So what if (to expand on that)… the Jedi leadership knew that Anakin, as a former slave and son of the people, was destined to lead the Jedi back to their real roots in some sort of mass anti-imperialist movement (think religion + anti-imperialism + planned economy, sort of like modern Iran). To keep that from happening, they got him involved with Amidala, who in addition to being a borderline predator like most libs, also preached “democracy” to him night and day. Amidala then, for her own political ends, maneuvered Anakin into a close relationship with her protege Palpatine, whom she had gotten elected chancellor. Of course Palpatine had his own agenda, and when the time was right, he got rid of both Padme and the Jedi, and installed a fascist government. Of course Padme, being a lib, had the nerve to act surprised and shocked at the situation she had helped create – “what’s this? Fascism again? Why does this keep happening? Oh the horror!” – and couldn’t understand why Anakin suddenly had it out for her. (In “Anakin, all I want is your love” we see the willingness of liberals to cozy up to “former” Nazis and other genocidal maniacs).
… And I just tried to make some kind of logical sense of the prequels. Man, that hurt my brain.
From my understanding, it goes back to the Iran-Iraq war, when the Soviet Union supplied weapons to Iraq. But the Iranian government has always had a complicated relationship with Marxism-Leninism. Marxist parties have been (often violently) surpressed, and the government officially condemns Marxism as atheistic and incompatible with Islam. However, Marx and Lenin are studied in Iranian universites as anti-colonial political thinkers, and the Iranian government’s understanding of imperialism is Leninist. The state ideology of Iran, in other words, is not Marxist, but it incorporates many elements of Marxism.
To understand Islam as a political movement in today’s world, we need to recognize that there are three main political currents in contemporary Islam: Shia as represented by Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood or “westernizers,” and Wahhabism. Shia is generally anti-imperialist in the Leninist sense, and tends to be allied with Russia and AES states. The Muslim Brotherhood (think Turkey, Qatar, and Al-Jazeera magazine) hold a position similar to that of many Protestants in the US: namely, capitalism is in itself morally neutral, and bad only when unguided by religious principles. Wahhabism, heavily promoted by Saudi Arabia, is anti-capitalist and opposed to western colonialism, but believes that the solution is reestablishing both the caliphate and the entire medieval social order; it can probably be fairly considered a form of fascism.
During the Polish-Soviet war of 1919-1921 – Polish revanchists trying to remake the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth – Poland annexed parts of Ukraine and Belarus that it had controlled prior to 1772. The Peace of Riga formalized this. The Soviet Union took back these territories in the 1939 “invasion.”
There’s a supposed quote by Zbigniew Brezinski which I keep seeing online, to the effect that to keep Russia down the US has not only to split the USSR, but cause another major split within the Orthodox church – and that Ukrainian nationalism will be a good lever to effect this. Don’t know if it’s genuine or not, but it does seem to describe what the US and their puppets in Kiev are doing.
Gonna go ahead and say it, the Molotov-Ribbentropp pact was unironically a good thing given the circumstances (Britain and France both refusing to enter into an anti-fascist alliance with the USSR). A master stroke of diplomacy that forstalled the inevitable and gave the Soviet Union time to develop and arm.
It also let the Soviet Union take back territory that had been stolen during the Polish-Soviet war and save a big chunk of Poland from Nazi rule.
That people see him as a hero is so weird. Maybe I’m missing something, but the only argument I’d ever heard in his favor that’s remotely plausible is, “sure, plenty of chetniks collaborated with the Ustase, but Mihailovic had nothing to do with it.” Which basically boils down to “he wasn’t a traitor, just a supremely incompentent general who couldn’t control his own troops.”
Is that really somebody to lionize?
Protests in Shanghai this past week, still think the CCP is good?