The irrelevancy of Palestine

[Tukhachevsky]

I know this is a polemic subject, so before replying me I ask you to refrain from ad hominens. And be ready for a wall of text.

I was making a research about indian and south american slums- complexo do alemão in Rio de Janeiro and Dharavi in Mumbai being perfect examples- and how big was my surprise when I compared their populations to Gaza and West Bank, and saw that the palestinian population is way smaller than slum inhabitants. Not only that but Israel territory (20k km²) is smaller than the state of Massachusetts (27k km²).

So I ask you, from where all this anti-israel motivation inside the left comes? Unless all socialists parties and organizations are supposed to indirectly follow Soviet Union geopolitics and soviet opposition to Israel, how the palestinian struggle is more relevant than, let's say, russian occupation of Abkhazia or south Ossetia?

I anticipate some arguments:

-That Israel is a racist or ethnocentric state:
I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.

-That Israel was "stolen" from the original inhabitants:
Ignoring the problems of this argument, for if it was true all Mexico would belong to Aztecs, and considering that Israel had a jewish community since Ottoman times, how the creation of this state can be a theft if the arab league declared war- rejecting the partition plan and calling for the expulsion of jews- and lost? And by expelling jews from their countries, didn't muslim leaders irreversible validated the creation of Israel? Israel creation seems more like a civil war than a theft.

-That Israel is a western colony in the Middle East. That Israel is a manifestation of Usa imperialism:
And this is the most abstract, emotional, irrational and vague one. And it reeks of scapegoating. Israel is an imperialistic colony, but South Korea, Taiwan, Panama, Falklands, French Guiana, Suriname and etc don't? This brings me back to an earlier point: should all socialist parties or movements follow cold-war soviet geopolitics; specially when it indirectly lends support to religious fanatics organizations like Hezbola and Hamas, the complete opposite of the communist ideology?


Thank you for reading until here. For years I was supportive of Palestine, but now I'm researching that I'm making a paper about demographics I'm seeing things in a complete different light.
So, for socialism, is Palestine so relevant as people try to make?

[campesino]

how do I down rep someone?

[roy]

the conflict between israel and palestine plays a much bigger part in world politics than, as an example you mentioned, abkhazia. it's not that the people living in mumbai's slums are less important than the palestinians, but the conflict's connections to terrorism, the relationship between east and west etc. is going to cause it to be in the limelight a lot more than instances of extreme poverty that occur the world over.

[Tukhachevsky]

the conflict between israel and palestine plays a much bigger part in world politics than, as an example you mentioned, abkhazia. it's not that the people living in mumbai's slums are less important than the palestinians, but the conflict's connections to terrorism, the relationship between east and west etc. is going to cause it to be in the limelight a lot more than instances of extreme poverty that occur the world over.

Indian and brazilian slums have criminal organizations that practice what many countries would call "terrorism", they kidnap people, they threaten, they even put buses on fire.
But I totally agree with you, israeli-arab conflict seems very much a west-east dichotomy, a huge clash of ideology and mentality. Maybe they live in an eternal cold-war? It's funny to see middle east history and how geographical conditions and the lack of natural defenses contributed to eternal instability and the manifestation of localized wars. I bet even without Israel this area would be deep in conflict.

[Book O'Dead]

I know this is a polemic subject, so before replying me I ask you to refrain from ad hominens. And be ready for a wall of text.
[...]
So, for socialism, is Palestine so relevant as people try to make?

I don't know how relevant Palestine and its people are "for socialism" but I do believe that Palestine is relevant to the Palestinian.

Isn't that enough?

[Tukhachevsky]

Isn't that enough?

Every protest march I went in the last 4 years had people waving palestinian flags and were protests totally unrelated with the palestinian cause, i.e. raise of salary of federal teachers, etc.
I had acquaintances lobbing people for boycotts of israeli stores, newspapers less or more incline with the government orientation denigrating Israel, lol even one university colleague made an abstract painting with the title "Israel plans bombing gaza"!
If the palestinian cause is relevant for palestinians I wonder why it is so pushed to non-palestinians.
As I said before the relation between Palestine and any economic, political and social revolution is tenuous at best, and the left leaning towards the palestinian side seems more as a blindly continuation of Soviet Union geopolitics than anything rational.
After studying demographic fluxes in the middle east I felt almost, if I were to do a shitty comparison, as if I was the water in someone else mill, doing the dirty work for a conflict totally unrelated to me (and to socialism as a whole).

Well, another wall of text. I hope the mods understand I'm just rant or relieving and don't ban me.

[Book O'Dead]

After studying demographic fluxes in the middle east I felt almost, if I were to do a shitty comparison, as if I was the water in someone else mill, doing the dirty work for a conflict totally unrelated to me (and to socialism as a whole).

Well, another wall of text. I hope the mods understand I'm just rant or relieving and don't ban me.

So helping to secure the Palestinian people a free and independent homeland is "dirty work"?

I would agree but not in the sense you mean it.

[electrostal]

An independent Palestine would not be some great step towards the victory of world socialism ( or perhaps even bourgeois-democracy and secularism) however the Zionist regime in Israel, that main outpost and fortress of imperialism in the Middle East, should and must be resisted and fought against.

[Tukhachevsky]

So helping to secure the Palestinian people a free and independent homeland is "dirty work"?

In detriment of other people, yes.

[Manic Impressive]

nice OP with some good arguments. You missed out the most important one though, that national liberation struggles only lead to another set of bourgeois being installed to exploit workers.

there's another reason why it continues to be the most important national liberation struggle.

Recent history. For quite a long time it's been a movement allied with insurrectionary left wing groups, whether M-L or anarchist. Groups have gone to Palestine and Syria to get training from arab independence groups. They've received arms and training and been kept in safety by these groups. It's also been a hub for all other national liberation movements ETA or the IRA and plenty of others. It's been a pillar of resistance against the bourgeois of powerful nations. The enemy of my enemy and all that.

It's also part of the DNA of Trotskyist and M-L groups to support national liberation struggles. It's not blindly following the foreign policy of the USSR but it is their tactical decision they think it will bring about world socialism one tin pot dictatorship and state capitalist regime at a time.

[Book O'Dead]

In detriment of other people, yes.

What 'other people'?

And is that a criterion that socialists should use when selecting which liberation struggle to support?

To me, the notion that the struggle of Palestinians against Israel for self-determination is irrelevant or that to support it is harmful to the fight for socialism is a dangerous and repugnant notion.

While I do not argue that the Palestinian struggle is central to the fight for socialism--because it isn't--i believe that socialist are morally obligated to lend critical support to all legitimate struggles for liberation. And history has shown that the Palestinian fight to regain lost territory and to establish their own homeland is as legitimate now as when it first began.

[Rafiq]

For anti imps, the struggle in palestine is the heart of the Arab struggle against colonialism and imperialism, and it's much more focused on, considering the middle east is the sole main interest of the U.S., and Israel seems to be, to them, the manifestation of American interests.

Doesn't mean I support Anti Imperialism that includes class collaboration, though. Especially not the likes of Islamists.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Rafiq]

And manic, yes, because of Soviet support, the leading groups in Palestine were secular leftists

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Positivist]

I support solidarity between Palestinian and Israeli workers, and I do acknowledge that the Zionist eviction of the Palestinian people was unjust, but I also understand the points presented in this op.

If each segment of the global proletariat is equally important, than why is such emphasis placed on Palestinian workers? Manic Impressive raised many good reasons for why this is, and their is also the very real injustice that the Palestinians suffered which illicits sympathy, as well as the fact that Israel is a bastion for imperialism in its region.

You are correct that there are many other imperialist puppets throughout the world, what distinguishes Israel is its location. The Israeli territory lies inbetween Africa, the Middle East and Europe. One of which is a major center of commerce, the other two massive caches of natural resources.

But what Palestinian Nat. Lib. supporters neglect is that, as Manic Impressive noted, the overthrow of the Israeli government and the installment of a Palestinian one will only result the suppression of the workers by a new bourgiose.

[Manic Impressive]

And manic, yes, because of Soviet support, the leading groups in Palestine were secular leftists

Left wing of capital ;)

[Peoples' War]

Left wing of capital ;)
Could be worse. They could be revisionist Kautskyites like the SPGB, eh mate?

[Book O'Dead]

Could be worse. They could be revisionist Kautskyites like the SPGB, eh mate?

Why this gratuitous sectarian dig?

[Deicide]

Does anyone else think the Left has really, really, like realllllyyy, terrible insults?

''WELLL, YO MOMMA WAS.... A KAUTSKYIST REVISIONIST!!!''

:crying:

[Ocean Seal]

The difference is that Palestine's situation can be changed with a mere lifting of the blockade and tearing down its man made borders. You can't change the situation of the slums with something so simple.

[Book O'Dead]

Does anyone else think the Left has really, really, like realllllyyy, terrible insults?

''WELLL, YO MOMMA WAS.... A KAUTSKYIST REVISIONIST!!!''

:crying:

I thought that socialists were tasked with finding good reasons to unite, not bad ones to pick a fight.

[Manic Impressive]

Could be worse. They could be revisionist Kautskyites like the SPGB, eh mate?
LOL that's the worst attempt at an insult ever. It's not even close to factual. I can't get over how much I love this. Lenin was influenced by Kautsky's revisions along with the rest of the second international. The SPGB went to the 2nd international once and rejected it as reformist. :laugh:

Thanks for the laugh though keep trying

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

-That Israel is a racist or ethnocentric state:
I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.The repression of the Jewish population is something many Arab nationalists don't like to address, and it probably contributes to the sense of siege in Israel. It's not much of a reason to endorse a nationalist project in Israel though, as nationalism merely reproduces new kinds of oppression.

The reality is that life in Israel is no cakewalk for Arabs either, and it is getting worse. Arabs are in the Knesset, which is proof of the fact that Israel's racism is not, or at least was not in a Totalitarian format. However, the reality is that many Arabs are still fairly marginal populations in Israel. Not to mention, the rights of Israeli Arabs says nothing of the rights of Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank.


-That Israel was "stolen" from the original inhabitants:
Ignoring the problems of this argument, for if it was true all Mexico would belong to Aztecs, and considering that Israel had a jewish community since Ottoman times, how the creation of this state can be a theft if the arab league declared war- rejecting the partition plan and calling for the expulsion of jews- and lost? And by expelling jews from their countries, didn't muslim leaders irreversible validated the creation of Israel? Israel creation seems more like a civil war than a theft.Any ethnic or nationalist state is an imposition against residents of the area who are not of that nation. A Jewish state is thus an imposition on all non-Jews in the area, and a Muslim state or a Christian state would be a similar imposition.

As for the expulsion of Jews, it is proof that the Arab leaders of the time were vile demagogues but it does not justify the theft of Palestinian land, because the Palestinian people were not directly responsible for the decision to expel those people. We should be more concerned with improving the material conditions of both populations, outside of arguments of who did what to who 6 decades ago.


-That Israel is a western colony in the Middle East. That Israel is a manifestation of Usa imperialism:
And this is the most abstract, emotional, irrational and vague one. And it reeks of scapegoating. Israel is an imperialistic colony, but South Korea, Taiwan, Panama, Falklands, French Guiana, Suriname and etc don't? This brings me back to an earlier point: should all socialist parties or movements follow cold-war soviet geopolitics; specially when it indirectly lends support to religious fanatics organizations like Hezbola and Hamas, the complete opposite of the communist ideology?The issue is more that Israel is a state which acts on behalf of a community of people who are largely either recent immigrants or the descendents of people who immigrated in the past 6-7 decades. The right of these people to immigrate is fine and should be protected, and that in of itself is not colonial. The colonial aspect comes when it is decided that the newcomers have more rights than the local people.

Also, Hamas is not the only representative of the Palestinian people. There are many secular movements. There are also religious fanatics in Israel ... in fact the ratio of secularists:fanatics seems fairly similar in both countries.


Thank you for reading until here. For years I was supportive of Palestine, but now I'm researching that I'm making a paper about demographics I'm seeing things in a complete different light.
So, for socialism, is Palestine so relevant as people try to make? The demographics point is actually the real problem with Israel. There is this perpetual fear in the politics about maintaining a Jewish majority in the country. It seems the political leaders are willing to go to any means necessary to maintain this, from denying the right of Palestinians to move back to the homes they lost after the war (or at least get new ones in Israel), to forcing out illegal immigrants.

Anyhow, the Israel-Palestine problem is more complicated than anybody makes it out to be, but broadly speaking Palestinians have been denied a lot of very important freedoms in the very real sense of the term. A Palestinian cannot build buildings in 60% of the West Bank, for instance, because it is legally governed by Israel still and the government does not give out many building permits to Palestinians. There are all sorts of absurd rules and regulations which are a part of the Occupation. Heck, Israel used to ban the import of many kinds of vegetable to Gaza (which was what the Turkish flotilla was protesting)

[shinjuku dori]

The difference is that Palestine's situation can be changed with a mere lifting of the blockade and tearing down its man made borders. You can't change the situation of the slums with something so simple.

Is this a joke? Where has "national liberation" brought real gain to any worker? Happy Vietnamese worker! You are liberated! Now you can labor in a Nike sweatshop with Vietnamese managers!

"Independent Palestine" is a pure fantasy. Local bourgeoisie will be free to rule over impoverished tiny national slum. There will be no development. Capital doesn't need to and can't develop Palestine. There will still be wage slavery. There will still be war between Israeli and Palestinian.

Nationality must be disolved through communism.

[Comrade Trollface]

I oppose the occupation and apartheid regime not only as a leftist, but as a Jewish leftist. Israel is acting in my name as a Jew. In this guise she has donned the cloak of Nebuchadnezzar, seized the sword of Titus and hitched Khmelnitsky's steed to Pharaoh's Chariot. If every state must be opposed by its own people, then the fact that Israel is styled as a Jewish state places some of that responsibility on my shoulders.

[Internacional]

In detriment of other people, yes.

Who's better to liberate than Palestine? Not getting into any arguments here, but the inhabitants of Africa are held in a tight grip by war, famine, and AIDS. They'll have to sort their own way out, as their is no organized resistance against foreigners in those parts, but people who like to profit out of a bad situation. As for Latin America, they're still in their infancy of capitalism after decades of U.S backed dictatorships (Peron in Argentina, Sanindistas in Nicaragua.) so that'll take some time. Palestine is perfect in that it has an influential Communist Party (PPK.), an inherently revolutionary class (I would argue, moreso that those in Africa, as the Palestinian's oppressor is an outsider rather than their own, uniting them as a whole.) and international support from a lot of countries (130, matter of fact. I'm sure they'd help them rebuild after the liberation, opening Palestine up as a place for growth, eventually opening up the road for socialism.)
Palestine, in my mind, is the most immediate place that needs liberation. It's all there, ready to go. It doesn't make sense at all to not support a Palestinian state.

[Ocean Seal]

nice OP with some good arguments. You missed out the most important one though, that national liberation struggles only lead to another set of bourgeois being installed to exploit workers.

there's another reason why it continues to be the most important national liberation struggle.

Recent history. For quite a long time it's been a movement allied with insurrectionary left wing groups, whether M-L or anarchist. Groups have gone to Palestine and Syria to get training from arab independence groups. They've received arms and training and been kept in safety by these groups. It's also been a hub for all other national liberation movements ETA or the IRA and plenty of others. It's been a pillar of resistance against the bourgeois of powerful nations. The enemy of my enemy and all that.

It's also part of the DNA of Trotskyist and M-L groups to support national liberation struggles. It's not blindly following the foreign policy of the USSR but it is their tactical decision they think it will bring about world socialism one tin pot dictatorship and state capitalist regime at a time.
At the risk of sounding trite, where are your revolutions?

[Raúl Duke]

That Israel is a racist or ethnocentric state:
I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.

What's weak about this argument is that it doesn't dispute the fact that there's a ethnocentric element to the state of Israel. Sure, Arabs have and probably still, especially due to "bad blood," discriminate against Israelis and have been open to anti-semitism in certain nations...

But the Israelis aren't no saints either. What they're doing seems to be an out-right virtual genocide of sorts where they oppress and apply random violence to the Palestinian people in the hopes they die or leave and never be able to come back. They're also discriminatory against other kinds of Jews (Etiophians, Sepharedim, etc) due to racial/ethnic concerns, so there's a substantial degree of racism/xenophobia within Israel.

Saying "Hey well the Arabs are racist/anti-semites" does not wash away the fact that the Israeli government and many Israelis are xenophobes/racists.


-That Israel is a western colony in the Middle East. That Israel is a manifestation of Usa imperialism:
And this is the most abstract, emotional, irrational and vague one.

Perhaps, but US geo-politics does treat Israel as a "major ally" that would/will support US motives in the region. Whether that's true or not, I don't know. But the US does see Israel as something of the sort.

[Manic Impressive]

At the risk of sounding trite, where are your revolutions?
When we have "our" revolution there won't be another one ;)

[cynicles]

Are we really having this discussion again? I smell a troll.

[Peoples' War]

LOL that's the worst attempt at an insult ever. It's not even close to factual. I can't get over how much I love this. Lenin was influenced by Kautsky's revisions along with the rest of the second international. The SPGB went to the 2nd international once and rejected it as reformist. :laugh:

Thanks for the laugh though keep trying
October 27, 1914: “I hate and despise Kautsky now more than anyone, with his vile, dirty, self-satisfied hypocrisy ... Rosa Luxemburg was right when she wrote, long ago, that Kautsky has the ‘subservience of a theoretician’ – servility, in plainer language, servility to the majority of the party, to opportunism” - Lenin.

Most Marxists were influenced by him, up until he became a revisionist. He wasn't always one.

Like Kautsky, the SPGB believes it can win a majority in parliament and then have socialism. Sorry, doesn't happen that way.

[Book O'Dead]

October 27, 1914: “I hate and despise Kautsky now more than anyone, with his vile, dirty, self-satisfied hypocrisy ... Rosa Luxemburg was right when she wrote, long ago, that Kautsky has the ‘subservience of a theoretician’ – servility, in plainer language, servility to the majority of the party, to opportunism” - Lenin.

Most Marxists were influenced by him, up until he became a revisionist. He wasn't always one.

Like Kautsky, the SPGB believes it can win a majority in parliament and then have socialism. Sorry, doesn't happen that way.


There is an element of 'Kauskyism' integrated in Deleonism, and Lenin is said to have expressed admiration for De Leon.

De Leon believed that in some countries political democracy could be used to advance the goal of establishing a socialist republic of labor. Assuming, of course that the political activities of socialists went hand in hand with the revolutionary activity of socialist industrial unions poised to take, hold and operate the industries of the country in question.

[Art Vandelay]

October 27, 1914: “I hate and despise Kautsky now more than anyone, with his vile, dirty, self-satisfied hypocrisy ... Rosa Luxemburg was right when she wrote, long ago, that Kautsky has the ‘subservience of a theoretician’ – servility, in plainer language, servility to the majority of the party, to opportunism” - Lenin.

Most Marxists were influenced by him, up until he became a revisionist. He wasn't always one.

Like Kautsky, the SPGB believes it can win a majority in parliament and then have socialism. Sorry, doesn't happen that way.


Perhaps you should pull quotes from all the times Lenin still quoted Kautsky after the revolution, favorably I might add. Also calling the spgb " kautskyist" is funny, them stem from the tradition of impossibilism.

[Manic Impressive]

Oi you lot leave him alone can't you see he's trying his hardest to have a go at me. He's not doing very well at it but at least he's making an effort which I applaud him for.


October 27, 1914: “I hate and despise Kautsky now more than anyone, with his vile, dirty, self-satisfied hypocrisy ... Rosa Luxemburg was right when she wrote, long ago, that Kautsky has the ‘subservience of a theoretician’ – servility, in plainer language, servility to the majority of the party, to opportunism” - Lenin.

Most Marxists were influenced by him, up until he became a revisionist. He wasn't always one.

Like Kautsky, the SPGB believes it can win a majority in parliament and then have socialism. Sorry, doesn't happen that way.

The Dude that Lenin quote is in relation to Kautsky taking the side of the bourgeoisie during the 1st world war. A rejection of Internationalism, the SPGB has always held the same position on internationalism concerning bourgeois wars and so would have agreed with Lenin that the first world war is not a war which the working class should be participating in. I think we probably even praised his decision to withdraw Russian troops from the war, I can't remember.
Using parliament is a position held by Marx and Engels and funnily enough EVERY SINGLE LENINIST PARTY IN EXISTENCE. Except of course for Left communists and anarchists who are the only ones who reject participation in parliament. The difference between how we would participate in parliament and how contemporary Leninist parties would use parliament is that we say capitalism can never work in the interests of the working class and have no ambition to run capitalism or run anything else for that matter, a vote for us is a vote to simply say I am ready for revolution, nothing else. Whereas the Leninists would offer a program of nationalization, in other words reforms.

The Dude I want you to keep trying not in this thread, but one day, maybe you'll actually be able to insult me with something factual. When that day comes I want your slur to shock me to the core, to reduce me to tears, to make me pull out my hair because if you manage that you'll have least have learned about socialism ;)

P.S. here's how the pro's insult the SPGB


The Russian debacle is rather appalling but quite explicable. Lenin and Trotsky appear to me to be of the SPGB type or the wilder types of the SDP

[Book O'Dead]

P.S. here's how the pro's insult the SPGB Originally Posted by British Prime Minister Clement Atlee
The Russian debacle is rather appalling but quite explicable. Lenin and Trotsky appear to me to be of the SPGB type or the wilder types of the SDP


Insult or back-handed praise?

[Peoples' War]

The Dude that Lenin quote is in relation to Kautsky taking the side of the bourgeoisie during the 1st world war.Strange, it is in reaction to Kautsky's support of it, but the wording is oddly not in line with it being a criticism of Kautsky just supporting the war.


A rejection of Internationalism, the SPGB has always held the same position on internationalism concerning bourgeois wars and so would have agreed with Lenin that the first world war is not a war which the working class should be participating in.Not the point I'm arguing.


Using parliament is a position held by Marx and Engels and funnily enough EVERY SINGLE LENINIST PARTY IN EXISTENCE. Except of course for Left communists and anarchists who are the only ones who reject participation in parliament. The difference between how we would participate in parliament and how contemporary Leninist parties would use parliament is that we say capitalism can never work in the interests of the working class and have no ambition to run capitalism or run anything else for that matter, a vote for us is a vote to simply say I am ready for revolution, nothing else. Whereas the Leninists would offer a program of nationalization, in other words reforms.This grouping together of Leninists, Trotskyists and MLs into a single generic brand is a bit of a stupid thing to do.

Yes, using parliament is promoted for agitation and achieving reforms. Achieving socialism through parliament (by winning a majority), as the SPGB believes it can do, is contrary to Marx and Engels. It is what Karl Kautsky believed in. This is revisionism, plain and simple.

Leninists, such as myself, promote participation in parliament for the purpose of agitation and propaganda. It's a good way to gauge support as well. If reforms are able to be achieved, they should be. The amelioration of the conditions of the working class, via reform, is something Marx and Engels supported.


The Dude I want you to keep trying not in this thread, but one day, maybe you'll actually be able to insult me with something factual. When that day comes I want your slur to shock me to the core, to reduce me to tears, to make me pull out my hair because if you manage that you'll have least have learned about socialism ;)


Are you claiming that the SPGB doesn't believe it can achieve socialism via parliamentary means?

[#FF0000]

But the Israelis aren't no saints either. What they're doing seems to be an out-right virtual genocide of sorts where they oppress and apply random violence to the Palestinian people in the hopes they die or leave and never be able to come back.


Yeah this is my main concern with the Palestine/Israel thing. Israel's dumped white phosphorous on residentials in Palestine and shoots Palestinians on the regular, and a lot of Palestinians are living in absolute squalor with limited access to water, let alone healthcare or anything else like that.

So if a Palestinian person wants to take up a rock or rocket against that, whether they're a communist or an anarchist or have no political motive beyond "making it stop", I gotta say that's not something I can find fault in.

[electrostal]

So if a Palestinian person wants to take up a rock or rocket, whether they're a communist or an anarchist or have no political motive beyond "making it stop", I gotta say that's not something I can find fault in.
You should though. Terrorism does more harm to Palestinians themselves than to the Zionist regime. IIRC these rocket launches from Gaza actually kill mostly Palestinians.

[#FF0000]

You should though. Terrorism does more harm to Palestinians themselves than to the Zionist regime. IIRC these rocket launches from Gaza actually kill mostly Palestinians.

Hey, when I see evidence of that then I'll change my mind, but even then I'm still all for Palestinians who resist Israel in other ways.

[Hiero]

It's also part of the DNA of Trotskyist and M-L groups to support national liberation struggles. It's not blindly following the foreign policy of the USSR but it is their tactical decision they think it will bring about world socialism one tin pot dictatorship and state capitalist regime at a time.


But what Palestinian Nat. Lib. supporters neglect is that, as Manic Impressive noted, the overthrow of the Israeli government and the installment of a Palestinian one will only result the suppression of the workers by a new bourgiose.

These comments are irrelevant and deviod of any sympathic consideration about what it is like living under Israel occupation. Palestinians are living in refugee camps, unemployed or live in the large prison like state of Gaza and face daily humilitation at the hand of Israeli colonialism.

What you stale Marxists do is completely remove the human from the context, people really care about class politics in most contexts. Palestinian people don't want to live in humilation, a secular state with power sharing would be an improvement in peoples live, a step away from Israeli domination of Arab life is an improvement for a large mass of people. Even if this was to occur in a two state solution.

It is funny that you talk about this national bourgeoisie, when a large section of Palestinian people don't work. In Gaza 2010 45% of the working population were unemployed*. 1.4 million registed Palestinian refugees live in camps where "Socio-economic conditions in the camps are generally poor, with high population density, cramped living conditions and inadequate basic infrastructure such as roads and sewers."** You have such a large portion of Palestinian who are not working, which means their contact with a Palestinian bourgieosie is very minimal, basically the Palestinain bourgeoisie can not put Palestinians to work. How are Palestinian workers going to fight against a Palestinian bourgieosie that barely has the power to consolidate hegemony.

Yet some how you ridicilous marxist imagine a class war that takes precedence over war with Israel. It just does not exist. It only works if you don't understand Marx and Lenin and imagine in ever scenerio that a class stuggle is occuring in the excact same context in ever location.

No one is saying the end of colonialism would bring about world socialism (which is irrelevent and a lie, no one says that Palestinian nat-lib would bring world socialism, just the same as no says a revolution, a workers strike, a militant protest will bring about world socialism, but we still would engage in thoose events), but it might bring about stability in the region.

The aim then of communist is to re-agitate in whatever procedes after colonialism. You have to be senile to imagine that there really is a socialist struggle occuring in Palestine and Israel outside of the fight against colonialism.

*http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/un-study-gaza-unemployment-rate-remains-among-the-worst-in-the-world-1.367580
**http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=86

[Jimmie Higgins]

So I ask you, from where all this anti-israel motivation inside the left comes? Unless all socialists parties and organizations are supposed to indirectly follow Soviet Union geopolitics and soviet opposition to Israel, how the palestinian struggle is more relevant than, let's say, russian occupation of Abkhazia or south Ossetia?
I can't speak to the experience of organizing in other countries, but Israel is a bigger deal to US radicals because the US government has so much influence and involvement. I've never been a part of a protest asking the Israeli government to do this or that, but movements that have made demands on the US or denounced US support of these policies.

Pro-Israel apologists in the US often ask, "why protest this, not the atrocities by such and such dictator in Africa". Well what would be the goal of such a movement to influence policies of other countries - would it demand that the US or UN step in? That would only by used by and ultimately aid imperialists. What would a protest in the US do about Russian occupations? Protesters could make some symbolic demands, but really it would only gain traction if used by US politicians in their competition with Russia.

Sure it's important to denounce many of these things on principle, I denounce China's dealing with Tibet, but most of the "movements" in the US around this are worse than useless. Israel and Colombia, for example, are different if only that they are keystones in the US imperial system.


-That Israel is a racist or ethnocentric state:
I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.This is not the main reason for opposition from the Left to Israel, but it does expose the brutality of the system. And as for your example, this is a farcical analogy. In US history, there are many recorded examples of horrific massacres of settlers by Native Americans. So should we see the two sides as equivalent? Or is one (the actions of some native americans) a fucked up thing that happens in conflicts - and the other (what the settlers did) an example of a system of colonization?

Yes, there are many fucked up governments out there, they do many fucked up things. How does this make the Israeli situation irrelevant?


-That Israel was "stolen" from the original inhabitants:
Ignoring the problems of this argument, for if it was true all Mexico would belong to Aztecs, and considering that Israel had a jewish community since Ottoman times, how the creation of this state can be a theft if the arab league declared war- rejecting the partition plan and calling for the expulsion of jews- and lost? And by expelling jews from their countries, didn't muslim leaders irreversible validated the creation of Israel? Israel creation seems more like a civil war than a theft.Yeah, not the main issue for me at all. Jews and Muslims that live there should continue to do so - there's no turning back the clock. They just won't be able to live there as long as US imperialism and Israeli Zionism are strong.


-That Israel is a western colony in the Middle East. That Israel is a manifestation of Usa imperialism:
And this is the most abstract, emotional, irrational and vague one. And it reeks of scapegoating. Israel is an imperialistic colony, but South Korea, Taiwan, Panama, Falklands, French Guiana, Suriname and etc don't?Abstract? The Israel is the largest recipient of US aid, without US backing, Zionist apartheid would be much harder to maintain. The US has been involved in many wars in the middle east and south Asia, and Israel is a home-base for the US in the region. Because of US imperialism, the middle east looks as repressive and economically unequal as it does.


I was making a research about indian and south american slums- complexo do alemão in Rio de Janeiro and Dharavi in Mumbai being perfect examples- and how big was my surprise when I compared their populations to Gaza and West Bank, and saw that the palestinian population is way smaller than slum inhabitants. Not only that but Israel territory (20k km²) is smaller than the state of Massachusetts (27k km²).The numbers of people are the reason you don't think it's important? The balance of very large systems sometimes have very small weak-links. How do people in the US try and take on US imperialism - something that hurts workers in the US as well as obviously in targeted countries? It's important to try and hit on the cracks or the exposed nerves of the larger system and Israel is very important for the US in maintaining a middle east where US interests dominate and other client states in the region obey.

[shinjuku dori]

a secular state with power sharing would be an improvement in peoples live, a step away from Israeli domination of Arab life is an improvement for a large mass of people

How is black people doing in South Africa?

[Hiero]

How is black people doing in South Africa?

In what context? How can anyone answer such a broad question.

[shinjuku dori]

Apartheid is no longer in South Africa. Every social democrat reformist supported capitalist ANC. Now black people in same condition as before really. It's no improvement after 20 years. When will you learn?

[~Spectre]

So I ask you, from where all this anti-israel motivation inside the left comes?

Just use Occam's razor. Most English speaking leftists on this site are probably from the United States or England. The United States and England are more heavily involved in the maintenance of Israeli imperialism, than they are in the Russian sectors. Hence it's a more relevant thing to protest in context.

As for international forums etc like the UN, the ugly truth is that it's simply because Arab states raise a fuss about it for their own political gain, as opposed to issues like Kurdistan.

[Ostrinski]

''WELLL, YO MOMMA WAS.... A KAUTSKYIST REVISIONIST!!!''
:crying:Awww damn.. shit just got real.

[~Spectre]

-That Israel is a racist or ethnocentric state:
I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.

Drop the "I was surprised" histrionics. If you're going to argue Zionism, at least be open about it.

Your research is off, it happened before the six days war. That said, it's not relevant to the occupation of Palestinian territories, because the Palestinians themselves had also been victim to occupation by Arab armies, and they themselves possessed no armed forces.

It's a standard zionist talking point to mention battles between Arab states and Israel, and try to associate the stateless and army less Palestinians with this.




-That Israel was "stolen" from the original inhabitants:
Ignoring the problems of this argument, for if it was true all Mexico would belong to Aztecs, and considering that Israel had a jewish community since Ottoman times, how the creation of this state can be a theft if the arab league declared war- rejecting the partition plan and calling for the expulsion of jews- and lost? And by expelling jews from their countries, didn't muslim leaders irreversible validated the creation of Israel? Israel creation seems more like a civil war than a theft.

It's not that Palestinians were there first, it's that Palestinians are still there now. Millions living under siege or occupation, others in Israeli dungeons, and others in refugee camps (with of course an elite the lives well in Ramallah and Jordan).

As for theft, it's that geographically, a small group of aggressive settlers, came in, and took the majority of the land via force of arms.

The original partition was at the time a bad deal for the Palestinians (though in retrospect, obviously they'd accept). Israel however, while formally accepting the agreement, rejected it as well.

Ben-Gurion stated, as did others, that they would accept, only to expand immediately afterward. Indeed, the Zionist founders were very consistent in their plans to expand Israel. Something that remains official policy.



That Israel is a western colony in the Middle East. That Israel is a manifestation of Usa imperialism:
And this is the most abstract, emotional, irrational and vague one.

Israel is the leading recipient of U.S. military aid, and one of the largest armed forces in the world. It also has 300 nukes. Accordingly it gets more attention.

The maintenance of Israeli policy leaves in place a system of extrajudicial execution of dissidents (liquidation), and a militarism that almost resulted in a nuclear exchange between the United States and the then Soviet Union, pointing to the dangers of an aggressive nuclear power that has such U.S. backing.

Likewise, because Israel is popular in the United States, such policies, such as these assassinations have now been seamlessly integrated into U.S. policy.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

So I ask you, from where all this anti-israel motivation inside the left comes?
To me, being a leftist means solidarity with the oppressed and complete opposition to the oppressors. If you side with Israel over the Palestinian people, you are a reactionary.

[shinjuku dori]

Millions living under siege or occupation, others in Israeli dungeons, and others in refugee camps (with of course an elite the lives well in Ramallah and Jordan).

Sounds like blacks in America.

[~Spectre]

Sounds like blacks in America.

Not analogous. Blacks in America can do things like own houses and marry. The basic shit that was allegedly resolved last century.

Not so for Palestinians under Israeli occupation.


Moreover, what's the relevance? Leftists protest the conditions here much more than they focus on Palestinian issues. To pretend otherwise is to fall into this

"What's your Real Motive For Hatred of The Jewish State?" propaganda.

[Hiero]

Apartheid is no longer in South Africa. Every social democrat reformist supported capitalist ANC. Now black people in same condition as before really. It's no improvement after 20 years. When will you learn?

My point was that there was no major class struggle in Palestine as imagined by the stale Marxists. There is no major movement towards socialism in Palestine that is being carried out by the working class, as the working class has no real stability to organise.

You are either a scientific socialist (Marxist) or ethnic socialist (Arab/African). Either socialism is carried out by the working class as an emancipatory movement in the right conditions or you conveice of it as a political program that can be brought about in class demoracy.

For example Communism is obviously the best system humans can live under, but that is not on the table at the moment, so that does not mean there are not little moments of progress for oppressed people.

Also what you failed to do was provide any level of measurement improvement for Black and coloured people in South Africa. Blacks in South Africa are not class homogenised, so different Blacks in South Africa fair better in post-Apathiad South Africa. The majority no longer face overt racial segregation, including Indians. Even poor Blacks no longer face the harsh racial hegemony of Afrikaans. The class sytem is more a reality now then in aparthiad South Africa.

[shinjuku dori]

Where poor and working class blacks living now? Same slum. Where they working? Same place or still nowhere. Who owns business? White guys or black capitalist. Again I got to ask what is the benefit.

Same America. Black man is allowed to be president. Allowed to buy house. What's real? Black people living in urban war zone, internal colonies, like refugee camps.

Same would come in Palestine. I am not to help the Palestine capitalists have their own zone of operations.

Only solution is global-wide revolutionary drive. Raise a new red army and send it to the West Bank

[NoPasaran1936]

If the palestinian cause is relevant for palestinians I wonder why it is so pushed to non-palestinians.


Internationalism, perhaps?

[Dean]

I was surprised in my research to discover that israelis are forbidden to live/travel/visit any muslim country and that during six days war all jews were expelled from muslim countries, being Israel the sole recipient for them. While on the other side, there are many muslims living in Israel, some even inside politics.


Typical inaccuracies. Israel just started expelling african migrants yesterday - a week ago, the interior minister said "when will they realize that Israel is for the White man?"

Sorry, you're full of shit.

[citizen of industry]

Only solution is global-wide revolutionary drive. Raise a new red army and send it to the West Bank

You should send it to some of the refugee prisons in Japan on your way there. How are you going to raise this red army when you say in your intro thread you aren't part of any organization and your activism is limited to internet trolling?

[shinjuku dori]

You belong to fake union recognized by no one with no contracts. Only main union in this country is integrated to state. Please learn before you insult your own intelligence panky man.

I won't raise anything. Wave comes of spontaneous. No body made Egypt or Hungary.

I am anarchist. Smash organization!

[TheRedJew]

If there will be a palestinian state, it would be a victory for facism and nationalism.
The Israeli people are much more leftist oriented and the arabs are mostly right wingers capitalists (with the exception of maki members)
I would support Palestine only after the revolution in Israel (soon) will start and then realese them as communists

[genstrike]

Apartheid is no longer in South Africa. Every social democrat reformist supported capitalist ANC. Now black people in same condition as before really. It's no improvement after 20 years. When will you learn?

Really?

No one is going to argue that Africa is a socialist paradise or is likely to become one anytime soon under the ANC, but how do you argue that black people in South Africa are no better off than under apartheid?

I'm sure not having to deal with pass laws, bantustans and Sharpevilles is at the very least a slight improvement in condition.

[shinjuku dori]

but how do you argue that black people in South Africa are no better off than under apartheid?

http://www.newint.org/sections/agenda/2012/01/01/-anc-apartheid-south-africa/

[Jimmie Higgins]

Really?

No one is going to argue that Africa is a socialist paradise or is likely to become one anytime soon under the ANC, but how do you argue that black people in South Africa are no better off than under apartheid?

I'm sure not having to deal with pass laws, bantustans and Sharpevilles is at the very least a slight improvement in condition.

I agree. Apartheid, Zionism, and Jim Crow are all examples of (different) ideological and structural support systems to maintain the dominance of a ruling class. Not having a revolution means that ultimately any reforms or gains can and will be pushed back or neutered because the system and class that has an interest in keeping the population divided and under control remains intact. But falling short of a revolution doesn't mean that these temporary gains are the same as having no struggle at all.

In the US, Jim Crow was destroyed and even the power of a backwards ruling sub-group in the US class (the agrarian elite) lost their leading position in the south to the urban bourgeois of the South. Systemic racism was reconsituted as part of a ruling class backlash during the economic crisis of the 1970s through the "war on crime/drugs" hysteria and the increased repression - targeted towards the poor, disproportionately to the black poor and working class. But while this new form of structural racism has its own problems and horrors, there are also advantages. Direct repression like this in many ways makes class poltics clearer in any movement wanting to take on these issues. While the Civil Rights movement began as a middle class reform movement focusing on upwardly mobile blacks being held back by Jim Crow policies, any new movement against racism would have to take on the prison and police system and the class nature of who gets targeted and locked up. This is an advantage and it's also an advantage in a way that people are seeing racist polices carried out by the state itself, uniformed officers, rather than gangs of young white thugs (often white workers in the North).

In other words while the end of Jim Crow didn't end racism, just one expression of systemic racism, and it would take a revolution to do this ultimately, the end of Jim Crow is still an amazing advance for the class struggle and means that without strict legal segregation in the workplace and communities, the possibility for working class solidarity across ethnic lines in the US is much more possible than when Jim Crow was hanging like a weight on the working class (and a tool used by our bosses to activly prevent unified rural/industrial working class movements).

[TheRedJew]

Zionism died in 1948

[TheRedJew]

If there will be a Palestinian state, it would not be socialist, it would probably be a islamic dictatorship.
Israel on the other hand have a big chance of becoming communist if you decide to support the protesters

[ВАЛТЕР]

Israel on the other hand have a big chance of becoming communist if you decide to support the protesters


What a bunch of horseshit...

EDIT: The part about it becoming "communist" not supporting the protestors.

[Jimmie Higgins]

If there will be a Palestinian state, it would not be socialist, it would probably be a islamic dictatorship.
Israel on the other hand have a big chance of becoming communist if you decide to support the protestersWell I would have solidarity with an anti-zionist movement in Israel of Jews and Muslims and others - and I would show solidarity by trying to help build a US anti-war movement sees ending US funding of the Israeli state and other repressive client states.

Zionist apartheid would be much harder to maintain without US material support and so that would aid any internal radical or reformist anti-Zionist movements in Israel.

[Tukhachevsky]

Sorry for the delay in replying, too much work and few time.


Typical inaccuracies. Israel just started expelling african migrants yesterday - a week ago, the interior minister said "when will they realize that Israel is for the White man?"

Sorry, you're full of shit.

Enjoy living in your fantasy bubble where arabs doesn't discriminate against africans in North Africa. Ever wondered how they ended in Israel? Search for Darfur massacre, at least the israelis expel them instead of killing.

Also, are you trying to create a straw man by bringing racial issues?


Who's better to liberate than Palestine?

My main questions was the opposite (and I sincerely don't hope to convert anyone): Why Palestine is better- or considered better- than the others? And I tried to enumerate every reason from a shamelessly continuation of Soviet Union geopolitics to a lobby from muslims countries and organizations, and none had a real political justification behind. It's the same pressure that made gaza being liberated from Israel before and now what gaza looks like? A huge slum, they even have birth rate and unemployment typical of slums.

I don't want to dismiss what you said about palestinian communist parties (names are only names) nor you affirmation of international support (cold war gonna cold war), so I ask you to say more about this. And provide some links. I find extremely interesting the existence of a communist party, specially after I saw that high school palestinian tests try to indoctrinate students with a martyr mentality.


Abstract? The Israel is the largest recipient of US aid, without US backing, Zionist apartheid would be much harder to maintain. The US has been involved in many wars in the middle east and south Asia, and Israel is a home-base for the US in the region.

I don't see Usa or Israel as the main provocateurs of war in the middle east, a territory that always lacked natural defenses and was always unstable during history. I hope that with better technologies like electric automobiles north american imperialism will come to halt and the main fuel for the industrial society, oil, will see a much smaller demand.
And Israel only started to receive aid from Usa after 1987, after the Yom Kippur war where Egypt was heavily backed by Soviet Union. Not ignoring too that the PLO receive aid from Usa, EU and Arab League after Paris Pledging.
This "apartheid state" was maintained for decades even with a huge Import>Export economy (because of arab embargo) without aid besides the german reparation. By looking at Israel tree map of exports (http://atlas.media.mit.edu/explore/tree_map/export/isr/show/all/2009/) I see that much of the Usa aid grants the american monopoly in many israeli markets, even the military.

My point from posts before is the same. Why should a socialist work for the benefit of theocracies or petroleum based autocracies? Why should I be the water running another person mill, doing his dirty work? In protests the only thing people care about are numbers or quantity and I feel much the same in relation to Israel-Palestine.
I know of people in mongolia living under the sewers like rats and yet I don't see the international left worried about them, I only see newspapers complaining about every Israel-Iran issue.

[cynicles]

You know it's people who keep trying to to tell me and others to ignore Israel's human rights abuses that make me wanna focus on it more. And so what if there are poor people in other countries? Why am I limitted to only being able to choosing one cause? The only reason Israel gets so much attention is because it and it's defenders keep obsess over even small criticism and then the issue gets even more publicity and then people get suspicious. And what do oil dictatorships and theocracies have to with it? They've mostly been allied with Israel and the US or completely ineffective. And yes, there is racism against black africans in Arab countries what of it? Nobody here is denying it exists but how do you plan on resolving it while dictatorial regimes backed by the west are still in power exploiting that bigotry?
Also nobody was saying Palestine was better or more deserving but it is a major issue in the region and one of the two last major scars of 20th century colonialism.
This position has nothing to do with the soviet union, people have already given their reasons why in this forum, if you can't get that through your head then please go see a doctor. Also lol at muslim lobby bullshit, I smell another hasbara troll. The rest of your post is frankly difficult to understand and damn near illegible.

[Tukhachevsky]

You know it's people who keep trying to to tell me and others to ignore Israel's human rights abuses that make me wanna focus on it more.

Yeah right, because there are so many people doing this.
It's not like there is a section in this site called the situation in palestine and people shouldn't be free to disagree with other without hearing that they should see a doctor.


The rest of your post is frankly difficult to understand and damn near illegible.

English isn't my native langue, sorry.

You seem angry by your post... You are not obliged to post here you know, you can just ignore.
Or you can explain how Israel is a colonialist state, an apartheid state or any of the others typical catch terms.
When I hear colonialist I imagine a plaque in hong kong written "no chinese and dogs allowed" by the government. You think Israel is the same?

[aquaruis15000]

When I hear colonialist I imagine a plaque in hong kong written "no chinese and dogs allowed" by the government. You think Israel is the same?

Sure. Arabs are prevented from living the same quality of lives as Jews are in Israel. This is a fact.

[~Spectre]

Enjoy living in your fantasy bubble where arabs doesn't discriminate against africans in North Africa. Ever wondered how they ended in Israel? Search for Darfur massacre, at least the israelis expel them instead of killing.

Israel does more than it's fair share of killing. Regardless, I don't see how any of this is relevant for the Palestinian-Zionist conflict.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. This "things are worse elsewhere!!" defense, isn't an excuse. It's like the neocons that used to argue about "Saddam's RAPE ROOMS !!!!!!!" and "HE GASSED THE KURDS!!!!!", to distract from the crimes they themselves were committing.




My main questions was the opposite (and I sincerely don't hope to convert anyone): Why Palestine is better- or considered better- than the others?

No one considers Palestine "better", but Israel receives more U.S. aid than any other country, which is why, along with the nuclear arsenal and increased propensity to go to war, that Israel may receive more attention than Brazilian favelas, amongst English speaking circles.


It's the same pressure that made gaza being liberated from Israel before and now what gaza looks like?

Liberated? Gaza is currently under siege, and has been repeatedly bombed and invaded over the last several years. How is that liberated?



And Israel only started to receive aid from Usa after 1987, after the Yom Kippur war where Egypt was heavily backed by Soviet Union.

You have no clue what you're talking about. Both U.S. aid, and the Yom Kippur war were almost decades before 1987 you dunce.


I don't see Usa or Israel as the main provocateurs of war in the middle east

That's interesting, considering that just in the last decade, the United States: invaded Iraq (1 million + deaths), assassinated Iranian scientists, launched a major cyber attack on Iran, invaded Iran's neighbor- Afghanistan (millions of refugees), bombed Yemen, backed a Saudi massacre in Bahrain, and sent billions of dollars of advanced weaponry to an aggressive Israeli state.

Expanding slightly outward, the U.S. also orchestrated the bombing of Libya, where the post intervention society is in chaos, with massive race based atrocities now popping up. They bombed Pakistan. They also backed the Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak, whose country was a torture center (as were places like Uzbekistan).

It's also interesting considering that, in the same time frame, Israel has maintained their occupation of the Palestinian territories, Lebanese territory, and Syrian territory. Has sent various assassins into places such as the U.A.E., have carried out an Ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, have placed Gaza under siege, invaded Gaza, bombed it and committed mass slaughter. They invaded Lebanon, and committed various atrocities there. They almost caused a major international incident by sinking a Turkish ship heading towards Gaza, and they continously threaten Nuclear war against Iran.

And this is just in the last 10 years. But you're right. Other than a few million dead people, millions deplaced, countless tortured, a few dictators, and the threat of nuclear war: THEY CLEARLY HAVEN'T PROVOKED ANYTHING.

Must be some interesting research you've done.

[cynicles]

Yeah right, because there are so many people doing this.
It's not like there is a section in this site called the situation in palestine and people shouldn't be free to disagree with other without hearing that they should see a doctor.



English isn't my native langue, sorry.

You seem angry by your post... You are not obliged to post here you know, you can just ignore.
Or you can explain how Israel is a colonialist state, an apartheid state or any of the others typical catch terms.
When I hear colonialist I imagine a plaque in hong kong written "no chinese and dogs allowed" by the government. You think Israel is the same?

Yes I am angry quite frankly every fucking week someone shows up on these forums engaging in this apartheid apologism and rehashing the same old arguments about why Israel deserves to be exempted from a critique and why we should ignore Palestinian suffering. I sick of it, and everyone on this socalled "Zionist left" does it. Get it through your heads WE WILL NOT ABANDOM THOSE SUFFERING THE IDIGNITIES OF IMPERIALISM! And yes Israel is the same it stole land, engaged in ethnic cleanings, subjects a disenfranchised population living under its occupation to its whims, builds Jewish only settlements in occupied land joined by Jewish only roads. The list goes on and on

[aquaruis15000]

Right on!

There is some point to it though, even if he is misguided. Why does Darfur get so much attention when the Congolese civil war that lasted longer and lead to many more deaths was ignored? Why do we hear more about Palestinians than Roma, Chechnians or Karen in Burma?

But yea, no need to choose. We're against all oppression of course!

[Tukhachevsky]

Yes I am angry quite frankly every fucking week someone shows up on these forums engaging in this apartheid apologism [...] Get it through your heads WE WILL NOT ABANDOM THOSE SUFFERING THE IDIGNITIES OF IMPERIALISM!

And?
This is only evidence of how much of the left is being alienated by a voice, mysteriously related to the geopolitics of defunct soviet union and to religious supremacy, that is so vocal as to the point no one else can't be heard (and if they can be heard, they are soon framed as "apartheid apologist" as you clearly put).
While this fight against "imperialism" arbitrary keeps ignoring a bus being burned in Rio de Janeiro or a human living in a sewer in mongolia, I doubt people will see coherence in your "struggle"; they'll see as oportunism or as a typical white middle class compartment.


Israel does more than it's fair share of killing. [...] Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. No one considers Palestine "better", but Israel receives more U.S. aid than any other country

You quoted me out of context.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" is exactly where I'm trying to get! I'm not saying others wars, genocides or killings diminishes or justifies Israel acts, I'm asking exactly what makes Israel-Arab conflict so emblematic, untouchable and special to socialism in detriment of what is happening in others countries!
The country that receive most usa foreign aid is Afghanistan, seconded by Pakistan.



You have no clue what you're talking about. Both U.S. aid, and the Yom Kippur war were almost decades before 1987 you dunce.

No, see: 1987, third line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_military_relations#Mi litary_aid).
I was summarizing when referring to Yom Kippur war, by Israel being more west aligned in consequence of this event of cold war.


List of middle east wars

I could say the same of soviet backed dictatorships (Egypt), theocracies (Iran), invasions (infamous afghan war), etc... Again this is exactly where I'm trying to get: the region since antiquity is violent, unstable, characterized by localized/proxy wars, ambiguous; and yet 90% of the left without hesitating a single moment, sided with the coalition of muslims and soviet states that created the UN resolution of zionism=racism.
And now I see news talking about russian troops hired by Iran to be stationed in north country, russian missiles tests over middle east, ayatollahs claiming that drugs in Iran are zionist tools to weaken the population and I'm suppose to think of Palestine liberation? This looks only a case of arab or muslim leaders being stubborn and rejecting the existence of Israel, and creating this scapegoating enemy where he canalizes all the frustration and problems of the population. And I mean all of them, including Palestine.

[~Spectre]

And?
I'm asking exactly what makes Israel-Arab conflict so emblematic, untouchable and special to socialism in detriment of what is happening in others countries!

It's not emblematic. It's simply the largest recipient of foreign military aid, the biggest regional aggressor, has a nuclear arsenal, and has a lot of defenders in the English speaking world (thus more counter speech is required)

This has been told to you a few times now, but you ignore it because it doesn't fit into your Zionist narrative.



The country that receive most usa foreign aid is Afghanistan, seconded by Pakistan.

Military aid, no. That's Israel.





No, see: 1987, third line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_military_relations#Mi litary_aid).
I was summarizing when referring to Yom Kippur war, by Israel being more west aligned in consequence of this event of cold war.

U.S. military aid began before 1987, as your article even admits you dumb fuck. That's when they gained a heightened NATO status. Again, you got the date of the Yom Kippur war off by almost 20 years, but hey!



I could say the same of soviet backed dictatorships (Egypt), theocracies (Iran), invasions (infamous afghan war), etc...

1) Who the fuck is defending the Soviet Union?

2) No you can't. Only one country in the middle east has invaded and occupied all its neighbors. Iran in contrast hasn't invaded anyone in decades.

3) Only one country launched a war over the last ten years that killed over a million people. This is the same country that funds Israel. Guess why activists in this country might want to focus on cutting U.S. military aid to Israel?

Again this is exactly where I'm trying to get: the region since antiquity is violent, unstable, characterized by localized/proxy wars, ambiguous; and yet 90% of the left without hesitating a single moment, sided with the coalition of muslims and soviet states that created the UN resolution of zionism=racism.



And now I see news talking about russian troops hired by Iran to be stationed in north country, russian missiles tests over middle east, ayatollahs claiming that drugs in Iran are zionist tools to weaken the population and I'm suppose to think of Palestine liberation? This looks only a case of arab or muslim leaders being stubborn and rejecting the existence of Israel, and creating this scapegoating enemy where he canalizes all the frustration and problems of the population. And I mean all of them, including Palestine.

1) Iranians aren't arabs you dumb fuck.

2) Why do you keep bringing up Iran as a counter to the Palestinians? What is the relevance?

3) If you don't want the issue to be used for scapegoating, then solve the issue.

[~Spectre]

This looks only a case of arab or muslim leaders being stubborn and rejecting the existence of Israel

This too is false. There's been a full peace plan on the table for several years, in exchange for an end to the occupation, and a recognition of a Palestinian state. Even Hamas has stated their desire to come to a long term peace if Israel is willing to end their occupation.

But then again, you did "research".

[GallowsBird]

What is it with the Zionists keep coming back again and again to invade this forum? They are starting to remind me of a nasty rash that you keep putting lotion on till it goes only for it to return again and again with the only purpose being to irritate you.

I'm sorry but a leftist cannot support Israel as Israel is an Imperialist state and Zionism is a racist nationalist ideaology.

People like Tukhachevsky should realise that Arabs are a widespread group with various differences culturally and politically so blaming Palestinians for something another Arabic state does is ridiculous and not a good way to argue in favour of Israel and against Palestine.
It is as ridiculous as saying the Netherlands should be conquered by France because they are a Germanic state like Nazi Germany.

It is even more ridiculous to use Iran (which is an Indo-European state speaking a language in the Indo-Iranian branch) against Palestine on the basis they are Arabs (they aren't as mentioned) or Muslims (would you blame Ireland for crimes commited in another traditionally Catholic state like Nicaragua?).

I think someone needs to find better arguments; if there can be any good defence of taking land from an indigenous population based on a story from an ancient mythological text and strange notions of "racial entitlement".

[cynicles]

And?
This is only evidence of how much of the left is being alienated by a voice, mysteriously related to the geopolitics of defunct soviet union and to religious supremacy, that is so vocal as to the point no one else can't be heard (and if they can be heard, they are soon framed as "apartheid apologist" as you clearly put).
While this fight against "imperialism" arbitrary keeps ignoring a bus being burned in Rio de Janeiro or a human living in a sewer in mongolia, I doubt people will see coherence in your "struggle"; they'll see as oportunism or as a typical white middle class compartment.

People living in the Occupied territores are also living in poverty with all the same problems, why do I have to ignore them and focus on only the causes you approve of. You wan't people to pay more attention to those issue? Then stop complaining and post stuff about them in the forums. If people ignore them then you can come back here and whine about inconsistencies.
Also, you are an apartheid apologist as far as this thread has showed, and acting like your support for an ethno-nationalist state like israel is some mavericky voice being pushed to the margins by the mainstream is just ridiculous and outside of reality, people lose their jobs for criticizing Israel.
Once again you also bring up the soviet union for no reason except to for whatever reason imply it's the only reason we oppose the ethnic cleansing and reactionary policies of the Israeli state. In addition to that you're now bringing up religious supremacy for some arbitrary reason. Why do I have to change my belief just because some reactionaries in Iran just happened to not like Israel? The US supports the use of firetrucks! The US is an imperialist state therefore we shouldn't use firetrucks or else we're all imperialists!



I could say the same of soviet backed dictatorships (Egypt), theocracies (Iran), invasions (infamous afghan war), etc... Again this is exactly where I'm trying to get: the region since antiquity is violent, unstable, characterized by localized/proxy wars, ambiguous; and yet 90% of the left without hesitating a single moment, sided with the coalition of muslims and soviet states that created the UN resolution of zionism=racism.
And now I see news talking about russian troops hired by Iran to be stationed in north country, russian missiles tests over middle east, ayatollahs claiming that drugs in Iran are zionist tools to weaken the population and I'm suppose to think of Palestine liberation? This looks only a case of arab or muslim leaders being stubborn and rejecting the existence of Israel, and creating this scapegoating enemy where he canalizes all the frustration and problems of the population. And I mean all of them, including Palestine.
Egyptian dictatorships? You mean like how the US supported Anwar el Sadat and unrepented Neo-Nazi and Hosni Mubarak who without a thought sent in his police force to massacre 1000 Egyptians within a month? And Nasser was not some Soviet puppet contrary to popular american mythology, he was allied with them because Britain, France and Israel invaded Egypt starting the Suez crisis trying to exert their colonial control back onto the state. And nobody here even necessarily agrees with everything Nasser did, he failed to keep his promises to the Nubians, the Greeks who fought with him to defend Egypt, suppressed large numbers of communists and failed to defeat Israel during the 1967 war as well as appointing Sadat his successor.

Iranian theocracy? You mean the one that rose to replace the US backed dictatorship of the Shah that was brought to power after a US/British coup against the democratically elected Mossadegh?

Afghan war? Who cares what the Soviet Union did in the days of yesterfuck? You keep acting like everyone here gives a flying fuck about the USSR.

Nice jobs on the orientalist version of history about the middle-east by the way. And what the hell does that have to do with the left supporting a resolution conedmning zionism as racism, which quite frankly is a light criticism in my opinion.

Again I have to stress who gives a fuck what crazy shit is coming out of the Ayatollah's gob? What does their crazy conspiracies have to do with Palestine? And why is any level of solidarity or support for Palestinians by other Arab all of the sudden "creating this scapegoating enemy where he canalizes all the frustration and problems of the population"?

You've proven yourself not only completely ignorant about the middle east and it's history but shown a continual willingness to stress irrelevant nonsequitors, an orientalist and racist attitude toward the people of that region in general while making every excuse in the book to justify avoid Israels attrocities. You are clearly neither a revolutionary leftist or suited for these forums. I'm damn near sure your a slightly more sophisticated hasbara troll but since I don't have any proof I'd say you're just a zionist.

[Tukhachevsky]

"Dumb fuck", "zionist", "completely ignorant about middle east", "hasbara troll" (wtf?), ... Sure you guys are trying to make an adult discussion here.
Is this the ostracism of questioning unconditional support for Palestine in the left?

I hope one days these keyboard wars actually help a national liberation around the globe instead of only serving to give a sense of political fulfillment or righteousness to someone behind a screen.
At least they aren't youtube comments, right?

[~Spectre]

"Dumb fuck", "zionist", "completely ignorant about middle east", "hasbara troll" (wtf?), ... Sure you guys are trying to make an adult discussion here.
Is this the ostracism of questioning unconditional support for Palestine in the left?

I hope one days these keyboard wars actually help a national liberation around the globe instead of only serving to give a sense of political fulfillment or righteousness to someone behind a screen.
At least they aren't youtube comments, right?

I just negged you into the red, and I'm quite happy about this.

[Per Levy]

"Dumb fuck", "zionist", "completely ignorant about middle east", "hasbara troll" (wtf?), ... Sure you guys are trying to make an adult discussion here.
Is this the ostracism of questioning unconditional support for Palestine in the left?

I hope one days these keyboard wars actually help a national liberation around the globe instead of only serving to give a sense of political fulfillment or righteousness to someone behind a screen.
At least they aren't youtube comments, right?

you know between the few insults were actually several good arguments and points to your posts, but why adress the content if you can just chicken out and cry out about insults. its the internet live with it.


Enjoy living in your fantasy bubble where arabs doesn't discriminate against africans in North Africa. Ever wondered how they ended in Israel? Search for Darfur massacre, at least the israelis expel them instead of killing.

so you're saying sending people into death, like expelling a certain group into a hostile territory where they die, is allright? by your logic israel is helping all these evil arabs to kill black africans who got away.


Also, are you trying to create a straw man by bringing racial issues?

sorry to say but dean didnt brought race into this, it was an israelian minister who did.

[El Chuncho]

More Zionist threads? I am tempted just to sit back and eat popcorn!

I think it is plain and obvious that Tukhachevsky is a hasbara troll; it is not as if they are uncommon online. His posts are merely a justification of Israeli brutality and oppression towards the Palestinian people (whose land they stole from). He, as pointed out by others, views all Arabs (and possible all Muslims) as one, unified people and thus blames all for negative actions caused by one group. This means that he is a racist Zionist and should be banned like Havee and RedJew.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I don't see Usa or Israel as the main provocateurs of war in the middle east,? At any rate, they are the largest military powers in the region (and even much of the world) for a reason.


a territory that always lacked natural defenses and was always unstable during history.Every region has been unstable. This region, in modern history, has been the target of imperialism and every country there has been shaped by its legacy (literally, their rulers and borders) or response to it.


I hope that with better technologies like electric automobiles north american imperialism will come to halt and the main fuel for the industrial society, oil, will see a much smaller demand.America doesn't get consumer petrol from the Middle East, they get it from North and South America mostly. The US wants to control the rest of world's supply of oil - specifically China. It's imperialism, not oil - just like British imperialism was based on control of the trade and shipping through that region.

[X5N]

Oppression of peoples, no matter how small their population is, is never "irrelevant."

[blake 3:17]

Oppression of peoples, no matter how small their population is, is never "irrelevant."


It's just racist BS. Not sure why this thread has been allowed.