While some on twitter trying to defend Angry Arab’s [shameful and disgusting] positions on the Syrian revolution (which I’ll be responding to soon on this blog), I was asked this question:
I love KABOBfest blog, and I do respect most of its writers, but this tweet above is offensive on two levels.
1- When the Tunisian revolution erupted, everyone here supported it, did it have “faces”? More importantly, must it? Isn’t the most amazing thing about regional revolutions is how it proved “opposition” folks are fucked as well as “intellectuals” and “experts”?
This question @Kabobfest asked kind of missed the whole point of the new era we’re witnessing: it’s people’s time, no leader is needed.
It’s become evident in the Syrian consciousness now that not only the street is leading the revolution, but most importantly, activists and prominent intellectuals that are loved by the revolutionaries cannot contain the people’s movement. For example, Burhan Ghalious is very loved by the Syrian street, he’s cool and all, but if he went on TV and said “hey guys, I think we should stop and start talking to the regime instead.” Not only no one will listen to him, but pretty much it’ll mean he’s fucked for good, after Adonis and Angry Arab.
Who to support? The people. Period.
The person asking this question is living in another continent, politically and historically. Faces are not what people want nor what they’re looking for. They’re rather looking for a political discourse, which is a huge topic right now in Syria.
2-Another reason why this question is offensive: the person asking this question clearly hasn’t done his/her homework.
This revolution has so many faces, you’re just not looking close enough.