Riseup4Rojava started in the Netherlands
Hier kun je discussieren over Riseup4Rojava started in the Netherlands .
Riseup4Rojava Netherlands is an initiative in solidarity with the Rojava Revolution and its achievements. The need for international solidarity and struggle has made it clear to us that defending the revolution and achievements of the rojava revolution is a historical and political duty for every social struggler. Among the various regions of the world, especially Europe, the Netherlands was one of the areas where the Riseup4Rojava movement did not exist, so we decided to create Riseup4Rojava Netherlands.
1- Decisions in Riseup4Rojava Netherlands are based on the Assembly.
2- We are not a hierarchical or authoritarian structure.
3- Collective responsibility, unity in thoughts, unity in actions and self-organisation in the form of non-centralization of power are the fundamentals of Riseup4Rojava Netherlands.
4- The goal of Riseup4Rojava Netherlands is to organize and mobilize local people for international solidarity and struggle in defense of the revolution and the achievements of the Rojava Revolution.
Riseup4Rojava Netherlands
Our Instagram page:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CL-MA5YDN_H/?igshid=1fpccq5i51s1t
Rojava is some phantom
Rojava is some phantom statelet, which was mainly financed by illegal trade in oil and other supplies with the fascist regime of war criminal Assad. It has some sort of a maoist structure with a very superficial anarchist coating, which means there's a lot of talk about councils and democracy but in reality an omnipotent party with it's own political police is having control over everything. Significant is the personality cult around the imprisoned Great Leader, Öcalan, which is not very spontaneous at all but is imposed by higher ranks of the party (some say it is instigated by the subject of the cult himself). It really has nothing to do with class struggle, or you could say: it only has to do with class struggle in as far as it is just another attack against our class. I really don't understand why libertarians fall for this crap.
You don't understand it because you obvioulsy are too short mind
You don't understand it because you obvioulsy are too short minded. I'm assuming your information comes from Al Jaazera? Have you ever tried to establish an anarchist or communist system within a capitalist world hegemony? No, because this is not possible everyone in this world is some way or the other reliant on this system. Thats why If you anarcho kiddie squat a house you won't survive without buying goods aka. taking part in the system. Thats why it is considered to be a revolution and not a libertarian socialist utopia, which again is not possible in the current state of the global hegemony.
Oil: Yes Rojava is reliant on the extraction of oil and oil trade. The main addressee of the extracted oil is the local population. However, it is not the main customer. The deal is with Assad, also with the Iraqi state and the Barzani government in Iraqi Kurdistan. These are of course all social systems that run counter to the ideals of the PYD and the entire TEV-DEM. Sometimes you are in an open conflict with one another. The self-government is aware of the ecological and political problems, but cannot currently do without the oil trade. Because, guess what natural resource to live the self sustainable utopia is difficult if you are bombed from all sides.
Abdullah Öcalan: Yes the personification is sometimes problematic, however, a revolution without a theoretical framework is de facto chaos. He laid the groundwork combining Wallerstein, Marx, Freud, Goldstein, Bookchin and all the good theory that helps to make a revolution in todays world possible. I do not see a lot of similarities with Mao tbh, since there is until today no central commitee. There are great documentaries explaining the grass root democratic functioning of the autonmous commites it appears that you are not too much into reading yourself. A mediating force (political police if you want to call it) is unfortuntely also needed, since patriachy, religous fundamentalism and other problematic ideologies are not overcome from one day to another.
C'mon show a bit of realism and try to adress the issues that are legitimite criticism rational, a morally perfect self government is in the middle east sadly not achieved yet, neither is it possible.
Yes most of the radical left identifies with this revolution, and I doubt that you've understood the revolution or the political context around it.
"anarkiddies"
Spoken like a true tankie. Nuff said.
A valid critique on a critique
The things said in the response above have little to do with stalinism and everything with a clear distinction that has to be made between a revolutionary situation or rebellion and the utopia one is trying to achieve. The points are a valid critique on the first response, which is literally severed from any realistic perspective of what one can achieve in the region and the hard work it costs to bring about change.
Such a great theoretical
Such a great theoretical framework! The guy is absolutely ridiculous, as are all the leftist fellowtravellers praising his "thought".
Meanwhile the big elephant in the room is a huge taboo, which is definitely not openly discussed in the "grassroot democratic" committees: the alliance between Assad and the PYD. I still think there's some difference between an "anarkiddy" going to the supermarket and making some political deal with one of the greatest dictators of our time, responsible for about half a million of civilian deaths!
http://npnf.eu/spip.php?article819
Oh and by the way, in case
Oh and by the way, in case you didn't notice (you really didn't, right?): there actually was a genuine social revolution going on in Syria, where people were building true grassroot democratic structures! And those Syrian people did not even need mister Öcalan's brilliant thoughts to do so. That revolution was largely ignored and now will be forgotten by those western "libertarians", who just go for the PKK-show. It won't be forgotten by the Syrian people and others in the region, nor by the many refugees who came to live overhere. And neither will it be forgotten by people who truly love freedom and justice and have an open eye for the fraudulence and lies that once again are being sold to us!
And where are those councils
And where are those councils now? They were crushed by assad or islamic fundamentalists.
People like you only support revolutions after their defeat. Yes, there are issues with YPG/PYD etc but they have also managed to survive in an extremely hostile situation while at the same tine maintaining at least some libertarian socialist principles. Most importantly pluralism, direct demoracy and concrete initiatives towards economic democracy. For that they should be praised, supported, etc, with of course the necessary criticism. But you can criticize as comrades, or as enemies. To me, they are comrades.
- an ex-squatter anarkiddie (ex because of age, not because i gave up on anarchism).
Also, Ocalan is in a turkish
Also, Ocalan is in a turkish jail and he's never coming out. As far as idolized leaders go, thats the best place you can have them, apart from dead.
Sure, totally makes sense:
Sure, totally makes sense: people like you support the revolution that never was, the party which always had their dirty little secret, their deal with the guy who crushed the real revolution. So are you going to tell your "comrades" what you think about their Great Leader and their campaigns to get him released? Nice equal relationship!
Cynical remarks...
That is the most cynical thing coming from an 'anarchist?!'. So on the one hand dogmatic sectarianism and on the other you are prepared to make selective exceptions when they fit you? Your whole argument is flimsy thing.
Revolutions are a heap of contradictions and one can criticize safely from afar but your critique will not change anything. Only direct engagement. Next to that also the anarchist movement has had its leaders, this is something most never really got to give a good answer on. I think leadership is not necessarily a problematic thing and anarchists historically have also not always been against it either. The question has always been how accountable they are, for how long, for which function etc.
This sloganism is bringing us nowhere and has no political perspective whatsoever.
Another comrade.
Yes and the Kurds pulled out
Yes and the Kurds pulled out of that, and for that they should be criticized - as comrades. But where does this stance of yours leaves us. What you can do is maybe try and gather the libertarian revolutionaries from Syria and try to learn from their experiences, maybe help them organize and get vocal.
Great idea! Like on the
Great idea! Like on the anarchist bookfair in London you mean? Syrian anarchists get silenced when they speak up against the anarcho-stalinist lies!
Interview met de Syrische
Interview met de Syrische dissident Ahmad Abazeid, gisteren in NRC:
"In 2014 besloot president Obama de Koerdische YPG te bewapenen tegen IS. Hoe heeft dat het conflict veranderd?
„Dit was precies waar het regime op hoopte: dat het Westen zich niet op Assad maar op terroristen zou gaan richten. De denkfout is dat IS überhaupt nooit zo sterk had kunnen worden als het regime eerder verslagen was. De voedingsbodem voor extremisme nam toe door de wreedheden van Assad. Bovendien heeft het regime opzettelijk jihadisten uit de gevangenis vrijgelaten om olie op het vuur te gooien.”
Maar er moest toch worden ingegrepen tegen IS?
„Ja, maar dat had ook gekund door samen te werken met het Vrije Syrische Leger, dat al veel eerder tegen IS vocht. Obama koos de YPG omdat hij een snelle oplossing nodig had en deze groepering zich in het Westen wist te verkopen als een progressieve beweging. In Syrië daarentegen staat de YPG bekend als een totalitaire beweging die al in 2012 een nietaanvalsverdrag met Assad sloot. Ze hebben Koerdische critici vervolgd en drukten demonstraties tegen Assad de kop in. In feite heeft de YPG de revolutie weggekaapt van de demonstranten op straat en heeft zij de Amerikaanse steun gebruikt om een eigen staat te stichten.”
Iets te gemakkelijk de
Iets te gemakkelijk de militaire confrontaties tussen Assads leger en de YPG sinds september 2012 weggelaten ????
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AANES%E2%80%93Syria_relations
Nou nee, want in de context
Nou nee, want in de context van de hele burgeroorlog waren die er nauwelijks. Wel lezen wat er staat: "For most of the Syrian civil war, there has been a non-aggression pact between the military of Syria and the Syrian Democratic Forces, with occasional confrontations and some cooperation against Islamist groups, in particular against the Turkish Armed Forces and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army." Terwijl het hele land in opstand is tegen het dictatoriale regime, sluiten die lui een non-agressie pact? Wat is dat voor "revolutie"?