|
AFancyQuestionMark posted:That's not how negotiations work. Well yeah, normally in negotiations, when the other side betrays you, you won't want to negotiate with them again, unless they can demonstrate that they have their rogue elements under control.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 09:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:40 |
|
|
Wasn't the HDP actively the government's landline to the PKK during the peace process? It's not a betrayal to be talking to them if that's actively what makes them useful in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 09:01
|
|
|
Imagine enraged_camel sitting at the negotiations for the good friday agreement. 'You want the ability to hold a referendum for independence at any time, and an independent political body with autonomy??? I'll kill you traitors' 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 09:05
|
|
|
What do imagine it would have done for the legitimacy of the PKK if you made an honest effort at reconcilement instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater and they kept on the violence? From whom do you think their ability to function as an independent organization comes from?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 09:10
|
|
|
So is Turkey just going to keep the Kurds hostage forever or is there a real effort to stamp out their culture? I know that's happened in the past but is it ongoing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 14:03
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:Anyway, The pacific theater in the second world war was an ethnosectarian conflict between Protestants and Mahayana Buddhists, although the Buddhists were defeated in Japan, the Protestants failed to invade China for unknown reasons, perhaps this was due to the expansion of the Orthodox extremists, who may have been trying to reunite the Mongol empire. This is stupid as poo poo. Religion did motivate many conflicts in European history (see the 30 Years' War in particular), but it wasn't the cause of the World Wars--the West has been more secular than the modern Middle East for centuries now (partially as a reaction against the 30 Years' War). Religion isn't the only thing going on in Middle Eastern conflicts, but trying to ignore sectarian divisions would leave a giant gaping hole in any analysis of the conflicts of the last few decades. HorrificExistence posted:It's not clear who wants an independent Kurdistan besides western map starring experts. Certainly not Iraqi Kurds, aligned with the KRG. Not even the armed groups in Northern Syria. The referendum in which the Iraqi Kurds overwhelmingly voted for independence was all the way back in 2017, so I don't expect you to remember it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 14:59
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:So is Turkey just going to keep the Kurds hostage forever or is there a real effort to stamp out their culture? I know that's happened in the past but is it ongoing? As far as I know much of the efforts at cultural assimilation, such as the suppression of language, largely stopped around the late 90s/early 2000s. I don't think any of that has made an official return, but with the general situation of the press, the banning of the HDP and the flaring up again of the conflict (at least in border regions, it hasn't got anywhere close to as violent as it used to be in Turkey itself) I would imagine that Kurdish language media in Turkey quite possibly is having a harder time now than they were a decade or two ago. It still bears mentioning that the Kurdish majority regions in Turkey are much more of a patchwork than is often realized in the West, there's alot of Turks living there as well and this goes way back. Things aren't even remotely as simple as just granting independence however that would be done. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The referendum in which the Iraqi Kurds overwhelmingly voted for independence was all the way back in 2017, so I don't expect you to remember it. That was just internal politics. No group with authority has been willing to stake itself on an independent Kurdistan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
Turkey had outlawed the letters Q, W and X and you could be tried for "using illegal letters" if you defied the ban. This insanity stopped in 2013; back when Erdogan still liked the Kurds. Because yes, this was entirely about punishing the Kurds for not being Turks: these three letters are not used in the Turkish language. It's extremely petty and it was never really enforced because how do you want to enforce something like that; but it does show the length to which Turkey went to repress Kurdish identity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Turkey had outlawed the letters Q, W and X and you could be tried for "using illegal letters" if you defied the ban. My daughter, born in 2011, was registered as a Turkish citizen in 2012, and her middle name is Alexandra, but because of that law she's officially registered as Aleksandra in Turkey. We had to go to three different government offices in Istanbul because no-one knew what they were supposed to do with a K in the name of someone who wasn't Kurdish, and I'm pretty sure the last person took a guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
An irony of Turkey's oppression of the Kurds is that keeping them in poverty seems to result in their birth rates being substantially higher than the rest of the country, which is actually below replacement level.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:An irony of Turkey's oppression of the Kurds is that keeping them in poverty seems to result in their birth rates being substantially higher than the rest of the country, which is actually below replacement level. Yeah, this would be irony if every Kurd was a PKK supporter but the majority of Turkish Kurds support the Turkish state and its constitution. The HDP was the first party to denounce to coup even while its outcome was very up in the air.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:Yeah, this would be irony if every Kurd was a PKK supporter but the majority of Turkish Kurds support the Turkish state and its constitution. The HDP was the first party to denounce to coup even while its outcome was very up in the air. ...because they knew they were going to be instantly banned if they provided any reason whatsoever, and also because the military dictatorship was even worse to the Kurds than Erdogan after his heel turn. It's true that not all ethnic Kurds share the goals of Kurdish nationalists, but I assume the least assimilated Kurds would be the ones with the highest birth rates, whereas the more assimilated Kurds would have a birth rate closer to the national baseline. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:...because they knew they were going to be instantly banned if they provided any reason whatsoever, and also because the military dictatorship was even worse to the Kurds than Erdogan after his heel turn. And they got banned anyway. Anyway does anyone have any insight on why Erdogan turned to decidedly anti-Kurd, I guess part of it may have been that the existence of explicitly Kurdish parties like the HDP meant he couldn't really count on Kurdish votes for his party anymore and had to swing more towards Turkish nationalism, though I suspect the reasons are more mulitfaceted than just that, and also probably a more impulsive, considering Erdogan. The kind of interesting thing is that parties such as the AKP actually kind, for a while, did portray a way for Kurds to become a more natural part of Turkey without assimilation and cultural repression, with their focus on Islamic identity, which other Turkish parties largely downplay or ignore in favor of an overhwelming focus on Turkish ethno-nationanalism. And for a while it kind of seemed to work, both in the case of AKP receiving a good portion of their votes from Kurds and in them introducing legislation that made stuff a little bit easier for Kurdish language and culture (or doing away with some legislation that suppressed this) and Turkey's Kurds who despite the PKK and other Kurdish separatist parties generally being socialist or even communist, typically are among the more socially conservative in Turkey, particularly for those living in the southeast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:And they got banned anyway. Anyway does anyone have any insight on why Erdogan turned to decidedly anti-Kurd, I guess part of it may have been that the existence of explicitly Kurdish parties like the HDP meant he couldn't really count on Kurdish votes for his party anymore and had to swing more towards Turkish nationalism, though I suspect the reasons are more mulitfaceted than just that, and also probably a more impulsive, considering Erdogan. The kind of interesting thing is that parties such as the AKP actually kind, for a while, did portray a way for Kurds to become a more natural part of Turkey without assimilation and cultural repression, with their focus on Islamic identity, which other Turkish parties largely downplay or ignore in favor of an overhwelming focus on Turkish ethno-nationanalism. And for a while it kind of seemed to work, both in the case of AKP receiving a good portion of their votes from Kurds and in them introducing legislation that made stuff a little bit easier for Kurdish language and culture (or doing away with some legislation that suppressed this) and Turkey's Kurds who despite the PKK and other Kurdish separatist parties generally being socialist or even communist, typically are among the more socially conservative in Turkey, particularly for those living in the southeast. The party itself hasn't been banned yet (though calls to ban it are becoming more vocal), but a bunch of members and some leaders have been arrested. A military dictatorship still would have probably been worse though, given that the word Kurds was banned last time they had a military dictatorship, and they used to depopulate and destroy entire villages back then. The primary reason people sympathetic to Kurds cite for the conflict is that the HDP cost Erdogan his parliamentary majority by clearing the 10% threshold in an election, which meant that he wanted to punish them and gather the rest of the country behind him in a nationalist frenzy (which he eventually rode to constitutional changes securing his role separate from parliament). The primary reason people sympathetic to Erdogan cite is that the PKK killed a Turkish police officer, though people more sympathetic to the Kurds would point out that ISIS had just bombed an HDP gathering and the government didn't seem to mind a whole lot/was still relatively cozy with ISIS in general at the time as/because they were killing Kurds in Syria. I think there's some degree of truth to both the idea that spillover from Syria helped catalyze it and that the greater political freedoms Erdogan granted the Kurds backfired a bit when they voted in their own party instead of supporting him, and he decided he didn't actually care about them when they didn't serve his purpose. Beyond that, Erdogan was looking for new allies since his relationship with the Gulen movement had broken down, and nothing makes friends with the Turkish militarist faction faster than killing Kurds. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:Yeah, this would be irony if every Kurd was a PKK supporter but the majority of Turkish Kurds support the Turkish state and its constitution. The HDP was the first party to denounce to coup even while its outcome was very up in the air. Yeah, why would the party first in the line to the chopping block not goad the government, if not to show their great and genuine love for the Sultan?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:Yeah, this would be irony if every Kurd was a PKK supporter but the majority of Turkish Kurds support the Turkish state and its constitution. The HDP was the first party to denounce to coup even while its outcome was very up in the air. As Sinteres pointed out there is no mainstream force in Turkey historically trustworthy to the Kurds. The Kemalists, whether democratic or military regime? lol Like I pointed out pages ago the mainstream either way is hugely nationalistic. Also I think we should award you a trophy for being the only resident tankie blinkered enough to go to bat for Turkey. Congrats on going above and beyond expectations!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
Grape posted:
The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states? Too far
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states? This is irony right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:This is irony right? A single caliph in Istanbul would mean middle eastern peace in a day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states? And the second greatest anti-imperialist force was the British empire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
Zudgemud posted:And the second greatest anti-imperialist force was the British empire. Yeah dude, totally comparable. we also have to break up China to assure that the Tocharians get their right of self-determination after a millennium of captivity. Every people needs it's own ethnically exclusive Volksgemienshaft!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:06
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states? Anti-imperialist because their empire was falling apart?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Anti-imperialist because their empire was falling apart? It was a successful transnational empire until the liberals brought their beloved nationalism with them. And Surprise! End result of that is genocide. crazy
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:It was a successful transnational empire until the liberals brought their beloved nationalism with them. And Surprise! End result of that is genocide. crazy A successful empire is by definition not Anti-Imperialist
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Pretty sure we're all being trolled at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:A successful empire is by definition not Anti-Imperialist drat okay gotta tell the Qing and Maratha empire. Zudgemud posted:And the second greatest anti-imperialist force was the British empire. Great Britain invented a modern Greek identity because its inbred nobility of classical pedants was bored and decided the totally ethnically distinct and mistreated Greeks needed a homeland. A little ethnic cleansing later and bam, Greece is back after 2 millennia of captivity! But that wasn't imperialism because uhh, they took it over originally at some point, unlike any other place on earth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Why wouldn't you go to bat for it? You wanna keep supporting colonial successor states? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ou6JNQwPWE0 HorrificExistence posted:A single caliph in Istanbul would mean middle eastern peace in a day. How completely ignorant of all history do you have to be to think this. They weren't even counting double digit caliphs before people were infighting over it. Do you have literally no idea what the Sunni-Shia split even is. What.... are you??
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:The Ottoman empire was the greatest force for anti-imperialism in the 19th century. Thats a wrap folks lock the thread weve come full circle
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
Grape posted:Shia whoa hold up, why are we bringing polytheists into this. Really though, if we had a single quasi-political caliph (like the pope for the xtians) the sunni world would be a lot more stable HorrificExistence fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:drat okay gotta tell the Qing and Maratha empire. The Qing?? The Qing committed a genocide in order to control territory clearly. Look up the Dzunghars and what happened to them. It's actually honestly really racist, in the benevolent sense, to just waltz over to non-white empires (or what you deem non-white) and christen them good. Which is literally all you're doing lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
Grape posted:The Qing?? And the solution to this is making more volkish states and just having them fight it out in a genocide bowl? That was europe when empires were replaced with racial states. Also, I'm saying that those empires were victims of imperialism, and by resisting invaders, they were, by definition, anti-imperialist. It's the same logic that undermines support for Assad. HorrificExistence fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:whoa hold up, why are we bringing polytheists into this. Wow, I feel like we're on the cusp of a new radical Marxist faction. One that advocates wiping out all the troublesome distinctions, minorities and sectarian divides in favor of the biggest dominate ones. That once homogenity is reached socialism will truly be achieved. Because this is the subtext I'm seeing with all your arguments here. Though I guess that's the Khmer Rouge, or honestly just kinda Strasserite fascism I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:And the solution to this is making more volkish states and just having them fight it out in a genocide bowl? That was europe when empires were replaced with racial states. Septimius Severus attempted a genocide of the Scots
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
The best thing would be for the US to just go straight up conquering poo poo instead of their usual stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Pretty sure we're all being trolled at this point. HorrificExistence posted:The ottoman empire was a transnational state that assured human rights and dignity for all of its citizens until its very conclusion when russians tried to foster religious extremism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
I never get tired of pointing this out to the "NO WAR BUT CLASS WAR" purists, but even Vladimir loving Lenin deliberately split the former Russian Empire land into a bunch of ethnically defined sub-states due to his concern about the dominate ethnicity (Russians) lording over everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:Septimius Severus attempted a genocide of the Scots
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:40 |
|
|
The Black Panthers are anti-imperialist volk stooges.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 20:45
|
|