Protests hit Israel too....

[RadioRaheem84]

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRealNews?blend=3&ob=5

Americans greatly admire Israel, so I hope they take a lesson from the Israeli workers out in the streets protesting against the stagnation in wages, the rise of prices, and the crippling corruption.

It seems like the Arab Spring has also influenced Israelis to get up and raise some hell.

[Metacomet]

Israel does have many reasonable, normal people. Unfortunately the far right nutters have 12 kids each and now the results are coming to pass.

And that woman who talks about the middle class is a moron.

[Flying Trotsky]

Israel is a fascist state- who cares whether or not they protest? Sure there are "liberal" Israelis like the Maki Party, but at the end of the day, a race state is a race state.

[maskerade]

oh no the middle class is apparently suffering. let's forget about the Palestinians so they can continue to live comfortably in illegally occupied suburbia.

[RadioRaheem84]

I don't think the silly liberal lady at the end of the video is representative of all the Israelis.

Seriously, what is with all the hostility toward Israeli workers? And who said forget the Palestinians?

[Tommy4ever]

The woman at the end came off as a real arse ''the government are supporting the weak''. :confused:

But a movement of Israeli workers hostile to unrestricted capitalism can only be a good thing.

[maskerade]

I don't think the silly liberal lady at the end of the video is representative of all the Israelis.

Seriously, what is with all the hostility toward Israeli workers? And who said forget the Palestinians?

I was responding to the lady rather than anyone in the thread, as she said it wasn't true about the government being harshest towards those who aren't white and Jewish

[Pretty Flaco]

I don't think the silly liberal lady at the end of the video is representative of all the Israelis.

Seriously, what is with all the hostility toward Israeli workers? And who said forget the Palestinians?

We've gotta be workers united. The state isn't representative of the wants of the people. Calling israeli workers fascist is stupid.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

The woman at the end came off as a real ***** ''the government are supporting the weak''. :confused:

But a movement of Israeli workers hostile to unrestricted capitalism can only be a good thing.
*facepalm*

[eyedrop]

Israel is a fascist state- who cares whether or not they protest? Sure there are "liberal" Israelis like the Maki Party, but at the end of the day, a race state is a race state.

If Israel is a fascist state shouldn't it then be even more important that people are protesting? Not less.

[Tommy4ever]

*facepalm*

:blushing:

Sorry about that. I was just using it as a generally abusive term. :blushing:

* I'll change it to something not so sexist.

[Red Commissar]

Hopefully they'll keep strong and won't buy into the attempts by the right over there to claim the housing woes can be fixed by expansion of the settlements. Western states pretty much do the same thing when economic crisis hits to deflect attention away from the system- blame it on immigrants and/or welfare cheats.

[Flying Trotsky]

Seriously, what is with all the hostility toward Israeli workers? And who said forget the Palestinians?

I'd argue that as an occupying force, the Israeli "working class" isn't of much use to the cause of justice and liberty. If Israel was turned into an Israeli worker's utopia, it'd still be a brutal apartheid state. For that reason (among others), I don't really see why we should care. Either way, the Palestinian people- those who are really being oppressed, lose.

[Flying Trotsky]

We've gotta be workers united. The state isn't representative of the wants of the people. Calling israeli workers fascist is stupid.

I'm all for being workers united, but the majority of Israeli working class is comprised of Palestinians. Each morning, Palestinians get herded through the barrier-wall check-points, go to work for their Israeli taskmasters, and in the evenings are herded back over. I'd argue the Israeli "proletariat" is a comparatively small group, and while exploited, not nearly on the level of the Palestinians.

[Welshy]

I'm all for being workers united, but the majority of Israeli working class is comprised of Palestinians. Each morning, Palestinians get herded through the barrier-wall check-points, go to work for their Israeli taskmasters, and in the evenings are herded back over. I'd argue the Israeli "proletariat" is a comparatively small group, and while exploited, not nearly on the level of the Palestinians.

I may be wrong on this, but I thought one of aspects of Israeli Apartheid was that Palestinians tended to be shunned as workers in Israel as oppose to how black south Africans were used as labors during Apartheid there.

[Flying Trotsky]

I grew up in the Middle East (not Israel, but the surrounding areas), and from my talks with Palestinian refugees, working-class Palestinians have a status similar to Latino immigrants in the states- hated and yet used at the same time.

[RadioRaheem84]

I grew up in the Middle East (not Israel, but the surrounding areas), and from my talks with Palestinian refugees, working-class Palestinians have a status similar to Latino immigrants in the states- hated and yet used at the same time.

That's all over the Middle East, not just Israel.



I'd argue that as an occupying force, the Israeli "working class" isn't of much use to the cause of justice and liberty. If Israel was turned into an Israeli worker's utopia, it'd still be a brutal apartheid state. For that reason (among others), I don't really see why we should care. Either way, the Palestinian people- those who are really being oppressed, lose.


Then as an occupying force in Iraq and Afghanistan, heck the whole world, working class protests and demonstrations against capitalism in the States mean nothing tpo, eh?

Anti-capitalism would assuredly mean anti-Apartheid too.

[Flying Trotsky]

Then as an occupying force in Iraq and Afghanistan, heck the whole world, working class protests and demonstrations against capitalism in the States mean nothing tpo, eh?
I'm not entirely sure what you mean here- could you clarify?



Anti-capitalism would assuredly mean anti-Apartheid too.

I'm not sure that would be the case. There are plenty of countries in which there's a tendency to resist Capitalism, but still plenty of bigotry and racism. Just look at France, Germany, the Netherlands, or Britain. While none of these countries are truly-Socialist, they're certainly opposed to what we'd normally dub "Capitalism", and even so, there's still plenty of vicious xenophobia.

[Motown]

Good for the Israeli workers. *Facepalm* at te guy saying their is no Jewish working class in Israel.

[RadioRaheem84]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here- could you clarify?



I'm not sure that would be the case. There are plenty of countries in which there's a tendency to resist Capitalism, but still plenty of bigotry and racism. Just look at France, Germany, the Netherlands, or Britain. While none of these countries are truly-Socialist, they're certainly opposed to what we'd normally dub "Capitalism", and even so, there's still plenty of vicious xenophobia.

But the parties that tend to resist capitalism in those nations also tend to resist racism, xenophobia and war like policies. I think you are confusing the parties and organizations that help organize anti-capitalist rallies for the nation itself.

We're talking about planned action by workers to denounce capitalism and war like policies.

The United States is also an occupying force in two nations. So are we not to support working class struggles against the Status quo, that would most likely undo the occupations?

[Flying Trotsky]

The United States is also an occupying force in two nations. So are we not to support working class struggles against the Status quo, that would most likely undo the occupations?

Ok, I get what you're saying now.

You're right, but there's a huge difference between a nation's military occupying a foreign country, and an entire nation occupying a foreign country. There's war and then there's colonization, and Israel isn't simply occupying Palestine with its military, but with its society as well, and that includes the Israeli "working-class".

To the best of my knowledge, even the most radical of Israeli left only endorses a two-state solution...

[RadioRaheem84]

I am also of the opinion that the Israeli left is pretty soft on the solution, but for the most part they're blatantly in opposition to the Israeli occupation, more so than the Israel supporters in the US, where the Israeli lobby is strong.

[Libertador]

To the best of my knowledge, even the most radical of Israeli left only endorses a two-state solution... Removing Israel from the map entirely would be an injustice to the innocent people who are simply Israeli for being Israeli, albeit based upon the injustice done to the Palestinians.

My only fear is that at some point we will look at the Palestinians as we look at Greece today and wonder how some could ever expect that they will ever reclaim Anatolia.

[RadioRaheem84]

Removing Israel from the map entirely would be an injustice to the innocent people who are simply Israeli for being Israeli, albeit based upon the injustice done to the Palestinians.

My only fear is that at some point we will look at the Palestinians as we look at Greece today and wonder how some could ever expect that they will ever reclaim Anatolia.

Yeah but most support a general two state solution that gives nothing back to the Palestinians. It's typical fluff that even Alan Dershowitz supports.

There are two, two state solutions. One actually supported by the Palestinians and one supported by Israel and the US.

The Israeli left tends to support the latter or be skiddish on the issue.

[Welshy]

Ok, I get what you're saying now.

You're right, but there's a huge difference between a nation's military occupying a foreign country, and an entire nation occupying a foreign country. There's war and then there's colonization, and Israel isn't simply occupying Palestine with its military, but with its society as well, and that includes the Israeli "working-class".

To the best of my knowledge, even the most radical of Israeli left only endorses a two-state solution...

One can also see the US as occupying a foreign country or multiple foreign countries, because of the fact it exists as the result of colonization of American Indian territories and the genocide against these groups continued well after the beginnings of the labor movement in the US. So by your logic communists shouldn't have supported the struggles of the American Working Class.


Also your attitude towards the Israel working class only serves to help enforce the ethnicity/religion based divide between the workers of that region and only serves the interests of the Capitalist class.

[RadioRaheem84]

Exactly, Flying Trotsky's complaints seem more like ethnic tension that is wrapped around political tension. A distrust of all Israeli people.

[Flying Trotsky]

Alright, there's a lot to cover here, so I'll try to go point by point.


Removing Israel from the map entirely would be an injustice to the innocent people who are simply Israeli for being Israeli, albeit based upon the injustice done to the Palestinians.

I'm anti-nationalist- I believe people have the right to live wherever they wish to live. If every Jewish person on the face of the earth wanted to live in Palestine, I say they have a right to do so. However, no one has the right to displace someone else, much less create a state based on a loose amalgamation of culture and religion. You wouldn't support a Caucasians-only state, why support a Jews-only state?

No, I say the only equitable solution is for the creation of a single state based on the one-person-one-vote system. That's justice, liberty, and equality for everyone, regardless of race or religion.


One can also see the US as occupying a foreign country or multiple foreign countries, because of the fact it exists as the result of colonization of American Indian territories and the genocide against these groups continued well after the beginnings of the labor movement in the US. So by your logic communists shouldn't have supported the struggles of the American Working Class.


Also your attitude towards the Israel working class only serves to help enforce the ethnicity/religion based divide between the workers of that region and only serves the interests of the Capitalist class.

Now there's a really good argument- and one that's particularly important to me as I'm part Native American. Now as RadioRaheem84 already pointed out, the Israeli left doesn't really endorse any equitable deal for the Palestinians. The same can't be said for the leftist organizations and Native Americans in the US. There are plenty of Marxists here working towards reparations for the Native Americans, including the return of such areas as the Black Hills. Speaking for myself, I'd like to see a one-state solution in which Native Americans and immigrants to North America live side-by-side. I can't turn back the clock on the brutal genocide of the Native American tribes. I wish I could, but I can't. The only thing left for me to do is try to work towards the integration of Native Americans into the US and make as many reparations for their miseries as I can.

[RadioRaheem84]

Fair enough stances, that you can reasonably debate. I wish people didn't neg rep you so fast, but it's just at first your posts seemed more anti-Israeli worker than anti-Israel, the State.

[Flying Trotsky]

Meh- these things happen.

[RedSonRising]

It's clear that a majority of organizers in these protests have an interest in social justice and achieving the basic needs required for the working class to at least survive without excessive suffering. There was not much questioning on the protesters' opinion on the Israeli economy in relation to Palestinian apartheid, which would be interesting to hear. This is a definite positive development for the internal politics of Israel.

[Optiow]

Nice to see Israeli's protesting. Now the ruling elite can't just say the Palestinian Muslims are the only ones who are creating 'trouble'.

[ckaihatsu]

I'm anti-nationalist- I believe people have the right to live wherever they wish to live. If every Jewish person on the face of the earth wanted to live in Palestine, I say they have a right to do so. However, no one has the right to displace someone else, much less create a state based on a loose amalgamation of culture and religion. You wouldn't support a Caucasians-only state, why support a Jews-only state?




To the best of my knowledge, even the most radical of Israeli left only endorses a two-state solution...




Now there's a really good argument- and one that's particularly important to me as I'm part Native American. Now as RadioRaheem84 already pointed out, the Israeli left doesn't really endorse any equitable deal for the Palestinians. The same can't be said for the leftist organizations and Native Americans in the US. There are plenty of Marxists here working towards reparations for the Native Americans, including the return of such areas as the Black Hills. Speaking for myself, I'd like to see a one-state solution in which Native Americans and immigrants to North America live side-by-side. I can't turn back the clock on the brutal genocide of the Native American tribes. I wish I could, but I can't. The only thing left for me to do is try to work towards the integration of Native Americans into the US and make as many reparations for their miseries as I can.




the only equitable solution is for the creation of a single state based on the one-person-one-vote system. That's justice, liberty, and equality for everyone, regardless of race or religion.




I'd argue that as an occupying force, the Israeli "working class" isn't of much use to the cause of justice and liberty.




[T]here's a huge difference between a nation's military occupying a foreign country, and an entire nation occupying a foreign country. There's war and then there's colonization, and Israel isn't simply occupying Palestine with its military, but with its society as well, and that includes the Israeli "working-class".




If Israel was turned into an Israeli worker's utopia, it'd still be a brutal apartheid state. For that reason (among others), I don't really see why we should care. Either way, the Palestinian people- those who are [I]really being oppressed, lose.


FT, your statements are showing a less-than-revolutionary politics -- I'd term it *reformist* overall.

- With a population of 7 million Israel can't be oversimplified to merely being a large U.S. military outpost, *or* to that of a purely Zionist people with a single-minded politics of repressing Palestinians. You're breezily characterizing Israeli workers as having the same objective race-oppressing interests as those of the nation's ruling Zionist politicians -- this is too much of a stretch, even if many Israelis happen to be right-wingers.

- You're contending that a racial-based politics could somehow provide a solution to the apartheid of the Occupied Territories. I'll argue that there cannot be a "one-state" solution, much less a "two-state" solution, while *states* remain at all. Only the multiracial Israeli working class, along with the working class of the entire Middle East, can sufficiently address that region's social ills, namely by taking a decisively *class*-based position against social injustices perpetrated by the ruling elites throughout, including U.S. imperialism and its global hegemony.


Israeli protest movement sparks mass strikes

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/aug2011/isra-a03.shtml


The Israeli protests and the unity of Arab and Jewish workers

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jul2011/pers-j30.shtml

[Ernst]

i dont agree with FT at all but he mentioned a quite crucial point. israeli working class benefits from the apartheidsystem. a movement [not communist] struggling for the interests of israeli working class an others like the petty bourgeoisie struggles implicitly for the persistance of apartheid [maybe not in that fascist style the gov do].
the israeli revolutionaries duty is to build an cp led by the palestinian interests and start to crush israel. only if israel is no more there will be the chance to achieve socialism.

[Arlekino]

Well done Israel, my opinion the strike went good, good slogans and clear message to all workers, so good for Palestinians and Jews.
http://krasnoe.tv/node/10705
Is in English please watch.

[pluckedflowers]

Lenin's Tomb (http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/08/few-observations-on-israels-protests.html) had some worthwhile commentary on this issue yesterday. Max Ajl (http://www.maxajl.com/) also says he'll be writing something on it soon, which I look forward to reading.

[ckaihatsu]

i dont agree with FT at all but he mentioned a quite crucial point. israeli working class benefits from the apartheidsystem.


This is incorrect, though.

The Israeli working class benefits from apartheid as much as the U.S. working class receives benefits from an expansion of the U.S. debt limit -- in other words, not at all. In each case there's no mercenary incentive or patronage method whereby voluntary participation in apartheid or expressed political support for politicians' economic policies results in bigger bank accounts for workers. Instead it's apples-and-oranges as usual, with ruling-class-oriented methods playing out "above the heads" of the working class.

Racial apartheid and money-supply machinations, respectively, are only *diversions* as far as the working class is concerned. Meanwhile a few more minutes or years have been leached away from the timeline of workers activity in *their own* best interests.





a movement [not communist] struggling for the interests of israeli working class an others like the petty bourgeoisie struggles


Which is it that you're talking about here -- the interests of the Israeli working class or so-called "petty bourgeoisie struggles" -- ?





implicitly for the persistance of apartheid [maybe not in that fascist style the gov do].
the israeli revolutionaries duty is to build an cp led by the palestinian interests and start to crush israel. only if israel is no more there will be the chance to achieve socialism.

[Rafiq]

I'm appalled at these so called 'communists' denouncing what could become a real workers revolution.

[maskerade]

I'm appalled at these so called 'communists' denouncing what could become a real workers revolution.

that's a bit premature, don't you think?

[Ernst]

In each case there's no mercenary incentive or patronage method whereby voluntary participation in apartheid or expressed political support for politicians' economic policies results in bigger bank accounts for workers.
this is obviously a pure economistic POV. and furthermore absolutely false. the whole israeli existence is based on apartheid. without apartheid there will be very likely no israel and definitely no profits from being the imperialists outpost.
self-evident this apllies to israeli working class too. i will not list up all the benefits in comparison to the arabs blow-by-blow. just mentioned health care, housing, wages, superior identity, sustentation, recreational stuff, education and so on.

btw. its the same with the usa, germany and any other imperialism. the people doesn`t benefit from afghans or iraqis being killed but they profit from the persistance of imperialism. so war is a necessity just as the expansion of the U.S. debt limit. not to touch on the corrupted parts of working class.

[RadioRaheem84]

I would like to know the Israeli Left's opinion on the Palestinian issue. So far I have read some rather luke warm stuff coming from them; opposing the occupation and the settlements but weary on the solution, focuing on two states but with more concessions toward the Israeli end.

[ckaihatsu]

this is obviously a pure economistic POV. and furthermore absolutely false. the whole israeli existence is based on apartheid. without apartheid there will be very likely no israel and definitely no profits from being the imperialists outpost.
self-evident this apllies to israeli working class too. i will not list up all the benefits in comparison to the arabs blow-by-blow. just mentioned health care, housing, wages, superior identity, sustentation, recreational stuff, education and so on.

btw. its the same with the usa, germany and any other imperialism. the people doesn`t benefit from afghans or iraqis being killed but they profit from the persistance of imperialism. so war is a necessity just as the expansion of the U.S. debt limit. not to touch on the corrupted parts of working class.


Well, if you think that I'm tending towards the economistic side of things then I'll have to note that *you're* tending towards the Third-Worldist side of things with your line that domestic populations benefit from imperialist policy and the colonization of oppressed peoples.

I *will* acknowledge that domestic populations tend to benefit from value-exploiting domestic currency, but that's only while people are in the role of consumer.

Your line here is practically petty bourgeois since those *are* the type who can benefit from imperialist policy, as with accessing cheaper lines of credit for investments. This, though, does *not* speak to the interests of the working class as a whole, either domestically or otherwise, who are *not* capitalists, by definition.

Also:








Important strategic consequences follow from Machover and Orr's analysis. If the class antagonism is dominant, then the Left should focus its activism first on organising the Israeli working class as the key to breaking the colonial project. The self-organisation of that working class would be central to the downfall of that colonial system. If the colonial dynamic predominates, then Machover and Orr are right to conclude that "as long as Zionism is politically and ideologically dominant within that society, and forms the accepted framework of politics, there is no chance whatsoever of the Israeli working class becoming a revolutionary class". In which case the only solution is a regional revolutionary upsurge.

Well, the miraculous beginnings of such a regional revolt have been evident since January this year.





[T]he Israeli state invests a lot in the development of settlements, which requires an unusual degree of investment in the repressive apparatus. That necessarily diverts resources from 'internal' development, even if the long-term payback for such colonization is expected to outweigh the costs. Investment in the military vs investment in welfare is one of the issues that has arisen in recent Israeli debates.

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/08/few-observations-on-israels-protests.html

[A Marxist Historian]

FT, your statements are showing a less-than-revolutionary politics -- I'd term it *reformist* overall.

- With a population of 7 million Israel can't be oversimplified to merely being a large U.S. military outpost, *or* to that of a purely Zionist people with a single-minded politics of repressing Palestinians. You're breezily characterizing Israeli workers as having the same objective race-oppressing interests as those of the nation's ruling Zionist politicians -- this is too much of a stretch, even if many Israelis happen to be right-wingers.

- You're contending that a racial-based politics could somehow provide a solution to the apartheid of the Occupied Territories. I'll argue that there cannot be a "one-state" solution, much less a "two-state" solution, while *states* remain at all. Only the multiracial Israeli working class, along with the working class of the entire Middle East, can sufficiently address that region's social ills, namely by taking a decisively *class*-based position against social injustices perpetrated by the ruling elites throughout, including U.S. imperialism and its global hegemony.,,

That's about right. Here you have a tiny hunk of land too small for two rival nations, and basically impossible to fairly divide into two pieces and have either piece be viable. Plus, such a division would just mean ethnic cleansing, given the population interspersal. So a "two state" solution would be a disaster, and a "one state" solution means one nation, probably the ones speaking Hebrew, on top, and the other one, probably the one speaking Arabic, on the bottom. And don't pay any attention to who has more numbers, as questions like that get settled by force of arms, not at the ballot box.

So in this kind of situation the problem can only be solved by a revolution uniting Jewish and Arab workers vs. Jewish and Arab ruling classes, to break down those national divisions. Nothing else could possibly work. Until that happens, things will continue to go the way they always have for the last 40-50 years, namely just getting worse and worse year by year, sometimes slowly, sometimes more quickly.

The real importance of these protests in Israel is that they were touched off, obviously, by the "Arab Spring" protests in Egypt and so forth. This does indicate some hope for the future.

Unfortunately, the "Arab Spring" seems to be running into a brick wall, with fortified military dictatorship in Egypt and several other countries, and bloody civil war leading to nothing except more suffering elsewhere.

And with the imperialists having totally coopted the original protests in Libya with lightning speed, and a distinct danger of the same thing happening in Syria, the only country where the protests have much life at this point. And little news coming out of Tunisia, the country where the working class was most to the fore.

So unless you have a turnaround, I suspect these Israeli protests will sputter out.

-M.H.-

[ckaihatsu]

That's about right. Here you have a tiny hunk of land too small for two rival nations, and basically impossible to fairly divide into two pieces and have either piece be viable. Plus, such a division would just mean ethnic cleansing, given the population interspersal. So a "two state" solution would be a disaster, and a "one state" solution means one nation, probably the ones speaking Hebrew, on top, and the other one, probably the one speaking Arabic, on the bottom. And don't pay any attention to who has more numbers, as questions like that get settled by force of arms, not at the ballot box.

So in this kind of situation the problem can only be solved by a revolution uniting Jewish and Arab workers vs. Jewish and Arab ruling classes, to break down those national divisions. Nothing else could possibly work. Until that happens, things will continue to go the way they always have for the last 40-50 years, namely just getting worse and worse year by year, sometimes slowly, sometimes more quickly.

The real importance of these protests in Israel is that they were touched off, obviously, by the "Arab Spring" protests in Egypt and so forth. This does indicate some hope for the future.

Unfortunately, the "Arab Spring" seems to be running into a brick wall, with fortified military dictatorship in Egypt and several other countries, and bloody civil war leading to nothing except more suffering elsewhere.

And with the imperialists having totally coopted the original protests in Libya with lightning speed, and a distinct danger of the same thing happening in Syria, the only country where the protests have much life at this point. And little news coming out of Tunisia, the country where the working class was most to the fore.

So unless you have a turnaround, I suspect these Israeli protests will sputter out.

-M.H.-


Good basic rundown, and I generally agree, with the reservation that Syria is not Israel, Libya, Yemen, or Tunisia. I tend to think of it as being more on par with Egypt, meaning that it's a larger country, with larger influence and greater resounding implications for all of the Middle East and North Africa.

Whereas Tunisia's Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was readily ejected from power, and Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh has teetered on the brink of a Western-backed coup attempt, Libya's Gadaffi has now fully resisted international imperialist military intervention, with Israel's Netanyahu remaining solidly within the U.S. global protectorate.

Only massive sustained mass protests and resulting labor militancy whisked Mubarak well out of the reach of his reliable U.S. patron, while the traditional military apparatus of punishing rule remains, unfortunately, in Egypt.

The Arab Spring momentum has affected the smaller, latter-uprising countries in lesser-impacting ways, while Syria's al-Assad -- not to mention the Saudi ruling family and Bahrain -- has remained virtually untouched by anti-government protests there so far.


What remains in front of us is *not* cause for perceiving a slipping away of energetic momentum, but rather is potential for a *qualitative* shift in which militant consciousness may reformulate at a higher, region-wide, more-broadly-identifying and more-generally-organized level -- a consciousness won from on-the-ground experience of struggle that can now manifest as being more resolute and not as easily brushed aside by any given regime's militaristic force.

In other words I think the groundwork has now been laid out over a broad area, and while it may ebb for a moment it is "regrouping" even while new shoots of struggle sprout even further outward, in major European countries and now in Israel.

These broader-scale political dynamics of struggle will most likely "play out" through Syria since it's the other major country in the region and less susceptible to an inherently limited domestic populist protesting.

[Apoi_Viitor]

this is obviously a pure economistic POV. and furthermore absolutely false. the whole israeli existence is based on apartheid.

What?


without apartheid there will be very likely no israel and definitely no profits from being the imperialists outpost.

The Israeli economy is over 200 billion dollars, and at most, 5 billion of that is from direct US aid...


its the same with the usa, germany and any other imperialism. the people doesn`t benefit from afghans or iraqis being killed but they profit from the persistance of imperialism. so war is a necessity just as the expansion of the U.S. debt limit. not to touch on the corrupted parts of working class.

Please explain how I profit from the "persistence" of imperialism.

[A Marxist Historian]

Good basic rundown, and I generally agree, with the reservation that Syria is not Israel, Libya, Yemen, or Tunisia. I tend to think of it as being more on par with Egypt, meaning that it's a larger country, with larger influence and greater resounding implications for all of the Middle East and North Africa.

Whereas Tunisia's Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was readily ejected from power, and Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh has teetered on the brink of a Western-backed coup attempt, Libya's Gadaffi has now fully resisted international imperialist military intervention, with Israel's Netanyahu remaining solidly within the U.S. global protectorate.

Only massive sustained mass protests and resulting labor militancy whisked Mubarak well out of the reach of his reliable U.S. patron, while the traditional military apparatus of punishing rule remains, unfortunately, in Egypt.

The Arab Spring momentum has affected the smaller, latter-uprising countries in lesser-impacting ways, while Syria's al-Assad -- not to mention the Saudi ruling family and Bahrain -- has remained virtually untouched by anti-government protests there so far.


What remains in front of us is *not* cause for perceiving a slipping away of energetic momentum, but rather is potential for a *qualitative* shift in which militant consciousness may reformulate at a higher, region-wide, more-broadly-identifying and more-generally-organized level -- a consciousness won from on-the-ground experience of struggle that can now manifest as being more resolute and not as easily brushed aside by any given regime's militaristic force.

In other words I think the groundwork has now been laid out over a broad area, and while it may ebb for a moment it is "regrouping" even while new shoots of struggle sprout even further outward, in major European countries and now in Israel.

These broader-scale political dynamics of struggle will most likely "play out" through Syria since it's the other major country in the region and less susceptible to an inherently limited domestic populist protesting.

I'll refrain from comments about Syria for the simple reason that I don't think I understand what's really going on there now. It is very true that Syria is a very, very important country.

It would be nice if a sudden explosion of workers militancy in Egypt were to reverse the current situation there. I don't see any *immediate* signs of that though. Rather it looks as if the original militancy of the mass mobilizations against Mubaraq have petered out. The petty-bourgeois "Facebook Revolution" is over, it lost. And now Mubaraq #2 has successfully kicked the demonstrators out of the square, without any particularly huge public reaction.

But the working class is mobilizing and not yet intimidated, and Egypt is by far the most important Arab country, with by far the biggest population and by far the largest working class.

What is to be done? The working class needs to organize, and it needs a revolutionary party with a revolutionary program. The best thing for Arab militants and revolutionaries to do right now is to draw the lessons of the failed "Arab Spring," and think about and discuss what the program and principles of that revolutionary party must be. And participate in organizing the workers of course.

And the peasants. The desperately poor Egyptian "fellahin" are the revolutionary force that will have to be organized to overthrow the Egyptian military dictatorship. They are still the majority of the population.

-M.H.-

[Sasha]

http://media.schlijper.nl/normal/11/08/06/110806-43-tel-aviv-j14-demonstration-kaplan.jpg

source: http://schlijper.nl/search/J14/td%3A20111231/110806-52-tel-aviv-j14-demonstration-marmorek.photo

[Red And Black Sabot]

:laugh: That picture ^^^