Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds; applies to institutions too.

https://mronline.org/2021/02/18/role-of-ngos-in-promoting-neo-colonialism/

The west doesn’t care about the Chinese or muslims but we are supposed to believe they care about Chinese muslims. Please let me know how many countries with a minority (Uyghur muslims as the example here) population have their languages on their currency and actively promotes their culture significantly (like drawing in tourism), skyrocketing of HDI and then gets accused of whatever you are doing here.

The thing with the neither Washington nor Beijing schtick is that it is tantamount support of western atrocity propaganda; you want to believe Western lies as you have already decided on a hierarchy of human beings and denigrate those who stand against Western imperialism. If you know you have been lied to about every Western Designated Enemy since WWII but choose to believe current ones then you ain’t brainwashed, just bigoted.

Thanks for replying and I am enjoying the civility.

This view would mean that trans men are oppressors, with all the baggage that comes with it - that they not only choose to be oppressors, but that they become oppressors even though trans men are also discriminated against.

I would argue that this is only true if we consider patriarchy the same as misogyny. Liberals do. Marxist-leninists shouldn’t. And I would argue because it stems from liberal conception of liberation is rooted in hyper-individualism rather than the correct understanding of patriarchy as a structural concern.

Let’s again make the abstract concrete. You can see how the above plays out in real life in bourgoisie society. It is not uncommon for liberal feminists to do the following: they equate a non-white man who is part of an ethnic demographic that is oppressed under white supremacism is part of the patriarchy if he is a misogynist (or for some for just being a man) and then you will see liberal feminists end up using white supremacist racist tropes to describe men of people of colour as inherently violent/dangerous etc even if the liberal feminist themselves are non-white. This is categorically wrong, but why?

Let’s take the US for example. The black person is not in charge of the patriarchy that suppresses them as a group. The black man is often actually targeted for state violence because he is a black man. They are victims too of that patriarchy.

The same can be applied all over the world: the Palestenian man or boy in Palestine under Israel or the Dalit man under hindutva patriarchial society etc are not agents who rule the patriarchial society - they themselves are also victims of the same patriarchy. Palestenian men for example are targeted because they are plaestenian man. How many times have seen in media, in order to attain sympathy from the reader, explain that the Israelis are killing/torturing women and children, ie excluding the adult palestenian male with the subtext that a level of brutality against the latter is more acceptable. Do we really think the Palestenian man is then part of that patriarchal superstructure, here manifested in genocide, just because he is a man? Of course we shouldn’t.

Conflating the violent misogyny of the individual with the patriarchal structure that enables it ends up effectively absolving the superstructure of its sins which means one could be amplifying the patriarchal society often manifested above as white supremacism while nominally one says they stand for say women’s rights - effectively whitewashing the oppression of patriarchy just so one can uphold the few - one ends up with liberal feminism, TERFs etc rather than the marxist conception of true liberation which submlimates all of the above. We should understand that patriarchy, inherited from feudalism before it, in our society amplifies capitalist exploitation and immiseration.

It’s got so bad some marxists are now no longer using the term feminism to equate with women’s liberation.

And I need to read more Kollantai.

You know how marxist-leninist differ from liberals in how they define capital - rather than an immutable object we consider capital as a relation (very specifically it is labour - embodied in the relation between the worker and those who own the means of production ie the capitalist. For example, a hammer is only defined as capital once we confirm its relationship between the worker and the bourgoisie).

In that same line of thinking, dialectial materialists would consider gender as a coercive hierarchial social relation that reproduces capitalist exploitation and it is this what is sought to be abolished. One is only a certain gender only in relation to other genders. It is not an immutable charecteristic atomised from society.

I think what might be wrestled here in the article is maybe the contradictions of the liberal conception of empancipation.

Let’s make the abstract concrete. In the west one could consider that gay rights was “accepted” because they had to succumb to patriarchial concepts of self ie they were born gay as an immutable characteristic and it is because of this characteristic therefore they should be given rights. What if it was not an immutable characteristic?

This conundrum (for liberals) stems from the bourgoisie conception of what feminism should mean; emancipation means taking space at the table of the bourgoisie white cis-male. Liberation for the liberal ends up meaning to have the power of the bourgoisie to exploit, or at least have a fair chance of aquiring this power to exploit.

With that in mind what would liberal conception of trans liberation then look like? It essentially means equal oppurtunity to become bourgoisie too and the cultural dynamics in the proletetiat to uphold this hegemony.

So how would marxism sublimate this? What would marxist liberation for trans/queer folk look like? Where will that journey take us? Would we be still be upholding gender as defined above? I think the road will take us to the abolition of gender.

I strongly suspect that the default is that we are all on the spectrum but those who consider ourselves straight and cis have a greater ontological adherence to gender and sexuality as defined by our bourgoisie society. I strongly suspect that these characteristics aren’t as immutable as we “straight folk” think we are.

Just saying, Afghanistan has observer status already in SCO :)

Forgot to say - Grand Chessboard by Brzezinski; former national security advisor ie straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak.

Some books (and check their sources):

• Washington Bullets by Prashad,
• Jakarta Method by Bevins,
• Killing Hope by Blum,
• Shock Doctrine by Klein,
• Confessions of an Economic Hitman by Perkins,
• Overthrow by Kinzer
• Legacy of Ashes by Weiner

I’m sure there are youtube videos as well on most of the above books.

There’s also on the other side things likes Gene Sharp’s works such as from Dictatorship to Democracy which I understand are used by colour revoution movements, may be useful in understanding methodology.

Also, on persuasion: https://redsails.org/masses-elites-and-rebels/

Thank you for this post/comment and sharing that study.

🫡

We must remember ultimately the true national liberation struggles sublimate the borders carved in blood by the bourgoisie.

Sometimes discipline comes out of necessity when the conditions of capital become so stark that unity is surivival. Having said that, it is unbecoming of us self-proclaimed MLs to rely on such “passivity”; it reeks of privilege to renege the duty of action.

Out of curiosity which one was it?

Marxism is a science; it must be understood from the lessons of the past to build more robust solutions. Not easy but not impossible; we know this because within capital are the seeds of its own destruction. We are often forged by the failures we did not willingly choose.

Then there’s room for birth of a genuine one.

The white conservatives aren’t friends of us either, but they at least don’t try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps us always aware of where we stand with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to us but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure us, and as we run from the growling wolf, we flee into the open jaws of the “smiling” fox.” - Malcolm X

The situation is getting worse.

(^The relative silence in the media is deafening. It happened within the last 2 days.)

The solution to defence is organisation: either within the UK through communities whether formal or informal, nominally political or not, or outside of the UK ie leave and be part of an anti-imperialist citizenry. The ML approach will take it one step further with militant organisation with above ground and underground movements.

You may have misunderstood how these drones work when considering western drones seem to be more effective against unarmed women and children, journalists, medics etc. These non-western drones are instead designed with genocidaires in mind. Hope that clarified the confusion.

Ideological superstructure can only exist with a material basis. Exploitative relationships between peoples exist with a flow of material gain in the direction of the oppressor and their collaborators; it is not just ideological - in fact when that material relationship changes the ideology has to re-adapt.

Dialectical materialism and with that marxism-leninism partly has an appeal because it takes out so much of the frustation of the contradictions of the world.

When one is at the receiving end of white supremacism for years on end, and to feel that “if only they understood the truth then maybe they will stop” leading to a vacuous nihilism bound by endless racist propaganda, and then to have that weight to be lifted off you when it is understood that they are not “brainwashed” is sometimes an experience that has to be felt to be believed. It fills one with revolutionary optimism that the world can be changed for the better.

They live in the privilege that COVID disproportionately affect people of colour due to inequal access to healthcare and comorbidities reflecting wealth distrubutions.

I wonder why that escaped you.

I wonder what the differences in lived experiences and demographics who read that Redsails article and say yeah that better reflects their reality versus those who feel they feel better served still by liberal concepts of indoctrination and brainwashing putting the ideal before the material.

Thank you for this excellent post/reply!

Thanks for sharing this. I hope Maduro has built up sufficient Venuzuelan defence and deterrence.

Do you just… not believe false consciousness exists?

To choose to engage in such idealism warrants an insulation from the consequences that only orientialism could afford. The prejudice that allows the oppressor and his collaborator this leeway derives from a material privilege to accomodate such an apologism.