Imperialism by its essence is the overarching influence in the region, as the system of global hegemony. Other influences are subordinated and distorted that they conform to such hegemony.
The disparities between various regions, such as between Europe versus the Middle East, are directly a consequence of imperialism imposed by the former on the latter, not by either carrying an intrinsic superiority or deformity.
Every region has a violent history, but the current political configuration in the Middle East is directly a consequence of Western imperialism, even while many among the Western populations carry a sense of smug self satisfaction.
Yes people still pretend that.
I don’t know where you live, that you think nobody pretends that.
American exceptionalism is alive and well.
The prevailing opinion, if not that the US remains as a functional democracy, that it once was functional as a democracy, but has become broken and in need of repair.
The pivotal question is when, if ever, did it ever even come close to fulfilling its own ideals as a democracy.
Those who support an ethnostate do so without identifying it as an ethnostate. They simply argue for the supremacy of one particular group.
There are plenty of echo chambers of every variety and orientation. The value of federation is to produce an experience that is varied and complete.
The point is not that workers under capitalism are not paid wages, but rather that working for wages is required to survive.
Workers live under consistent threat of destitution, homelessness, and starvation, even while massive wealth is hoarded, and resources controlled, by an immensely privileged, narrow cohort of society. The coercive conditions of labor under capitalism give rise to the comparison with more explicit forms of slavery.
Many instances have de-federated with LemmyGrad and Hexbear, which are considered to be badly behaved at the level of the administrators.
The instance to which you object is not similarly problematic. Rather, you feel annoyed by the political leanings, even while the community is permissive of varied political orientations.
Instances may be blocked in your user account, in case doing so makes your personal experience feel more relaxed or productive. You may also consider restricting your participation to communities that enforce a conformity you find suitable. There are plenty of safe spaces in the world for convicted liberals.
You also disregarded the examples you were presented.
I am emphasizing that the current global imperialist hegemon is the West, and that there has never been another, which are not controversial, nor diminished by any of your examples.
As explained, the backward situation in Iran was directly a reaction of earlier interference by the UK.
Finally, your arrogant tone is not contributing to an appearance of your being clever or informed.
Deeper in the past Muslim-majority states attacked the nearby fringes of the West, but the recent history is the West subduing most of the world as global imperialist hegemon.
It is the global imperialism of the West that directly accounts for reaction taking hold in such colonized regions.
We are talking about the current geopolitical configuration.
The argument presented is that in many Muslim-majority regions and states, the current political configuration is fundamentally a reaction to the imperialism and colonialism of the West.
Your examples are too deep in the past to be strongly relevant as antecedents to the current configuration, and also, fail in their attempt to paint Islam as exceptional.
Nice pivot.
Western corporations benefit from slave labor. Islam is not exceptional.
Leftists are derided as extremist.
What do you understand as the meaning of the post?
No Muslim-majority state ever colonized the West.
In historical fact, the relation has occurred only in one direction.
Characterizing Islam as imperialist sidesteps the actual argument being presented.
Regardless, communist society would be one in which production is controlled directly by workers.
Red Scare propaganda, and its fundamental essence now entrenched across society, is largely to blame for decency and empathy becoming demonized as extremist.
Simply acknowledging historical antecedents is not whitewashing or idealizing the past.
I am describing actual leftists.
You are describing a small minority of self-styled leftists who largely are terminally online.
Those doing the real work, such as practicing mutual aid or organizing tenants unions, are not generally defending historic atrocities.
The point of the post is that the window of mainstream discourse has shifted so far right that even basic human empathy has become controversial.
When have workers ever controlled production, with such control being horrible for workers?
The US was founded on slavery and genocide. When elections were implemented, four percent only of the population was granted suffrage, propertied white men.
I always wonder at what particular point the US is believed to have become democratic, since its founders clearly maintained a deep enthusiasm for racism, sexism, and aristocracy.