WTF--if you're an American, it is officially ILLEGAL to boycott Israel!!! [Archive]

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 09:20

Land of the Free my commie pinko ass:

http://www.bis.doc.gov/complianceandenforcement/antiboycottcompliance.htm (notice it's a ".gov" website, so it's official, and not made up)

What do the Laws Prohibit?

Conduct that may be penalized under the TRA and/or prohibited under the EAR includes:

Agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
Agreements to discriminate or actual discrimination against other persons based on race, religion, sex, national origin or nationality.
Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex, or national origin of another person.

and the punishment:

The penalties imposed for each "knowing" violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 or five times the value of the exports involved, whichever is greater, and imprisonment of up to five years. During periods when the EAR are continued in effect by an Executive Order issued pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the criminal penalties for each "willful" violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 and imprisonment for up to ten years.

bcbm

14th July 2010, 09:24

i don't think this applies to someone on an individual level deciding not to purchase israeli goods.

Palestine

14th July 2010, 09:42

Its amazing when DEMOCRACY works.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 09:42

i don't think this applies to someone on an individual level deciding not to purchase israeli goods.

Truth is, it shouldn't apply at all. My country is the United States of America, not the Free-association of Israel. I'm really ashamed, once again, of America.

14th July 2010, 09:47

@OP: did you read the link you posted?

The very first text on the page is as follows:

Antiboycott Compliance

The Bureau is charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. (http://www.bis.doc.gov/eaa.html) Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain Moslem countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.So if you are not a US company, it isn't particularly relevant to you, even if you have dropped such an insane quantity of acid that you believe atomized individuals making 'informed' consumer choices is the solution to Zionist war and occupation.

this is an invasion

14th July 2010, 09:49

Why are people freaking out? This applies entirely to the bourgeoisie.

DO NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM

14th July 2010, 09:50

truth is, it shouldn't apply at all. My country is the united states of america, not the free-association of israel.
usa! usa! usa!

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 09:52

Slavoj Zizzle

14th July 2010, 09:52

This is probably a good thing. It's completely irrational and paranoid of the U.S. government to have a law like this for something which is basically a non-issue. Try getting them to enforce it, getting thrown in jail over such a BS charge and exposing the farce of U.S. freedoms will do much more for the Palestinian cause than 10 people declaring they won't buy Israeli oranges anymore.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 09:53

Think of the principle.

14th July 2010, 09:53

Chambered Word

14th July 2010, 09:57

Think of the principle.

Yeah but who cares. There are much worse assaults going on in the US of A against freedom of speech. This is hardly noteworthy, and not that surprising.

this is an invasion

14th July 2010, 09:57

You guys are missing the point though--this is the twinning of US economy with supporting Israeli opression. it's basically saying "if you want to start even a just charity, or a fucking barbershop but deliberately avoid buying Israeli shaving cream, and want to oppose the Israeli occupation--you are breaking the law".

It has nothing to do with whether it applies to the regular citizens or the bourgeoisie. it has everything to do with the fact that our country is a proxy state for Zionism, and has made opposing it at the economic level illegal.

So? Don't start a business.

Wait, why would a barbershop need to boycott Israel in the first place? Does Israel export fine scissors and shaving creams? You're being silly right now.

I honestly don't see why you're reacting so much to this. It doesn't even effect working class people. And yeah, America supports Israel, blah blah blah.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 09:58

No offense, but you're basically an idiot.

that was constructive. care to explain how I'm an idiot? I'm sorry the fact my country makes it a legal offense to avoid supporting zionism--it has nothing to do with whether it only effects the bourgeousie or not. it has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that our government passes laws that directly regulate opposition to Zionism.

Palestine

14th July 2010, 09:58

No offense, but you're basically an idiot.

Please explain, Mr. All Knowing.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 10:01

Yeah but who cares. There are much worse assaults going on in the US of A against freedom of speech. This is hardly noteworthy, and not that surprising.

it's this kind've laziness when it comes to defying American support for Israel that is the reason why Israel can get away with murder and no one cares. If no one makes a sound, then no one knows that this kind've shit is going under our noses.

What will it be tomorrow? making opposition films to zionism illegal? but I guess that shouldn't effect me--afterall, I'm not a film maker. :rolleyes:

wow, I'm really dissappointed in all these "anti-Imperialists".

Slavoj Zizzle

14th July 2010, 10:13

it's this kind've laziness when it comes to defying American support for Israel that is the reason why Israel can get away with murder and no one cares. If no one makes a sound, then no one knows that this kind've shit is going under our noses.

What will it be tomorrow? making opposition films to zionism illegal? but I guess that shouldn't effect me--afterall, I'm not a film maker. :rolleyes:

wow, I'm really dissappointed in all these "anti-Imperialists".

You're under the mistaken impression that the U.S. is under the control of Zionism or Israel, when in fact Israel is a puppet state for the U.S. Fighting Zionism is a worthy cause, but attacking it as if it is anything other than the will of the United States, and ultimately another imperial prospect of the American Empire is failing to address the root. Israel gets away with murder because the U.S. wills it so, resisting the U.S. will take care of both problems.

14th July 2010, 10:14

that was constructive.
Sorry, I'm completely exhausted, it wasn't a good way to respond.

care to explain how I'm an idiot? I'm sorry the fact my country makes it a legal offense to avoid supporting zionism--it has nothing to do with whether it only effects the bourgeousie or not. it has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that our government passes laws that directly regulate opposition to Zionism.
You are opposing Zionism from the perspective of US nationalism. This isn't your country. The US state is the instrument of the US ruling class, and the dominant part of the US ruling class evidently has an interest in maintaining certain levels of trade with Israel.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 10:15

You're under the mistaken impression that the U.S. is under the control of Zionism or Israel, when in fact Israel is a puppet state for the U.S. Fighting Zionism is a worthy cause, but attacking it as if it is anything other than the will of the United States, and ultimately another imperial prospect of the American Empire is failing to address the root. Israel gets away with murder because the U.S. wills it so, resisting the U.S. will take care of both problems.

I actually believe these days that Israel and the USA are one in the same. while I agree with many of your points, I don't believe there is a difference between the Israeli and American leadership anymore. they are two puppets controlled by the same puppet masters, that being, the corporate powers that be, and the elite group of lobbyists who seem to have our economy and citizenry by the balls.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 10:17

You are opposing Zionism from the perspective of US nationalism. This isn't your country. The US state is the instrument of the US ruling class, and the dominant part of the US ruling class has an interest in maintaining certain levels of trade with Israel.

I was speaking from the stand point, in that, as long as the USA continues to exist, it shouldn't exist solely as an instrument to support global imperialism.

I am strongly opposed to the US government. considering my contempt for the US intervention in Latin America and Africa, it shouldnt' be hard to see. as to the American people however, no. I'm not a 3rd worldist. they did not all collectively do anything wrong.

Sorry, I'm completely exhausted, it wasn't a good way to respond.

no problem, I understand; I spend alot of my time on Revleft this summer because my "missus" works a night job, so I wait until 6AM for her to get home then we go to sleep; and I'm on summer holiday from college. so I get tired as hell, and when I should go to bed, I'm ranting about shit on Revleft :P sometimes, that makes me overreactive, and sometimes that makes me an asshole...

this is an invasion

14th July 2010, 10:19

I was speaking from the stand point, in that, as long as the USA continues to exist, it shouldn't exist solely as an instrument to support global imperialism.

I am strongly opposed to the US government. considering my contempt for the US intervention in Latin America and Africa, it shouldnt' be hard to see. as to the American people however, no. I'm not a 3rd worldist. they did not all collectively do anything wrong.

Laws exist to primarily protect the interest of the bourgeoisie. I don't see how this new thing is somehow defying the logic of the state or the logic of capital.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 10:23

Laws exist to primarily protect the interest of the bourgeoisie. I don't see how this new thing is somehow defying the logic of the state or the logic of capital.

that's an anarchist position, of which I'm not an anarchist; I believe laws, when made in the interest of the Proletariat, can be of the greatest good; I understand that the laws in the USA do not reflect the interest of the people, but that doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater and show total complacency and disregard either.

Slavoj Zizzle

14th July 2010, 10:24

I actually believe these days that Israel and the USA are one in the same. while I agree with many of your points, I don't believe there is a difference between the Israeli and American leadership anymore. they are two puppets controlled by the same puppet masters, that being, the corporate powers that be, and the elite group of lobbyists who seem to have our economy and citizenry by the balls.

Absolutely right. I also do think attacking Zionism is a good target since it seems to be one of the few issues where it's so awful only the U.S. elite can get away with supporting it, and it is completely within our power to affect as Americans. However, expecting anything from corporations in terms of boycotts etc is a mistake, and any real change is gonna have to be both from the bottom up and against capitalism as the ultimate goal. Also I agree threads early in the morning make everyone cranky :(

14th July 2010, 10:32

The laws apply only to capitalists. End of story. I now await the closure of the thread.

Slavoj Zizzle

14th July 2010, 10:35

The laws apply only to capitalists. End of story. I now await the closure of the thread.

Yeah but is this inherent in a system of laws or only in a system governing capitalism? If you believe the former, good luck with your revolution, you might have some problems with organization and consolidating your gains :blink:

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 10:36

The laws apply only to capitalists. End of story. I now await the closure of the thread.

I understand, but that''s missing the point. for now, it applies to capitalists; so few people knew about this, what's next? will it apply to journalists? to aid workers?

14th July 2010, 11:29

Yeah but is this inherent in a system of laws or only in a system governing capitalism? If you believe the former, good luck with your revolution, you might have some problems with organization and consolidating your gains :blink:

I understand, but that''s missing the point. for now, it applies to capitalists; so few people knew about this, what's next? will it apply to journalists? to aid workers?
I understand your concerns. This law could in fact be made applicable to workers.

danyboy27

14th July 2010, 14:11

well, a us company can boycott israel, its really easy, and a us company can make deal with blacklisted countries has well!

its all about HOW you do it! after all, you can not purchases your merchandise in israel beccause you dont speak hebrew, or beccause you can have it ''cheaper'' somewhere else, or beccause shipping time is too low, beccause its your ''competitor'', you prefers to buy american etc etc etc.

there is like a million excuses buisness and organisation can invent in order circumvent rules and regulation.

after all, its an american company who supplied spare part for the iranian f-14 for 20 year after the embargo have been established on the iranian governement.

governemental rules and regulation for embargo and restriction are a fucking joke.

M-26-7

14th July 2010, 15:20

our country is a proxy state for Zionism

No, it's not. And this is about a hair away from the neo-fascist talk about ZOG.

The U.S. supports Israel because it serves certain strategic interests of the U.S. in the Middle East region. Not because of the Israel Lobby, or the romantic support of American fundamentalist Christians for the Jews and the "Holy Places", or anything else. The main, driving factor of U.S. support for Israel is plain, old economic interests.

By the way, this Act hasn't stopped several American universities from divesting from Israel (just as they did from South Africa in the 1980s). And it technically can't stop a company from doing so either--they just can't explicitly say that the reason they are not buying anything from Israeli companies is because they are Israeli. Much in the same way that despite the existing labor laws they can fire workers for being gay, black, female, or pregnant, as long as they just don't give this as the explicit reason for the firing. In other words, you can enter into an agreement to boycott Israel, as long as you keep it secret.

What companies would want to boycott Israel, anyway? Only companies with exceptionally close economic ties to some other Middle Eastern government(s). If you read the Act carefully, it is intended to prevent companies from boycotting Israel in agreement with foreign governments - it "prohibit[s] U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain Moslem countries".

In other words, this Act is meant to make it so that other Middle Eastern countries cannot declare an embargo of Israel of the kind that the United States maintains on Cuba. If they do, then this Act says that American companies may not participate in it. Frankly, most U.S. companies that do business in the Middle East probably consider this law protection rather than some kind of horrible restriction on their freedom: Now they are free to do business both with Israel and with Israel's neighbors, and if some of Israel's neighbors protest that these companies should not be doing business with Israel for whatever reason, the companies can point to this Act and say, in effect, "My hands are tied--my government says I cannot participate in your boycott no matter how much I want to."

After all, corporations are not ideological organizations, they just seek a profit.

Adi Shankara

14th July 2010, 22:06

No, it's not. And this is about a hair away from the neo-fascist talk about ZOG.

this sounds like a poor attempt to silence my opposition to Zionism (aka imperialism) by invoking the right wing's shared contempt, then you attempt to create a chilling effect in my opinion by associating it with the right wing, and thus, racism.

really, that was a very bad strawman.

You can be opposed to Zionism on every level, and still have respect for jewish people.

Zionism does not equal Judaism, nor the opinions of the Jewish people as a whole, but a few far-right bigots who think they're better than Arabs.

M-26-7

14th July 2010, 22:13

this sounds like a poor attempt to silence my opposition to Zionism (aka imperialism) by invoking the right wing's shared contempt, then you attempt to create a chilling effect in my opinion by associating it with racism.

No, it wasn't anything like that. If I thought your actual opinions were anything near those of a fascist, I would be making a thread requesting your banning, not politely correcting you. I'm giving you a comradely heads-up that what you are saying not only is a mistaken analysis, but on the surface also sounds like it is about a hair away from the fascist analysis of ZOG.

The real problem was not with your wording, however, but with the fact that your analysis is utterly wrong: the U.S. is not beholden to Israel, Israel is beholden to the U.S.--and the U.S. helps Israel because what Israel gives it (a bastion of power in the region) is worth incomparably more than it gives Israel.

Also, I oppose Zionism, so of course I do not want to "silence [your] opposition to Zionism".

bcbm

15th July 2010, 18:48

this sounds like a poor attempt to silence my opposition to Zionism (aka imperialism) by invoking the right wing's shared contempt, then you attempt to create a chilling effect in my opinion by associating it with the right wing, and thus, racism.

well when you say shit like this

I actually believe these days that Israel and the USA are one in the same. while I agree with many of your points, I don't believe there is a difference between the Israeli and American leadership anymore. they are two puppets controlled by the same puppet masters

it kind of sounds a lot like this

http://whatisthepyramid.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion-translated-by-victor-e-marsden.gif

Broletariat

15th July 2010, 23:08

Guys I think this is a great opportunity to agitate the working class in our favor, I've presented this information to a few of my apolitical friends and even they're pissed off and asking who to write congressmen letters too. If some sort of protest against this organises keep me posted so I can redirect them and hopefully attend myself. You could easily pull in some free-market goons to mix with the socialist majority protesting to spread some socialist awareness too.

16th July 2010, 01:34

the socialist majority

what planet do you live on?

bcbm

16th July 2010, 01:35

I think this is a great opportunity to agitate the working class in our favor

by fighting for the rights of companies to boycott as they please?

Lyev

16th July 2010, 01:40

The bourgeoisie deserve freedom just as much as anyone else here! They're people too! :mad:

Hiero

16th July 2010, 02:00

that's an anarchist position, of which I'm not an anarchist; I believe laws, when made in the interest of the Proletariat, can be of the greatest good; I understand that the laws in the USA do not reflect the interest of the people, but that doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater and show total complacency and disregard either.
It is a Marxist position.

Broletariat

16th July 2010, 02:20

what planet do you live on?
Well the majority of people that would be protesting would be more left-leaning than most at least no?

by fighting for the rights of companies to boycott as they please?

We obviously wouldn't give it that spin.

this is an invasion

16th July 2010, 02:54

The bourgeoisie deserve freedom just as much as anyone else here! They're people too! :mad:

Was this a serious post?

t.shonku

16th July 2010, 03:27

So basically the government of USA tells its peoples what you can do and what you can't?Don't you think that's dictatorship?

turquino

16th July 2010, 03:36

by fighting for the rights of companies to boycott as they please?
And why's that wrong? If people can pressure corporations into not doing business with Israel, and as a result weaken the country’s economy, I would consider that a victory. The purpose of this antiboycott law is to prevent people from doing just that. In this instance, fighting for the freedom of capital to boycott Israel is beneficial to our cause of ending the colonial occupation.

16th July 2010, 07:29

Was this a serious post?
It says a lot about Lyev that you need to ask that question :p

16th July 2010, 07:35

And why's that wrong? If people can pressure corporations into not doing business with Israel, and as a result weaken the country’s economy, I would consider that a victory. The purpose of this antiboycott law is to prevent people from doing just that. In this instance, fighting for the freedom of capital to boycott Israel is beneficial to our cause of ending the colonial occupation.
Yeah, let's "put pressure" on corporations - that'll teach 'em! "The pen is mightier than the sword" and all that shit. Whilst we're at it, why don't we take the ruling class-encouraged avenues of voicing dissent for every case from now on?

Besides, ruining Israel's economy won't do shit at all for the Israeli working class. We've seen it in other Western countries: in times of ecnonomic crisis, the state bails the capitalists out and the capitalists even sometimes take gigantic bonuses whilst their wage-slaves get fired, have their pay cut or find that inflation has caused their cost of living to rise. Let's not repeat this foolishness again. I can't believe any communist would say something so silly.

Jazzratt

16th July 2010, 08:02

So basically the government of USA tells its peoples what you can do and what you can't?Don't you think that's dictatorship? I guess, but then every country tells its people what it can and cannot do - that's basically the function of the state and laws. Getting worked up because a (dubiously enforceable) law targetting companies exists is ludicrous really.

empiredestoryer

24th July 2010, 02:17

the usa is a big joke

gorillafuck

24th July 2010, 02:34

this is an invasion

24th July 2010, 03:04

Companies that boycott Israel are small companies, large corporations don't it. Do you really think that fighting for the rights of small businesses to boycott Israel will actually be beneficial to the cause of ending colonial occupation?

I think the real question is: what does any of this have to do with the working class?

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 06:12

I don't like it but I don't see that it really matters. Anyone that pays taxes is unwittingly supporting the Israeli war crimes. Moreover, this specifically applies to corporations, which I'm ideologically opposed to in principle, and especially for the sorts of companies that do business with the Israeli military. As far as I know colleges, for example, are exempt, I know of at least one that has divested from Israel, and I think it would be a good policy to support at other universities.

Outinleftfield

24th July 2010, 07:49

I dont really care about the bourgeoisie being prosecuted but there are probably some out there who are upset about what Israel does in Palestine and oppose it. This law ties economic interests between the American bourgeoisie and the Israeli bourgeoisie, preventing any possibility of economic interests disentangling as a result of a slowly growing boycott.

Plus, now companies have a convenient excuse not to boycott Israel. They can't! If they didn't have that excuse to hide behind and there was enough public pressure to boycott Israel from protests and from consumers choosing to shop at companies that boycott Israel and boycott ones that don't then there could be a Boycott Israel Campaign just like there was against apartheid South Africa.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 07:59

@OP: did you read the link you posted?

The very first text on the page is as follows:
So if you are not a US company, it isn't particularly relevant to you, even if you have dropped such an insane quantity of acid that you believe atomized individuals making 'informed' consumer choices is the solution to Zionist war and occupation.

Economically attacking Zionism is the most effective tool available.

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 08:40

Economically attacking Zionism is the most effective tool available.

The most effective solution to Israeli aggression, and Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, is to pressure our government to accept the global consensus. If the US did that it would be over almost instantaneously. US rejectionism is the only thing perpetuating this conflict.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 08:45

The most effective solution to Israeli aggression, and Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, is to pressure our government to accept the global consensus. If the US did that it would be over almost instantaneously. US rejectionism is the only thing perpetuating this conflict.

Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests. Your friend Chomsky would be one of the first to point this out.

To attack this you play the bourgeoisie off against itself. Much like how a dialogue on a public healthcare system in the United States only really started to get serious attention when the industrial sections of capitalism pushed the issue to remain more economically viable.

You economically pressure the relevant Israeli interests, and you economically pressure American companies. The governments will follow.

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 09:15

Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests. Your friend Chomsky would be one of the first to point this out.

To attack this you play the bourgeoisie off against itself. Much like how a dialogue on a public healthcare system in the United States only really started to get serious attention when the industrial sections of capitalism pushed the issue to remain more economically viable.

You economically pressure the relevant Israeli interests, and you economically pressure American companies. The governments will follow.

It's more than that, it also has to do with Washington's plans for the Middle East and that Israel is the regional superpower which makes it strategically useful.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 09:20

It's more than that, it also has to do with Washington's plans for the Middle East and that Israel is the regional superpower which makes it strategically useful.

"Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests."

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 09:24

"Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests."

Actually the oil companies, let's face it they're the relevent players, have actually wanted the US to join the global consensus for some time. One of the few issues where their opinion is disregarded.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 09:34

Actually the oil companies, let's face it they're the relevent players, have actually wanted the US to join the global consensus for some time. One of the few issues where their opinion is disregarded.

1) You can't just narrow down issues to "oil". There is a wide range of capitalism that benefits from the current U.S. - Israel dynamic. Such as the military-industrial complex. The U.S. supplies Israel with money that is usually used to purchase weaponry from U.S. based defense contractors.

2) Oil interests don't care about "the global consensus". They care about control of oil resources. Regionally, Iran is the only oil producer outside of U.S. control. Israel serves as an important proxy force against Iran. Conflict also drives the price of oil up blah blah.

3) If you don't think U.S. foreign policy is motivated by calculated economic gain and the interest of domestic capital, then what is it driven by?

See, the point is: Even if you aren't a Marxist, you at least seem to accept that governments tend to follow the desires of the most influential members of society (truism yes), i.e. the owners of society.

U.S. policy in Israel benefits large sections of U.S. concentrations of capital, and doesn't adversely effect any others. By changing this equation, through say boycott or divestment, government policy will change to reflect the new interests of the influential.

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi

24th July 2010, 09:52

Economically attacking Zionism is the most effective tool available.

Sure, but at the point of production (Israeli workers getting militant).

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 10:00

1) You can't just narrow down issues to "oil". There is a wide range of capitalism that benefits from the current U.S. - Israel dynamic. Such as the military-industrial complex. The U.S. supplies Israel with money that is usually used to purchase weaponry from U.S. based defense contractors.

Are the defense contractors more of a concern than the oil companies? I'm not convinced, of course I haven't really studied it in-depth.

2) Oil interests don't care about "the global consensus". They care about control of oil resources. Regionally, Iran is the only oil producer outside of U.S. control. Israel serves as an important proxy force against Iran. Conflict also drives the price of oil up blah blah.

Yeah, that's exactly why they don't like it.

3) If you don't think U.S. foreign policy is motivated by calculated economic gain and the interest of domestic capital, then what is it driven by?

It's also about power, about global hegemoney.

See, the point is: Even if you aren't a Marxist, you at least seem to accept that governments tend to follow the desires of the most influential members of society (truism yes), i.e. the owners of society.

That's sort of a blanket truism, almost painfully obvious, yeah. I take it you're referencing John Jay, there.

U.S. policy in Israel benefits large sections of U.S. concentrations of capital, and doesn't adversely effect any others. By changing this equation, through say boycott or divestment, government policy will change to reflect the new interests of the influential.

If supporting Israel became a liability, if it really threatened profits, yeah it would change, but I don't see any realistic set of circumstances leading to that. It's much harder to change companies than it is to change the state, even though the state is largely responsive to the private sector. They can be held accountable much more easily, they actually have mechanisms to do that. Corporations are untouchable, unless you wage an incredibly effective PR campaign that actually hurts profits. In this case that's a massive undertaking. I still say it's much better to directly pressure the government to change the policy.

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 10:03

Sure, but at the point of production (Israeli workers getting militant).

I don't think that's a great strategy, not that I'm against the idea, mind, however, it's fascinating that there is so much more debate about this issue in Israel. If some of the stuff that gets published in Haaretz were published in Newsweek, heads would roll. The American debate, at least in the mainstream media, is way more polarized.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 10:10

Are the defense contractors more of a concern than the oil companies? I'm not convinced, of course I haven't really studied it in-depth.

They seem to have huge influence on U.S. policy.

Yeah, that's exactly why they don't like it.??? They have every reason to be thrilled with U.S. policy.

It's also about power, about global hegemoney. "Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests."

Power is useful because it is profitable.

That's sort of a blanket truism, almost painfully obvious, yeah. I take it you're referencing John Jay, there.No I was actually paraphrasing your guy Chomsky.

If supporting Israel became a liability, if it really threatened profits, yeah it would change, but I don't see any realistic set of circumstances leading to that. It's much harder to change companies than it is to change the state, even though the state is largely responsive to the private sector. They can be held accountable much more easily, they actually have mechanisms to do that. Corporations are untouchable, unless you wage an incredibly effective PR campaign that actually hurts profits. In this case that's a massive undertaking. I still say it's much better to directly pressure the government to change the policy.Sure it's difficult to change the the cost-benefit of a scenario like this, but it's doable. More difficult still would probably be to pressure your government to act against the interest of concentrations of capital.

It's always better to attack the root of a problem than it is to simply try to vote out different members of the same dominant ruling interests.

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi

24th July 2010, 10:21

I don't think that's a great strategy

It's the default mode of struggle around the world. Do you think that trying to befriend corporations is going to help either? As people have noted, even if Israel did get hit in an economic sense noticeably (which is still impossible), it wouldn't liberate Palestine by default, it could even give Israel more reason to target Palestine and Palestinians. Which could lead to other countries cracking down on Palestinian diasporas and Palestine solidarity campaigns too.

Really, the whole idea of getting workers and the petit-bourgeoisie to boycott a small and rather untargeted part of the massive, tangled Capitalist system was proven a failure, in the Hot Autumn period of left-wing struggle in Italy.

not that I'm against the idea, mind

Good. Occasionally, you get people that are against the idea, they say the Israeli working-class is all bad, or 'reactionary'.

however, it's fascinating that there is so much more debate about this issue in Israel. If some of the stuff that gets published in Haaretz were published in Newsweek, heads would roll. The American debate, at least in the mainstream media, is way more polarized.

Is this in regards to the Israeli goods boycott or economic direct action by Israeli workers?

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 10:40

They seem to have huge influence on U.S. policy.

No doubt. What I was wondering about was; ‘Do they wield more political power than the oil companies?’ I’m not sure.

??? They have every reason to be thrilled with U.S. policy.

The oil companies want the US to join the global consensus. That’s why I said it’s one of the few issues where they part with the business elite, or, at least, one segment, thereof.

"Right, but the U.S. only does this because it is an economically appealing route to take for ruling interests."
Power is useful because it is profitable.

Well, money is merely a particular manifestation of power. I really think it’s more than that.

No I was actually paraphrasing your guy Chomsky.

I really wish you’d stop doing that. Well, in that case, he was probably referencing John Jay’s statement; “The people who own the country ought to govern it.”

Sure it's difficult to change the the cost-benefit of a scenario like this, but it's doable. More difficult still would probably be to pressure your government to act against the interest of concentrations of capital.

So you’re not an American, that’s significant.

I disagree, I think it would take considerably less pressure from the public to change Washington’s mind than to change Raytheon’s mind. Of course, a big problem is the Israeli lobby. Another reason why US politicians are so vehement about Israel is because it’s an easy way to lock up votes, they don’t really have to do anything. You’d have to be able to compete with that voting bloc.

It's always better to attack the root of a problem than it is to simply try to vote out different members of the same dominant ruling interests.

I like the metaphor, it’s a good principle, but if we’re talking specifics, in this instance, I disagree with your assessment.

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 10:46

It's the default mode of struggle around the world. Do you think that trying to befriend corporations is going to help either? As people have noted, even if Israel did get hit in an economic sense noticeably (which is still impossible), it wouldn't liberate Palestine by default, it could even give Israel more reason to target Palestine and Palestinians. Which could lead to other countries cracking down on Palestinian diasporas and Palestine solidarity campaigns too.

Really, the whole idea of getting workers and the petit-bourgeoisie to boycott a small and rather untargeted part of the massive, tangled Capitalist system was proven a failure, in the Hot Autumn period of left-wing struggle in Italy.

I just meant I'm skeptical that it could actually produce the desired result. I'm all for it. Actually, I think internal support for the global consensus is a more effective tactic than a boycott, but I'm still skeptical.

Good. Occasionally, you get people that are against the idea, they say the Israeli working-class is all bad, or 'reactionary'.

That sounds like a very broad generalization. I can't say I've studied enough about the Israeli working class to judge, anyhow.

Is this in regards to the Israeli goods boycott or economic direct action by Israeli workers?

Well, I was just making the observation that mainstream political discourse about the conflict is actually more polarized in the United States, which is interesting.

~Spectre

24th July 2010, 10:48

No doubt. What I was wondering about was; ‘Do they wield more political power than the oil companies?’ I’m not sure.

Apparently you believe they do.

The oil companies want the US to join the global consensus.

No they don't. I've already outlined in this thread why they don't give two shits about the "global consensus" and why they have every reason to be thrilled with the status quo of U.S. policy.

Well, money is merely a particular manifestation of power. I really think it’s more than that.

You think they want 'power' at the expense of profits? I'm all for dystopia but the nature of capitalism doesn't really follow with your
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_realism
theory.

So you’re not an American, that’s significant.

I am an American. Sorry if I worded that weirdly.

I disagree, I think it would take considerably less pressure from the public to change Washington’s mind than to change Raytheon’s mind. Of course, a big problem is the Israeli lobby. Another reason why US politicians are so vehement about Israel is because it’s an easy way to lock up votes, they don’t really have to do anything. You’d have to be able to compete with that voting bloc.

The lobby is irrelevant. And pretty much all modern attempts at understanding political-economy would contradict your assertion here.

http://www.amazon.com/Golden-Rule-Investment-Competition-Money-Driven/dp/0226243176

I like the metaphor, it’s a good principle, but if we’re talking specifics, in this instance, I disagree with your assessment.

Changing politicians rarely does anything significant.

NGNM85

24th July 2010, 11:42

Apparently you believe they do.

It just seems to me, especially since oil has played such a prominent role in US politics.

No they don't. I've already outlined in this thread why they don't give two shits about the "global consensus" and why they have every reason to be thrilled with the status quo of U.S. policy.

I know they were pressing for Washington to join the global consensus, although not because it’s the right thing to do. Things may have changed.

You think they want 'power' at the expense of profits? I'm all for dystopia but the nature of capitalism doesn't really follow with your
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_realism
theory.

I don’t see any conflict with the tenets of ‘political realism.’ I think money is just one particular manifestation of power.

I am an American. Sorry if I worded that weirdly.

Scratch that, then.

The lobby is irrelevant. And pretty much all modern attempts at understanding political-economy would contradict your assertion here.

http://www.amazon.com/Golden-Rule-Investment-Competition-Money-Driven/dp/0226243176[/quote (http://www.amazon.com/Golden-Rule-Investment-Competition-Money-Driven/dp/0226243176%5b/quote)]

Yes, the politicians who get the most money tend to win. However, there would not be such sophisticated mechanisms of indoctrination if they weren’t needed, the ruling institutions devote a substantial amount of resources to this effect, to keep ‘the great beast’ at bay. This is because an aroused public is threatening. Virtually all progressive reforms were won by people standing up and fighting for them. This is the ‘problem of democracy’, how to make sure people stay quiet and obedient without a gun in their back. They are clearly threatened by it. That says something.

[QUOTE=~Spectre;1811245]Changing politicians rarely does anything significant.

I’m not talking about just changing politicians, although that will almost undoubtedly be necessary, I’m talking about changing the policy.

turquino

24th July 2010, 12:15

Yeah, let's "put pressure" on corporations - that'll teach 'em! "The pen is mightier than the sword" and all that shit. Whilst we're at it, why don't we take the ruling class-encouraged avenues of voicing dissent for every case from now on?

Besides, ruining Israel's economy won't do shit at all for the Israeli working class. We've seen it in other Western countries: in times of ecnonomic crisis, the state bails the capitalists out and the capitalists even sometimes take gigantic bonuses whilst their wage-slaves get fired, have their pay cut or find that inflation has caused their cost of living to rise. Let's not repeat this foolishness again. I can't believe any communist would say something so silly.
Most of the big Israeli capitalists and foreign investors would survive the end of the Israeli state. Short of socialist revolution, the new state would be obliged to respect private property and business would continue more or less as usual. In some ways, it might be in the capitalists' interests to hasten its end. It stands to reason that a poor Palestinian state is more exploitable than a rich Jewish one. But for many Israelis, those who are outside the "ruling class", colonialism is a sort of social safety net, and it is not one they're willing to give up. This is what makes them especially dangerous. Fascism and terrorism are the fallback for the dispossessed colonist. Look at the OAS or the AWB, they are a picture of Israel's future.

t.shonku

24th July 2010, 13:53

I really don't understand this! on one hand US government claims itself to be leader of free world and accuses other countries (who don't sing to US tune) to be dictatorial and on other hand bullies it's own citizen by help of FBI and tells them what they can do and what they can't.
The bad thing about all this is american left is not there to resist,bcoz they are so unorganized.

LeninBalls

24th July 2010, 15:52

Think of the principle.

Think of the children

praxis1966

24th July 2010, 19:56

To return to the point of the OP, this could actually affect workers directly. The SF Bay branch of the IWW has a motion to be debated and voted on at the annual national conference in September to take an official stance of boycott, divest, and sanctions against Israel for it's Palestine policy. This isn't something that we came up with willy nilly either. It's something the Gazan labor unions directly asked us to do.

Anyway, I have a feeling that this motion (if passed) will have the functional effect of applying the aforementioned legislation to our union since the businesses who employ our members are bound by law to abide by it. Not that the IWW will give a shit, we're not class collaborators, but I have the sneaking suspicion that the feds won't look to fondly on this situation and might seek to do something about it either under this or some other as of yet unwritten legislation.