„What is Daesh? If you think of political change as something akin to a change of air in the room, then Daesh is the person who puts all windows wide open for a limited break only to close them again soon. The reformist is the one who puts them a little open over a long time and ignores the noise. After a revolution you can still have reforms but they will fail to lure anyone into fraudulent compromise. In the worst case you have only one window and to keep the door closed so that reform can never mature into revolution. The problem is, currently Daesh does achieve this by throwing an ancient vase into the window, pulling out after both are broken, and boasting that it left a lot of work. It should be using the handle.“

„Nevertheless, Saud is the cancer, Daesh is the better-than-none treatment. There can be proposals of an alternative treatment, but calling for the Islamic State to cave in to Saud is nonsense, all the more so from the ground of the Korean approach on sovereignty. The problem of Saud is that it responds to Daesh attempts for exchange of air by opening the valves of gas and oil, creating an explosive fuel oxygen mix susceptible to the lightest spark. In short, these rotten fruit are being challenged by their offspring, and to evade those challenges they are squandering their wealth in a trade war. It is like the parable of the evil planter who would rather sell off the property than allow its heirs to choose their own way.“

„What is going on there? We observe resource squandering. They are wasting tomorrow‘s resources to prolong yesterday‘s fraud. Why would someone want to do that if it has been fraud all along the way? Answer: There is speculation over Daesh to cave in. Before the fat man gets slim, the little boy dies of hunger. But can that really be desired? It would not make the cancer of the international system go away. It would not even bring about a more successful treatment. It is lament without an alternative. The classics of Marxism-Leninism call this a reactionary and immature position. It is looking up to the apologetics of imperialism instead of looking down on it. It does not see imperialism as what it is but is harbouring naive expectations instead.”

“Let me take you in depth with this. What would happen if Daesh were to say, hi there, we decided that nationalism is still worth yet another try, go ahead and assign us to nations? It would be a lie, but nobody would care. Daesh leaders would be serving man-made nation states instead of a transcendental purpose. Not a single problem would be solved, but every solution thereof would be buried underneath a shit-load of misled enthusiasm. It would not merely be an abuse of identity. This is a fictional scenario for the self-evident reason that Daesh created itself out of hell fire precisely in order to remove Saud and beyond that purpose would decay into a caricature of itself. The classics termed feudalism anachronistic long ago. It would be naive to assume Saud could be removed with a music video.”

“What matters from the perspective of class struggle is to get feudalism abandoned. This requires communism, global communism, not the nationalised variety mirroring some aspects of feudalism that failed, because it has made it evident over the time that democracy alone cannot overcome that remainder. Our aim is to neutralise a dynasty that is run by an affinity group of clerics with another affinity group of clerics rejecting every aspect of dynastic rule as well as its democratic surrogate. The regulation of oil production must cease to be a weapon in the hand of the feudal landlord, all the more so as it is still extremely difficult to entirely discard oil use without ending up with a surrogate monopoly of other energy carriers. If Daesh commits its oil to this global purpose it is a good thing, better for the climate than those phoney – election-cycle-bridging – diplomatic treaties.”

“In the end, an indigenous treatment against the cancer of Saud is in our interest, not for ourselves but because it is the best for them. It is also in the interest of their Islamic neighbours who bear the load of its aggressions. Furthermore it is an open secret that this cancer has befallen the Western military-industrial complex. To achieve any significant political changes of industrial nations the oil spill is the first issue to do something about. As long as the spill goes on the world economy is a destructive force that cannot lead to anything good because it spills its toxic investments everywhere. We need to roll back the economy into the marketplaces and create non-commercial spaces in order for the things to arise that are not worth living for under commercial circumstances. With fossil energy at realistic prices actually everything that is not explicitly commercial is non-commercial.”

“And here we get at the fundamental impulse that inspires Daesh: With Saud in charge of it, the Arab cultural heritage currently is not worth living for, and unlike Al Qaeda which merely drew consequences thereof the Islamic State has the purpose to change that. Or more precisely, create the economic conditions with which it might become so. But to end the spill Daesh must overrule Saud in terms of control of oil infrastructure. Yet once that happens the imperialist cancer is expected to spew destruction again. It is already happening in the Northern neighbour territories and in the Houthi war in the South of the Arab peninsula. Hence, in order to make its cultural heritage worth living for again, Daesh must successfully overrule both the native dynasty and the foreign imperialist. Only overruling one side is being exploited by the other and might play out worse than doing nothing.”

“That actually is a situation Korea should be familiar with, given the puppet regime in the South and the foreign military occupation. To make unification worth living for both disturbances must be neutralised at once. This makes it all the more saddening that the situation is not properly recognised by the Korean side. But at the heart of the failure is the lack of historical materialism: Since Saud is the single biggest remainder of feudalism, which democracy never managed to overcome, and communism is at the end of historical progress in which both are to be entirely dismantled, a stumbling bloc of that dimension ought to be of interest to communists already for theoretical reasons alone. How can it be? It can be because other than a grain field an oil field can deliver next year’s harvest this year. So seen from the future, it is a looting case and Daesh are the vigilantes.”

“Maybe if Korea had oil it would be weighing the issue more carefully. It has something Daesh is not striving for, and that is nuclear deterrence capabilities of extremely high ceremonial significance. And it is priding itself to hold these to the world in the name of a historical ambition of communism. It is equipped with an atomic leverage to a similar extent as Arabia with the petrochemical leverage. It sees itself locked in deterrence with the North Americans, but it is an open secret that experts disagree whether in terms of oil Saud controls Unitedstates or the other way round or both. One way or another, anyone interested in defeating the Americans should be interested in defeating Saud. Defeating not deterring, as in overcoming not occupying.”