You can read part 1 here: Part 1 – The Enemies of the Taliban
You can read part 2 here: Part 2 – The Enemies of the Taliban
Leftists
Among the enemies of the Taliban, the leftists and the small leftist-affiliated groups—despite being the most disorganized, unmotivated, and incoherent—are also the most furious and resentful. These leftists are associated with an old, worn-out ideology, not necessarily elderly in age but outdated in thought. Their deep-seated resentment stems from the fact that, ideologically, the left is the polar opposite of the right. Therefore, the intensity of the leftists’ rage and rebellion against the Taliban and other radical Islamic groups can be seen as both natural and justifiable. There is another reason that fuels this animosity: Afghanistan’s leftists have experienced more bitter defeats in their battles with Islamists than any other political force. Their reactions, in this case, are therefore understandable and logical.
Any political movement that, like Afghanistan’s left, has endured severe defeats and suppression becomes filled with bitterness, anger, and resentment. However, the real tragedy isn’t that Afghanistan’s leftists are overwhelmed by excessive rage—which could be destructive if channeled effectively. One might wish that the old left, through the application of a well-devised and impactful strategy of anger, could become destructive enough to take meaningful steps toward implementing liberating political actions. Unfortunately, this is far from the case. The real problem isn’t an excess of genuine anger but rather its deficiency. What we are witnessing is an overwhelming amount of virtual anger. This anger, generated and distributed across social networks, quickly dissipates at that same level, only to be replaced by fresher outbursts. As a result, the heightened anger and fury among Afghanistan’s leftists, instead of igniting revolutionary motivation, have led to their increased isolation. They have become so marginalized that they are now effectively out of the political game, only found in abundance on Facebook and X (formerly Twitter), where their primary activity consists of hurling insults and venting—what they consider “exposing the truth” or “protesting.” They no longer have any meaningful, substantive discourse to offer.
The small organizations and groups claiming to follow leftist thought, throughout all the years that the Taliban were fighting to regain political power, instead of adopting updated and effective strategies and programs to bring leftist ideology into the broader political arena, have remained painfully out of touch with reality. They have been filled with resentment, stuck in outdated thinking, intensely sectarian, factionalist, NGO-driven, family-oriented, dogmatic, delusional, and fantastical. Ultimately, all their concern became how to use the emergency that arose after Afghanistan’s fall to the Taliban to relocate themselves and their families to Western countries. These are the same countries that, when the old leftist NGO business in Afghanistan was thriving, were labeled “bloodthirsty imperialists.” Those who intended to migrate to these countries were called derogatory terms such as “coward” and “runaway.” Now, these very individuals have packed their bags for those countries, and there is no longer any sign of the minimal activity they had in Afghanistan, with their only “active” presence now on Facebook and nothing more.
Reducing class struggle to virtual resistance carries two disastrous consequences: one for Afghan politics and the other for the old left itself. The first consequence is that in the absence of a real leftist movement, our country remains trapped in the clutches of Islamic fundamentalism, unable to take steps toward economic, political, or cultural development. This lack of progress ensures that no opportunity for the establishment of democracy or secularism in Afghanistan will arise. Given the bad experiences many have had with leftist ideology in Afghanistan and other countries, some may ask, “What does democracy have to do with leftism?” In my view, those who ask this question have a point, as most leftist regimes in the world have been anti-democratic, despite carrying the label “democratic.” Even the names of leftist parties that founded the most authoritarian and criminal regimes in history were adorned with the word “democratic.” We need look no further than the name “People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan.”
Similar examples can be found in other countries. However, there have also been political regimes, both past and present, that hold leftist views while being staunch defenders of democracy. Moreover, the old leftist ideology that resorted to maximum repression to maintain power and obliterated any semblance of democracy holds no appeal. People much prefer political regimes built on liberal democracy to such leftist policies. After all, in neoliberal governments, there is at least some breathing room, and citizens are less poisoned by the stench of toxic ideology. Given these circumstances, we need a new interpretation of leftism—one that recognizes that leftist ideology can only play a vital and pivotal role in politics by simultaneously defending democracy and secularism.
However, Afghanistan’s old leftists have been unable to take steps in this direction, as they refuse to reject dogmatism and say no to the sacred texts of Russian-Chinese Marxism. They continue to staunchly believe in Stalinism and its policy of maximum repression. If they were to come to power—which, fortunately, becomes less likely with each passing day—they would impose an atmosphere of suffocation and terror reminiscent of Stalin’s Soviet Union. Since it is clear that there is currently little room for this to happen—Stalinism is so despised and reactionary that only a deluded fool or incurable ideological fanatic could still defend it—the chances of its success in Afghanistan’s political arena are slim.
Now, we come to the second consequence of reducing class struggle to virtual struggle. By reducing real struggle to soft, purely virtual struggle, Afghanistan’s leftists are undermining their roots. In the age of social media, no one can deny the importance of virtual struggle, but this type of resistance is only truly effective when it supports real, physical political struggles or follows on from them. If you cannot extend real struggles into the virtual space or, conversely, bring virtual resistance into the realm of physical politics, your chances of success are slim. If you invest all your resources in virtual struggle without doing anything beyond that, you will not be taken seriously. This is precisely what has happened to Afghanistan’s old leftists, and it is heartbreaking that they still do not realize the dangerous trap they are in or the disastrous future that awaits them.
You can read the Persian version of this analysis here:
بخش سوم – دشمنان طالبان | روزنامه ۸صبح
You can read Part 4 here: Part 4 – The Enemies of the Taliban
