285
submitted 1 day ago by Wudi@feddit.uk to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago

You literally changed the noun here

The nation is its people. You don't get to wiggle out by saying "I just hate the government, not the popular movement that formed the government". Iran isn't being occupied from the top by an invading army. It's a super-majority Muslim nation that is governed by a popular clergy and democratically elected bureaucracy.

You focus on the “anti-imperialist” side of the ledger, whereas I asked about all MENA countries.

The pattern of imperial conquest, ethnic divide-and-conquer governance, and villainization of popular politics isn't unique to occupied MENA states. What sets Iran apart from Saudi Arabia or Turkiye or Jordan or Egypt is its unaligned status.

What Americans claim they hate about Iran and Yemen but can't be bothered to care about in Dubai or Kuwait or Azerbaijan is a series of tropes drummed into them by Christian Fascist national media.

Why are the western allies also autocracies? Qatar, UAE, Saudi, Jordan. Who do they also suppress? Right: the Left, the socialists, the labour movement, the radical youth.

Iran isn't a leftist or socialist state in any meaningful sense. They're as draconianly anti-socialist as any Saudi government. That's a big reason why you have crowds of Iranian civilians gulled into supporting a nepo-baby from Maryland as their US-sponsored savior (which the US secretly backed a return of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a western proxy). This is not a conflict between Western liberals and Eastern socialists. It's a fight between Western Christian Imperialists and Eastern Muslim Nationalists.

That question is a gotcha

Thought-Terminating liberalism at its finest.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca -2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

You accuse me of ...liberalism when you have swallowed hook line and sinker the romantic nationalism that is the foundation liberalism. I mean this is just out in the open:

The nation is its people. You don’t get to wiggle out by saying “I just hate the government, not the popular movement that formed the government”. Iran isn’t being occupied from the top by an invading army. It’s a super-majority Muslim nation that is governed by a popular clergy and democratically elected bureaucracy.

Ein volk, eh?

There is basically zero marxism in your diatribe. The only thing that has a "red" tint in what you're saying is the word "imperialism", but your framework differs extremely little from Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. You use left-wing vocabulary, but the structure of your analysis is nationalist and civilizational rather than class-based.

I don't see any point in continuing this discussion, we're using fundamentally different paradigms and value systems here.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

you have swallowed hook line and sinker the romantic nationalism that is the foundation liberalism

???

Ein volk, eh?

Scaring yourself by reading words in German will put you out of whole branches of modern political philosophy.

I don’t see any point in continuing this discussion

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Lol, just to clarify, because your American(?) mind probably cannot understand what I wrote, and you respond with "???":

You think I'm calling you a liberal because you support human rights and NGOs or whatever. I'm calling you a liberal because your basic unit of analysis is the nation. "The nation is its people" is not a Marxist statement. It's a liberal-nationalist one, romantic nationalist: Mazzini, Fichte, Michelet, Paparigopoulos. Marxists don't accept the "nation" as the unit of analysis. We ask where are the class antagonisms, political conflicts, and repressed social movements. Where did this go when you collapsed them all into "the nation"? In the "anti-imperialism" dualism, the clash of civilizations. Huntington, nationalism, clash of civilizations and romanticism. That's the paradigmatic disagreement.

Bye.

this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
285 points (89.9% liked)

World News

56378 readers
2257 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS