The supposed 8 reasons Leftists should support Israel

[Manifesto]

While on Facebook I happened upon an article that a certain Zionist "Socialist" posted saying how Israel is the most progressive nation in the Middle East Leftists should support it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-krinsky/8-reasons-leftists-should_b_653432.html


Israel continues to be the demon poster-child of the Left. The prime example of a repressive regime and abuser of human rights. On the Left, people became outraged and agitated over Israel more than over any other cause. Israel's supposed villainy will bring out protestors on cold, rainy days in a way no other issue can. Many of these people are earnest, but perhaps misled. In most ways, my own politics tend to be Liberal-Left: I support single-payer, universal healthcare, I opposed the war in Iraq and the Bush-Cheney "imperial presidency," I even voted twice for Ralph Nader. However, like French philosopher Bernard Henri-Lévy, I differ on Israel and reject the demonization of Israel, whether at the United Nations, in the world media, or among American and European Leftists.
If my fellow Leftists or even Liberals think that the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement will help bring an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as peace to the Middle East and harmony to the community of nations, they are sadly mistaken. There is a difference between criticism and demonization, and the campaign against Israel is of the latter type. Criticism, and there is much of it within Israel's own healthy democracy, can result in positive change. But the focused attempt to demonize Israel, not undertaken against any other nation, is aimed at delegitimizing Israel and undermining its very existence, as if the problems of the world were the fault of the Israelis -- the fault of the Jews -- and if they would only go away, all would be better.
Not only is this a sorry illusion, but this concerted assault on Israel itself betrays the principles of the Left.
Here, then, are 8 reasons Leftists should be Pro-Israel (or, at least, Pro-Peace rather than Anti-Israel):
1. Human Rights. The Left fights for human rights in the world. Even if one thinks Israel or its soldiers guilty of human rights violations (and I am not willing at the outset to grant this point), there is no international or historical comparison that could reasonably rank Israel among the worst criminals of the world or of history. Whether we look at the scale of the conflict, the numbers of lives lost, or the treatment of the press or of dissidents, there are far too many examples of bloodshed and persecution dwarfing anything done by Israel against the Palestinians over the last four decades since the Six Day War, when Israel was attacked by its neighbors. Even Arab treatment of Palestinians, such as in Jordan's Black September massacre, caused thousands of deaths, possibly more in 10 days than in four decades of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And how can we compare Israel to Mugabe's Zimbabwe, or the Chinese crackdown on Tibet and Tianneman? Or the disappearances and death squads of Latin America Square or the killing fields of Pol Pot? Let alone the genocide pursued by Hitler or Stalin's murderous reign? Let us be clear: genocide is the attempt to exterminate an entire people and culture; this is not what has happened to the Palestinians, and it is not the goal of Israeli policy. By contrast, the explicit aim of Hamas is to eliminate Israel. So, if we support human rights and oppose persecution, ought we not first to focus our efforts on the places where we find the worst situations? Can anyone rationally claim that among these places, let alone the most horrendous of all, is a small nation on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea?
2. Internationalism. Leftists tend to support internationalism. One would think that the United Nations would be the world body most dedicated to furthering this aim. But how is it that Israel, this small nation, has become such a central concern? From 2003-2010, there have been more than 900 human rights actions against Israel at the U.N.; the next closest is Sudan at just under 400. Israel is the only member of the U.N. to be excluded from any of the five regional groups. And should not all on the Left oppose the absurdity of the so-called Human Rights Council, whose members include such paragons of humanitarianism as China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Kyrgyzstan? How can Leftists stand silent when the Turkish Prime Minister denounces Israel for human rights crimes while then promising that the Kurds will "drown in their own blood," in a conflict with human rights abuses on both sides and tens of thousands individuals killed? If Gaza is not the ideal place to live, if the Gazans are suffering, nevertheless the photos in the New York Times and elsewhere and the testimony of reporters clearly demonstrate that Gazans are not starving, their store shelves are not empty, whether for food or consumer goods; as difficult as the situation may be, it is simply not the pinnacle of human rights disasters, and Israel is thus not deserving of international condemnation above all other nations in the world.
3. Peace. Leftists want peace. In the Middle East and elsewhere. The polls make clear that, overwhelmingly, Israelis desire peace with their neighbors; the difficult sacrifices, including the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza make this evident. Israelis are prepared for a secure, two-state solution, to live side-by-side in peace. Meanwhile, the stated goal of its enemies is to end its existence. A simple thought-experiment should make the matter starkly clear: If tomorrow Hamas and other Palestinian groups unilaterally put down their weapons, what would follow? Peace. If Israelis unilaterally put down their weapons, what would follow? Millions of dead or exiled Jews. Anyone on the Left who does not recognize this is living in denial. Leftists should support peace and not live in denial.

4. Anti-Authoritarianism. Leftists oppose authoritarianism and dictatorship and instead support popular, democratic rule. Israel maintains a vibrant, parliamentary democracy, with a broad range of views represented, much more so than in the United States, for example. Indeed, Arabs parties and Communists have long had representatives voted into the Israeli Knesset. Can we imagine such representation, as well as the freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in Israel's Arab neighbors? In the Gaza ruled by Hamas? In Egypt or Syria or Saudi Arabia? By opposing Israel and supporting groups like Hamas, the Left is not supporting a liberation struggle but rather the effort to replace the Middle East's only democracy with yet another repressive dictatorship. Do Leftists really desire such an outcome? How can the one major effort to boycott, divest, and sanction be aimed at a democratic nation like this? As Bernard Henri-Levy has written at the Huffington Post of the "Confusion of an era when we combat democracies as though they were dictatorships or fascist States. This maelstrom of hatred and madness is about Israel. But it also concerns, as we should be well aware, some of the most precious things established in the movement of ideas in the last thirty years, especially on the left, and these are thus imperiled."
5. Human Dignity and Equality. The Left fights for the values of dignity and equality. Are these traits exemplified more by Israel or its neighbors? Look at how much Israelis value the life of a single soldier, in the willingness to trade hundreds of prisoners for one soldier, and even to trade prisoners to recover their dead for proper burial. Look at the rules of engagement of the Israeli Defense Forces, at how the IDF calls and leaflets civilians to warn them; does any other military do such a thing? In terms of equality and human rights, compare the state of women's and gay and lesbian rights in Israel with that in the rest of the Middle East. And in terms of human dignity, do people on the Left think so little of Palestinian dignity that they are willing to claim Palestinians have "no choice" but to turn themselves into homicidal-suicidal bombers to kill Israeli children? Can we not expect more of people? Treating Palestinians like helpless victims does less than recognize their human dignity.
6. Anti-Discrimination. Leftists oppose sexism, racism, and any similar sort of discrimination. And so, Leftists do or ought to oppose anti-Semitism in the same way. And yet, Leftists too often give a pass to anti-Semitism masked as anti-Zionism or anti-Israel sentiment. The playwright David Mamet has written in the Huffington Post as follows: "Yet most of the Western Press, European and American, pictures Israel as, somehow the aggressor, and the Israelis as somehow inhuman, and delighting in blood." As Mamet has elaborated in his book The Wicked Son: Anti-Semitism, Self-Hatred, and the Jews, this is nothing less than a reworking of the old Blood Libel against the Jews--except this time, instead of being accused of using non-Jewish blood to bake matzah, the Jews are accused of spilling blood for no reason other than gratuitous pleasure. Leftists ought to be vigilant in distinguishing between constructive criticism of Israel and dehumanizing caricatures of Jews.
7. Self-Defense. Only the most uncompromising pacifists oppose the right to self-defense, and certainly most Leftists uphold this right. At least when Palestinians are doing the defending. Why are Israelis exempt from this right? How many Leftists would sit idly by while rockets rained down on their towns and families, with their children traumatized? And if we said, oh, but people are only killed occasionally, would that minimize your commitment to protect your family? Only Jews are expected to lay down their weapons and offer their throats. How dare the Jews have the chutzpah to fight back?!
8. Progress. We want movement on Palestinian-Israeli and Arab-Israeli peacemaking. Yet, demonizing Israel, singling it out, as is done at the UN and on college campuses will do little to advance peace. We all know, have all known for decades the basic outlines of a peace settlement. The Israelis have been prepared for this and have prepared their citizens. The Left should be pressuring Palestinians to accept peace and to stop teaching their children that Jews are monsters after their blood. This sort of pressure might bring some progress.
It was long ago time for Leftists to tear down the poster that features Israel as the demon-child of human rights abuse and repression. It is time for Leftists to become outraged not over Israel, but over the distortions and demonization of Israel on college campuses and at the United Nations and throughout the media and politics. It is time for Leftists to reject the treatment of Israel as a pariah, or Jews as bloodthirsty murderers, and time instead to welcome Israel into the community of nations as a full member, subject to the same criticism and praise as any other nation.

[Hexen]

These Zionist "Socialists" are obviously just another incarnation of the Nazis.

[Rusty Shackleford]

the author claims to be a left liberal and therefor has no credibility when speaking about the left.

[Volcanicity]

I gave up at number 3 where it says Israelis desire peace with their neighbours.I mean what the hell.

[Chambered Word]

1. Human Rights. The Left fights for human rights in the world. Even if one thinks Israel or its soldiers guilty of human rights violations (and I am not willing at the outset to grant this point), there is no international or historical comparison that could reasonably rank Israel among the worst criminals of the world or of history. Whether we look at the scale of the conflict, the numbers of lives lost, or the treatment of the press or of dissidents, there are far too many examples of bloodshed and persecution dwarfing anything done by Israel against the Palestinians over the last four decades since the Six Day War, when Israel was attacked by its neighbors. Even Arab treatment of Palestinians, such as in Jordan's Black September massacre, caused thousands of deaths, possibly more in 10 days than in four decades of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And how can we compare Israel to Mugabe's Zimbabwe, or the Chinese crackdown on Tibet and Tianneman? Or the disappearances and death squads of Latin America Square or the killing fields of Pol Pot? Let alone the genocide pursued by Hitler or Stalin's murderous reign? Let us be clear: genocide is the attempt to exterminate an entire people and culture; this is not what has happened to the Palestinians, and it is not the goal of Israeli policy. By contrast, the explicit aim of Hamas is to eliminate Israel. So, if we support human rights and oppose persecution, ought we not first to focus our efforts on the places where we find the worst situations? Can anyone rationally claim that among these places, let alone the most horrendous of all, is a small nation on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea?

False dichotomy of bad human rights violators vs worst. Also, socialists don't support the bourgeois concept of human rights. We support the emancipation of the working class. This is so full of liberalism I could puke.


2. Internationalism. Leftists tend to support internationalism. One would think that the United Nations would be the world body most dedicated to furthering this aim. But how is it that Israel, this small nation, has become such a central concern? From 2003-2010, there have been more than 900 human rights actions against Israel at the U.N.; the next closest is Sudan at just under 400. Israel is the only member of the U.N. to be excluded from any of the five regional groups. And should not all on the Left oppose the absurdity of the so-called Human Rights Council, whose members include such paragons of humanitarianism as China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Kyrgyzstan? How can Leftists stand silent when the Turkish Prime Minister denounces Israel for human rights crimes while then promising that the Kurds will "drown in their own blood," in a conflict with human rights abuses on both sides and tens of thousands individuals killed? If Gaza is not the ideal place to live, if the Gazans are suffering, nevertheless the photos in the New York Times and elsewhere and the testimony of reporters clearly demonstrate that Gazans are not starving, their store shelves are not empty, whether for food or consumer goods; as difficult as the situation may be, it is simply not the pinnacle of human rights disasters, and Israel is thus not deserving of international condemnation above all other nations in the world.

Following on with the previously established false dichotomy ('oh Israel isn't as bad as Turkey though! Why are you such an anti-semite?'). We support internationalism in the sense that we support the working class worldwide, not in the sense that we think the UN is great or something. :rolleyes:


3. Peace. Leftists want peace. In the Middle East and elsewhere. The polls make clear that, overwhelmingly, Israelis desire peace with their neighbors; the difficult sacrifices, including the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza make this evident. Israelis are prepared for a secure, two-state solution, to live side-by-side in peace. Meanwhile, the stated goal of its enemies is to end its existence. A simple thought-experiment should make the matter starkly clear: If tomorrow Hamas and other Palestinian groups unilaterally put down their weapons, what would follow? Peace. If Israelis unilaterally put down their weapons, what would follow? Millions of dead or exiled Jews. Anyone on the Left who does not recognize this is living in denial. Leftists should support peace and not live in denial.

We don't want peace. We want revolution. If I recall correctly the crux of the argument, resting on desire of the state of Israel for peace, is patently false (if someone could shed some more light on this it would be interesting). Why should Palestinians accept peace when their land is being stolen by Israelis, their homes are bombed and the ports are being blockaded? It's a liberal double-standard.


4. Anti-Authoritarianism. Leftists oppose authoritarianism and dictatorship and instead support popular, democratic rule. Israel maintains a vibrant, parliamentary democracy, with a broad range of views represented, much more so than in the United States, for example. Indeed, Arabs parties and Communists have long had representatives voted into the Israeli Knesset. Can we imagine such representation, as well as the freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in Israel's Arab neighbors? In the Gaza ruled by Hamas? In Egypt or Syria or Saudi Arabia? By opposing Israel and supporting groups like Hamas, the Left is not supporting a liberation struggle but rather the effort to replace the Middle East's only democracy with yet another repressive dictatorship. Do Leftists really desire such an outcome? How can the one major effort to boycott, divest, and sanction be aimed at a democratic nation like this? As Bernard Henri-Levy has written at the Huffington Post of the "Confusion of an era when we combat democracies as though they were dictatorships or fascist States. This maelstrom of hatred and madness is about Israel. But it also concerns, as we should be well aware, some of the most precious things established in the movement of ideas in the last thirty years, especially on the left, and these are thus imperiled."

I shouldn't even have to answer this. We do not support bourgeois democracy - but, regardless, Israel is not a democracy any more than South Africa was.


5. Human Dignity and Equality. The Left fights for the values of dignity and equality. Are these traits exemplified more by Israel or its neighbors? Look at how much Israelis value the life of a single soldier, in the willingness to trade hundreds of prisoners for one soldier, and even to trade prisoners to recover their dead for proper burial. Look at the rules of engagement of the Israeli Defense Forces, at how the IDF calls and leaflets civilians to warn them; does any other military do such a thing? In terms of equality and human rights, compare the state of women's and gay and lesbian rights in Israel with that in the rest of the Middle East. And in terms of human dignity, do people on the Left think so little of Palestinian dignity that they are willing to claim Palestinians have "no choice" but to turn themselves into homicidal-suicidal bombers to kill Israeli children? Can we not expect more of people? Treating Palestinians like helpless victims does less than recognize their human dignity.

Not only a strawman but obviously false:

http://imeu.net/engine2/uploads/2/israel-army-tshirt.jpg

...enough said.


6. Anti-Discrimination. Leftists oppose sexism, racism, and any similar sort of discrimination. And so, Leftists do or ought to oppose anti-Semitism in the same way. And yet, Leftists too often give a pass to anti-Semitism masked as anti-Zionism or anti-Israel sentiment. The playwright David Mamet has written in the Huffington Post as follows: "Yet most of the Western Press, European and American, pictures Israel as, somehow the aggressor, and the Israelis as somehow inhuman, and delighting in blood." As Mamet has elaborated in his book The Wicked Son: Anti-Semitism, Self-Hatred, and the Jews, this is nothing less than a reworking of the old Blood Libel against the Jews--except this time, instead of being accused of using non-Jewish blood to bake matzah, the Jews are accused of spilling blood for no reason other than gratuitous pleasure. Leftists ought to be vigilant in distinguishing between constructive criticism of Israel and dehumanizing caricatures of Jews.

:rolleyes:


7. Self-Defense. Only the most uncompromising pacifists oppose the right to self-defense, and certainly most Leftists uphold this right. At least when Palestinians are doing the defending. Why are Israelis exempt from this right? How many Leftists would sit idly by while rockets rained down on their towns and families, with their children traumatized? And if we said, oh, but people are only killed occasionally, would that minimize your commitment to protect your family? Only Jews are expected to lay down their weapons and offer their throats. How dare the Jews have the chutzpah to fight back?!

But is it self-defense when you send professional soldiers, armour and aircraft to kill civilians, especially if you began and continued the conflict in the first place?

http://www.usterrorists.com/pix/Israelis_killed_by_Palestinians_in_Israel_and_Pale stinians_killed_by_Israelis_in_Gaza_-_2008.png

OH NO WE'RE BEING ATTACKED BY THE PALESTINIANS


8. Progress. We want movement on Palestinian-Israeli and Arab-Israeli peacemaking. Yet, demonizing Israel, singling it out, as is done at the UN and on college campuses will do little to advance peace. We all know, have all known for decades the basic outlines of a peace settlement. The Israelis have been prepared for this and have prepared their citizens. The Left should be pressuring Palestinians to accept peace and to stop teaching their children that Jews are monsters after their blood. This sort of pressure might bring some progress.
It was long ago time for Leftists to tear down the poster that features Israel as the demon-child of human rights abuse and repression. It is time for Leftists to become outraged not over Israel, but over the distortions and demonization of Israel on college campuses and at the United Nations and throughout the media and politics. It is time for Leftists to reject the treatment of Israel as a pariah, or Jews as bloodthirsty murderers, and time instead to welcome Israel into the community of nations as a full member, subject to the same criticism and praise as any other nation.

We don't treat imperialism nor racism with respect.

I think the article is directed towards liberals and not the actual 'Left' but I still think most liberals will have a hard time swallowing this horseshit anyway.

[Wanted Man]

Quite honestly, who cares about these people? Who are they to proclaim themselves part of some kind of "socialist" or "leftist" movement? Do we ever see them doing anything in that direction? All we usually see from them is dis-informative articles like this one. Why should anyone even bother engaging with them on their own playing field, thereby accepting the commonality that they claim with us?

EDIT:


In most ways, my own politics tend to be Liberal-Left: I support single-payer, universal healthcare, I opposed the war in Iraq and the Bush-Cheney "imperial presidency," I even voted twice for Ralph Nader.

Well, shit. Sorry for doubting you, bro.

[Adi Shankara]

I think asking someone's opinion on Israeli apartheid is a good litmus test to see where they stand politically, as it can be relatively easy to gauge by their reaction to the question.

If they say "The state of Israel has a right to exist, but should stop harming Palestinians" they're probably liberals or light-leftists. If one says "Israel has a right to defend itself against Islamic terror" they are most likely a conservative bigot. If they say "Jews are god's chosen people and the filthy Arabs only came here in the 1940's, so we have a right to destroy them", they are probably Israelis. :lol:

[Catillina]

4. Anti-Authoritarianism. Leftists oppose authoritarianism and dictatorship and instead support popular, democratic rule. Israel maintains a vibrant, parliamentary democracy, with a broad range of views represented, much more so than in the United States, for example. Indeed, Arabs parties and Communists have long had representatives voted into the Israeli Knesset. Can we imagine such representation, as well as the freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in Israel's Arab neighbors? In the Gaza ruled by Hamas? In Egypt or Syria or Saudi Arabia? By opposing Israel and supporting groups like Hamas, the Left is not supporting a liberation struggle but rather the effort to replace the Middle East's only democracy with yet another repressive dictatorship. Do Leftists really desire such an outcome? How can the one major effort to boycott, divest, and sanction be aimed at a democratic nation like this? As Bernard Henri-Levy has written at the Huffington Post of the "Confusion of an era when we combat democracies as though they were dictatorships or fascist States. This maelstrom of hatred and madness is about Israel. But it also concerns, as we should be well aware, some of the most precious things established in the movement of ideas in the last thirty years, especially on the left, and these are thus imperiled."

They tried to ban Arab Parties from the election :rolleyes: Only their supreme court overturned the ban.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-bans-arab-parties-from-running-in-upcoming-elections-1.267987

http://www.haaretz.com/news/elections/supreme-court-overturns-ban-on-arab-parties-from-national-elections-1.268900

[Boboulas]

I gave up at number 3 where it says Israelis desire peace with their neighbours.I mean what the hell.

Everyone wants peace, they just want it on their terms.

[Widerstand]

He said he voted twice for Ralph Nader. That killed me.

[Red Commissar]

What I never like about these arguments is there's a "clash of civilizations" mindset here. In other words Israel is a force of progress while the "others" are mindless barbarians.

[RadioRaheem84]

Typical Euston Manifesto, liberal bile, that seems to define left issues mostly on social issues.

[RedSonRising]

I stopped reading at "Human Rights" as the first point trying to argue in favor of Israel. Laughable.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

His no.1 reason is 'human rights'. Firstly that's false, and secondly that is a giveaway of your stereotypical 'liberal' or Guardianista.

[ContrarianLemming]

These Zionist "Socialists" are obviously just another incarnation of the Nazis.

Godwins law

[RadioRaheem84]

Quite possibly the most pathetic political document I've ever read.

More so than this?

http://eustonmanifesto.org/the-euston-manifesto/

[Rusty Shackleford]

shall we come up with a unified message to copy and paste onto the discussion on the article? maybe a short refutation? one person seemed to think were anti-internationalist because we dont like globalism.

[redSHARP]

If they say "Jews are god's chosen people and the filthy Arabs only came here in the 1940's, so we have a right to destroy them", they are probably Israelis. :lol:

i've met a a lot of israelis who actually support a one state solution with palestinians and israelis having equal citizenship, and actually say that israel has no right to exist.

but a lot would agree with the above statement

[9]

It is very hard, and in fact nearly impossible, to productively engage people who have this mindset - typical Zionist nationalists who can only express and qualify their opinions on the state of Israel by insinuating that everyone who disagrees is an anti-Semite, or by pathologizing them along the lines of Mamet. No matter how solid and informed is your argument, they will simply dismiss it by attributing sinister motivations to it, making any sort of honest exchange completely unattainable. If someone wants to waste their time engaging the bullshit in the article, that is their choice, but I agree with Wanted Man that it is pointless.

Just as a side note, though, anti-Zionists need to quit arguing in these terms:

These Zionist "Socialists" are obviously just another incarnation of the Nazis.

Originally Posted by Thomas Sankara (different thread from yesterday)
For a state founded by the survivors of fascism, Israel is ironically the most fascist/nationalist state in existence today.

Oh how quickly the oppressed become the oppressors, eh?It is simply capitulating to, and reproducing, the discourse created by Zionist national mythology. This is a stupid thing to do. People should stop doing it. Just sayin'.

[gorillafuck]

Supporting Israel for human rights reasons? That's like supporting Pinochet for anti-fascist reasons.

[LOLseph Stalin]

That link came from me who received it from a zionist leftist... I did notice it said "left liberal" though.

[Obs]

Just as a side note, though, anti-Zionists need to quit arguing in these terms:

It is simply capitulating to, and reproducing, the discourse created by Zionist national mythology. This is a stupid thing to do. People should stop doing it. Just sayin'.
Why? The similarities between modern Zionism and national socialism are striking.

[Manifesto]

That link came from me who received it from a zionist leftist... I did notice it said "left liberal" though.
And your point? :P

[Magón]

Well my whole viewpoint on the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Israel, and the whole Middle East, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Islam. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in the Middle East and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

That "Zionist Socialism" is just a crock. :rolleyes:

[LOLseph Stalin]

And your point? :P

No reason. I was just pointing it out. :P

[Proletarian Ultra]

Islamophobia is a great excuse for being a crypto-imperialist douche!


Well my whole viewpoint on the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Israel, and the whole Middle East, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Islam. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in the Middle East and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on Russia, and the whole Eastern Europe, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Orthodoxy. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Eurasia and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on China, Vietnam, and the whole East Asia, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Confucianism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Asia and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on Cuba, Venezuela, and the whole Latin America, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Catholicism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Latin America and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on Britain, France, Germany and the whole Europe, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Protestantism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Europe and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on Congo, Angola, South Africa, Liberia and the whole Africa, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Animism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Africa and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Well my whole viewpoint on US, Canada, and the whole North America, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Mormonism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in America and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.


(Did I forget any place? I think we just proved Leftist Revolution is impossible and undesirable everywhere.)

[Obs]

That depends - are there any religious people currently in the Antarctic? Because then obviously leftist revolution is impossible there, too.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Well my whole viewpoint on the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Israel, and the whole Middle East, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Islam. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in the Middle East and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

That "Zionist Socialism" is just a crock. :rolleyes:

Yes let all of a region just implode upon itself. its better than working toward a socialist/commuinist/anarchist revolution.

Until the late 70s, islam was a minore force in regional anti-imperialism. The main force was either arab naitonalism(Ba'ath), or socialism(PLO, PFLP PKK).
in the 70s Afghanistan actually had a communist revolution(which is why the soviet union ended up being in afghanistan for 10 years) and that was when us sponsored islamism a la Mujahaideen(later to become taliban and northern alliance) became a stereotype.

[genstrike]

This article is so ridiculous and asinine that there is no point to trying to engage with it. But, what do you expect? It is the Huffington Post, after all.

[9]

Why? The similarities between modern Zionism and national socialism are striking.

In the sense that they are both racist, nationalist ideologies which correspond to ethnic cleansing, but then, those are a dime a dozen, and I think there are other historical examples of ethnic cleansing which bare much greater similarity to the state of Israel than Nazi Germany.
I think mostly the sort of arguments I was addressing are made by people who've swallowed hook, line, and sinker this narrative that portrays the state of Israel as somehow the living embodiment of the victims of Nazism. I think that is mostly why the parallels are drawn - "the victims of Nazism are the new Nazis" - it seems super provocative if you're a liberal and you don't realize that you're just reproducing this "the state of Israel as the victims of Nazism" discourse which is precisely why Zionism is so immensely effective at portraying the state of Israel as the victim in the first place, in spite of the fact that it has been engaged in ethnic cleansing for the whole of its existence.

[Magón]

Islamophobia is a great excuse for being a crypto-imperialist douche!

Yeah, you're so right, I am so afraid of Islam and what it can do. Please, let me hide my children from that arab dressed man. Let me kill anyone who may signify looking possibly Middle Eastern. I hate them so much... Give me a break, I'm not afraid of Islam. I just don't give a shit about Islam! Just like I don't give a shit about any other religion. Am I such a crypto-imperialist douche for that? Hell if I am! I just don't think such a radical region, like the Middle East can have a successful Leftist Revolution. There's too many factors against them there, that anyone who might try would probably be killed! Ever heard of the Iranian Secret Police aka the Iranian Revolutionary Guard?



Well my whole viewpoint on Russia, and the whole Eastern Europe, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Orthodoxy. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Eurasia and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Yeah, because I put so much emphasis on Russia or any other Eastern European country, and their Orthodox views. I bet if you went to Russia, or any other Eastern European country, and talked to any person claiming Marxism, Communism, Anarchy, whatever, that they're not putting Religion as a means to how they're thinking. If they have a religion at all.


Well my whole viewpoint on China, Vietnam, and the whole East Asia, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Confucianism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Asia and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

China and Vietnam? Really? I already think those two nations have failed miserably at a Socialist or Communist government/society. But not because of religion. The Middle East is much more Religion oriented, than any other region in the world. Why the hell else do you hear about Shia or Sunni Muslims, etc. blowing each other's Mosque? Islam has become a lot more radicalized in the years, than any Christian or Eastern religion has, or is.


Well my whole viewpoint on Cuba, Venezuela, and the whole Latin America, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Catholicism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Latin America and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

Also, have you ever been to Latin America? Have you ever visited Cuba or Venezuela? Or any other Latin American nation? Have you ever talked with the people, seen the streets, looked around? Well I have, and I can tell you that Catholicism hardly has a grip in either of those two nations in any major city or village. Sure you see churches, crosses, etc. around, but Catholicism is hardly a factor in peoples eyes when looking at politics. (Unlike the US or other Western Nations, they can tell the two apart pretty well.) Visit one of them before spouting shit like that, I'm embarrassed for you, or anyone who tries that. Especially when talking to someone who's actually been there, and lived there for months at a time.


Well my whole viewpoint on Britain, France, Germany and the whole Europe, is that a Leftist Revolution can't really work there. Their religions restrict them too much, especially Protestantism. I say let them at each other all they want, I don't care, blow each other up, shoot each other, whatever, I don't care, I've seen what a Leftist struggle can do in Europe and it failed. They don't have anything I can support anyway.

What do I care what Britain, France, or Germany do? They've shown what can happen in a "Leftist Revolution", and especially in Germany. It failed, but once again, not because of religious means. France failed, but there never was a point to start. Same with Britain I imagine. You make it out like I think all these different regions and continents will fail because of some religious reason? Well you're making some pretty big assumptions my friend, because I only think the Middle East is a failed plan. And just because I think they should be allowed to handle their own matters between themselves, and not have others intervene, is completely standing up to my Anarchist ways. Be a Marxist-Leninist, and you be the Imperialist! Shit, sure does seem like you want to be. By stating this, it seems like you're interested in getting to that mess of the Middle East. Well I'm not, and I think they should do what they want without intervention from the Left.

You can't have revolution everywhere! Even if the Left have control over 3/4ths of the world, there will always be places where the Left looses ground and a Bourgeois ruler or rulers takes over. It's just how societies are! I won't bother with the Middle East, because I see nothing good to come of it. I'm not interested in their resources like some Imperialists. I'm not interested in their secular religious wars. I'm not interested in their problems. I have no interest in that entire region. So I say if they want to blow each other up, shoot each other to hell, or do nothing at all, then that's there business. It doesn't mean I'd cut myself off from the region. If there were people from there, who no longer wanted to live there, and wanted to live in my society, I'd allow them to. No problem at all.

You're trying to make it out like I'm afraid of Islam, and stuff like that. Well like I already said, I'm not. I just don't have any interest in the region. It's a waste of time and space in my opinion. I like the people, and I like their food, but all that aside, I don't care for their religiously intertwined politics.


Yes let all of a region just implode upon itself. its better than working toward a socialist/commuinist/anarchist revolution.

Until the late 70s, islam was a minore force in regional anti-imperialism. The main force was either arab naitonalism(Ba'ath), or socialism(PLO, PFLP PKK).
in the 70s Afghanistan actually had a communist revolution(which is why the soviet union ended up being in afghanistan for 10 years) and that was when us sponsored islamism a la Mujahaideen(later to become taliban and northern alliance) became a stereotype.

I never said it'd implode on itself. I'm just taking the Middle East for what it is right now. Secular religious groups fighting for power over this and that, for this and that reason. Like I said, I don't care what they do to each other, I just don't want to be involved. Is that so hard to understand? Not wanting to get involved in a dispute or region I have no business being in in the first place. If they have a Socialist Party, then fine, I'd support it if it was something I thought I could. But I wouldn't drag myself in any deeper then saying I show support of that group. If they wanted a revolution, I'd support that if I thought the revolution was right. But the Middle East has changed a lot since the 70s and 80s.

Nowadays, the Middle East has become far more radicalized than before. They even have people recruited all the way from the US itself, and they're gaining more support in the different nations that openly show support of them. (The people, not necessarily the governments, but it's not impossible either.)

I don't hate the region, I think a lot of interesting history has come out of the Middle East. A lot of good, but a Leftist Revolution I cannot see winning there with how religiously bound the people in the Middle East are. I'm just stating what I think on the matter, take it or leave it. If you think a Leftist Revolution can be won in the Middle East, good for you, but until I actually see some headway done and some major victory or two won by the Left. Then I'll stick to my thinking that a Leftist Revolution cannot be won in the Middle East because of religious reasons. No matter what they are, I don't think it could be won.

[progressive_lefty]

Poor effort facebook fool lol..

[Rusty Shackleford]

I never said it'd implode on itself. I'm just taking the Middle East for what it is right now. Secular religious groups fighting for power over this and that, for this and that reason. Like I said, I don't care what they do to each other, I just don't want to be involved. Is that so hard to understand? Not wanting to get involved in a dispute or region I have no business being in in the first place. If they have a Socialist Party, then fine, I'd support it if it was something I thought I could. But I wouldn't drag myself in any deeper then saying I show support of that group. If they wanted a revolution, I'd support that if I thought the revolution was right. But the Middle East has changed a lot since the 70s and 80s.

Nowadays, the Middle East has become far more radicalized than before. They even have people recruited all the way from the US itself, and they're gaining more support in the different nations that openly show support of them. (The people, not necessarily the governments, but it's not impossible either.)

I don't hate the region, I think a lot of interesting history has come out of the Middle East. A lot of good, but a Leftist Revolution I cannot see winning there with how religiously bound the people in the Middle East are. I'm just stating what I think on the matter, take it or leave it. If you think a Leftist Revolution can be won in the Middle East, good for you, but until I actually see some headway done and some major victory or two won by the Left. Then I'll stick to my thinking that a Leftist Revolution cannot be won in the Middle East because of religious reasons. No matter what they are, I don't think it could be won.

I think The Vegan Marxist pointed out about a potential Peoples' War being waged by Afghan Maoists... [citation is still needed]

Anyways. you are right that currently a leftwing revolutionary movement wont develop right now. But conditions change. conditions are not static. Who knows maybe in a week, in a year, or in a decade there will be a rise in left winth revolutionary movements. to say it wont happen is to take something at face value and apply that as something that is permanent. The Islamist movement is a reaction to imperialism(which was ironically fueled by the imeperialists themselves) therefore it is takes the leading role in anti-imperialism in the region. But that is not forever. remember that.

[Magón]

I think The Vegan Marxist pointed out about a potential Peoples' War being waged by Afghan Maoists... [citation is still needed]

Anyways. you are right that currently a leftwing revolutionary movement wont develop right now. But conditions change. conditions are not static. Who knows maybe in a week, in a year, or in a decade there will be a rise in left winth revolutionary movements. to say it wont happen is to take something at face value and apply that as something that is permanent. The Islamist movement is a reaction to imperialism(which was ironically fueled by the imeperialists themselves) therefore it is takes the leading role in anti-imperialism in the region. But that is not forever. remember that.

Conditions do change, and like I already said, if a revolution from the Left were to happen that I thought I could support, then I'd support it. But I wouldn't put too much hope into it's winning over the more extreme radical islamist groups. I'd see it more like the Maoists in India, then something like in Russia during 1917.

And like you said, this Islamist movement is a reaction to Imperialism. A Middle Eastern, reaction to Imperialism. That's their response to it, is through these radical Islamist groups. Not a Leftist Revolution.

[Obs]

Conditions do change, and like I already said, if a revolution from the Left were to happen that I thought I could support, then I'd support it.
But you're an anarchist, so that will never happen. :confused:

[Magón]

But you're an anarchist, so that will never happen. :confused:

What are you talking about? So because I'm an Anarchist, I can't support a revolution, that may not be of Anarchist creation? Isn't that what the Anarchists in Russia in 1917, Spain in 1936, and other places have done? Supporting revolutions that aren't necessarily Anarchist started. I may be an Anarchist, but I still support Hugo Chavez. He's no Anarchist, but I still support him.

[leftace53]

The writer of the article is an IRL troll.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Conditions do change, and like I already said, if a revolution from the Left were to happen that I thought I could support, then I'd support it. But I wouldn't put too much hope into it's winning over the more extreme radical islamist groups. I'd see it more like the Maoists in India, then something like in Russia during 1917.

And like you said, this Islamist movement is a reaction to Imperialism. A Middle Eastern, reaction to Imperialism. That's their response to it, is through these radical Islamist groups. Not a Leftist Revolution.


the first response was not islamism. it was socialism and arab nationalism. there are many responses to imperialism. islamism is just one, its not a permanent position. it will decline in a decade or 2 possibly.

[DragonQuestWes]

I see that document as stand-up comedy material.

Zionist Socialism is an oxymoron. Does that guy think that the Palestinians are the bourgeoisie!? Wow.

[Manifesto]

I see that document as stand-up comedy material.

Zionist Socialism is an oxymoron. Does that guy think that the Palestinians are the bourgeoisie!? Wow.

He is a total racist and Islamophobe, as one would probably expect from a Zionist.

[Chambered Word]

The writer of the article is an IRL troll.

It all makes sense now.

Go home, everyone.

[4 Leaf Clover]

and then you say liberalism is not danger for left