Where are you on the political spectrum?

[jess]

Is this Rojava in Syria? (just looked it up).

Kind of hard to imagine anything but auth right existing in the middle east (maybe Qatar is an exception?)

It is hard to imagine, but it exists there.

[jess]

How someone can honestly believe that the most heavily regulated and restricted market can coexist with the most complete personal freedom is beyond me.

an economy where businesses are predominately worker co-operatives, and political organisation based on the same principles of grassroots democracy modelled after Rojava.

[JBS]

an economy where businesses are predominately worker co-operatives, and political organisation based on the same principles of grassroots democracy modelled after Rojava.

I'd submit that "libertarian socialist" is an oxymoron, but more importantly that you might want to use the term communalist instead of communist.  In communism, all economic power is in the hands of the central state.

[Christo]

Though consequently conservative in matters of morale* & culture, the system thinks otherwise: 

*) You would call it morality, yet I hate the word an prefer to call the very same thing "morale" for *my* reasons.

[jess]

I'd submit that "libertarian socialist" is an oxymoron, but more importantly that you might want to use the term communalist instead of communist.  In communism, all economic power is in the hands of the central state.

No communism doesn't have to have economic power in the hands of a central state.

[jess]

Not entirely sure what the deal is with people having an issue around certain languages and terminologies used. There are grounds to call a society modelled on Rojava 'communist' with an economic system based around addressing Marxist analysis of capitalism.

[JBS]

Not entirely sure what the deal is with people having an issue around certain languages and terminologies used. There are grounds to call a society modelled on Rojava 'communist' with an economic system based around addressing Marxist analysis of capitalism.

Perhaps the term is less loaded for your age group than mine. But when I was about your age, the gulags were in operation with Natan (Anatol) Sharansky one of the most famous political prisoners in the world, China was just beginning to recover from the Cultural Revolution, and since I live in Florida this was local news for me
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift

So, no, Rojava is not Communist.

[Mirror Image]

Here's what I scored:

[amw]

as an "authoritarian leftist" who approves of gulags and all that, I think one should be skeptical of the PYD less due to its system of decentralized communalism and more due to the fact that it is a United States proxy whose primary purpose in the region is to prevent Syria from reunifying and posing a threat to American interests in the Middle East. Israel also had a decentralized commune system but definitely wasn't socialist by any stretch of the imagination. Socialism without internationalism, socialism that is limited to a dominant ethnic group or that sides with the empire against the oppressed, is just woke fascism. And regardless of the views of the rank and file members of PYD cadres (which I have heard often do not reflect those of the leadership) the leadership has remained consistently and firmly attached to the boot of American fascism.

For working anarchist movements that aren't backed by the CIA the best example out there is the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) in Chiapas, Mexico & surrounding areas, and there are also fairly strong ideological links between anarchist and Maoist "people's wars" such as those continuing to be waged in the Philippines, India and Sri Lanka among others.

As far as Middle Eastern politics goes almost all actual left-wing parties were wiped out during the Cold War; of those that remain the PFLP probably has the best line but it's still a complete mess in terms of actual power base. And Hezbollah is not quite on the left (although in the Lebanese political context, which is well to the right of the American one, it's a social democratic party, Nasrallah being the rough equivalent of their Bernie Sanders) but remains probably the most effective anti-imperialist actor in the region. The modern political spectrum there isn't the left/right libertarian/authoritarian axes from this particular political compass test; the two axes would be religious/secular and imperialist/resistance.

[JBS]

Here's what I scored:

I thought you'd be more libertarian.

Of course the questions are rather 2000ish and need to be updated.

[JBS]

as an "authoritarian leftist" who approves of gulags and all that, I think one should be skeptical of the PYD less due to its system of decentralized communalism and more due to the fact that it is a United States proxy whose primary purpose in the region is to prevent Syria from reunifying and posing a threat to American interests in the Middle East. Israel also had a decentralized commune system but definitely wasn't socialist by any stretch of the imagination. Socialism without internationalism, socialism that is limited to a dominant ethnic group or that sides with the empire against the oppressed, is just woke fascism. And regardless of the views of the rank and file members of PYD cadres (which I have heard often do not reflect those of the leadership) the leadership has remained consistently and firmly attached to the boot of American fascism.

For working anarchist movements that aren't backed by the CIA the best example out there is the Zapatista Army of National
Liberation (EZLN) in Chiapas, Mexico & surrounding areas, and there are also fairly strong ideological links between anarchist and Maoist "people's wars" such as those continuing to be waged in the Philippines, India and Sri Lanka among others.

As far as Middle Eastern politics goes almost all actual left-wing parties were wiped out during the Cold War; of those that remain the PFLP probably has the best line but it's still a complete mess in terms of actual power base. And Hezbollah is not quite on the left (although in the Lebanese political context, which is well to the right of the American one, it's a social democratic party, Nasrallah being the rough equivalent of their Bernie Sanders) but remains probably the most effective anti-imperialist actor in the region. The modern political spectrum there isn't the left/right libertarian/authoritarian axes from this particular political compass test; the two axes would be religious/secular and imperialist/resistance.

I'll make allowances for the fact that you are the only real Leftist in GMG.
But no...
Israel started out as a committed social democracy, but slowly abandoned it because it discovered socialism as an economic system didn't work very well. Until Begin became premier it was probably more socialist than any country in Europe. And Begin became premier in large part because of the failures of socialism. [If you say Israel is now borderline fascistic, I might agree, but because of its treatment of non Orthodox Jews, not because of its treatment of Palestinian terrorism.]

I will assume you are familiar with the idea that fascism, since it assumes state control of the economy in the name of the Nation or thr People, is really just another form of Socialism/Communism.

So I will just leave this thought dangling: isn't Hezbollah just another agent of Iranian imperialism?

[Florestan]

Here's what I scored:

And here's my score:

Looks we're quite similar in political outlook. 

[Mirror Image]

I thought you'd be more libertarian.

Of course the questions are rather 2000ish and need to be updated.

Yeah, I don't really know what to say. I tried to answer the questions truthfully.

[Florestan]

I'll make allowances for the fact that you are the only real Leftist in GMG.

I'll make allowance for the fact that she's either clueless or trolling.

I will assume you are familiar with the idea that fascism, since it assumes state control of the economy in the name of the Nation or thr People, is really just another form of Socialism/Communism.

Actually Fascism --- a specifically and exclusively Italian thing, not to be confused with Nazism --- was less totalitarian than Communism.

So I will just leave this thought dangling: isn't Hezbollah just another agent of Iranian imperialism?

Nah, imperialism is by definition a Western thing. Iran is just a formerly oppressed nation which liberated themselves and now are disinterestedly helping other people in their liberation struggle. Heck, read some Lenin and you'll see for yourself. 

[amw]

Israel started out as a committed social democracy, but slowly abandoned it because it discovered socialism as an economic system didn't work very well. Until Begin became premier it was probably more socialist than any country in Europe. And Begin became premier in large part because of the failures of socialism. [If you say Israel is now borderline fascistic, I might agree, but because of its treatment of non Orthodox Jews, not because of its treatment of Palestinian terrorism.]

I will assume you are familiar with the idea that fascism, since it assumes state control of the economy in the name of the Nation or thr People, is really just another form of Socialism/Communism.

So I will just leave this thought dangling: isn't Hezbollah just another agent of Iranian imperialism?

I think you're conflating social democracy, socialism and fascism—socialism means the working class owns the means of production, not just any scenario with a strong central state. States are not neutral in the class war; they exist to further the interests of one class or another. In any case, since the Israeli state from its inception ruled over a disenfranchised population of Palestinian Arabs (who were under military occupation from 1948-1956 and then had second-class citizen status enshrined into law from that point on, as well as the military occupation of the West Bank, Golan Heights and Gaza from 1967) its social democratic structures and norms were always subordinate to the fundamental ideology of völkisch nationalism that characterises most settler colonies in their early stages, and therefore could be abandoned whenever it was politically convenient to do so. The main purpose of social democracy is to provide a financial incentive for the national working class to continue to support the national bourgeoisie, and from the Begin era onwards the national (i.e. Israeli Jewish) working class was sufficiently well indoctrinated as to make social democracy unnecessary to gain their loyalty.

Probably the simplest way to put it is that a socialist state serves the interests of the working classes; a fascist state serves the interests of the national bourgeoisie; a capitalist state serves the interests of the international bourgeoisie. I know many socialists would disagree on this point though, with many of them not believing fascism exists at all as a separate ideology.

As for "Iranian imperialism" I don't think it has been much of a factor since the fall of the Safavids. There is currently only one empire and it is so destructive and violent that any serious opposition to it must be characterised as resistance rather than a contest of great powers. The only country that could eventually become an empire capable of rivalling the American one is the People's Republic of China, and if that day comes, despite China's many flaws I think I'd rather be on its side than the USA's.

[Florestan]

Not entirely sure what the deal is with people having an issue around certain languages and terminologies used.

Terminology and its use make the difference between reality and fantasy. Totalitarian communism is reality; anarcho-communism is fantasy.

But be it as it may, if Rojava is the ideal have you ever considered emmigrating there?

[Christo]

Iran is just a formerly oppressed nation which liberated themselves and now are disinterestedly helping other people in their liberation struggle.

Indeed, partly true. The 1955 coup d'état was CIA-led: "UK prime minister Winston Churchill and the Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government, though the preceding Truman administration had opposed a coup, fearing the precedent that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involvement would set." The 1979 Iranian Revolution primarily an attempt to overthrow this brutal dictatorship, just like the Egyptians tried to do in 2012-13 (but failed, the Sissi dictatorship again built with American support). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Things are often two-sided, there's more evil than Leninism, though the evil of Leninism is hard to surpass (agreed). 

[Florestan]

The 1979 Iranian Revolution primarily an attempt to overthrow this brutal dictatorship

Only to replace it with an equally if not more brutal one.

[Christo]

Only to replace it with an equally if not more brutal one.

Almost, but not completely, and as always the outcome of massive manipulation. Khomeiny in his Paris exile not the religious man people hoped he was, but a shrewd politician who soon got rid of all the democrats around him, perhaps remember those early two years with a few genuinely democratic & wise political leaders? All gone after two years, Khomeiny turning into the tyrant he always was, but succeeded to hide, especially in western eyes, he was long supported by European politicians. )

[Florestan]

Almost, but not completely, and as always the outcome of massive manipulation. Khomeiny in his Paris exile not the religious man people hoped he was, but a shrewd politician who soon got rid of all the democrats around him, perhaps remember those early two years with a few genuinely democratic & wise political leaders? All gone after two years, Khomeiny turning into the tyrant he always was, but succeeded to hide, especially in western eyes, he was long supported by European politicians. )

Yeah,  the perpetual Western naivete in thinking that the avowed enemy of a dictatorship must necessarily be a democrat and should be supported is staggering and time and again backfired against them, especially in the Middle East and especially in Iran which turned from one of their staunchest allies into one of their bitterest foe.

If the CIA prepares a new coup to overthrow the current theocratic regime all Westerners should this time back it up unreservedly, but I doubt it. There will always be some Justin Trudeau out there whose quarrel is rather with the US than with Iran.