SpookyGenderCommunist [they/them]

Mao ZeDong x Nikita Khrushchev Friends to Enemies to Lovers Erotic Fan Fiction

  • 6 Posts
  • 180 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle



  • Ok, yeah this makes sense. This footnote is backing up the “suez crisis formed the basis for a growing US-Israel Alliance” claim, by pointing to a separate historian who’s making the same claim (Since of multiple people came to the same conclusion then you can argue that the evidence points to that interpretation of the facts of the case).

    And the explanation given by the other author gives two reasons:

    • Ihe US didn’t want to invade, in order to paint itself as more restrained than the Soviets, re: the Invasion of Hungary.

    • Israel could serve as an imperial outpost, and thus a check on Arab leftists, like Nasser, in lieu of an invasion.



  • This is a pretty standard summary of the Suez crisis tbh. Geopolitics is weird, and sometimes leftists make major L’s, like the USSR supporting the creation of Isreal, based on a misapplication of the national question. The world isn’t a simple “good guy/bad guy” Marvel movie-ass binary.

    If you want a really fucked up example, look at the Biafra War

    Given that this is just general background on the Suez crisis, that kind of “general knowledge” typically don’t require citations, but making the claim “The suez crisis formed the basis for a growing US-Isreal Alliance” is a claim that needs backed up. Hence why that’s the sentence that gets a footnote.

    So, if I’m writing a book about the world system of the late 18th century, and I say “In 1776, The American colonists declared independence” give some background information, and then proceed to make a claim about the impact that independence had on, global trade. Then I need to back up the claim about global trade.

    The background on The american war of independence is just that, background, and doesn’t require citations. Because there’s a presumed general knowledge that if you’re reading this book, you won’t need that explained to you.

    Out of curiosity, what’s the footnote in question? What does it say?














  • I seem to recall that the YPG/SDF even said that they felt the global left, and the western left in particular, failed them. And that failure of international support and solidarity is what forced them into a position of having to work with the US to fight ISIS.

    So now they’re in a situation where NATO is actively fucking them over. Turkey has parked itself on the border, and regularly lobs bombs at civilian targets, and the US looks the other way, while it swallows up Syrian oil. They don’t want the US there, and openly state as much. But their presence is the only thing keeping Turkey, a fellow NATO power, from invading even more.

    And what’s the Western Left’s response to this obvious imperial plunder? For people who do nothing but post on the bear website, to complain about a lack of ideological purity from a global south leftist movement that’s been forced to choose between being plundered by the US, genocided by ISIS, or invaded and occupied by Turkey.

    I’ve even seen people (more on Reddit then here, tbf) smugly saying that civilian deaths are ok, because “that’s what they get for siding with the US”, as though that justifies NATO war crimes, or that the people of the region even wanted that in the first place.

    It’s almost like the world is more complicated than a Marvel movie.