You're viewing a single thread.
saw someone say maybe another trump win is good because it will mobilize the left a little more
threw up in my mouth a bit through the tears
It's a round about way of saying they want a civil war.
A lot of those types of leftists fantasize about a glorious revolution, but many revolutions have happened and no utopias exist so…
I think Contrapoints made the same argument in one of her videos.
Agreed. I would add to that -- there's actually an incredibly instructive example to draw by looking at the non-violent-revolutionary movements that did achieve big social change in the past. The US labor movement in the late 1800s, Gandhi's independence movement, the US civil rights movement with its partial victory, things like that. There are a ton of examples of people who achieved big things to revise the systems that rule their daily lives, starting from a way less advantaged position than the left in the modern day US. It's not easy, no, but compared to an Indian person under the British Raj it's an absolute cakewalk.
Strangely enough, the people who are so incredibly upset with the broken system in the US as it pertains to this election (which, yeah, I get that), are somehow totally uninterested in looking at what actions big or small might produce positive change. They're solely focused on criticizing Biden and only Biden, or on saying that it's so broken that we might as well let Trump come to power because what's the difference.
It's like "The plane is having engine trouble and I don't know if we're going to make it. I'm real scared and upset about the situation we're in. I know! Let's shoot the pilot in the head."
Wasn't the us labor movement violent? I seem to remember something about troops firing on striking miners.
Mine owners utilized violence and essentially wage slavery to keep miners from unionizing and asking for more fair working conditions. Pinkertons got their reputation as being violent corporate mercenaries in this period, and they continue to be. The violence caused miners to fight back, and when they did the US army got involved usually in the interest of the mine owners. The lead up to the Battle of Blair Mountain is one of the best examples of this and maybe the most impactful.
It was nonviolent, until bosses/police starting shooting miners and their families, at which point it developed into a small-scale civil war. So yes, I shouldn't have simply said blanket non violent I guess... I was just trying to draw a distinction between "let's fight for justice for ourselves" versus "let's storm the capital and do away with the leaders" as two roads (with the first being more effective, and the second often leading to catastrophe instead of the progress that was hoped for.)
Labor rights and the labor movement throughout history in the US have been incredibly violent so I don't know what revisionist history you're talking about.
You're right, I should amend my comment to note that it wasn't non violent and basically a small-scale civil war
Oh, hang on
(Actually, I do think I should have said it was nonviolent until they started shooting railroad workers, since that one came first. I'm a little fuzzy on the exact chronology but I think that would have been more accurate yes. The person I was responding to just said miners so I said miners.)
They would engage in retaliatory violence but the first shot was never fired by the labor organizers
I love how centrists will confidently cite the civil rights movement without a hint of irony, and then completely ignore what those civil rights leaders had to say about the objections of moderates over direct action. They'll silently downvote a direct quote from MLK without engaging with how it somehow doesn't apply to them.
Direct action on Gaza sounds great.
Are you under the impression that MLK was saying, don't vote for Boutwell in his election against Bull Connor, because Boutwell isn't good enough to deserve our support?
He's not making a comment on voting or not voting at all, in fact this is written after Boutwell was elected.
He's addressing criticisms that directing protests at Boutwell before he has a chance to govern is misplaced and ill-timed, and he's pointing out that while Boutwell may be gentler, he's still a segregationist and is still in need of pressure. It doesn't matter if one is gentler than the other, the goal remains the same, and no freedom is ever given by the oppressor without being demanded.
Biden is gentler, but he's still a Zionist, and so he is still in need of pressure.
In case you're unfamiliar with the rest of his letter, he's also saying that the purpose of all direct action is to place pressure on moderates so that they may come to the negotiation table, even -and especially- direct action that causes material (in MLK's case, non-violent) harm to those same moderates.
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation
And I haven't even gotten to the Malcom X quotes.
They also seem to leave out the reality that without the threat of Malcom MLK would have been a lot less effective.
I know what he's saying, yes. Like I say, pressure on Biden over Gaza sounds great, and it actually seems like it's having an impact, although it's still pretty fuckin mild compared with what the US should be doing.
It's less than it should be, but it's more than anyone has done before.
I've been super impressed with most of the conversations here and how they've evolved. Early on, there was a lot of friction between the uncommitted movement and the center-left, and I saw some accounts really grabbing ahold of that divide and trying to expand it... but the community turned it around. We saw a few weeks of posts explaining the difference between primaries and the general in a surprisingly nonabusive way for social media and now those troll accounts can just keep throwing out "genocide Joe" and it becomes less plausible and more ridiculous everyday he takes another step away from Israel.
Man, do I want more, but we've gotta claw for every inch, and it's easier to do together.
Great summary. This has been my experience as well. You know what that means tho, right? WE MUST PUSH HARDER STILL!
The astroturfers will only get more numerous and hateful as we inch closer to november.
Stay strong comrade. Solidarity with workers, solidarity with the voters of which we should be a part, solidarity with those establishing systems of mutual aid, solidarity with those that take to the streets. Everyone must do a little of sonething, some will do more of everything.
Ah, well welcome to the protest then, comrade.
🫡 🚩
Later in his life Malcolm X realized much of his youthful positions on things was stupid and he retracted them.
But not before we all benefitted from his activism.
To [email protected] 's point, MLK and Malcom ended up playing off each other in a way that resulted in the civil rights act, and for that we should certainly be grateful
Well said.
I believe a fraction of them are actual authoritarian sympathizers, and are just hoping "their brand" will align with a future hypothetical autocrat.
They don't want actual justice, they just want to reroll the dice and hopefully come out on top.
To the other fraction, I think those folks are exactly the folks who completed those movements you mentioned. They worked hard to push the existing system towards their goal, often starting from a very weak position.
That pushing largely isn't done, and it is less glamorous and obvious compared to flipping the table, killing the current leaders (and a bunch of other demonized but innocent groups oopsie daisy) and trying again. That's how you get a Khmer rouge and then a pol pot.
We need another MLK and his contemporaries.
I agree, we really need some leftists who have the backbone of MLK.
Now let me say a word for those of you who are on strike. You’ve been out now for a number of days. But don’t despair. Nothing worthwhile is gained without sacrifice. The thing for you to do is stay together. Say to everybody in this community that you’re going to stick it out to the end until every demand is met. And that you’re going to say, “We ain’t going to let nobody turn us around.” Let it be known everywhere that along with wages and all of the other securities that you are struggling for, you’re also struggling for the right to organize and be recognized…
We can all get more together than we can apart. This is the way to gain power. Power is the ability to achieve purpose. Power is the ability to effect change. We need power…
Now the other thing is that nothing is gained without pressure. Don’t let anybody tell you to go back on your job and paternalistically say, now, “You’re my man, and I’m going to do the right thing for you if you’ll just come back on the job.” Don’t go back on the job until the demands are met. Never forget that freedom is not something that must be demanded by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed. Freedom is not some lavish dish that the power structure and the white forces imparted with making positions will voluntarily hand down on a silver platter while the Negro merely furnishes the appetite.
If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it. Now, you know what, you may have to escalate the struggle a bit. If they keep refusing, and they will not recognize the union, and will not decree further check-off for the collection of dues, I’m telling you what you ought to do, and you’re together here enough to do it. In a few days you ought to get together and just have a general work stoppage in the city of Memphis.
Now that shit will fire you up. Good stuff.
Notice he was very forceful and determined, but never said stupid stuff like "hurr let's get the guillotine!"
Nor did he say "hurr it's your duty to vote for the lesser-evil!"
Well, it's completely irrelevant to the quote
Lol wut? He's saying that power comes from solidarity, and with solidarity you make demands, and when you have power you do not relent until those demands are met. He's also saying that the harm caused by direct action in pursuit of liberty is justified, even when that harm is to everyone (as in the case of a general work stoppage in an entire city). That you don't want to see the relevance isn't something I can help.
The point isn't to cause the harm, it's to use the threat to gain concessions.
Say to everybody in this community that you’re going to stick it out to the end until every demand is met. And that you’re going to say, “We ain’t going to let nobody turn us around.
We can all get more together than we can apart. This is the way to gain power. Power is the ability to achieve purpose. Power is the ability to effect change. We need power…
If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it. Now, you know what, you may have to escalate the struggle a bit. If they keep refusing, and they will not recognize the union, and will not decree further check-off for the collection of dues, I’m telling you what you ought to do, and you’re together here enough to do it. In a few days you ought to get together and just have a general work stoppage in the city of Memphis.
Yeah that's about unions, in active negotiations.
You are not in active negotiations. You are in the end game. You have very few possible choices, and holding out (not voting) does not empower a track of choices, or opportunity. It only silos you into a particular choice.
"Sticking it out" does not better your scenario, and especially does not better the scenario of the most at risk.
Quit bolding shit, I know how to read.
Lol what a fruitful day of reading: since you mentioned Gandhi...
Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French.
A 'No' uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a 'Yes' merely uttered to please, or worse, to avoid trouble.
Fear has its use but cowardice has none.
Man lives freely only by his readiness to die, if need be, at the hands of his brother, never by killing him.
It is any day better to stand erect with a broken and bandaged head then to crawl on one's belly, in order to be able to save one's head.
Is it not enough to know the evil to shun it? If not, we should be sincere enough to admit that we love evil too well to give it up.
If co-operation is a duty, I hold that non-co-operation also under certain conditions is equally a duty.
Honestly, of all the civil rights figures you could have cited, Gandhi is the one who would tell you that non-cooperation with evil is more important than self-preservation. How on earth could you look at Gandhi and say; 'he would want me to vote for the lesser evil'?
I thought we had worked this out earlier, talking about Bull Connor. I was all on board when I thought you were saying, let's give Biden a hard time over Gaza. Now I'm a lot less sure what you're saying.
Do you think working as a collaborator of the Raj, is more or less the same as voting for the clearly less-genocide-supporting of two arguably-genocide-supporting candidates?
Would this apply also to refusing to vote for Boutwell over Connor, or refusing to vote for the SDP (with all its colonial adventures in Africa and etc) over the NSDAP in prewar Germany?
I think u accidentally replied to the wrong comment, but im starting to really love seeing ur name come up. Very well informed on a period in time most of us only know so much.
No, he's saying sticking with your principles is more important than even preventing your own harm. He pushed for change by being willing to sacrifice himself. He wasn't just blindly non-violemt, he risked self injury to advance change
You keep fast-forwarding to voting day, but confidently standing your ground now is what moves the needle, not beating the drums of cooperation for Biden.
Yes, I know what Gandhi's saying. I'm asking how you'd apply it to the present day, and you're deflecting instead of answering.
You keep fast-forwarding to voting day
Oh sorry I must have replied to a message under the wrong meme or something; the one on my screen is different I guess.
(Edit: Also there's this)
I keep asking you to clarify what you're saying, and you treat it like it's some sort of trick, and react with tactics instead of clarity. That's a hallmark of propaganda. Just say what you mean, if you feel confident enough to stand your ground in it.
I'm saying the same as Gandhi is:
Stand up for your principles and don't cooperate with genocide. Be willing to put yourself in harms way (trump) and demand justice in exchange for your vote.
It's not a trick or propaganda, it's pretty straightforward. I'm so confused because you do seem genuine but for some reason no matter how close I walk you to the conclusion you still somehow miss the point.
Stop committing yourself to supporting Biden when he's actively supporting genocide. Push him to see reason. In 7 months you can make the hard choice you keep harping about, but until then what's the fucking point of running cover for him when you could be pushing him to see reason
It's not that goddamn complicated.
Stop committing yourself to supporting Biden when he’s actively supporting genocide. Push him to see reason. In 7 months you can make the hard choice you keep harping about, but until then what’s the fucking point of running cover for him when you could be pushing him to see reason
I noticed this comment outside of the conversation we were already having, and I had to say that I actually completely agree. We should be pushing him, especially since there's evidence it's working. And you don't have to refuse to vote for him -- you still have 7 months until you have to make the hard decision.
I can get behind this.
Thank you for saying that, truly.
People are treating protests of Biden as if it's the same as wanting Trump to win. People are so committed to the electoral team sports that they're completely allergic to exercising their power against their own party.
There's a reason why civil rights movements existed almost entirely outside of electoral politics; liberty and justice were never on the ballet to vote for to begin with.
If MLK resigned himself to what Democrats were willing to provide without protest, we'd still have segregation. If Douglass avoided speaking truth to power and rallying against Lincoln, we might not have abolished slavery and reconstruction might have been even worse (though admittedly reconstruction was shit anyway, but at least that wasn't Lincoln's fault).
Be willing to put yourself in harms way (trump)
There it is
You understand that it's not just me in harm's way with Trump, right?
That he's far more pro genocide (including specifically in Palestine) than Biden is?
I'm so confused because you do seem genuine but for some reason no matter how close I walk you to the conclusion you still somehow miss the point.
Believe it or not, there is often more to a conversation than you just walking the person you're talking to over to the point that you want to make and repeating it in different ways until they absorb your way of seeing it.
I could be right or wrong; I'm just saying how I see things. But if your whole model for this is that your viewpoint is the correct one, and you need to persuade the person you're talking to to see things exactly as you do and anything else is just a frustrating expenditure of bytes, then I think you're gonna get limited benefit from any amount of time you spend online.
Im not telling to vote for Trump. I'm not even telling you to not vote for Biden. I'm telling you to fucking ask for something in exchange for the vote.
There's a separate argument about what the value democracy is if it can't be expected not to support genocide, but I'm not even pressing that issue.
Saying you aren't going to vote if Biden doesn't see reason doesn't put Trump in the white house, it puts pressure on Biden. What you actually do on election day is different, but campaigning for Biden despite his genocidal complicity is so far from activism that it's borderline complicit in the genocide in itself.
Gandhi worked with the lesser evil plenty to earn India's independence. He negotiated with Britain on pacts and agreements that didn't result in India's freedom but generally gained them more autonomy and fairness. He even supported the British in WW2 and suspended independence efforts at the time.
If Gandhi said "okay hold up, let's take care of the fascists alongside our colonizers"*, I think he would want you to vote for the lesser evil. I think we can infer from his actions that progressively achieving a goal through nonviolence is something he wholeheartedly supported.
*(Granted, he still advocated that Japan and the Nazis be defeated without significant violence)
And Douglass eventually worked with Lincoln, but not before ruthlessly criticizing him and supporting the dump-lincoln movement
Gandhi refused repeated offers from the British, he absolutely did not just accept their offer as given.
True, but the offers he did accept were not immediate independence for India. He knew when to take a good compromise and when to push for more. He continued to negotiate with the British while taking imperfect, but good deals.
Lol this is what gets me about the "get the guillotine" folks.
They think they'll be the youth on the propaganda poster, waving the flag over the rubble of a conquered city, as if that's realistic, or that it wouldn't come with massive loss of life (not just in the capital class), lawlessness, and a huge power vacuum that will obviously be filled by an authoritarian (and likely a bigoted fascist).
People only seem to know the "guillotining the aristocracy" part, not the "reign of terror" part.
Or the bit about setting up systems of mutual aid so that our comrades arent killed by the dogs. Theyre here to cry against voting. Not to actually bring about a revolution and especially not keep each other alive in the event of one.
I've seen some people on lemmy when I first started lurking, try to claim that some of the most dystopian nations are really close to utopia and are actually trying really hard guys. I think many of them were those types of leftists.
Just get a load of the accounts that keep replying to the comments i leave. Theyre not good faith actors. Theyre paid trolls or bots. And theyve flooded this thread. This post was at 440 upvotes with 240 comments some hrs ago and as of now sits at 489 and 360 comments. That should hopefully strike one as unusual. Im willing to bet that in that time this thread was upvoted significantly more than 50 times. American leftists are being targeted to ensure we dont turn out in november.
All those armchair warriors that have a couple guns and say they're ready for the revolution, but aren't even participating in any activism besides edgelording on forums.
Sure you are, champ. Sure you are. Why don't you instacart yourself some hot pockets and a gallon of ice cream.
If you aren't part of at least three mutual aid groups providing mesh support in your tri-county area, I don't wanna hear a goddamn thing about the revolution from you.
This comment reads like sarcasm, but unironically yeah. If you aren't politically active already, you're not going to suddenly gain the will to overthrow the government when Trump wins again.
For sure. If you want to break the chains of international capitalism, you better have a tested plan to replace those logistics networks for necessities.
I hope this doesn't come across as insincere, but why is the tri-county part relevant? Is it just a convenient geographic grouping? Is it a metaphor?
Metaphor. I mean you should not only be supporting your own community, but involved in inter-community aid and organization if you are truly advocating for a revolution.
It blows my mind that we're still discussing this after the German left took this approach with Hitler.
There is no "after fascists". Fascists are the enemy that we unite against. Hitler wouldn't have come into power if the leftists and moderates cooperated and had a healthy relationship. Even if some factions of the left/moderates want to play off fascists for power, there's still plenty of people in the relevant group who dislike the fascists. Unite with them to take down the fascists and elements of their party who empower them.
We'll get nowhere if we assume the entire group of leftists/moderates are fascist supporters. We need to ally.
??
There is no "after fascists"? What the hell are you talking about? Are you aware Germany is currently one of the strongest economies, one of the top political players, one of the most influential countries we have today? They also have laws specifically prohibiting denying the holocaust and disseminating Nazi propaganda, because they learned and our . They learned their lesson with fascism and now are actively fighting against it, while being a great country to live in; This is after fascists. Sure, it wasn't the next fucking day. But it happened, which is more than can be said about the US.
So yeah, maybe sometimes the solution is to burn the country down and hope it rises from the ashes. If it does, it'll be stronger. If it doesn't, maybe it shouldn't.
I don't think hoping someone external can decimate our population in a war is the answer. Especially when the country most likely to do so would be China.
The current US military is more powerful than Hitler's ever was, and it's not close.
There is no "after fascists"? What the hell are you talking about? Are you aware Germany is currently one of the strongest economies, one of the top political players, one of the most influential countries...
Ok, we've solved it:
Step 1: Vote in fascism.
Step 2: Wait for the US, UK and Russia to destroy your country and millions of your young people.
Step 3: ...
Step 4: Leftist utopia.
As long as the US provides essentially all of your military support for the next hundred years, free of charge
The trolls ive spoken to here are afraid of leftist solidarity. They claim they want change, but whine and cry the second you call for all roads for change to be taken. Mutual aid, direct action, and voting are praxis. We will have an impossible time trying to get any of those first 2 done under dumbass.
As someone on the far end of the left spectrum, any and all leftward movement must be embraced at all opportunities. How am i to convince anyone to work together with me, if I shit on their methods? All must be embraced. Some will be more effective, some less, but thats how we make connections.
Its about time this country learned what solidarity is.
Very well spoken. Even if the progress is minor, it's helping some people, and that's important. Obamacare was not the ultimate, perfect healthcare fix, but it did give a whole lot of people affordable healthcare where they didn't previously. It was a cause worth supporting for that reason. And as someone who had to rely on it for a time, I greatly appreciate it.
If we've made someone's life better or easier, we've succeeded. That to me is practical leftism. We help as many as we can as much as we can. Since we aren't in unilateral power, that means we have to compromise. And working with colleagues will be more successful than being combative. The lone socialist in the Virginia House was able to get a lot done that way.
Thats a part of practical leftism indeed! Did the legalize end even the legal persecution of LGBTQ folks? Not entirely, look at the south. But it did( force a cultural shift. Suddenly it wasnt so cool to use gay as an insult and shit on queer ppl who looked/dressed/sounded a certain way.
The LGBTQ ppl in my life have been afforded the ability to step out of the closet with less fear than before. If im to march with them, this imperfect solution is working towards my ends as well.
Solidarity, comrade, regardless where ur politics are. I want liberation even for the righty whities that profess to hate us.
I really hope the majority of leftists are like you. I'm slightly more right, as a progressive, but I hope the more combative leftists I see online are just the loud minority.
You seem like someone that I could have a fun debate with over a beer about where we differ, and you have my respect.
Thanks dude.
The combative ones seem like trolls to me. I left a comment elsewhere outlining it, but leftist spaces on reddit were once open minded and places for critical thinking, not circle jerking. Our wing is being coopted ths way the right was in 2016. Only reason i speak to the trolls is so for everyone else to see.
Lol are you really going for this "notlikeotherleftists" persona? Buddy there's already a name for that. It's "liberal". You're talking like one, acting like one and voting like one.
Never said any of that. In fact, given the fact that theres groups like the Spanish anarchists who participate in govt, what im going for is exactlyliketheotherleftists. Except u know, the actual ones who understand that building bridges is how u make anything happen.
"building bridges" as in voting for pro-corporate genocide supporting trash like Biden?
As in, for the millionth time, since u follow me around, keeping the guy who wants to let "stepping-stone" Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe get over run.
Eta: also, this troll keeps ignoring my repeated endorsement of direct action and mutual aid but fixates on the voting thing. Funny how one (apparently meaningless) point there is enough to warrant following me around wherever i go to wage the same tired discussion. "Genocide bad," "yes, but 10x as much genocide worse." "😡"
I like to point to one of the most successful Socialist parties that ever existing in the USA: The Socialist Party of Milwaukee. They got 3 mayors elected and effected actual change.
Part of the Socialist Party's lasting success in Milwaukee can also be attributed to their pragmatism, Gousha says. Daniel Hoan made a point to exist within a capitalist free market system, they were fiscally conservative, and they worked with other parties to accomplish their goals.
Their pragmatism drew criticism from other socialists around the country, who called Milwaukeeans "sewer socialists" for not being revolutionary enough, according to Gousha.
"As Gene Zeidler said, 'The socialists of Milwaukee took that as a badge of honor. And they said, well you may think we need to be more revolutionary but you could not be elected dog catcher and we’re winning elections,' " Gousha notes.
Specifically Voting is the starting shot from which all other actions flow in an election cycle
Doing all the other parts is basically just aesthetic shopping if you won't do the part that changes material conditions at the macro level
I... understand.
This is what i mean by solidarity, amigo.
I disagree, on a fundamental level, that is. Voting is, as far as im concerned, the least you can do...
Still doing it. Ill still discuss with u voting options and effecting change via the electoral method. I vote in any and all elections in which i am eligible. Right now, i dont give two shits about convincing u about direct action being more effective. If i waste my time on that, that takes time from both of us in which we could be doing something productive (like discussing with those who are more likely to be swayed why direct action is important). Much more productive use of my time with u would be discussing which candidates are most likely to make material conditions better for us all.
And above all of that, you are (more than likely, anyway) a working class comrade who is exploited for their surplus value the same way i am. Why would i want to get on ur bad side? I want change, and ur preferred method is proven, clearly. Its best for us all to foster good relationships with one another. Then, you have another reliable voter in me, and i can rest assured that by working together (in say, going after the less reliable voters) u and I are pushing our communities in the correct (read: left) direction.
I say again, solidarity, amigo!
That's what I meant by starting shot, it's the least you can do.
Aesthetic shopping at every other step without doing the first part is bailing water out of a ship without plugging the hole first, like yeah you can absolutely keep the water out but more is gonna keep coming in without doing that first step to try and stem the problem from getting even worse.
I just resent the people who skip the first step especially right now because to me it seems less like they're even interested in bailing the water out and more like they're interested in looking grammable while doing a shit job at bailing water out, which hilariously I see a lot of them projectingly accuse moderates of doing whenever there's an argument about who gets to show up to pride.
IMO admittance to the marches and mutual aid events and conferences and stuff should be predicted on proving you voted, something like a BPT verification pic, something that is recognizably you, a date the pic was taken on, and the most recent "I voted sticker" for the place you voted in. Probably won't get all the slacktivists but it'll definitely filter out the karens who think demanding to speak to the party's manager is ultra based praxis! XD
Solidarity l'enton sadi'i!
Haha!
Youve a way with words. Those first two paragraphs id love to stamp in highly visible public spaces, esp the second! Thats exactly how it feels, and then these numbskulls insist if u suggest voting ur a "lib," as if the society i advocate hardest for isnt cashless, classless, stateless.
That last paragraph tho... i dont like the idea of holding any purity tests to begin with, but i do understand the sentiment. As ive seen some others on here say, if ur over here crying about ppl voting, chances are ur not going to be the one going out and actually participating in direct action, or esp mutual aid, in the first place.
l'enton sadi'i
Forgive my ignorance, but what language would this be, what does it translate to?
Shami dialect Arabic, it means "solidarity to you my friend!"
In MSA it'd have been written l'entum sadiqi.