A response to critics

A few people have criticized me lately for not looking “anarchist” enough in my blogging. This is a response to them. When I launched this blog, I did not intend it to focus on economic-political-philosophical aspects, or solely on leftist or anarchist movements. My analyses – though definitely impacted by my personal beliefs – are objective dissections of real events [in the Middle East, though occasionally going beyond it]. I do not feel obliged to provide a class reading (as an anarchist I am more concerned with the idea of statehood, authority, and power) of these events. In fact, such a reading would be extremely limited and not exactly accurate. The core of the struggle is power, questions of authority and freedom that go beyond a proletarian “revolution” and the ability of such a “revolution” to fix it, so to speak. I must take this opportunity to criticize those who think that they ought to find class struggle in everything. They twist and turn things to find an aspect that would give their class analysis some form of validity. Often, not finding it, they simply insert it. For example, there never was a (real or imagined) class awareness or class struggle in Lebanon, or in fact in Palestine (despite the presence of the Palestine Communist Party and its attraction of both Jews and Arabs), yet there are people who think a class analysis explains everything in the struggle that led to the establishment of the state of Israel. There are also those who think joint class struggle would eliminate power struggle, suffering, and oppression. This is outrageous. And it is yet another point on which I have continuously criticized Marx and Marxists.

To conclude this entry, I will post a number of links to posts I have made in the past on the topic of class struggle and leftism, hoping that it will satisfy, at least temporarily, those who are of the opinion that you can’t be leftist if you don’t find elements of leftism in everything:


6 responses to “A response to critics

  1. Anarchistian, I’m reading this with tired eyes but one thing is clear: you are a powerhouse of knowledge and heart, written beautifully. I’m going to re-read the posts you linked above when my brain’s functioning 100%. I only stumbled on your blog during the friendly neighbour’s peace-waging initiative, and I’m delighted to find that you address concerns pre-dating this most recent round of nation-battering. I’m interested in your views on March 14 vs March 8, knowing as I do many constituents of March 8 and more than a few leftists suffering identity crises, occasionally drunk on Fairouz and drawn to March 14 in between bouts of big picture lucidity and defence of March 8. A kind of existential Schizophrenia thriving on the misapprehension that there are only 2 options.

  2. Actually, Memo, I have criticized Lebanese leftists a lot on the March 8 / March 14 issue, and eventually ran out of patience and started ignoring them altogether. I always argued that they need not have taken any position with regards to the two. And while I support the military resistance of HezbAllah (for lack of other options; plus I would definitely not prefer the central government’s own armed forces, i.e. the army, even if it were capable of driving occupation forces, since my preference, if I have to choose, is always with the non-state actor), I do not support their political position on many issues.

  3. This is from an entry I wrote back in April of this year:

    The limitations of the system should be transcended rather than submitted to. The problem with Marxists, Leninists, Marxist-Leninists, communists, and other leftists in Lebanon is that they feel they need to take a position on March 8 and March 14. Most in fact feel the need to be pro-March 14, simply because it is the “patriotic” (or “more patriotic”) thing to do. I call this “the juggling act”. You simply cannot juggle patriotism and Marxism or patriotism and anarchism… It’s like jugging with one hand behind your back, with both objects being double-edged knives. Now if you can imagine that, you have imagined the future of the defeatist left.

  4. And this is a response to a leftist activist in Lebanon who defended political alliances with groups of “questionable” background (March 14 forces in particular) for the sake of furthering leftist objectives:

    I guess you can call me an idealist “who sit[s] on the side and watch[es]”, but it’s a matter of choice and principle, and it’s better than not sitting on the side and watching and instead engaging in the standard Lebanese discourse and battle of words, as well as inappropriate alliances.

    Those who argue for joining the system for its own sake are indeed opportunists. But those who argue for joining the system for the sake of the cause that they claim to represent are worse: they are defeatists. And defeatism is enemy #1 because it is the enemy within.

  5. This blog is interesting and informative.

    Your blog has >50,000 hits. That should say something.

    Thank you for visiting my blog. I hope you return.

  6. Renegade Eye,

    Just to clear the confusion – as there seems to be one – whatever happened on MFL’s’ blog between “me” and you (something about my blog??) was not my own doing, but rather someone who was impersonating me, I suppose.. Again I am not sure what happened, as the comments seem to have been removed (??).. Anyway, I enjoy reading your blog and hearing your perspective. To avoid any future confusion brought about by some people who need to get a life, from now on all my comments on MFL’s and your blog will be from a blogger username: anarchorevolutioniscoming.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s