Often, material the US Empire reports as “aid” is in the form of money supposedly earmarked for development, but in practice ends up in the pockets of pro-US politicians and very little ends up doing anything. The Empire calls it “aid,” but really it’s bribery, and impacts very little in a positive direction.
Secondly, I find it disgusting that you’d use the fact that I’m fine with using they/them pronouns as a means to bludgeon my point. I’m pansexual, and consider myself cisgender. I am queer, and a number of movements I support would oppose that, such as Palestinian liberation. At the same time, I also understand that the path to progress is ending imperialism, not punishing these otherwise progressive movements. By cedeing the narrative to imperialists, you morally justify any terror they inflict, because the Empire has labeled them “bad” and you’ve agreed with them.
The path to liberation for queer Yemenis is made far easier when they have ended imperialism. Progressive social movements in Yemen should be supported regardless, but to try to foster the narrative that Yemen is socially conservative, therefore they are “bad” and thus the imperialists are justified is wrong.
I’m not stupid, and I’d rather you not treat me as such.
I don’t believe I’ve made any such claims about yemen being “bad” nor that that would somehow justify imperialism. I referenced your use of pronouns to point out that you also can understand that supporting a cause is more complicated than simply ticking a box labeled “Support/Depose”, because you have a vested personal interest in the multifaceted nature of the topic.
My point throughout this has been that we should not excuse the bad things just because good things exist - that was the entire reason I called the US “The paragon of humanitarianism” or somesuch. It’s undeniably true that they give out more humanitarian aid than any other country, but that simple claim is both clearly not the full picture, nor does it somehow mean we should ignore their crimes.
If we’re going to support progressive social movements in Yemen, we must inherently accept that there is a state that warrants us progressing from. They are a socially conservative authoritarian nightmare, who tortuously put to death people extremely similar to both you and I. And yet despite that I still support their actions here. We should not hail them as a paragon of human rights, because they clearly are not, and doing so would invalidate the work of so many people who stand their lives against the social order in their country to try and secure a better life for people who have done nothing wrong. But we should also praise that “conservative authoritarian nightmare” regime’s actions here, because they have done something undeniably good.
The world is too complicated to have true paragons, and doing so oversimplifies reality to the point where we become comfortable with tragedy just because the binary says we must be.
The problem with your framing, and the disconnect between you and I, seems to be that you look at progression/regression as simply personal choices, and to be weighed out on scales of positive and negative. You have to analyze the actual underlying systems, ie US Imperialism vs a nationalist country under siege by imperialism. These movements aren’t to be weighed up on a scale, but the overarching forces at play have to be recognized and analyzed. Yemen’s path to progress socially is most accelerated by assisting them against imperialism, liberating queer Yemenis from US imperialism and making their social progress easier.
That’s pretty much exactly what I’ve been saying this entire time. To borrow your langauge: Reducing the situation to a simple binary (good/evil, “peak”/“struggling”, etc.) itself reinforces an imperialist narrative that removes the realities of the situation. By ignoring the actions they take that are negative, we allow that binary narrative to be forced upon them, removing any semblance of agency and reducing “conservative authoritarian nightmare” from a criticism of their government to a criticism of the country as a whole.
They cannot free themselves from imperialism if we use imperialist ideas like “Good vs. Evil” to quantify them.
Framing their government as “conservative authoritarian nightmare” follows the imperialist narrative. It’s a progressive nationalist country resisting imperialism, they would be thrown backwards with regime-change. It’s not about binaries, but about forces at play.
Absolutely! It’s not about binaries, and I’m not and never have been advocating for a regime change.
You yourself have described them as socially conservative:
their social conservativism isn’t intrinsic to being Yemeni but is a consequence of nationalist resistance to imperialism
And I continue to agree - and the reality is that right now, as a consequence of the imperialist system they’re forced to exist within, they are a socially conservative government that supports authoritarian actions as a consequence of outside pressures. I don’t think either of us think they intrinsically are that way, but they are that way right now - and the result is a situation I am absolutely comfortable describing as a “nightmare” for queer people to live within.
I don’t think that every aspect of Yemen is a nightmare, nor that it is a nightmare for every Yemeni citizen. But it is for some of them, and carrying that through as a description since the originating topic was based on the plight of queer yemeni is not particularly unreasonable.
For the queer Yemeni, liberation comes from opposing imperialism first and foremost. This is clear, and is why I take issue with framing the government as a reactionary nightmare. Rather, in resisting imperialism, it’s more common for social progress to accelerate. Yemen is one of the poorest countries in the world, and trying to frame it as an “authoritarian nightmare” just cedes the narrative to imperialists.
Yemen is progressive in the global context, and socially has a long way to go, but in that it already fights imperialism, is capable of progressing socially more expediently. This is the problem with trying to use moralistic terminology and loaded phrases like “authoritarian nightmare,” it makes it seem like Yemen needs outside intervention to progress, rather than internal progress.
Often, material the US Empire reports as “aid” is in the form of money supposedly earmarked for development, but in practice ends up in the pockets of pro-US politicians and very little ends up doing anything. The Empire calls it “aid,” but really it’s bribery, and impacts very little in a positive direction.
Secondly, I find it disgusting that you’d use the fact that I’m fine with using they/them pronouns as a means to bludgeon my point. I’m pansexual, and consider myself cisgender. I am queer, and a number of movements I support would oppose that, such as Palestinian liberation. At the same time, I also understand that the path to progress is ending imperialism, not punishing these otherwise progressive movements. By cedeing the narrative to imperialists, you morally justify any terror they inflict, because the Empire has labeled them “bad” and you’ve agreed with them.
The path to liberation for queer Yemenis is made far easier when they have ended imperialism. Progressive social movements in Yemen should be supported regardless, but to try to foster the narrative that Yemen is socially conservative, therefore they are “bad” and thus the imperialists are justified is wrong.
I’m not stupid, and I’d rather you not treat me as such.
I don’t believe I’ve made any such claims about yemen being “bad” nor that that would somehow justify imperialism. I referenced your use of pronouns to point out that you also can understand that supporting a cause is more complicated than simply ticking a box labeled “Support/Depose”, because you have a vested personal interest in the multifaceted nature of the topic.
My point throughout this has been that we should not excuse the bad things just because good things exist - that was the entire reason I called the US “The paragon of humanitarianism” or somesuch. It’s undeniably true that they give out more humanitarian aid than any other country, but that simple claim is both clearly not the full picture, nor does it somehow mean we should ignore their crimes.
If we’re going to support progressive social movements in Yemen, we must inherently accept that there is a state that warrants us progressing from. They are a socially conservative authoritarian nightmare, who tortuously put to death people extremely similar to both you and I. And yet despite that I still support their actions here. We should not hail them as a paragon of human rights, because they clearly are not, and doing so would invalidate the work of so many people who stand their lives against the social order in their country to try and secure a better life for people who have done nothing wrong. But we should also praise that “conservative authoritarian nightmare” regime’s actions here, because they have done something undeniably good.
The world is too complicated to have true paragons, and doing so oversimplifies reality to the point where we become comfortable with tragedy just because the binary says we must be.
The problem with your framing, and the disconnect between you and I, seems to be that you look at progression/regression as simply personal choices, and to be weighed out on scales of positive and negative. You have to analyze the actual underlying systems, ie US Imperialism vs a nationalist country under siege by imperialism. These movements aren’t to be weighed up on a scale, but the overarching forces at play have to be recognized and analyzed. Yemen’s path to progress socially is most accelerated by assisting them against imperialism, liberating queer Yemenis from US imperialism and making their social progress easier.
Well… yes.
That’s pretty much exactly what I’ve been saying this entire time. To borrow your langauge: Reducing the situation to a simple binary (good/evil, “peak”/“struggling”, etc.) itself reinforces an imperialist narrative that removes the realities of the situation. By ignoring the actions they take that are negative, we allow that binary narrative to be forced upon them, removing any semblance of agency and reducing “conservative authoritarian nightmare” from a criticism of their government to a criticism of the country as a whole.
They cannot free themselves from imperialism if we use imperialist ideas like “Good vs. Evil” to quantify them.
Framing their government as “conservative authoritarian nightmare” follows the imperialist narrative. It’s a progressive nationalist country resisting imperialism, they would be thrown backwards with regime-change. It’s not about binaries, but about forces at play.
Absolutely! It’s not about binaries, and I’m not and never have been advocating for a regime change.
You yourself have described them as socially conservative:
And I continue to agree - and the reality is that right now, as a consequence of the imperialist system they’re forced to exist within, they are a socially conservative government that supports authoritarian actions as a consequence of outside pressures. I don’t think either of us think they intrinsically are that way, but they are that way right now - and the result is a situation I am absolutely comfortable describing as a “nightmare” for queer people to live within.
I don’t think that every aspect of Yemen is a nightmare, nor that it is a nightmare for every Yemeni citizen. But it is for some of them, and carrying that through as a description since the originating topic was based on the plight of queer yemeni is not particularly unreasonable.
For the queer Yemeni, liberation comes from opposing imperialism first and foremost. This is clear, and is why I take issue with framing the government as a reactionary nightmare. Rather, in resisting imperialism, it’s more common for social progress to accelerate. Yemen is one of the poorest countries in the world, and trying to frame it as an “authoritarian nightmare” just cedes the narrative to imperialists.
Yemen is progressive in the global context, and socially has a long way to go, but in that it already fights imperialism, is capable of progressing socially more expediently. This is the problem with trying to use moralistic terminology and loaded phrases like “authoritarian nightmare,” it makes it seem like Yemen needs outside intervention to progress, rather than internal progress.