Well, I would read less into your comment if it was clearer. I explained the concept of prefiguration with Rojava as an example and you brought up that they have the same interests as the USA. So what is the implication or relevance here? Are you saying they wouldn’t have made it without the USA, that the USA helped them build the structures before the revolution or during or after? Or that it’s a USA backed coup? Which is it? You can’t write obscure comments and whine for being misunderstood.
My implication was simply that they are allowed to exist because they happen to align with geopolitical US interests in the region, and otherwise would have likely disappeared.
You didn’t respond to my comments on the Machnovschina
So your comments had nothing to do with the topic I was talking about, yet you expect me to engage with every detail of your offtopic comments, I see.
If you are interested: Gelderloos argues in Worshiping Power (worth a read and you find it on theanarchistlibrary.org) that decentralized guerrilla tactics are very good at defending, while being bad at conquering. If this would be enough to withstand between two imperial powers is very doubtful. I never said that anarchist movements in the broader sense are stronger, I would say tho they are worth fighting for. But you are aware that the Soviet Union doesn’t exist anymore either, right? And other Bolshevik adjacent movements were crushed by the USA. The line of argument you are using against anarchism can be used by liberals against Marxism Leninism. If you want to join the winning team, it isn’t any kind of socialism.
Well, I would read less into your comment if it was clearer. I explained the concept of prefiguration with Rojava as an example and you brought up that they have the same interests as the USA. So what is the implication or relevance here? Are you saying they wouldn’t have made it without the USA, that the USA helped them build the structures before the revolution or during or after? Or that it’s a USA backed coup? Which is it? You can’t write obscure comments and whine for being misunderstood.
My implication was simply that they are allowed to exist because they happen to align with geopolitical US interests in the region, and otherwise would have likely disappeared.
You didn’t respond to my comments on the Machnovschina
So your comments had nothing to do with the topic I was talking about, yet you expect me to engage with every detail of your offtopic comments, I see.
If you are interested: Gelderloos argues in Worshiping Power (worth a read and you find it on theanarchistlibrary.org) that decentralized guerrilla tactics are very good at defending, while being bad at conquering. If this would be enough to withstand between two imperial powers is very doubtful. I never said that anarchist movements in the broader sense are stronger, I would say tho they are worth fighting for. But you are aware that the Soviet Union doesn’t exist anymore either, right? And other Bolshevik adjacent movements were crushed by the USA. The line of argument you are using against anarchism can be used by liberals against Marxism Leninism. If you want to join the winning team, it isn’t any kind of socialism.