is very likely to exist in the country where I live, Greece, if the Turkish state wants and succeeds in implementing its fascist expansionist plans in the eastern Aegean.
The people of Greece are not going to raise red flags, they are more likely to resist the occupier through conservative and ethnocentric ideas and policies, but that does not mean that one can apply direct internationalist policies and propaganda as a leftist. He must first fight the (possible) occupation and help drive out the invading invader.
---
The
national struggle must not be completely equated with the
anti-occupation struggle.
An resistance movement to an occupation may be
a national-anti-occupation resistance movement, or it may be an
internationalist or non-national but also anti-occupation resistance
movement.
---
State socialism or "state capitalism" has damaged the prestige and ideological / moral person of the radical socialism of workers 'councils and workers' democracy.
Even today it is difficult to distance and symbolically alienate the revolutionary left from this failed model of socialism.
----
The expansive force requires the absence of another strong force on the borders of its territory.
Requires a protection zone, a neutral zone next to or around it.
This very demand, a brazen and hegemonic demand, clearly shows that there is a tendency for expansion and brutal violence.
All bloodthirsty empires want to be surrounded by unarmed and blackmailed peoples and ghost states, developing the false totalitarian and ethno-fascist narrative of a possible hostile "encirclement" they supposedly want to prevent. Of all the imperialist empires, those built in this way are the most dangerous and aggressive.
----
There is a double criterion of the westerners that does not seem at first glance, because they were somewhat "interested":
When Russia bombed civilians in Syria, yes, there was a Western reaction, but not like the reaction today to the Russian bombing of Ukraine.
The Syrian civilians "counted", but less than the Ukrainians.
This is not the fault of the Ukrainians. Both the Ukrainians and the Syrians are victims of the Russian imperialist atrocities, of the same usual Russian-imperialist "method": merciless bombings, without the slightest care being taken not to kill unarmed civilians. On the contrary, the target was and is the civilians.
A "method" common to all invading imperialist troops, from Vietnam to Kurdistan and Ukraine.
---
"quadruple" wronged peoples..
The west and the east quarrel, and each is right when it comes to the other. But there is a guilty secret for both of them:
The ''quadruple'' wronged peoples...
Let us first see, with a fantastic dialogue, how the double criterion and its critique of the "west" and the "east" are structured
East: "Why do not you protest the same for the Palestinians as for the Ukrainians?"
West: "Why do not you protest the same for the Ukrainians as for the Palestinians?"
At the end of the conversation, in a neglected corner, the peoples who were wronged both from the west and from the east: Kurds, Baloch, Assyrians and others.
At one point they protest, bringing to light the doubling of the "double standard" by all their oppressors, both Western and Eastern:
"Why do not you complain the same about us? and you westerners? who are protesting against the double criterion of the easterners, and you easterners? who you are protesting against the double criterion of the westerners.
Double criterion west plus double criterion east, we on the side, quadruple wronged, 4 times divided, therefore annihilated''..
Long live Kurdistan! Long live Balochistan!
The invisible peoples, for whom no tears are shed, neither in the west nor in the east.
---
The choice of the Ukrainian bourgeoisie to confront the Russian imperialist empire without substantial preparation and awareness of danger and with pro-Western delusions, shows the lack of a democratic national leadership in Ukraine.
---
Some people rightly judge the double criteria of the West: They say "why do not you say the same about Palestine?".
But what they say about the West regarding Palestine, they do not say about Ukraine.
Therefore the following applies to them as well:
"Why do you not say what you say about Palestine about Ukraine?"
"Why do not you say what you say about Palestine about Ukraine?"
And for Kurdistan, I will add.
---
A war can be defined from many objective points of view / dimensions, so it is hasty and sketchy to speak out against a war if we do not include in our speech (and in the definition contained in that speech) all its dimensions.
A war can be imperialist in its original cause and start, and from the point of view of a defending people turn into a just democratic war.
---
The criterion for defining a war as a just war from the point of view of a people cannot be the criterion before the Second World War.
Those who transfer the Leninist criterion by "jumping over" the Second World War, simply dogmatize their thinking, following the sectarianization of leftist thought after the fall of (non-existent as socialisms) state socialisms.
---
The
fact that the Ukrainian nation found itself entangled in Western
imperialist designs does not legitimize the occupying Russian
imperialists, nor does it justify a general characterization of the war
as imperialist in general, since from the point of view of the Ukrainian
nation it is now a war of life and death, a patriotic democratic
struggle.
---
When
there is conquest and occupation, of a people from a violent empire or
just from another nation, there can be no ''average equal distance''
between the conqueror and the conquered.
---
Cynical instrumentalization 1st:
An intervention involving planned bombing of civilians and infrastructure, use as a legitimization tool the existence (imaginary-overestimated or real) of fascists in the defending country.
Cynical instrumentalization 2nd:
Instrumentalize the presence of fascist forces in the defending country, in order to stigmatize its possible denial of the (4) humiliating terms set by the conquering power.
Already the Russian or pro-Russian propagandists in Greece, where they operate undisturbed, artificially ''predetermine'' any possible denial of these 4 terms of capitulation as coming from the fascists who (hypothetically or real) exist in the Ukrainian government.
In this way the occupiers proceed to a precautionary ideological de-legitimization any denial of humiliating capitulation, stigmatizing it in advance as of "fascist" origin.
---
In
Greece, the symmetrical criticism of the two imperialists (West-Russia)
functions as the propaganda means of supporting the Russian
intervention. This propaganda is carried out jointly (with ideological
variations) by both the Fascists-Neo-Nazis (most of whom are
pro-Russian) and the leftists, communists, etc.
Only a large part of the
anarchists keep a really equal distance.
---
The KKE (Greek Tudech) has friendly relations with the National-Socialist National-Communist Zuganov, a supporter of the Russian intervention and a right-hand man of Putin.
I will prove other relations of the Greek left with Russian imperialism.
The specific slogan of the "goose walking" march was the racist "anti-imperialist" slogan: "American murderers of peoples" while no slogan was heard against the Russian intervention in particular.
---
Der Kampf um die ukrainische Linke, alles was noch übrig ist, ist verloren. Dasselbe gilt für die ukrainische Arbeiterklasse.
Selbst wenn die russische Armee irgendwann vertrieben wird (zweifelhaft), dies wird sie nur den bürgerlichen Kräften dieses Landes positive ideologische und politische Ergebnisse bringen.
Diejenigen jedoch, die nicht als direkte Teilnehmer an diesem Drama leben, sich aber in ähnlichen „Situationen“ befinden und sich möglicherweise in der Zukunft in direkt ähnlichen „Situationen“ befinden, sollten sich Sorgen machen.
Wenn sich ein Land und seine Werktätigen an bestimmten Grenzen des globalen (imperialistischen) Wettbewerbs befinden, können sie sich den durch diese "Marginalisierung" verursachten Dilemmata nicht entziehen, indem sie sich auf eine abstrakte Neutralität berufen. Neutralität zwischen den imperialistischen Polen, solange sie bestehen, ist das ultimative Ziel, aber sie wird nicht ohne eine Art flexible und „dämonische“ taktische Verwirklichung dieses ultimativen Ziels erreicht.
---
Einige kritische politisch-militärische Aktionen Lenins werden, wenn man sie auf der Grundlage dessen beurteilt, was Lenin selbst gesagt hat, als abenteuerlich angesehen werden.
Ich kann es jedem beweisen, der es hören will, solange er es hören will.
---
Eine lebendige und praktische Dialektik kann (nicht mehr?) auf einer symmetrischen und abstrakten Position gegenüber den Polen der Weltherrschaft beruhen.
Die Situation erzwingt eine „dämonische“ Dialektik, die gerade die Asymmetrie des globalen imperialistischen Konflikts berücksichtigt.
---
Es gibt keinen Ausweg zwischen zwei dominanten Kräften, wenn jemand unbewaffnet zwischen ihnen steht.
Sich auf eine ideologische Neutralität zu berufen, während man sich unbewaffnet inmitten dieser dominanten Mächte befindet, hat nicht nur keine praktische Wirkung, sondern tendiert dazu, indirekt die Stärksten auf dem Schlachtfeld zu unterstützen.
Das Schlachtfeld ist immer spezifisch. Jemand, der sich gewissermaßen in der „Mitte“ zwischen zwei dominanten Kräften befindet, wenn sie auf dem Schlachtfeld kämpfen, das diese „Mitte“ ist, also in einem bestimmten Raum und in einer bestimmten Zeit, sollte nicht über die allgemeinen Kräfteverhältnisse sprechen diese Kräfte.
Zum Beispiel befinden sich die linken Kräfte in der Ukraine derzeit nicht in einem abstrakten „Mittelweg“ zwischen westlichem und östlichem Imperialismus, sondern „innerhalb“ der souveränen Macht des östlichen Imperialismus.
Sie können nicht von einer Klassenneutralität zwischen den beiden Imperialismen sprechen, wie es die linken Kräfte können, die „innerhalb“ der souveränen Macht des westlichen Imperialismus sind.
Die ukrainischen linken Kräfte können sich einerseits nicht dem direkten nationalistisch-patriotischen Kampf der ukrainischen bürgerlichen Kräfte anschließen, die den größten Teil des ukrainischen Volkes hinter sich herziehen, aber andererseits können sie auch nicht ideologisch und praktisch neutral bleiben, muss am Kampf gegen den Eroberer teilnehmen.
Diese schwierige Position ist keine besondere, sondern wird fortan die erzwungene Position aller linken Kräfte ''innerhalb'' der „geopolitischen“ Grenzen der entstehenden globalen imperialistischen Konkurrenz sein.
---
Ιωάννης Τζανάκος
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου