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?
You must log in or register to comment.
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.
A very reductive, contrarian way of thinking. “The US is bad, therefore anything the US opposes is good, actually”
For these people, everything is black or white. There is only the evil US plus its allies, and its heroic enemies.
To be blunt, I don’t give a fuck about her Australian ass trying to whitesplain shit. She has no right to speak over Iranian comrades; those who actually live through, and capably analyze the events occurring in their country.
