this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
29 points (91.4% liked)

Ask Lemmygrad

1026 readers
12 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Straight forward question. Been trying to gauge the man's politics and I think he leans more toward being an anti-colonial nationalist rather than an outright socialist. Still based and deserving of critical support, but maybe not the next Thomas Sankara; not that he needs to be, but it'd be cooler if he was.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Munrock@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

As military officer you could say he was a (disloyal) servant of the bourgeois state, but to say he was bourgeois just by being a military officer is stretching the definition. Saying he held "power and relative privilege" is a reach. He didn't own capital; he made money selling his labour to the state: he wasn't and isn't bourgeoisie.