[Marxism] A fruitless conversation

John Reimann 1999wildcat at gmail.com
Sat Jan 5 04:43:05 MST 2019

I had the misfortune of having a discussion with one of those left
Assadists. He made all the claims about US "regime change" in Syria. He
also denied that the US is just a bit player in Syria, that the major
imperialist force there is Russian imperialism. I told him I'd send him
some articles. I sent him three: One was an article of Michael Karadjis.
The second was this article of mine (

The third was a recent article from the Washington Post about what's
happening in Assad's prisons. I also commented that we should start from
the point of view of what the Syrian working class is experiencing. Here's
his response:

Don't agree. We have to look at it from the point of view of the US WC
which is rife with the chauvinist, nationalist and racist justifications
that have been given for continued US presence in the ME and everywhere
else on the globe.

Read article by Michael K.. There is no position in it except for a
backhanded justification for maintaining a US presence there to defend
Kurds, topple a dictator (Assad) and fight Islamic fascism (ISIS). Its
pro-imperialist, anti-imperialism which is all I hear from the left.

Here is what I stand for. A defeat of the US army in Syria or anywhere else
it is located on the globe. The best way to be an internationalist in the
US is to call for the removal of ALL US forces everywhere on the globe and
our goal as revolutionaries is for our soldiers to come home and turn their
guns on their rulers who sent them abroad for the interest of Capitol. I
support a removal of troops in Syria (as I support the removal of ALL our
troops everywhere) but recognize the this was NOT accomplished by the
anti-war movement which collapses entirely behind the Dems and the Obama
regime once he took power and has to recovered since.

My reply:
I wasn't going to reply because my experience is that discussions are
fruitless with those who use the same method as you do, (I say that because
your method is absolutely rampant on the left).
If you recall, the discussion started over a dispute not over our
"position" but over actual facts, over the actual history and actual
situation in Syria. I told you that I'd send you some articles to show that
you had the facts wrong. You don't comment on that. Instead, you jump
immediately to your "position".
You have the facts wrong on what is happening and what has been happening
in Syria. And facts matter. That is the starting point of Marxism, as
opposed to idealism.
I'll note another thing: All three articles start with the situation in
Syria, what the Syrian masses have been experiencing. The Washington Post
article - which I take it you didn't read - is very graphic on that. It
shows very clearly that Assad's methods differ very little from fascism.
Again, your method - which as I say is rampant - shows a lack of concern
for that, a lack of concern for the torture which millions of Syrian people
are experiencing. Socialists will never build an international movement of
working class people with that attitude. I don't intend to reply any
further for the reason I explained.

And to think that his method is rampant on the left!

John Reimann
*“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black
Jacobins" by C. L. R. James
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook

More information about the Marxism mailing list