von seepferd
Kyrylo Tkachenko schreibt über deutsche (und nicht nur deutsche) linke (und nicht nur linke) Liebe zu allen möglichen Despotien, Diktaturen und Autokratien der Welt. Einigen mögen vielleicht sowohl die Thesen als auch der Autor bekannt vorkommen, dem Rest stellen wir sie gerne vor:
The most significant recent developments in the western radical Left is the ‘geopolitical turn’. It declares itself in taking sides with any regime perceived as anti-western, and especially with Russia. This phenomenon is hardly new, but it has taken on new proportions and even a clearer meaning since the annexation of Crimea.
One immediate explanation is a kind of obsolete ‘leftist’ reflex based on the confusion of the former Soviet Union with modern Russia. Although the confusion itself is not exclusively ‘leftist’ and still forms part of a broader western cultural heritage, this cannot be the whole story. Moreover, this reflex in itself is a kind of a symptom of some intrinsic features of the Left.
The remarkable feature of the geopolitical turn in the western Left is the degree of its overlapping with the agenda of the far-right. Its most obvious appearance is the whole set of unifying concepts of the enemy. Those are United States, NATO, European Union, ‘corrupted’ elites and so forth. Although there are notable exceptions both on the Left and on the Right, anti-Americanism and Euroscepticism became a predominant trend on the both sides. Particularly noteworthy is the general correlation between the degree of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism. The more anti-Americanism becomes the central part of the worldview, the clearer it shows its anti-Semitic connotations. As judged against the backdrop of the situation in Germany, this applies to the far Left at least as much as to the far Right. It is important not only to state their common enemies, but also to investigate the criteria used for their selection. I would argue that the bonding substance of this construct is anti-liberalism.
This is not solely about hatred of the United States. As we can judge by the German Left, even hardened anti-Americanists were able to change their stance as soon as the White House was overtaken by an outspoken anti-liberal. The fact that this could be justified by some ‘geopolitical’ considerations only attests that the new turn in the western Left is not about geopolitics at all.
The same applies to Russia. For the western Left the country was, under Yeltsin, not an inspiration. The true excitement was triggered first by Russia’s military adventures abroad, justified (and cheerfully accepted by the Left) as a part of the grand battle against western expansionism. The crucial thing is that, both in the case of Ukraine and Syria, Russia fought pro-democratic revolts aimed at bringing down dictatorship and defending civil liberties. It is no accident that the western Left was not moved by the Chechen war, although it was even more brutal than the both the war in Syria and Ukraine and could be somehow defended from the standpoint of international law (as far as Russia, still being an empire, at least acted within its internationally recognized boarders). We can be quite sure that if and when Russia becomes a normal, democratic and peaceful state it will also cease to be an inspiration for the international radical Left.
The ‘geopolitical nature’ of the sympathies and aversions of this new red-brown coalition is determined by the single factor of anti-liberalism. ‘Red-brown alliance’ is not a term which everyone will like. How legitimate it is? The alliance to which I refer is not limited to content-related overlaps, but has reached a degree of coordinated action. German leftists’ support of the rightwing detachments like Prizrak would be just one of many examples for such direct cooperation.
Das Ganze gibt es dann hier in voller Länge: Eurozine: How Right is the Left?
Wir haben schon Stimmen vernommen, die meinen, das sei eine merkwürdige Definition von „links“. Es tut uns leid, in den Zeiten, wo sich sogar die MLPD noch vorteilhaft gegen die DKP abhebt, haben wir für euch keine andere Linke. Die neuerliche (eigentlich: immer wiederkehrende) Bereitschaft, die Lügen der Hamas und Co zu streuen und voller Pathos von IDF erschossener Hamas-Kämpfer zu gedenken („70 Jahre nach der Nakba geht die ethnische Säuberung Palästinas weiter“, schreibt z.B. Klasse gegen Klasse auf FB am 15.5.), zeugt nur davon, dass man weder vom Staat noch von Kapital irgendwas versteht oder auch nur verstehen will. Schade nur, die diesjährige LL(L)-Demo in Berlin ist vorbei. Gerne würden wir den „GenossInnen“ empfehlen, nächstes Mal Pimmeleichel statt roter Nelken sich an die Kragen anzuheften.
Was bleibt dazu noch zu sagen? Kyrylo delievers and definitely nails it. Man ziehe sich dieses Video von einer neuerlichen Veranstaltung des in Wien ansässigen Suworow-Instituts rein:
Es ist einerseits erfreulich, wenn die Feinde endlich anfangen, Klartext zu reden. Andererseits wäre es nicht schlecht, wenn sie noch jemand so deutlich hören würde, außer ihnen selbst. Warum ist die Rechte „so“, kann man sich vielleicht denken. Warum ist die Linke „so“ und warum es sie immer wieder zur Rechten zieht, dazu später an einer anderen Stelle.
