PD supporting (neo)-liberal politicians again
Jun 15 2009 02:55
Why is that PD always has the hardon for liberal elections? Palestine not so long ago and now Iran. And while Ahmadinejad is as cuntish as they come and is gladly suppresses all political opposition be it liberal or working class, he's never actually called for Israel to be wiped off the map. And fuck me "Mousavi was a ray of hope in Iran - to bring it out of the fundamentalist straitjacket, and into the modern sphere". I mean what the fuck is that shit? What about his horrible neo-liberal policies and his close alignment with the bazaaris and Iranian capital? Where's the analysis? But it seems like whenever it comes to something that relates to Israel PD just gets ridiculous. Where was the outrage about Sri Lanka then, surely much "worse" than both a stolen election in Iran and Israel's pummeling in Gaza.
Ffs PD, why the fuck is it ok to support neo-liberal politicians?
PD wrote:
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the creepy Iranian president, has stolen the election. All mobile phone text messaging services were shut down, disabling opposition co-ordinating activity on the day itself. People were bribed with potatoes, many outside the cities who are insecure about their economic future were bought off by the regime at the last minute. The palpable anger of peoples’ response to the fraudulent count on the streets is breathtaking to behold. So far, at least one-hundred opposition activists have been herded up by the state. The real figure will no doubt be much higher.Mousavi was a ray of hope in Iran - to bring it out of the fundamentalist straitjacket, and into the modern sphere.
Now Iran enters into a dark period - perhaps civil war, most certainly repression for anyone who dares to voice opposition to the tyranny. Ahmandinejad’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles can only mean a possible confrontation. He is bad news for everyone, but above all the Iranian people themselves. This hard liner, who is a Holocaust denier, is also of the view that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.
Jun 15 2009 07:15
#2
teh wrote:
Quote:
People were bribed with potatoes, many outside the cities who are insecure about their economic future were bought off by the regime at the last minute.stoopid proles always getting bribed from voting for modernity
In Ankara the Islamicists offer you coal. Though the father of a friend of ours who lives in the countryside was offered a cow. I'd consider voting for a cow.
Devrim
Jun 15 2009 12:56
#3
Khawaga wrote:
Why is that PD always has the hardon for liberal elections? Palestine not so long ago and now Iran. And while Ahmadinejad is as cuntish as they come and is gladly suppresses all political opposition be it liberal or working class, he's never actually called for Israel to be wiped off the map. And fuck me "Mousavi was a ray of hope in Iran - to bring it out of the fundamentalist straitjacket, and into the modern sphere". I mean what the fuck is that shit? What about his horrible neo-liberal policies and his close alignment with the bazaaris and Iranian capital? Where's the analysis? But it seems like whenever it comes to something that relates to Israel PD just gets ridiculous. Where was the outrage about Sri Lanka then, surely much "worse" than both a stolen election in Iran and Israel's pummeling in Gaza.Ffs PD, why the fuck is it ok to support neo-liberal politicians?
Broadly speaking, as you are well aware, it is because their politics is not derived from class analysis but historicist categories – as they see it, the capitalist democracy of Israel is a qualitative historical advance on theocratic capitalism... this is a common enough proposition within the project of the left (from Marx through the 2nd international, Gramsci, anti-fascism etc). The historicist argument (assuming the linearity of time and the material basis of progress based on increasing productive forces) precedes via the support for the least worst viable option in all cases (assuming that the victory of this least worst will itself produce conditions in which a better 'left' opposition will emerge). Capitalism is preferable to feudalism, Labour is preferable to Tories, anti-fascism is an advance on fascism, Israel is preferable to Iran (or contraiwise, Palestine is preferable to Israel) etc – at each juncture the most forward point must be supported. The assumption is of objective historical totalisation – of lines in the social relation which once crossed in a forward direction cannot then be re-crossed in the opposite direction.
But then, why would you be upset about this? Better to a. engage them yourself, or b. don't read their material in the hope of finding class based analysis.
Jun 15 2009 14:08
#4
PD just irks me sometimes, even though I do know that I won't find any class based analysis in anything they do. While I don't agree with their analysis I think their critique actually could sharpen class based analyses.
I guess it's their holier-than-thou attitude that pisses me off.
Jun 15 2009 14:20
#5
fort-da game wrote:
But then, why would you be upset about this? Better to ... b. don't read their material.
I think you may have a point here.
Jun 15 2009 14:29
#6
I think they also supported "vote labour to keep the bnp out" in the past.
In cheerleading so-called "progressive" bourgeois parties however, PD looks like it's shed even the ounce of bogus "criticism" that you would expect from Trots.
The ICC analysis of these events is not necessarily more illuminating as to what's actually happening over there, but it definitely makes more sense as a communist perspective.
Quote:
Capitalism is preferable to feudalism, Labour is preferable to Tories
this is a ridiculous non-sequitur though.
Jun 15 2009 14:37
#7
Vlad336 wrote:
I think they also supported "vote labour to keep the bnp out" in the past.
Vote labour to keep boris out even.
Jun 15 2009 18:22
#8
Devrim wrote:
teh wrote:
Quote:
People were bribed with potatoes, many outside the cities who are insecure about their economic future were bought off by the regime at the last minute.stoopid proles always getting bribed from voting for modernity
In Ankara the Islamicists offer you coal. Though the father of a friend of ours who lives in the countryside was offered a cow. I'd consider voting for a cow.
Devrim
If liberal factions gave even a pretense of offering anything to these people this wouldn't be an issue. Rafsanjani and Khatami already demonstrated the sham of parliamentary reform in Iran. And regardless of the slogans and militancy of the protesters I dont see how any of these actions will achieve anything other then channeling dissent towards Mousavi and co., who have the organization and the funding.
Jun 16 2009 14:14
#9
Khawaga wrote:
PD just irks me sometimes, even though I do know that I won't find any class based analysis in anything they do. While I don't agree with their analysis I think their critique actually could sharpen class based analyses.I guess it's their holier-than-thou attitude that pisses me off.
I agree about the 'sharpening', but this is also true of many intellectual traditions which are otherwise lost because they seem not immediately relevant. The question is always how to include the anomalous but still defend one's own holier-than-thou political integrity (which must be preserved at all costs). Without the function of a defence mechanism, which always appears so trivial in others' analysis but is so vital in one's own, what is to prevent a slide into relativism and perpetual topical revisionism? It is the attitude that defends the fragment and supplies it with the necessary energy and it is this possession of small fragments of truth, and the build up of organisations/traditions around them, which finally indicates that a proletarian communist set of relations cannot be expressed within a single defined organisation in the form of a 'programme' or set of principles.
stoopid proles always getting bribed from voting for modernity