To condemn an anti-imperialist state that is actively improving the Global South and other oppressed peoples’ material conditions is to condemn internationalism itself.
"Neither-sideism" is worse than the worst possible attitude because it involves wearing the mask of "neutrality".
“Neutrality” is one of the most persuasive illusions of modern political language. It presents itself not as a position among others, but as a space outside all positions. Yet this “outside” is often nothing more than the most refined form of an already embedded power structure.
Özcan Buze
Neutrality as the Invisible Ideology of the Modern Order
Neutrality is not the absence of power—it is the most effective way power hides itself. It defines what can be seen, what can be said, and what can be ignored.
Özcan Buze
May 01, 2026
View stats in the app
3
1
Introduction: The Anatomy of the Claim to Neutrality
“Neutrality” is one of the most persuasive illusions of modern political language. It presents itself not as a position among others, but as a space outside all positions. Yet this “outside” is often nothing more than the most refined form of an already embedded power structure.
At first glance, "neutrality" appears to signify a stance above conflict. But a closer look reveals something different: it is a framing mechanism that determines how conflict itself becomes visible, intelligible, and legitimate. Once this frame is in place, what counts as a legitimate actor, a valid question, or an acceptable reality is already partially decided.
The issue, then, is not whether "neutrality" exists, but how it is produced. In most cases, neutrality is not an ethical stance; it is a narrative technology—one that allows power relations to operate without naming themselves.
This disgusting paradigm was at its most obvious in Syria with "influencers" celebrating "liberation" for the people even as murder and ethnic cleansing was happening for all to see. It's there to be seen anyplace that Empire has stuck it's meddling conniving fingers into but was so blatantly obvious in real time there too that I couldn't fathom how they had the absolute tRumpian audacity to pontificate on who had a right to an opinion if it contradicted theirs. Supposedly leftists have no problem talking about regimes and liberation without seeing the oxymoron that concept creates in real time and the colonial mindset it typifies along with the white supremacy it tries to force down the throats of cultures which have existed for millennia. The narcissism is mind bending.
thank you. western lady from non violent communication circles, with little interest in naming Empire who loves stories of tribal learning in from thousands of years of oral telling The Walking People by Paula Underwood looked at me in horror when I said violence is the only way the yoke of empire is thrown. I quoted Fanon concerning violence in a recent trans contexual conversation facilitated by Warm Data Lab, she was very uncomfortable that i reminded the right to take arms. Warm Data Lab another construct without the history and saying all the contradictions about "a changing world" are valid as long as it doesnt lead to discomfort for the wealthy whites.
There is no such thing as an "anti-imperialist state." To think otherwise is to make a mockery of a marxist understanding of how imperialism comes about and why conflicts between sets of capitalist nations even occur.
"Neither-sideism" is worse than the worst possible attitude because it involves wearing the mask of "neutrality".
“Neutrality” is one of the most persuasive illusions of modern political language. It presents itself not as a position among others, but as a space outside all positions. Yet this “outside” is often nothing more than the most refined form of an already embedded power structure.
Özcan Buze
Neutrality as the Invisible Ideology of the Modern Order
Neutrality is not the absence of power—it is the most effective way power hides itself. It defines what can be seen, what can be said, and what can be ignored.
Özcan Buze
May 01, 2026
View stats in the app
3
1
Introduction: The Anatomy of the Claim to Neutrality
“Neutrality” is one of the most persuasive illusions of modern political language. It presents itself not as a position among others, but as a space outside all positions. Yet this “outside” is often nothing more than the most refined form of an already embedded power structure.
At first glance, "neutrality" appears to signify a stance above conflict. But a closer look reveals something different: it is a framing mechanism that determines how conflict itself becomes visible, intelligible, and legitimate. Once this frame is in place, what counts as a legitimate actor, a valid question, or an acceptable reality is already partially decided.
The issue, then, is not whether "neutrality" exists, but how it is produced. In most cases, neutrality is not an ethical stance; it is a narrative technology—one that allows power relations to operate without naming themselves.
This disgusting paradigm was at its most obvious in Syria with "influencers" celebrating "liberation" for the people even as murder and ethnic cleansing was happening for all to see. It's there to be seen anyplace that Empire has stuck it's meddling conniving fingers into but was so blatantly obvious in real time there too that I couldn't fathom how they had the absolute tRumpian audacity to pontificate on who had a right to an opinion if it contradicted theirs. Supposedly leftists have no problem talking about regimes and liberation without seeing the oxymoron that concept creates in real time and the colonial mindset it typifies along with the white supremacy it tries to force down the throats of cultures which have existed for millennia. The narcissism is mind bending.
thank you. western lady from non violent communication circles, with little interest in naming Empire who loves stories of tribal learning in from thousands of years of oral telling The Walking People by Paula Underwood looked at me in horror when I said violence is the only way the yoke of empire is thrown. I quoted Fanon concerning violence in a recent trans contexual conversation facilitated by Warm Data Lab, she was very uncomfortable that i reminded the right to take arms. Warm Data Lab another construct without the history and saying all the contradictions about "a changing world" are valid as long as it doesnt lead to discomfort for the wealthy whites.
There is no such thing as an "anti-imperialist state." To think otherwise is to make a mockery of a marxist understanding of how imperialism comes about and why conflicts between sets of capitalist nations even occur.
Beware of neo-reactionary hogwash