Pasted from /r/rojava

In response to this:

https://www.troploin.fr/node/83

A banal orthodox Marxist analysis of Rojava with gems like "class
replaced by gender… the PKK has doubtlessly swapped Marxism for
postmodernism."

It starts with a criticism of self defense because they are concerned
with arming society not industrial action. He obviously hasn't read much
about Rojava's economy because he doesn't know there were no factories
(besides grain silos) in Rojava - only peasants before the revolution.

So that means revolution must be impossible, or that the administration
should forget their ecology project and just drive full speed into full
scale Stalin-style industrialization. Despite that Rojava is under
embargo and unable to obtain raw materials.

The author then criticizes the PKK's multi-ethnic project because in
Marxist dogma, ethnicities do not exist. Only the proletariat modern
man... and everyone else.

With bitterness, the author notes that the PKK dropped communist
philosophy and adopted anarchist philosophy instead:

> Making a virtue of necessity, the PKK has ditched “class” and “party”
> references, and promotes self-management, co-operation, communalism
> (not communism), anti-productivism and gender.

Then he strangely criticizes them for working within the framework of
the Syrian state that they are locked into, and following Bookchin's
programme of confederal succession. The author seems to expect the tiny
region of 3 million people to abandon a sensible staged plan for
autonomy in favor of a global proletariat uprising.

Then there's a criticism of the social contact. At last a valid point.
But sadly continues to harp on about its lack of references to class
struggle.

He also criticizes the conscription which is in Rojava also contentious.
The draft is not for the normal army, only a force which stays in the
cities as a reserve. It was created after families were getting angry
that their children were dying in the war, while neighbors who support
Barzani have children who don't work or do anything (just waiting to
leave to Europe). Anyway it's a bit of a low attack to make given
they're in a war, under embargo with exceptional pressures and
destruction around them.

> Like all seasoned professionals, PKK and PYD master the art of
> projecting the positive image of themselves that outsiders wish to
> see. It is also only natural that the locals should try to impress
> visitors by stressing the most successful side of their movement.

Many of us have been here 2 years and speak fluent Kurdish. There is
indeed an assembly system based on local councils. In some regions /
neighborhoods working better than others. But it's there, and the author
jumps from questioning the substance of their meetings, to then claiming
that direct democracy cannot challenge state power - a bold claim with
no historical basis (strange for a Marxist rationalist).

This probably says everything about the article:

> if a major social upheaval is under way in Rojava, when and how was
> the ruling class overthrown?

Or even better:

> Zaher Bader visited Cizire in May 2014 and believes a revolution is
> taking place in Syrian Kurdistan:
>
> “Before we left the region we decided to speak to shopkeepers,
> businessmen, stall holders and people on the market to hear their
> views which were very important to us. Everyone seemed to have a very
> positive view and opinion of the DSA and Tev-Dam. They were happy
> about the existence of peace, security and freedom and running their
> own business without any interference from any parties or sides.”
>
> At last we’ve found a revolution that does not scare the bourgeois.

He even gets the name of Zaher Baher wrong.

Yes, Rojava is a revolution that is aimed at liberation of people from
all hierarchies not only class hierarchy. Yes, they are postmodernists
obsessed with ecology and mother-goddess mythologies. I have been told
many times: we are not for poor or rich, for Arab or Kurd, for women or
men, we are for all people.

He says that women fighters is not a sign of a feminist revolution or a
women's liberation struggle. How about the women who are in the
administration, strong independent women in positions of responsibility
in a society where before women couldn't even leave the house? The
effect of seeing women fighting against IS has a massive effect on the
psychology of women who are seeing that women can be capable of things
besides house-work, and the respect those women earn from the men for
all women everywhere because they're fighting.

The administration is also doing a great work to get women involved in
governance, education projects, forming women's organizations to
intervene in domestic abuse and rape, forming women's self defense
committees, training and arming them. It's a massive work in such a
short space of time in the most patriarchal culture in the world.

It really does feel like the author's own sexism and racism here is what
is shining through when he says:

> Why is the woman in arms so easily taken as a symbol of liberation,
> even to the point of disregarding what she is fighting for?
>
> If the picture of a woman with a rocket-launcher can make front-page
> news in Western tabloids and in radical mags, it is because she
> disrupts the (much-declined) myth of the female inborn peaceful or
> passive nature.
>
> How Western-centric this all is.

Has he even bothered to read the dozens of interviews or watch the video
interviews with YPJ fighters where they're talking about their
philosophy and why they fight? It's just pure judgement and prejudice
here. According to him, these are dumb women lacking agency. Pawns in a
bigger game. He doesn't think that they feel a part of history and
realize they are doing a great thing for their society.

More proof of how out of touch Marxist orthodoxy is with the modern world:

> It is small wonder some individuals and groups always prone to
> denouncing the military-industrial complex should now call for arming
> Rojava against ISIS

When you say you don't support arming Rojava with heavy weapons, that is
also in effect saying you oppose Rojava being armed with heavy weapons.
So is this author siding with ISIS or what? Because every faction in
this war is being armed by various powers. You cannot ignore this
reality of living in a world with states and super-powers.

If the US wants to side with a libertarian project because IS is a
bigger threat then we should support that, not lobby the US to withdraw
its support from Rojava. Do we prefer a militarized Turkey backed by the
US going to smash Rojava? (This seems to be what Hillary Clinton supports)

Author:

> For anarchists, though, the State is identified first and foremost
> with imposed vertical authority. Once these visible forms of
> constraint recede, it is enough for some anarchists (not all of them,
> far from it) to conclude that the end of the State has come or is
> under way. A genuine communal “horizontal” police force, for
> instance, will not be regarded as police any more.

Yes, this is what anarchists believe. I don't see a problem.

> The libertarian is defenceless against what looks so much like his
> programme: as he has always opposed the State and supported
> democracy, democratic confederalism and social self-determination
> have a lot to please him. The anarchist ideal is indeed to replace
> the State by thousands of federated communes and work collectives.

More Marxist garbage:

> the PKK insists it does not want to seize power, but to contribute to
> a system where power will be dispersed so that everybody shares power

He then complains that Rojava is probably going to emerge out of the
balance of a nexus of bigger powers. This is how nearly all new
political entities emerge in history. Just look at Yugoslavia which
thrived by playing off the Soviet Union and the US against each other
competing for their attention. In the Syrian civil war it is Rojava that
has gained the most through their diplomacy- every other faction has lost.

The author concludes that the PKK is vertically controlling Rojava under
their supervision. Anyone see the news title today?

"PKK foreign relations head: We objected to the Rojava-North Syria
federation’s announcement text. They did not think about the rest of
Syria. The plan should have been explained prior to the announcement. We
prefer the use of North Syria Federation and call for the removal of
Rojava from the name."
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2016/07/turkey-coup-pkk-kurds-rojava-us-intervention.html