[Marxism] Nonviolent resistance?
meisner at xs4all.nl
Sun Dec 16 09:29:12 MST 2012
At 10:36 16-12-12 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
>On 12/16/12 9:37 AM, Ron Jacobs wrote:
> From the above statement:
>The options are not limited to doing nothing or escalating warfare.
>Nonviolent resistance to tyranny has proven
>far more likely to succeed, and the successes far longer lasting.
>Nations and individuals outside of Syria should do what they can to
>facilitate the nonviolent pursuit of justice.
Thanks, Louis, for the link to SourceWatch and their damning info on the
one author of the supplied reference.
But even without that revelation, my initial reading of that same paragraph
already had me in a daze. This one left group, finally getting on board the
call against imperialist intervention in Syria, following 2 years of no
imperialist intervention in Syria, has the nerve to tell the Syrians that
any "pursuit of justice" can better be accomplished through nonviolent
civil resistance AS IF THE SYRIANS HAD NEVER TRIED NON-VIOLENT PROTEST!!! I
don't need to point out how many such non-violent protests were drowned in
blood before the protests -- some would say much too late! -- gave way to
revolutionary struggle. Equally absurd is the statement's suggestion for
"peace negotiations," again as if that route had never even occurred to the
UN, for instance.
Another bit of wisdom from the statement had to duly tackle the non-issue
of chemical weapons. After first emphasizing the total implausibility of
Assad ever using chemical weapons, it has to then point out the danger that
any supposed "escalated foreign intervention" would only "provoke" Assad in
that direction. Just as the peaceful protests in February 2011 "provoked"
Assad to bomb neighborhoods. Apparently anything activists do beyond
discussion on the internet (come to think of it, the Syrian revolutionaries
can't even do that safely) is liable to "provoke" the powers that be, and
should therefore be avoided.
With the current intensification of the situation in Syria, I find puzzling
and disturbing the paucity of discussion on this list, excepting an
occasional proclamation to prove some group's anti-imperialist credentials,
written as if they were unaware of developments over the last 20 months. I
will now try to return to that discussion and delve into a few recent posts
which seem to have been largely ignored (perhaps because they again run
counter to certain "anti-imperialist" preconceptions).
More information about the Marxism