******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Hi John You have struck upon something extremely important here. The way the Assadist anti-imperialists seem to jump seemlessly from a discussion about facts to their "position", which is apparently independent of and above mere facts. It's tempting to prescribe a simple underhand disinterest in the truth among these people, as they make contortions to justify Assad's latest enormity. However, it goes deeper than that, and you're right that it's a matter of their whole methodology. Stalinists have a mechanistic, faux materialism which is best shown by their obsession with labelling people "objectively" revolutionary or counter revolutionary. Rather than seeing people of having their own agency, they see them as mindlessly driven by "objective" forces beyond their control. Dialectical mysticism. Therefore, a Stalinist can genuinely believe that the Syrian people are "objectively" reactionary because they are opposed to Assad, who is "objectively" progressive because he is (supposedly) opposed to U.S. Imperialism. Facts, when you think in this manner, are irrelevant. Facts themselves become "objectively" revolutionary or counter revolutionary depending on whether they fit your world view. Tim N On Sat, 5 Jan 2019, 12:44 p.m. John Reimann via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu wrote: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > I had the misfortune of having a discussion with one of those left > Assadists. He made all the claims about US "regime change" in Syria. He > also denied that the US is just a bit player in Syria, that the major > imperialist force there is Russian imperialism. I told him I'd send him > some articles. I sent him three: One was an article of Michael Karadjis. > The second was this article of mine ( > > https://oaklandsocialist.com/2018/05/19/revolution-and-counter-revolution-in-syria-a-reply-to-r-l-stephens/?fbclid=IwAR0qg1Ky3NC5vQ4I2Mf15uTbfVS5Hd2EImZulZSBPF8BDwxjSPhhR-QpoHU > ) > > The third was a recent article from the Washington Post about what's > happening in Assad's prisons. I also commented that we should start from > the point of view of what the Syrian working class is experiencing. Here's > his response: > > Don't agree. We have to look at it from the point of view of the US WC > which is rife with the chauvinist, nationalist and racist justifications > that have been given for continued US presence in the ME and everywhere > else on the globe. > > Read article by Michael K.. There is no position in it except for a > backhanded justification for maintaining a US presence there to defend > Kurds, topple a dictator (Assad) and fight Islamic fascism (ISIS). Its > pro-imperialist, anti-imperialism which is all I hear from the left. > > Here is what I stand for. A defeat of the US army in Syria or anywhere else > it is located on the globe. The best way to be an internationalist in the > US is to call for the removal of ALL US forces everywhere on the globe and > our goal as revolutionaries is for our soldiers to come home and turn their > guns on their rulers who sent them abroad for the interest of Capitol. I > support a removal of troops in Syria (as I support the removal of ALL our > troops everywhere) but recognize the this was NOT accomplished by the > anti-war movement which collapses entirely behind the Dems and the Obama > regime once he took power and has to recovered since. > > My reply: > I wasn't going to reply because my experience is that discussions are > fruitless with those who use the same method as you do, (I say that because > your method is absolutely rampant on the left). > If you recall, the discussion started over a dispute not over our > "position" but over actual facts, over the actual history and actual > situation in Syria. I told you that I'd send you some articles to show that > you had the facts wrong. You don't comment on that. Instead, you jump > immediately to your "position". > You have the facts wrong on what is happening and what has been happening > in Syria. And facts matter. That is the starting point of Marxism, as > opposed to idealism. > I'll note another thing: All three articles start with the situation in > Syria, what the Syrian masses have been experiencing. The Washington Post > article - which I take it you didn't read - is very graphic on that. It > shows very clearly that Assad's methods differ very little from fascism. > Again, your method - which as I say is rampant - shows a lack of concern > for that, a lack of concern for the torture which millions of Syrian people > are experiencing. Socialists will never build an international movement of > working class people with that attitude. I don't intend to reply any > further for the reason I explained. > > And to think that his method is rampant on the left! > > John Reimann > -- > *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black > Jacobins" by C. L. R. James > Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/nelsontim86%40gmail.com _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
