Once their bourgeois propaganda media empire fully loses every remnant of its monopoly on truth, for sure. It’ll be out of eventual fascist policy or the final strategy of status quo preservation. Its first phase will be taking shape in the form of regional algorithm auditing like Oracle is doing with Tiktok.
They just need a scapegoat in the form of a figurehead to avoid having to attribute any shortcomings to the system their entire ideology is centered around.
Neoliberals just need to cope through past counterrevolutionary glory, let them. Their lies-based order is already crumbling, and every sane person is sooner or later going to become disillusioned by the ideology they spent trillions across decades propping up.
China’s great firewall is one of the greatest things to ever happen in the digital era, knowing how Western soft-power and imperialist surveillance are borderless now.
Greece has become a neoliberal nightmare surpassing previous milestones…
I don’t follow all this breadtube content or whatever people call it, and I don’t know that much about him, but I believe he functions as a pipeline for leftist ideas? A source of information or entertainment(?) for more nascent leftists, e.g. liberals who have been driven to gain consciousness as of late.
Europe is a laughing stock
Your thoughts?
Not related to Marxism… But this is literally what my partner and I are sort of doing right now… Basically. I did not know that there was a term for this, I suddenly feel so relieved and less ashamed.
“Syrian and Iraqi” interpretations would really just refer to how the Ba’ath party evolved in these countries, and their praxis. In Syria, it was more a matter of pragmatic state survival vs the more militaristic pan-Arabism as seen in Iraq under Saddam, for example. Pan-Arabism is simply a pillar of the ideology, that “Arabs are one nation”, in opposition to colonialism - but of course, in this case, it ignores the class antagonisms between e.g. a sheikh and an Egyptian peasant. Pan-Arabism is not unique to Ba’athism, though, given that ML movements like the Popular Fronts (…for the Liberation of Palestine, Oman, Yemen, etc) existed, which were also pan-Arabist but instead aimed for dictatorships of the proletariat instead of an “Arab” national bourgeoisie, though still rooted in national liberation.
My take is that Ba’athism is to West Asia what the Xinhai revolution was to China, or what Napoleon was to Europe, but from a colonial material base - the end goal still being to cement a national bourgeois capitalist rule in the region, and ensure sovereign development, even if under a bourgeois state. The FLN in Algeria (national liberation front), achieved something similar. Kicked out France and cemented the rule of a national bourgeoisie instead of a would-be comprador bourgeoisie (unlike Morocco and Tunisia, ruled by compradors which function as middle-managers for Western capital), and operated a similar state capitalist-like economy initially with social housing programs and collectivization too.
As for books on Ba’athism, I have personally only read Michal Aflaq’s own works a while back. I would start with فِي سَبِيلِ البعث (Fi Sabil alBaʿth) which in short outlines its fundamental principles.
Also, worth pointing out that Nasserism and Ba’athism were seperate schools of thought, both bourgeois nationalist, with Nasserism being far more dominant during its inception in the 50s and early 60s, thanks to the success of the Free Officers in 1952. Nasserism was more about the praxis that unfolded, giving way to theory, compared to Ba’athism, if that makes sense. I’m going to give you lots of first-hand sources here, but check out Nasser’s The Philosophy of the Revolution.
Also, Gaddafi is unlike any other pan-Arab figure. Initially a Pan-Arabist inspired by Nasserism, even his own revolutionary movement which ousted Idris in 1969 was named the “Free Officers” in honour of Nasser. Later, he proposed his own theory (Third Universal Theory), which was socialist first and foremost, birthing the Jamahiriya that replaced the Libyan Republic in 1977. It adapted Libyan material conditions and traditions within a socialist framework. The Jamahiriya, an actual socialist state as a result, abolished private property and even the party structure for direct democracy through local people’s congresses and committees across the country which would answer to central congresses and committees through delegations.
If you listen to Gadaffi’s speeches over time, particularly after the Gulf war, you will notice a pivot away from pan-Arabism towards pan-Africanism due to the prevailing bourgeois nature of pan-Arabism. Libya as a country on the African continent also meant its material interests were tied to pan-African liberation more than a utopian “Arab” nation. This about sums up how disillusioned he had become with pan-Arabism later on, and this a classic pan-African speech of his. Not only that, but he also oversaw the founding of the African Union following the Sirte declaration in 1999, and became its first chairman.
By far most mainstream publications on the Libyan Jamahiriya are all Western propaganda and NATO apologia garbage full of lies meant to smear it and justify its fate as a target of Western imperialism - both from Libyan compradors parrotting Western lies, and of course from Western pundits and academia. The level that the Jamahiriya is propagandized and smeared by the West pretty much matches the DPRK. Some supposedly good books do exist in English (like Lycett A. & Blundy D. “Qaddafi and the Libyan revolution”) about the Jamahiriya but I have yet to read them, so I can’t form an opinion on them.
If you are interested in understating the context surrounding 2011 and its aftermath, there is a book by Vijay Prashad (a Marxist, same guy who wrote “Darker Nations”) called “Arab Spring, Libyan Winter”. It’s less about the Jamahiriya’s model itself and more about NATO’s destructive assault on the country, and the counterrevolutionaries in question who aided it.
Besides that, some of the best textual sources for understanding the Jamahiriya’s itself that I know of, besides the Green Book (which is a must read if you haven’t!) are Gadaffi’s own works - yes, it was not just the Green Book that he wrote, but several important publications that go overlooked. I could spend so much time delving into detail about all of these works he wrote, which most people are completely unaware of because they were never translated and are only available in Arabic. He wrote a book on postcolonial mentality (yes, you’re right to think about Frantz Fanon because it deals with a similar subject!), on Islam and socialism in combination (offers food for thought on countering “muh atheism” talking points), one based on an interview with medical students in 1973 underlining the necessity of revolution, compilations of speeches, and so many others - definitely read these, most of them are quite short too.
They span multiple decades, from the early post-revolutionary Libyan Republic (1969 - 1977), throughout the Jamahiriya’s history up until the 2000s. Furthermore, archives of government websites exist which still contain many intact political documents and decrees in detail.
Also, after these websites shut down following the 2011 counterrevolution, some of them alongside broad information on the Jamahiriya and Gaddafi were preserved by loyalist exiles. Here’s a site where you can learn about the Jamahiriya using more official sources, from its achievements, to Gaddafi’s life, to ideology. It’s very useful.
If you want to reach out to some people to hear first-hand accounts, I recommend this Facebook page, and its accompanying YouTube channel which uploads old archived TV broadcast content and music. And this channel contains many old Jamahiriya broadcasts (and others) that you can listen to.
Hopefully some of this helps to give an overview
It always sickened me that Western reactionaries sympathize so much with these veteran enforcers of empire, but don’t care in the slightest about all the victims they murdered and occupied.
Nice to hear your perspective and recent journey! The priority, in the end, is not dwelling on “losing” a “debate” with a smug lib, but learning more and more about why they’re wrong, from observing world or domestic societal affairs whose class characteristics can put into perspective moving forward, to simply reading theory.
There mere existence triggers me sometimes and their smugness makes my skin crawl.
Exactly what bourgeois media trains them to. Those acquaintances won’t be so smug anymore once their beloved Western “democracy” crumbles further, they’ll be faced with a choice. And you could impact that if they’re people you know well / are close to - even if it won’t magically make all libs becomes leftists, obviously.
That’s an interesting approach, efficient way to flip the script and shut down all the propaganda which is exactly meant to DISTRACT from what happens at home.
…and progressive politicians are shot down during takeoff
Indeed, which serves as material proof that achieving socialism within bourgeois electoralism (or “democracy” as it labels itself) is not sustainable because it does not overthrow the ruling class (bourgeoisie) in favor of a new one (proletariat), and instead leverages the tools of the existing ruling class. Makes you think of a certain Allende… Or those who simply sell out.
Yes we should never stop explaining, but people will only listen if the material conditions provide the incentive.
That’s why I said this:
applying theory to give succinct explanations to real-world phenomenons in the neoliberal world anyone would understand
If said material conditions were not present, this would be not only pointless but also nearly impossible. Especially because the contradictions are already sharpening in the West now.
A point I intentionally glossed over because it was largely meant to generalize and apply not only to Westerners, is the labour aristocracy and similar class dynamics. The portion of the working class still far from disillusioned, who have been bought off by working class concesssions from the bourgeoisie derived from imperialist superprofits.
Look at the pension situation in Europe, and France’s latest austerity measures, as an example. What happens is that most of them, once this affects them, are captured by reaction instead of revolution, the default under the imperialist capitalist superstructure. This is giving rise to a majority of fascist sympathies once the last liberal has been scratched, which you implied. The tiny organized left in the imperial core, where this happens, is a drop in the ocean as far as “reversing” this entire phenomenon is concerned.
…it is not in my opinion- not a good use of time to debate with reactionaries. Those that can be convinced will sooner be convinced by reality as they have been so far. Those that cannot be convinced will serve to make reality worse (which works in our favor) and ultimately be destroyed as a consequence.
This I won’t disagree with, because “debating” with them means to speak on their terms which should be avoided in favour of simply turning the script in your favor if you’re forced to be around them in a given situation. Secondly, the good side of this is absolutely that they will accelerate the utter exhaustion of every single attempt at “saving” and “reforming” capitalism until they eventually discover that there’s nothing to lose from the current system. Imperialist capitalism has leveraged world wars to “salvage” itself, though, which we shouldn’t forget.
He wasn’t. He was inspired by Nasser initially, but ultimately developed his own socialist theory in the 70s, called the Third Universal Theory (Green Book), which was the manifesto of the Jamahiriya, and he opposed capitalism. The Jamahiriya, which basically means a “government of the masses” was an actual socialist state which abolished private property, and proposed the end of the rule of one group over another. Gadaffi was originally highly pan-Arabist, but later on he pivoted towards pan-Africanism due to the material reality of pan-Arabism being dominated by a national bourgeois current. This made him an even bigger threat to the West than any pan-Arabist, knowing African resources sustain the West’s wealth.
You could call it a form of Arab secular bourgeois nationalism that is also very left-leaning despite really being state capitalist, and as a result not free from capitalism’s inherent contradictions. Not nationalism as in chauvinism (which is the case for Western nationalism), but nationalism as in national liberation. It believes in the nationalization of key industries and most of all sovereignty, emerging as an anti-imperialist / anti-colonial ideology in its core. Where it differs from de facto “socialism” is that it usually doesn’t advocate for the abolition of private property, hence the “state capitalist” factor. Nationalization of key industries, as mentioned, in a resource rich region, was the reason it was a threat to Western imperialism in the first place and the US had to destroy Ba’athist countries.
It was born due the fact that capitalism in West Asia and North Africa was not an organic development, like in most of the world. It was a colonial imposition as these regions, which had a wide array of different pre-capitalist modes of production, were forced to vanish on a large scale, meaning a significantly smaller national bourgeois class existed that was responsible for leading a sovereign movement.
With France extending a hand, we now know that interesting developments could take place. Both govt figureheads, Rajoelina and Ntsay, have now fled… Please, let this be another AES-like wave.
I’ve seen this tendency from the entire left-“leaning” “al-Assad bad!” crowd. Claiming to oppose imperialism yet serving its narrative.
The regional comprador agents have been shaking hands firmly with their friends in the Zionist entity and Washington today. This “prisoner exchange” and these colonial peace talks are a distraction that aim achieve nothing but to prolong a status quo until it’s no longer convenient. The real prisoners were always the Palestinians. To consider both sides “prisoners” on equal terms is a joke. We must never let this slide and always keep our eyes on occupied Palestine. Never stop talking about it, never stop protesting. Palestine forever.
My paternal family is from El Guettar, I’m in hahaha
Whatever a fascist says out loud, a liberal thinks deep within. They can and will attribute phenomena like poverty and violence to the genetics and “culture” of the perceived “inferiors” (non-Western residents). This is just the fascist pipeline encroaching their facade in real time, and it seems to be skyrocketing in the EU core as a whole (Nordics, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany, etc). Checks out with their history of blind class collaborationism alongside being fascism’s left front, now facing the brutal material reality of late stage capitalism.