Color Revolutions may still sound like democratization and progress to many people.
The "progress" in Libya possibly hasn't sunk in to the consciousness of many people. That's the clearest example. Egypt is another pretty good one. Syria and Ukraine are subject to different interpretations for sheeple and anti-wars, and in this short comment I can hardly get started on that.
I see the same fundamental moral failure in the Color Revolution concept, as in Alinsky's path to "people" power. They are both orthogonal to any deep understanding of social justice; they could equally well be applied by fascists as communists. They eschew commitments to "isms."
Actually, it looks to me like both techniques are actually more amenable to fascism than anything else. They echo the rise of fascist states, such as that of Louis Bonaparte, in which violence provokes the state in an escalating spiral of violence. Where self-described Communists have won so far, they have won through democratic opportunism (Russia), or extended people's warfare (China and Cuba), and NOT through Alinsky's methods--which don't require the same widespread degree of personal commitment as people's warfare or majoritarian democracy.
In the Antiwar sector, Color Revolution is now a slur applied to largely ethno-fascist movements, like the one that "liberated" Ukraine, and the western financed jihad in Syria, Libya, and Egypt.
Speaking of ethno-fascism, the current homeland of ethno-facism, Israel, seems to have a curious relationship to countries where Color Revolutions have broken out. They are almost all "Enemies of Israel."
Which brings me to China. There is no question that Israel and China have been developing closer relationships since 1992. (It seems Israel is hedging it's bets about the next world empire.)
At the same time, there have been some antagonisms, more than with Russia and the USA in the current moment. For example, in 2014, China was one of 29 nations to vote in favor of an investigation of Operation Protective Edge. China is also friendly to Iran, the #1 "Enemy" of Israel. From an Israeli perspective, they could use some discipline.
We might go back to the creation of the State of Israel, and before Israel the more widely recognized ehno-fascist state of Nazi Germany. Both featured extremist violence front and center, but not so much the mass protest elements of Color Revolution. However, the violence was used in the same way--to discredit the previous secular authorities who couldn't efficiently deal with it.
The "progress" in Libya possibly hasn't sunk in to the consciousness of many people. That's the clearest example. Egypt is another pretty good one. Syria and Ukraine are subject to different interpretations for sheeple and anti-wars, and in this short comment I can hardly get started on that.
I see the same fundamental moral failure in the Color Revolution concept, as in Alinsky's path to "people" power. They are both orthogonal to any deep understanding of social justice; they could equally well be applied by fascists as communists. They eschew commitments to "isms."
Actually, it looks to me like both techniques are actually more amenable to fascism than anything else. They echo the rise of fascist states, such as that of Louis Bonaparte, in which violence provokes the state in an escalating spiral of violence. Where self-described Communists have won so far, they have won through democratic opportunism (Russia), or extended people's warfare (China and Cuba), and NOT through Alinsky's methods--which don't require the same widespread degree of personal commitment as people's warfare or majoritarian democracy.
In the Antiwar sector, Color Revolution is now a slur applied to largely ethno-fascist movements, like the one that "liberated" Ukraine, and the western financed jihad in Syria, Libya, and Egypt.
Speaking of ethno-fascism, the current homeland of ethno-facism, Israel, seems to have a curious relationship to countries where Color Revolutions have broken out. They are almost all "Enemies of Israel."
Which brings me to China. There is no question that Israel and China have been developing closer relationships since 1992. (It seems Israel is hedging it's bets about the next world empire.)
At the same time, there have been some antagonisms, more than with Russia and the USA in the current moment. For example, in 2014, China was one of 29 nations to vote in favor of an investigation of Operation Protective Edge. China is also friendly to Iran, the #1 "Enemy" of Israel. From an Israeli perspective, they could use some discipline.
We might go back to the creation of the State of Israel, and before Israel the more widely recognized ehno-fascist state of Nazi Germany. Both featured extremist violence front and center, but not so much the mass protest elements of Color Revolution. However, the violence was used in the same way--to discredit the previous secular authorities who couldn't efficiently deal with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment