Posted by: G-AZZI | November 3, 2010

Radical activism

Let me start by saying I am definitely not a right wing person, and I definitely have more in common  with a radical left activist than a right wing person.

We both agree that you cannot look at a certain aspect of human rights and ignore the other one. However we disagree when it comes to the methodology and the strategy that we need to use to counter human rights violation

Below is my criticism of the radical left based on my personal experience in Beirut

1- Radical leftists see the world in black and white, “either you are one of us or against us”. You can be called fascist, racist, sexist…. during any conversation or debate you have with a radical leftist. People are either bad or good there is not grey zone, the owner of a gay business ” commercializing the gay community” or CEO of a corporation are in the exact same box as policemen  harassing  , arresting and torturing LGBT people, they both are equally enemy.

2- Anger is a legitimate feeling in a world of injustice, it is normal for people to be angry, but the question is how to direct this anger in the right direction, how can we use people’s anger to create highly motivated people who are willing to make changes in their small communities. My question always was: do we want to change the system or use it for our own benefit, get in the system and change it from inside , constant aggressiveness  was not proven to be effective in the Lebanese context , angry activism is just another model of activism that was imported from the west. In five years of helem’s experience, we had to deal with people who are equally sexist and homophobic). I had the opportunity to speak about homosexuality and Helem in tripoli, zagharta , hermel, sour and in front of religious leaders from all arab countries in Egypt,  we did not get to a common ground with them by being angry and spreading fuck you’s all over the place or by telling them how horrible they are.

3- I have the impression than whenever something is popular or big , radical intellectuals manage to find something bad about it, it seems like success and popularity are signs of treason , Three years ago , Ziad Baroud , a young energetic civil society member becomes the ministry of interior, for the first time Lebanese civil society is represented in the government. A government that is full of corrupted politician and war criminals.

Ziad Baround is not a perfect man, but he definitely is the best we can get, he does not have the power to change the whole system, but he is trying his best. He had his ears open to activists and tried to change whatever he could. since a year Ziad Baroud is being trashed by radicals for not doing enough and he was put in the same box with Walid Jumblat , Samir geagea etc… (Because remember , things are black or white )

Ziad Baroud is only an example but this applies to artists, NGOs etc….

again this is  constructive criticism , I love  “my radicals” …. 🙂




  1. I love “my radicals” too, they inspire me and I have a lot of respect for many of their work. I agree with them on almost everything except for the points you mention here. I noticed that when we disagreed they made me feel I am “far right” to put it gently, but I know I understand why that could have been, you are right about the Black and White and mentality and it is good to remember that they are radical left, this leave a space for me and people like me on the leftish side of middle ground.

  2. Good analysis Gerge…

    i would add that ‘It is much easier to oppose that exists than to propose something that works’… Unfortunately, when the ‘radicals’ propose, they throw a theoretical idea with the tag ‘This is how it should be’ without proposing how to get there.. this type of proposition is to me, another form of opposition.

    This easy opposition is a form of mental laziness: i release my anger in one emotional burst rather than channeling it into long-term contructive action.

  3. It is not very accurate to say that radicals have no nuance in approaching social issues, seeing their involvement in social movements and organizations where they struggle on specific issues hand in hand with all kinds of people, and acknowledging their initiatives in building the LGBT movement in Lebanon. When it comes to one’s opinion about the struggle it is easy to categorize it as black or white, but it takes some efforts to build an argument. A homosexual person who can’t afford being the customer of gay establishments has all the interest and right to reject economic exploitation even when it comes from a gay CEO. Social divisions are more sophisticated than the simple dichotomy of gay and non-gay.
    There is no contradiction between wanting to change the system and reforming it. The issue is will the accumulation of reforms lead to a real change or not. Let’s take the example of women’s struggle for social justice, at least from the mid of the nineteenth century until now. The reforms of laws have not led to any real change in the situation of women.
    Who said that radical activism has to be angry?! On the contrary it can come from singing, dancing, loving… isn’t that what we want to do freely without being endangered every time we kiss our lovers on the streets? Anger is a state of mind, it is simplistic to say that radicals, who are human beings (3an jadd we are not aliens), are always angry and struggling in that way.
    Being a civil society member doesn’t mean earning the title of civil society representative, without any input from that civil society. Ziad Baroud is very close to the Maronite clergy and to the Lebanese President, of course giving Helem a ‘ilm w khabar number will be considered against the church’s (religion institutions) interests. What is really his best when we see unpunished racist, sexist, discriminative actions taken by the police against civilians who live in Lebanon?

    • Hi berna, i appreciate your positive attitude and your non-angry attitude.
      Not all radicals are the same, nor they have the same level of radicalism otherwise there will be unified extreme left parties in the world.

      But i am writing to comment on the gay business example, you say: “Right to reject economic exploitation even when it comes from a gay CEO”.

      First, the term CEO is quite disproportionate when considering Gay business in Lebanon. Most of the businesses are person-owned and fall in the category VSB (very small businesses: less than 20 employees). We are not talking about corporations here, and these businesses have very small influencing power on Media, or people, etc… This usage of CEO, is another example of the black-white mentality of some radicals. Not all businesses are alike, not all business are abusive or do exploit people. If you are a good cook and you dream to open a restaurant. you struggle and you realise your dream and finally you open your restaurant: do you become then a CEO? does it mean that you are exploiting your clients? do you become evil???

      Second, regarding the gay businesses nature. Gay businesses are mainly bars or others elements of the hospitality industry. They are service-providers, the same way when you open your restaurant, you become a service provider. Helem, Meem, Nasawiyya, AUB, AUH,.. are also service providers with the difference that they are non-profit organisations. All service providers have a clear service(s) they provide: the nature and the expectations of the service are clear and defined in advance, the cost is also known in advance.
      So let’s take acid for example, the people know why they go there, the cost is known, the expectations are also clear (including the sometimes rude attitude of the bouncers). People willingly go to Acid (ma 7ada le7i2on bel 3assa), they pay for the service. And if they are not happy with the service provided they stop taking it (they stop going to Acid).
      So where is the exploitation here? Did Acid cheat on the service it provided? did it force people to come? did people end up paying on the entrance a totally different amount from what the Acid announced? Did Acid blackmail people to force them to keep on coming?
      The only way i can see an exploitation is if we admit / beleive that people are not coming willingly.. somehow being fooled and manipulated.. being led like passive stupid sheep… Many radicals believe so, and what irritates me in this reasoning is that there is an underlying attitude and belief in the ‘radical’ head that all other people are stupid, they are not able to think right, they make the wrong choices.. and since they are this stupid, and luckily i am the only intelligent one, i should not take their opinion in consideration.
      Do you realise how this attitude is in complete opposition to the values of the radicals who call for equality and for flat organisation. It shouldn’t be a surprise then that the most abusive, oppressive and least inclusive regimes were radical left-wing regimes: North-Korea, the Soviet Union…
      Radicals should get over their belief that the others are stupid and manipulated, and that they are the only intelligent ones who see the conspiracy. This is when they are start to listen and respect other opinions or desires, and this is when we can talk about constructive opposition.

      It is very delicate to limit radicalism into a 3 paragraph text, there are definitely nuances.. and i admit that my comment has some simplifications. But i believe that my point is made even if i admit that some counter-examples might exist (the counter example remain exceptional though)

  4. ‘Radical leftists see the world in black and white’

    ‘being angry and spreading fuck you’s all over the place or by telling them how horrible they are’

    ‘radical intellectuals manage to find something bad about it, it seems like success and popularity are signs of treason’

    ‘(Because remember , things are black or white )’

    ‘This easy opposition is a form of mental laziness’

    ‘what irritates me in this reasoning is that there is an underlying attitude and belief in the ‘radical’ head that all other people are stupid, they are not able to think right, they make the wrong choices.. and since they are this stupid, and luckily i am the only intelligent one, i should not take their opinion in consideration.’

    ‘It shouldn’t be a surprise then that the most abusive, oppressive and least inclusive regimes were radical left-wing regimes: North-Korea, the Soviet Union…’

    I just decided to highlight the statements that most stood out for me,
    make of it what you want 🙂

    • Taking quotes out of context is another form of manipulation.. indeed it draws a caricature that doesn’t apply to anyone. one should avoid generalisations.
      But Anthony, sincerely, are there many people in the radical movement who beleive that the ‘others’ are a “bunch of stupid manipulated sheep”?

      • I really love how you’re on the role here, trying to make everyone else seem manipulative and ‘evil’, I clearly stated I put those up because they *bold* stood out for me *end bold*. Anyone can go, look up the context very easily (just scroll up the page) and decide for themselves (hence the make of it what you may).

        And I disagree with you completely, I seriously think you need to talk to more people and try a bit harder to understand a different perspective or point of view than your own. I love how you accuse ‘the radicals’ of so many things you actively practice in the replies you use.

  5. Tammouz,
    First of all, I could not help but notice that you state in the second paragraph that “Helem, Meem, Nasawiyya, AUB, AUH,.. are also service providers with the difference that they are non-profit organisations.” Let’s make something very clear, AUB & AUH are definetly not ‘non-profit organizations’ and are actually one of the most profit-centered businesses in Lebanon. For you to say such a thing reflects (in my opinion) on your misunderstanding of what ‘non-profit’ means.

    Also, one of the main definitions of the word exploitation is when there is ‘Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes’. With this definition, one can link certain businesses (but especially the gay businesses in Lebanon) to the term ‘exploit’ since their main purpose is to target an elite (disregarding ACID) upper-class group of people and making these spaces exclusive to them. The main idea behind the use of the term ‘exploited’ is that most members of the LGBTQ in Lebanon are oppressed and do not come from an upper class, open minded, safe environment and suffer in their daily lives because of their sexual orientation (among other things) therefore in not including these members of the community in a space but also economically exploiting the pockets of members of the LGBTQ community (seeing as there isn’t exactly many cheap options of ‘friendly’ places to go) these businesses are exploiting a group for selfish purposes.

    Furthermore, when mentioning ‘radical left-wing’ individuals or groups, it is immediately linked to a negative connotation or idea in people’s minds based exactly on the kind of argument you made (ie: “Radicals should get over their belief that the others are stupid and manipulated”). Where did you develop this belief about radicalism or radical individuals? There is no 1 radical mindset. Equality and flat-organization are important in order for everyone to be able to have an equal opportunity in life, the workspace, their thoughts/ideologies/expressing themselves, schools, homes, etc… The problem isn’t this ideology, the problem is that very rarely in the world we live in does this way of organization work because of the fact that most people feel comfortable having positions of power and authority over others.

    I can go on and on about the use of language, definitions, mindset, and history; but I suggest you do your own research before blindly attacking others.

  6. Amar,

    I do not think we have enough market study to decide that gay places are more expensive than other places, but giving you the benefit of the doubt and supposing this true, the attitude should not be “lets shut down these places”, but creating other alternative and competition. that is exactly what tammouz is talking about, do we spend effort an energy attacking people, shutting down places or finding solutions to the problems ?

    • Hey George,

      I didn’t read anywhere in Amar’s reply a call to ‘shut down’ these places, nor do I recall such a proposition ever being made…
      I think this is an assumption (correct me if I’m wrong) of the ‘radical approach’, which plays into the stigma that’s been propagated about radicals seeing everyone as ‘the enemy’ and just wanting to eliminate them. From my personal experiences, I don’t think this is true at all.

  7. Roo2 roo2 ya Amar, w khod nafass tawil. w rja3 e2ra elli katabto 3ala mahlak. Ma tenfe3il w don’t get aggressive. it doesn’t make ur argument any more valid!
    Please, when you develop an argument or counter-argument, develop it step-by-step, and argument the logic, don’t attack the person.

    Now getting to serious stuff:

    AUB, Helem and non-profit
    I purposefully mentioned AUB and AUH along with HELEM and MEEM, because of our subjective perception of things. AUB and AUH are officially non-profit organisations, read their statuses (see who need to do some research).

    1- Behind this example, i wanted to highlight that exploitation is a case-by-case not a matter of profit or non-profit. In other words, not all businesses exploit people, the same way some non-profits do exploit people.

    2- Organisations like Helem and Meem have employees, do provide services and sometimes have budgets larger than many small businesses in Lebanon. So they fall in the category of service providers, regardless if we like that or not. But this is not the purpose of the debate.

    Regarding the definition of exploitation and the use of language:
    i will take your definition you use though there exist more elaborate or precise definitions. “Utilisation of another person or group for selfish purposes”

    Utilisation implies ‘non-consent’ or the ‘use as a tool’, at least ‘against one’s interest’…
    Selfish is used in the sense of ‘my interest in opposition of others interest’

    When two parties are exchanging consentingly services and/or money, we talk about exchange and collaboration, not exploitation, especially when both parties are coming to a win-win situation or fulfilling each one’s interests.
    This is exactly what happens when you go to a gay bar, when you buy a sandwich, you consult a doctor or buy a t-shirt… So we cannot talk objectively about exploitation, as both parties are fulfilling their desire, objective and interest out of the transaction.

    So if i go to ‘Bardo’ because i want to go out, and i pay for a beer 10 000 liras. i wanted to go out, i knew in advance the cost of the beer and i am willing to pay for it. So i am following my own desire and my own interest, Bardo is also fulfilling his interests too.
    I don’t feel exploited nor do i feel manipulated! Unless you know better what is my interest. So if you still believe that i am manipulated and acting like a stupid sheep, this is when i will reiterate to you: “get over you belief that the others are stupid and manipulated, and that you’re the only intelligent one who see the conspiracy”… But maybe, you don’t think i am stupid or manipulated, in this case i thank you for giving me the credit for being equal.

    You say that: ‘Gay Businesses ‘exploit’ because they target an elite upper-class group and make these places exclusive to them’
    I personally share your indignation about the situation, but sorry, given your definition of exploitation, i objectively do not see an exploitation!

    If a business target a group rather than the others, it doesn’t mean it exploits either groups. It has a full right to define its target. Even charity does, you have charities for single-parent families, charities for victims of abuse… Even Helem does.
    Even you do, because you beleive you have the right to choose you friends and the poeple you hang out with. So if someone asks to go out with you, and you say no: you are targeting a group and excluding someone out of it. So are you exploiting someone here?

    Mind you that the ‘elite’ argument is irrelevant because the definition you use talks about other persons and groups regardless of their financial or educational level. So exploitation can occur everywhere and is not a matter of class or elite.

    Regarding the ‘exclusivity’, most of the gay business do not reject any person if it pays for the service it provides. some like ‘Wolf’ do, we will handle this part next.
    So since most of the businesses do not reject a person that is willing to pay for the service they provide, then we cannot talk about exclusivity. at least not in the sense you meant, that of ‘alienation’ or ‘rejection’.
    If a pregnant woman comes to Helem Clinic asking for a genycologue, we will ask her to go elsewhere. Are we being exclusive? Are we rejecting people? are we exploiting people?

    Now tackling the likes of ‘Wolf’, that half someone who selects who goes in or not. I personally do not like that, but objectively, it is its right: it is a private club, it is not a public place. It has thus the right to decide who comes in, the same way you have the right to decide who enters your house.

    ‘Meem’ is clearly exclusive as it targets Women only. Men are not allowed, it is clear cut!… Meem targets thus a group, excluding another group. Would this mean that Meem is exploiting its members? Does this put ‘Meem’ in the same level as ‘Wolf’ or other gay businesses?

    I hope you will read calmly what i wrote, then you will get to the conclusion that if ‘Gay business target a group rather than another, even if they target elite groups’. This doesn’t mean that Gay businesses exploit the LGBT community.

    Finally, your advice:
    You give me, at the end, a lesson about language and a lovely advice to go learn and stop acting blindly.
    You gave me through this the perfect proof to what you wanted to counter when you wrote your comment. Let me explain:

    “if i think what i think, then this means that i am stupid, i need to learn, and i am acting blindly”
    In other words, you suppose or believe, others who do not share your view are stupid or uneducated (your advice for me to research and learn), and act blindly in contrast to you, who knows and sees.

    This leads me to reiterate my original statement: “Radicals should get over their belief that other are stupid and manipulated, and that they are the only intelligent ones who see the conspiracy”…

    Please i want to clarify that this statement applies to the category of radicals that Georges targeted in his original post. I hate generalisation and as Georges said, i love my ‘radical’ friends even if i might disagree with them.

    We all share the same values, the disagreement is on the approach.

    Amar, you have totally the right to be revolted that there are very rich people and very poor people in Lebanon. That many business-owners give very low wages compared to the profits their employees generate. I am revolted too.

    But this doesn’t mean that all businesses are evil, nor that Gay businesses are evil. We should mix everything together otherwise we blurr our message and the reason why we exist.

  8. “The more detached one is from a role, the easier it becomes to turn it against the enemy. The more effectively one avoids the weight of things, the easier it is to achieve lightness of movement. Comrades care little for forms. They argue openly, confident in the knowledge that they cannot inflict wounds on each other. Where communication is genuinely sought, misunderstandings are no crime. But if you accost me armed to the teeth, understanding agreement only in terms of a victory for you, then you will get nothing out of me but an evasive pose, and a formal silence intended to indicate that the discussion is closed. For interchange on the basis of contending roles is useless a priori. Only the enemy wants to fight on the terrain of roles, according to the rules of the spectacle. It is hard enough keeping one’s phantoms at arm’s length: who needs ‘friendships’ which put us back on the same footing? Would that biting and barking could wake people up to the dog’s life roles force them to live wake them up to the importance of their selves!” Raoul Vaneigem

  9. Hey you guys! It’s actually nice talking about this topic…it’s quite good!
    There are also a lot of misconceptions about the ‘radical leftist’ by the ‘non-ideological people’ (keeping in mind that being an ideology!). I’m not trying to preach basic knowledge but we all know that the left is very broad, and has a lot of diverse schools, approaches, methodologies, and principles. A nice example would be Lebanon, on the main stream; the Stalinist Communist Party, the Feudalist Socialist Party (Junblat), and of course our all time favorite, the leftist-wannabes pro-government: the Socio-Democrats. All of these, and others that are not mentioned, come from different schools and principles. What is missing in this debate is that the ‘non-radicals’ do not see that even the activists associated with the left have different points of views (Marxists, Leninist, Socialists Internationalists, Social Nationalist…) and they act upon things differently, not the stereotype of the left by generalizing everyone under these behaviors.
    1. Perhaps things are not black and white, but also one’s positions and ideas should be taken into consideration. Meaning, that since we are all on the same page that human rights are interlinked and non should prioritize one right over the other, opposition will be formed when someone try to breach this position and agreement. A recent example I personally had when it came to civil rights for Palestinians in Lebanon, and after a debate that ended with consensus on the fact that human rights are interlinked, an official member of this political party stated on that Palestinians should have the right to work, only very specific types of job (caretakers, taxi drivers etc..) even if that person studied law, medicine or engineering. This is a classist behavior based on ethnic segregation and racism..thus this person is called a racist! Same thing goes on: one someone acts like a fascist, then it would be completely legitimate to call him/her/them fascists! Perhaps the ‘radicals’ are not known for their sugar-coating preferences and choice of words (?)
    As in terms of the Gay business, the whole debate was not against people making money and not totally due to commercializing the gay community. It is also has to do with reported attitudes and prices. The questions being asked were “how come none of these ‘friendly’ places wants to hire a transgender, and other non-heteronormative LGBTQs to work there, yet only seem to focus on the executive gay and lesbian image of being ‘straight acting’ and ‘hot’ in the public eyes (or Plaztik Magazine!)?” and “how come all places that host LGBTQs as clients do not allow them to be close to each other (is it a pub or a public school) and the prices got hire and OBVIOUSLY overpriced (you don’t need to get funding for research on the market to find that 14$ for a drink is a rip-off!)” additionally, the rejection by some of these places to put a poster for IDAHO or LGBTQ related events…and the list goes on.
    The connection between the CEO and the gay business owner (not all of them of course) is there when that gay business owner is acting exactly like a CEO only on a smaller scale. (aka petite bourgeoisie).
    If we wanted to stand in solidarity with each other and fight the real ‘enemy’, then we can start by working on these places attitudes; when someone is rejected from going into a place and having fun based on their sexual orientation, gender identity and lifestyle (trannies shouldn’t even think of coming near a bear place..rawr!) – then we take the lead against the system from there.
    Almost the biggest number of activists in this country come from certain socio-economical classes where they can afford a Beiruti gay lifestyle – yet we are getting so consumed by our bubble that we are not realizing that some people are suffering from exile and solitude because they have ABSOLUTELY no place to go and befriend someone just because they cannot afford 20$ burger and a 5.5$ glass of wine…leaving the only alternative to sometimes get engaged in risky behaviors in cruising areas.
    I do not expect people who do not work on the ground to see this devastating segregation based on economical class and social background and manage to link it to their flamboyant lifestyle. Their lifestyle is not the problem and they should have a negative one just because others are not as lucky – but it becomes a serious problem when these same people blind themselves from look at the ugly truth of others and denying that it is not fair.
    2. Anger is also a result of frustration. When an organized group of people come and work and find a common ground between them, then opposing front is created internally (due to the lack of the physical presence and participation of the opposers in these discussions) which keeps happening again and again) shouldn’t expect hugs and smiles.
    Anger eventually leads to motivation to change. There is absolutely no radical change that happened on this planet, that did not have angry masses wanting to have a better standard of living and have their rights, or even resist occupation and oppression. Being a reformer and coming always with a smile doesn’t really work, specially that when you’re trying to change the system from within, it’s not you who changes the system, it’s the system that will eventually change you…and Ziad Baroud is a good example of that. He is still way better than others, but whether he likes it or not, his political power is very limited because he joined the system and did nothing to mobilize himself and others to change it…yet the road to heaven is paved with good intentions!

    😀 😀 : D

  10. Joe, tomorrow I will have the once-in-a-lifetime opurtunity to kiss a man in front of the Pope… I will have you in mind and dedicate this kiss to you (be you a she or a he). I will also pray during the kiss to have your capacity of deep breathing and elegant anger.

  11. Leil habibi I am extremely proud and speechless for this! What you are doing is exactly like yourself: BEAUTIFUL!!! Thank you a lot! ❤ ❤

  12. Great let me put it this way 🙂 you promote T-marbouta as a gay place and get them to hire trans , then we can talk , otherwise the existing gay places are the best the gay community can get in terms of bars.

    there are plenty of things i cannot afford, but i would rather eat once in a good restaurant than eating 4 times a month at T-marbouta and deal with there bad food , extremely bad service and kerbala movie playing in the background.

    i cannot afford a 500 USD tshirt at aishti and i feel sorry for those who are willing to spend that much for t-shirt , why don’t i hate them ? because i don’t want to be them 🙂 instead i will push the state to add more taxes and make sure everyone gets the minimum for a decent life !

    so let everyone do it his way , and no you do not remember the gay frequented bars between 2000 and 2004 🙂

    good night

  13. popping in again!

    George you mentioned t-marbouta :S and no one’s ever promoted it as a gay place. I think the difference here is that one is actively marketing to the LGBTIQLMNOP-community and the other is not, but has a friendly atmosphere to diversity.

  14. I don’t want to understand. That’s why I’m spending time reading this blog and posting on it.

    “you feel discriminated against because u cannot afford a place , this is not discrimination.”

    Thats like saying: you feel discriminated because you can’t afford to go to university, this is not discrimination! (just substitute anything for ‘place’ and you’ll see the irony)

    I am really sick and tired on this ‘radical left’ stigmatization going on. Last time I checked, there’s no ‘handbook on being a radical leftist’ that has pointers like ‘accuse someone of having personal connections’ and ‘take sentences out of context to manipulate people’. We are all people. Not our political ideologies or mentality. There’s no such thing as ‘the radical left’ and propagating this stigma is counter-productive to everyone involved, though it does help in devaluing the opinions of anyone who supposedly falls into this category. if that’s the reason behind all the ‘radical leftist’ accusations in this blog post, then please spare me any more conversation.

    • i think have free education is much more important than going to a bar.And again you cannot blame AUB for being expensive , however you can blame the government for not developing good public universities.

      It is Helem’s job to provide , free safe place for the LGBT community , Many LGBT bars are willing to give from their benefit to support helem. Instead of spending our energy attacking gay places , especially that we understand nothing to this business, maybe more cooperation and creating alternative places is a better way to work

      And Anthony if you do not feel concerned by the article why have you all been so defensive ?

  15. Why don’t we take all the positive sides from each ideology and try to accumulate them. For example what is feasible and achievable? Destroying the whole system and building a new one or penetrate the system and change it from inside.
    I also believe that everything should be done step by step. Aren’t there any researches about what are the studies/strategies that lead to an achievable goal in order to practice it?
    What about advocacy and lobbying?
    Lets be positive, and lets use the positive energy in us, lets dislike instead of hate, lets disagree instead of attack, lets observe before analyze, lets do some researches before judge, lets discuss instead of quibble…
    With all the positive energy in me

  16. Mahdy,

    It is not a matter of ideology.

    I think if we all watch less American movies about the evil communists we would not be worried as much. It is extremely obvious that the only people who are making it an ideological conflict are the ones who are not close to the movement anymore. The previous comments were just minor clarifications on some misconceptions and attitudes, but the core of the problem is certainly not based on the political ideology…Some people want to ask questions and others do not want these questions to be asked.

    It’s not our job as a movement, to reform or compromise the leftist and right-wingers’ ideologies…that’s Sweden’s job 😛

    As Dom Helder Camara said: “When I gave food to the poor, they called me a Saint. When I asked why the poor have no food, they called me a Communist..”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: