a while ago i was in an argument with an anarchist about china and they hit me with the uyghur genocide argument so i sent them the article with the CIA guy openly admitting its a fabrication and they just didnt reply so im genuinely trying to wrap my mind around it. are they just in straight up denial and ignore it when people bring it up?
OR, the more horrifying alternative, are there some who just fw with the CIA for stopping ”red fascism”?? i know some people honestly believe communists should support ukraine due to ”morals” so maybe its possible?
“Two things can be bad at once.” They try to tell me.
theyre right, china is bad (in a sexy kinda way)
fuzzy satellite photos of middle schools in Xinjiang are enough to convince a western chauvinist, but years of seeing Palestine get torn apart live on video is “complicated”
I don’t think this comparison is fair or honest. Never once seen an anarchist call the Gaza Genocide anything other than what it is.
Liberals are the ones always hand-wringing about how “complicated” Palestine is.
I’ve seen some brainrot anarchists on twitter but I’ll take it with a grain of salt because it’s twitter
I mean I just got back on BlueSky a few days ago (their ban evasion methods suck apparently lmao) and deadass I just saw a guy (calls himself a demsoc, sympathetic to anarchism) confidently try to argue that Marx wasn’t anti-capitalist.
Social media has a way of bringing out the most bewildering takes from the most ignorant people on planet Earth.
Both. Some are just in denial, others genuinely think the US empire is the “lesser evil”.
This is what not understanding imperialism (defined by Lenin) gets you: A poor understanding of vague authorities as imperialist, with the imperial core’s lord (Amerika) being portrayed as the lesser evil by some.
People usually don’t reply when I bring receipts. That can be for several reasons, including the unlikely case where they learn that they may actually have been wrong. But I bring the receipts more for the lookie-loos than the interlocutor, anyway.
Here’s the thing, from their POV you’re using a logical fallacy know as guilt by association, so even if the CIA approves them, or even more than that, it doesn’t prove anything. And indeed, by itself it proves nothing, but we know the context where the CIA ends up being so sympathetic, the thing here is, anarchists above all else care about being more revolutionary (read edgy, in the good sense of the word) than anyone else, so this won’t matter to them.
Can you send me that cia doc? Haven’t seen it before
uyghur:
” The speaker is Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell and retired US Army Colonel. He was speaking at the Ron Paul Institute in August 2018 on the threefold purposes of the US presence in Afghanistan, one of which is to contain China. He said undisguisedly that “the third reason we were there [in Afghanistan] is because there are 20 million Uyghurs [in Xinjiang]. The CIA would want to destabilize China and that would be the best way to do it to foment unrest and to join with those Uyghurs in pushing the Han Chinese in Beijing from internal places rather than external”.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00Cvx0R8iDo
as for the CIA liking anarchists i cant find the doc this instant but i know its in the COINTELPRO
They dismiss links to gov.cn and the Ron Paul Institute out of hand. They censor themselves.
Here’s a link straight from a Western government
https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=4767d3ce-8490-464f-8508-d8f3b7878808&subId=703775
Do you have a link to the full speech, by any chance? Thanks either way.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
As someone who doesn’t align with Anarchism. I think this is a weak vector of rebuttal against Anarchism, because there’s plenty of non-aggressive treaties and other pacts signed between socialist states and mortal enemies. They can just point at Molotov-Ribbentrop pact for example.
“Stalin had to sign a pact with these guys to buy time! We had to do it with these guys!” It’s not exactly difficult for them to do it and therefore I think the question is deeper than that.
You have to ask each group specifically why did they do that, what are they hoping to achieve and what have they achieved?
A Modern day equivalent of a mind breaker would be China-Israel relations. I personally haven’t heard of a proper Marxist analysis on that situation. On an emotional level it’s at least on par if not worse than someone collaborating with CIA, but I’m supposed to rely on more than gut instinct aren’t I?
This is actually more about the CIA viewing anarchists as the weakest link and easy to exploit or misdirect and not about being guilty by association.
The CIA has historically created anarchist magazines and newspapers to bait them. They also liked to infiltrate anarchist organizations more because they are disorganized and more based around individualist “morals” rather than materialism.
You aren’t wrong. Our Anarchist movements are currently being infiltrated by a certain flavor of blue and a touch of yellow, but I can’t think of a way to actually do anything against it. They use plausible half-truths that I can’t simply deny, but an actually nuanced argument would get me eliminated.
And being a martyr for such a cause is not productive, because the headline would read: “Mentally insane woman defends Putin’s Russia”
When my family hates Putin for selling out the USSR and they know it, there’s a propaganda channel aimed for boomers and they do literally use that talking point to appeal to ex-soviet citizens. They’re quite clever I hate it. But to Anarchists truth is often black and white. Ala Big country attacks on small country, big country bad. It is actually a lot more nuanced than that.
Anarchist are like Skull Face from MGS. Big ambitions, toddler discipline.
“Waaah English bad language gonna ban English and fix the world!!”
“Waaah give every nation a WMD!!!”
What even is a Nation? Why Isn’t there a Székely Republic? What about Basques Republic? Should they have WMDs?
Should Micronesia have Nuclear Detents?
Dangerous topic for me to discuss because there’s a meme floating around about how there’s separatists in the region that borders Russia. I mean seriously? My ass would get bombed to stone age by this foolish meme of a proposal. It’s dangerously ridiculous. Sorry if I sound overly passionate I’m just really depressed about the suffering happening literally in the same spot my ancestors went to battle in the hopes that they would never have to go to battle again.
But yeah that’s Anarchism, it’s not much different than Trotskyism. I will work with them critically, but not take their assistance for granted. Best way to handle them imo. Extreme caution.
the thing is, if china openly cut ties with israel they would be sanctioned to death. north korea has no such ties with israel, look at how the world is treating them.
aligning with the CIA on the other hand is not the same. china assasinates CIA spies who infiltrate their country.
I think we can also ask how the material conditions change the considerations for who we should make pacts with. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was made during an era when there were different competing imperial powers, but the modern era is one where they all work together. Singing a pact with the hegemon means giving up sovereignty and being absorbed into the empire.
