I strongly disagree with the text. I understand it as the author doesn’t want the people of Iran to liberate themselves from tyranny, because then they would be controlled by US which is also tyrannic. But not supporting people liberating themselves because one feels like they know better than the people seems just like the imperialist logic, just reversed. What are your thoughts? Does the text reflect common opinion among anarchists?
Campist shit. The current Iranian government is fundamentally opposed to any progressive and liberating ideas. They don’t even pretend otherwise like some nominally socialist states did. The only argument against an outside intervention would be that a stable situation where people can mostly live their lives is at least in the short run preferable to destruction and war. But with the latest mass killing of protestors that idea is pretty much dead, even if they manage to turn it into a new graveyard peace.
Edit: the way the article is written, including specific terms, makes it unlikely that this was written by an actual anarchist and is rather an attempt at entryism of some MLs.
There are many arguments against an imperial invasion: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Vietnam, Chile, Venezuela, etc, etc etc. Every single one of these massacres was done for the “benefit” of those invaded.
Please don’t recycle fake imperial propaganda. The mass killings will come with the imperial invasion as usual.
https://the307.substack.com/p/how-atrocity-propaganda-manufactures
Please don’t recycle fake campist propaganda. Even the Iranian government itself talks about more than 3000 people killed.