Questions to Michael Karadjis.

 

Questions to Michael Karadjis.

1. Is the new imperialist world multipolar or (potentially) (again) bipolar?

2. Is the territorial-centric aspect of the new "Eastern" imperialism (as its reactionary aspect) a complementary or an essential element of it?

3. The necessary alliance with the "enemy of the enemy" is a cause of the alienation of the sectarian anti-imperialists of the West, but does it not also pose a danger to the leftists of the East "from the other way around"? Beyond wishful thinking, how and when will the peoples of the whole world meet, when they are thus divided into opposing, necessarily, allied formations?

4. Solve the mystery of the Syrian opposition for me. Aren't the vast majority of the anti-Assad opposition entirely or partial responsible for the jihadism diversion? Caution! I am not saying that the Syrian opposition was (and is) entirely and predominantly jihadist, as the Russian imperialists, Assad and the leftist Stalinist anti-imperialists say, but I am saying that the opposition has responsibilities:

a) because it tolerated the phenomenon, perhaps allied itself with them b ) put Turkey in the game from the beginning, c) it did not for a moment overcome theocracy and political Islam, d) it remained fanatically anti-Kurdish.

Is it so, or not? am I simplifying or saying what is hidden through idealizations?

 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος