Many leftists are extremely idealist and get swayed by Western opinion a lot. They dont support Hamas because Hamas are not the perfect MLs freedom fighters. This is childish and just gives ammunition to the liberals to discredit Hamas’ stance. This criticism of Hamas goes against the global decolonization cause. Every time a decolonial group fights against their oppressor, they are criticized even by leftists. Is this what Lenin referred to as left-com?

It sucks that people who one thought were comrades end up doing this. Like are we even on the same team or are you just a closeted liberal? It is crazy, unscientific and unmaterialistic to not consider Palestinian material conditions, and to not consider who they made their champions for this cause, but instead to apply your idealism to the situation.

  • cucumovirus@lemmygrad.ml
    121·
    10 months ago

    Because many of them don’t actually support Palestinian liberation, and are, as you suggest, still holding on to their liberalism even if they claim not to. Their support manifests only in an empty verbal declaration without any actual understanding.

    Take a look at this article which illustrates and analyzes the problem well. An excerpt:

    Some people understand being in favour of something as a kind of thought act: it happens in one fell swoop in the realm of intentions, and it can be verified by a simple declaration of support. It is enough for me to declare I’m in favour of, for example, abolishing the patriarchy, or capitalism, for these people to believe me. But what if I’m in favour of a general objective and at the same time opposed to every specific step needed to achieve it? Let us start by imagining how this contradiction might play out in the context of a simpler problem than patriarchy or capitalism: water is leaking through a hole in my roof. I am in favor of the overall goal of stopping the leak, but I insist on some strange rules. For instance, I decide that only supernatural beings can handle the problem. Or I forbid anyone from walking on the roof while fixing the leak. Or people may walk on my roof, but I demand that they refrain from using ladders or any other tool to get up there. Or they may use a ladder, but only after climbing onto the roof, never before. So long as I am imposing such conditions, what does it matter that I profess my desire to solve the problem? No matter how much I see myself as enemy number one of the leak, in practice I am actually in favour of keeping it around. Therefore, just saying that I’m in favour of a given objective is not enough. My declarations carry weight only when I support them with a thorough understanding of the steps needed to reach that objective and when I allow these steps to be executed in the necessary order.