Identical narratives from right and some left on the question of the protests in Iran.
M.J Olgin, the man who has
written the introductions for most of Trotsky’s book had outlined some of the
narratives of fascists and compared with the statements of the Trotskyites and
asked the question; “Is there any material difference between the last two
quotations and the quotations at the beginning of this chapter?” And responded;
“ It is difficult to detect any. The spirit is the same. The substance is the
same.” ..” Fascists and the former leader of the October Revolution, Leon
Trotsky, speak the same language.””…What is the difference between them? One
would be inclined to think that the fascists speak in the name of the
dictatorship of capital whereas Trotsky speaks in the name of the Russian
workers and peasants. But the fascists, too, profess to speak in the name of
the people.” (1)
From Donald Trump to every Zionist and fascists are making statements about the “uprising of people” in Iran and encouraging them “to keep on protesting and taking over the institutions”. Zionists on media outlets openly “urging the Iranian “people” to escalate their regime change activities” and they are pledging that they would be supporting them on the ground”. They all shouting; “we are with you. Not only from a distance verbally, but we are with you in the field. “ Mike Pompeo wishing happy new year to every Iranian “people” in the streets and also to every Mossad agents walking beside them”.
Fortunately not so many of them
in the world in general but the “usual
suspects- the Bundists” * and opportunist parties and organizations who
have been trying to gain them to their sides reiterating similar slogans with a
brush of “leftist” narratives.
* In this case it is referred to
the Kurdish Nationalists with left narratives
We know that the imperialists-fascists
are after regime change in Iran in order install their own puppet government
whether it would be Shah or someone else. What is it that these “leftists” with the same narratives of fascist are after? It is a “sensitive” subject in
some countries to touch upon, and it is very much unknown or ignored in others.
Is there a revolutionary situation in Iran? Let’s better put it; is the
objective and subjective conditions for revolution exists in Iran without any
external interference? Except those who shout, “long live US” and “long
live Israel” among them no one else in his sane mind claims it exists. However,
not their entire population but majority of the organizations and parties
support, participate and lead the "riots" (not the original protests) in most cases.
The objective reality on the ground is that the initial protests
were largely spontaneous without any leadership. According to the Kurdish
organizations’ media, this protests spread in over 50 Kurdish populated cities. Let’s
assume that they have acquired the “leadership” of the protests that turned in
to riots. It is, as Lenin noted, “not
the desires of individuals or groups, but the objective conditions” (2) determine the rise of struggle. And it is
correct that “when there are objective conditions for a direct revolutionary
onslaught by the masses, the Party’s
supreme political task is “to serve the spontaneous movement”. (3) It all depends on the correct assessment of
the concrete conditions and situation, not only in Iran specific but in
direct dialectical connection with the external situation. “Regardless of
the will and the consciousness, the dreams and the theories, of the various
individuals” says Lenin, “The objective conditions of social life and the class
struggle are more powerful than pious intentions and written programmes.”
(4)
Whatever the intentions of the “leaders”
in some cities, the success of a “revolution” depends on the “acute
revolutionary situation (which) is bound to convert a demonstration into a
strike, a protest into a fight, a strike into an uprising.” (5) and “in order to be able to exercise this
pressure from below, the proletariat must be armed—for in a
revolutionary situation matters develop with exceptional rapidity to the
stage of open civil war—and must be led by the Social-Democratic
Party.” (6)
Is there any such party (in Lenin's definition of it) exist in Iran?
Not that I know of. Without the existence of subjective conditions (leadership
and organized working class) even in the case of a “loose” existence of objective
conditions, to promote an uprising is an irresponsible act, and in this case,
serves the interests of Imperialists. Lenin points out that “the revolutionary
party of the working class is resolutely opposed to adventurism and never
plays with armed insurrection.”
Let’s assume that the Kurdish
leadership was after the “right of self determination” through external
support; to the US-Israel military attack on and invasion of Iran. Should the left support such an act?. Lenin
responded to this question without leaving no room for misunderstanding;
“we cannot be in favor of a war
between great nations, in favor of the slaughter of twenty million people for
the sake of the problematical liberation of a small nation with a population of
perhaps ten or twenty millions!” Of course not! And it does not mean that we
throw complete national equality out of our Programme; it means that the
democratic interests of one country must be subordinated to the democratic
interests of several and all countries," (7) " our
unreserved recognition of the struggle for freedom of self-determination does
not in any way commit us to supporting every demand for national
self-determination." (8)
Let’s say that there are various “strong
organizations” from different ethnic and religious groups leading the “uprising”.
The question then arises is what kind of political system they are after. Again Lenin pointed out that " it is not
so much a question of the size of an organisation, as of the real, objective
significance of its policy: does its policy represent the masses,
does it serve them, i.e., does it aim at their liberation from capitalism,
or does it represent the interests of the minority, the minority’s
reconciliation with capitalism? "" (9)
Under current conditions, there is no justifiable ground for Marxist Leninists to support the “uprising” in Iran whether it be theoretical or practical. Since largest sections of the population from every ethnic groups (especially in Kurdish regions as reported by them) remained either silent or opposed to the “riots” , it has come to the light that the leadership rioters-in-minority had been co-opted by CIA-MOSSAD-MI6 agent-provocateurs and by those proxies with “long live Israel” slogans. The ratio of overtly pro-US-Israel stands within Kurdish population in general should not be minimized, so the covertly ones - that of Bundists. In Iran specific that could be extended to Azeris, Arabs and Jihadists.
So, are they the “people” of Iran in general specified in the narratives? It is unavoidable that there have been innocent people who were only concerned with the economic demands, however all the evidences coming out (especially the locating and capturing the agents in hundreds through reengineering of Satellite -Starink-communication by Iran security services- with the help of Russians) indicates that the "uprising" was coordinated and managed by CIA-MOSSAD-MI6 agents and by their proxies. We probably will be witnessing summary executions of a larger number of them. Then we will hear the outcry by the same Western Media and its proxies on the "vicious execution" of "Iranian people."
One has to define "people". Do we mean "people" in the same context with what Bill Graham of US states; "Iranian people is our allies not our enemies?
Bundists call it "peoples of Iran" not "people of Iran" for ideological reasons. Is that a class based distinction or ethnicity based distiinction?
Who are the "people" and who are the common enemies of "people" at this given moment?
Who makes up the "chief enemy" of the " people" in general under the current conditions and situation? For Marxist Leninists the concept of "chief enemy" and its determination thereof at any given conditions is a basic requirement to follow.
Practice is a mirror of theories
one preaches, especially that of concealed ones. Starting from the Ukraine war, anti-colonial
struggles in Sahel, proxy-civil war in Myanmar, latest capturing, kidnapping,
and holding of the president of Venezuela and now “uprising” in Iran, the
stands on these issues and identical narratives of Zionists-fascists and some
so called “socialist” unveiling the masks on their faces.
Erdogan A
January 14, 2026
Notes
1-
M.J Olgin The Danger of Trotskyism
2-
Lenin, The Agrarian Programme of
Social-Democracy in the First Russian Revolution, 1905-1907, December 1907
3-
Lenin, The Crisis of Menshevism, December
4-Lenin, How the
Socialist-Revolutionaries Sum Up the Revolution and How the Revolution has
Summed Them Up January 1909
5-Lenin, The Dissolution of the Duma,
and the Tasks of the Proletariat
6- Lenin, Two Tactics of
Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution
7- Lenin The Discussion On Self-Determination Summed Up -
Marxism or Proudhonism?
8- Lenin The National Question in Our Programme
9- Lenin, Imperialism, and the Split in Socialism
.jpg)
