The Anti-Germans

[Marko]

What is your opinion of these Marxist-Leninists who support Zionism and the war in Iraq?

In my opinion their analysis that the capitalist governments and intellectuals who oppose the war and Israel's actions do so because of anti-Semitism that is deeply entrenched especially to the German society is correct.

However, this does not necessarily imply that the war and Israel's oppressive policies are justified even if the mainstream opposition is morally even more reprehensible.

BTW, as a newcomer I must ask whether anti-German opinions are acceptable here. :D

The anti-Germans in an anti-Nazi demonstration:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Hamm02.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Germans_...munist_current) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Germans_(communist_current))

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Those who support Zionist Israel and the imperialist Iraq war are not communists, nor comrades of any sort.

[Marko]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 30, 2007 09:15 am
Those who support Zionist Israel and the imperialist Iraq war are not communists, nor comrades of any sort.
The anti-German position on Israel explained:

Solidarity with Israel!
Withdraw the Right of Existence from Germany!

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust and calls for the
destruction of Israel. Meanwhile, Nazis are planning a demonstration on the
occasion of the Iran – Portugal soccer match on June 17th. The motto:
„President Ahmadinejad – Welcomed by Friends“ We want to disturb the
unspeakable actions of this anti-Semitic alliance and invite you to a
demonstration against anti-Semitism of all colours and against the German
reality.

In the aftermath of the revolution of 1979, Iran was remodeled into an autocratic theocracy that cuts women’s rights and persecutes the opposition.
Within the Muslim world the Mullahs of Iran stress their leading role in spreading anti-Semitism and a global call for arms against Israel. A European
debate on the condition of Iran has only started as a consequence of a possible
nuclear threat that Iran is posing to Europe, as well as the ongoing denial of
the Holocaust by Ahmadinejad. Although a visit to Germany by Ahmadinejad during
the World Cup has not been confirmed German’s Minister of the Interior,Wolfgang Schäuble, promised to be a „good host“ – that’s the way Holocaust-deniers are welcomed in this country. This preemptive hospitality cannot be explained without regard to the close economic ties of the two countries – Germany is Iran’s biggest trade partner. For example: a German firm sponsors the Iranian vice squad.
In the 1940s, ideological similarities already led to a practical cooperation of National Socialists and Islamic fundamentalists. The Freie Nationalisten
Rhein/Main (a regional hardcore Nazi-group from the river Rhine/river Main
region) stand in this tradition by solidarizing with the regime in Iran.
Nonetheless, they do not forget to agitate in a racist way against „massive
immigration and the corrosion of the German people (Volk)“. Islamic fundamentalists are welcomed as strategic partners in a fight of völkische collectives against an imagined world-wide Jewish conspiracy. Following the anti-Semitic delusion, Nazis suspect the „Kulturfeind“ not only in Israel but
behind every „malice“ of modernity; of course also in Frankfurt that they entitle the „city of stock exchange and the city of high street banks, the Jerusalem on the river Main“.

Behind the German curtain of complaints about savage anti-Semitism voiced by
Nazis and Islamic fundamentalists lies a broad anti-Semitic consensus.Following a study of 2005 68% of the German population are annoyed with „being charged with German crimes against Jews“. And just as many think that „Israel is waging a war of extermination against the Palestinian people“. Since 1989 postwar- Germans see themselves as world champions in dealing with history, claiming a morally superior position that allows them to demonize Israel as today’s perpetrator.

In trying to secure the everyday lives of Jews on a political and military level Israel must have our full support and solidarity. Instead of denying or
paternalistically granting Israel the right to exist – as many Germans do – we
consciously turn against Germany, the country of perpetrators. Due to it’s grave and outrageous crimes we decline to accept Germany’s right to exist.

http://bikinibottom.blogsport.de/

[Marko]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 30, 2007 09:15 am
Those who support Zionist Israel and the imperialist Iraq war are not communists, nor comrades of any sort.
The German ANTIFA:
http://bikinibottom.blogsport.de/images/israeldemo.jpg

[Wanted Man]

That's not "German AntiFa", that's Antideutsche scum with their own banner. It's not representative of all AntiFa.

And yes, they are scum. I don't know if Antideutsche views are "acceptable here", but I fucking hope not. Real communists don't support imperialism and the Zionist Apartheid state.

The Antideutsche once walked around with British and American flags, and banners in honour of "Bomber Harris", the man who in WWII was responsible for some of the terror bombings against Germany, including against Dresden. They were thanking the man who had thousands of people burned to death, just because he happened to be fighting against Germany. Talk about self-hate.

Bahamas also had an "in memoriam" for Theo van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by an Islamist after he had consistently referred to all muslims as "goatfuckers", said that he wished that a leftist politician got cancer, and made a movie together with Ayaan Hirsi Ali denouncing the violation of women as "part of Islam".

In that same article, Bahamas also said that the fact that muslims are now second-rate citizens in Germany and the Netherlands, is not because of social matters, but because of the muslims themselves, because they are all backwards, that patriarchy is to blame on Islam, and that "the majority of Dutch Moroccans" are muslim extremists who are oppressing women. This kind of shit could easily be confused for the party programs of right populists like Geert Wilders or fascists like Michiel Smit. But then again, Antideutsche probably supports them for opposing Islam!

According to their paranoid little minds, there is a direct line from modern-day communism, to anti-imperialism, to anti-zionism, to nationalism, to anti-semitism, to Auschwitz. Because of that, they say, we should support all the imperial adventures in the Middle East. Every political conflict is reduced to whether you are pro-zionist or anti-semitic. The war on Iraq should be supported, because it is, supposedly, a war for the security of Israel and Judaism (funny, the Nazis also say that, the only difference is that to them it's a bad thing, and a conspiracy theory, while the Antideutsche applaud it).

All of this leads to their strange behaviour. "Anti-nationalists" obsessively waving the national flags of imperialist countries. Self-declared "communists" objectively ending up in the same camp as Bush, Blair, Balkenende and Berlusconi. The reduction of politics to either liberal capitalism or anti-semitic barbarism. While they claim to support women's and gay rights, they do not want to fight for them at home, because that would undermine bourgeois society, and if you do that, the terrorists have won. You don't want the terrorists to win, do you?

The Antideutsche also bear similarities to certain American trotskyists, who ended up becoming neocons. Of course, those trots eventually discarded the left altogether. The Antideutsche still claim to be doing it "für den Kommunismus", in order to confuse and divide the communist and anti-fascist movements. But in practice, they are no different from the right. They have influence, because the German left is (rightfully so!) anti-nationalist, and wary of more anti-semitism. Certainly, nationalism and anti-semitism should be combated with full force. But that doesn't help us anything if we just line up with rightist forces, and, in practice, become part of them.

As a final note, a funny thing is that, for all their anti-nationalism, the Antideutsche are a distinctly German phenomenon! You would never find people like this in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, or wherever. After all, none of those countries have a very big consciousness of the suffering inflicted against the Jews. Of course, that means that nationalism and anti-semitism is a bigger trap to fall into, so it's kind of a double-edged sword. But still, there is nothing more deutsch than the Antideutscher.

[Marko]

However, Saddam was for all intents and purposes a Fascist ruler. The danger facing Iraq is a coup by Baathist Fascists or Islamic clerical fascists.

The people of Iraq can only be liberated by a Socialist revolution.

I think the Antideutsche understand these facts unlike many people here.

[Wanted Man]

So the war in Iraq is going to bring a socialist revolution? Okay.

Anyway, there is a fact that the Antideutsche (and you, supposedly a "Marxist-Leninist" :rolleyes: ) fail to understand: a nation which oppresses another nation cannot be free itself. In other words, socialism can not be brought about in America while US troops are enforcing the brutal exploitation of Iraq. Likewise, this occupation will not bring socialism in Iraq, either. Israel is also not "free" as long as Palestine isn't.

What basically makes the Antideutsche position so dubious is that they seem to have taken the "stage theory" to the extreme: not only must capitalism first fully develop, according to them, leftists should also support the increasing grip that imperialism holds over the world, while denouncing any kind of national liberation. That, somehow, will lead to socialism. :wacko:

[Marko]

Originally posted by Dick [email protected] 30, 2007 12:21 pm
So the war in Iraq is going to bring a socialist revolution? Okay.

Anyway, there is a fact that the Antideutsche (and you, supposedly a "Marxist-Leninist" :rolleyes: ) fail to understand: a nation which oppresses another nation cannot be free itself. In other words, socialism can not be brought about in America while US troops are enforcing the brutal exploitation of Iraq. Likewise, this occupation will not bring socialism in Iraq, either. Israel is also not "free" as long as Palestine isn't.

What basically makes the Antideutsche position so dubious is that they seem to have taken the "stage theory" to the extreme: not only must capitalism first fully develop, according to them, leftists should also support the increasing grip that imperialism holds over the world, while denouncing any kind of national liberation. That, somehow, will lead to socialism. :wacko:
Without World War I October Revolution would not have happened. Imperialist wars can increase the probability of revolution.

The war has weakened capitalist authorities both in America and in Iraq.

All capitalist forms of government are intrinsically oppressive. Anti-imperialist and "Social Democrat" forms of capitalism are even more dangerous because in softer forms of capitalism the life of the working class is more bearable. This reduces the will of the Proletariat to revolution.

To a certain point, "worse" is actually better.

[Edelweiss]

Actually I was waiting for an anti-German to discuss here for a long time. I was accused by some "comrades" here without a clue of being anti-German myself because of my support of Israel's right of existence, something which is shared by a majority of the German, radical Left. However, I do not support US imperialism, and I have a rather neutral position on the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which does not make me a anti-German. However, I share some positions of the anti-Germans like their, admittedly often paranoid and overdone, but uncompromising criticism of anti-semitism within the Left. I also share the position that "anti-imperialism" and pro-national positions are totally being overweighted within today's Left, mostly without any class connection, something which Marx never would have approved of, since he for example did support the American side in the US-Mexican war.

However, I'm opposed to the anti-Germans just like I'm opposed to simplistic, mindless "anti-imperialists" who support the current Iraqi resistance, the Hamas or the Hizbollah in the name of "anti-imperialism". For me political Islam is an equal enemy as US imperialism is.

We did often had problems here with anti-semitism coming from "our side", and often many people here had a blind eye on it, and justified it with "anti-zionism". Also the mindless, unreflected anti-zionism of many here is sickening me, as well as the pro-national, anti-American positions of some non-US comrades coming from imperialist countries them self like Canada or Australia. That's why I think that sometimes some anti-Germans like leftists would be healthy for some other countries too...

I wouldn't classify today's anti-Germans as Marxists-Leninists BTW, although they did have their origins in Maoist sects.

Anyway, welcome to the forums Marko, although I'm afraid that you will soon be restricted to "opposing ideologies".

[RNK]

All capitalist forms of government are intrinsically oppressive.

Like Israel's? :D No state has the right to exist more than any other -- particularly ones that have such controversial and brutally oppressive histories as a state formed by the social invasion of one people into the land of another, and the supplanting of an entire culture and class. But hey, that's just me.

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 01:47 pm
Without World War I October Revolution would not have happened. Imperialist wars can increase the probability of revolution.

The war has weakened capitalist authorities both in America and in Iraq.

All capitalist forms of government are intrinsically oppressive. Anti-imperialist and "Social Democrat" forms of capitalism are even more dangerous because in softer forms of capitalism the life of the working class is more bearable. This reduces the will of the Proletariat to revolution.

To a certain point, "worse" is actually better.
Of course, there is a great difference between Russia in WWI in 1917, and America in Iraq in 2007. Russia had millions of poor soldiers fighting as part of a massive war between the great imperialist powers. America, on the other hand, has a smaller, more professional army, that is currently deployed to enforce the exploitation of other (non-imperialistic) countries. So the comparison is completely false.

Anyway, what you're arguing here is a 'theory' that pops up on this board every once in a while, where someone says: "if revolution happens because the workers get fed up of being exploited, then we should not encourage any workers' action to improve their conditions, because that only makes them less revolutionary."

Some take it to extremes, saying: "if the workers only rise up when their conditions are really bad, then we should actively work on making them worse, so that they will rise up quicker."

While I do agree that economist tendencies are bad, this 'theory' is flawed for several reasons. If all forms of workers' struggle are discouraged by communists because they might just "pacify" the workers, then the workers' movement itself will be completely spineless and useless, making a revolutionary situation even more difficult.
If communists encourage the strengthening of imperialist capitalism because the adventure in Iraq might end up weakening the American bourgeoisie, this will not lead to a revolution. Sure, the American authorities may have weakened because of the Iraq fiasco, but it has not made a revolution any more likely. More likely, we'll see a Democratic government that doesn't change the policies much.
Lastly, the purely human factor: it's fucking ridiculous for communists to advocate that workers should be used as intruments, that thousands of them should be sacrificed for the strengthening of imperialism, just because of the misguided belief that this will lead to more militancy and a revolution. That class struggle should be discouraged by communists to strengthen imperialism, and then expect that said workers will still support communism. (more likely, this is the kind of crap that puts fascism into power!)
Malte: good post, I agree with most of it. I would disagree on "Israel's right to exist". Certainly, Israel in its current form is not an entity to support. Others would argue for a "two state solution". The idea behind that is nice, but in the current context, such a "solution" would not change much. After all, Israel is still a military power with imperialist support. Even now, we see Israel whipping up and intervening in the struggle between Fatah and Hamas.

If a two state solution is ever possible, it would only be in the context of equal relations between the two, without foreign intervention. Of course, in this world, where the US is allied with Israel, occupies Afghanistan and Iraq, and is threatening the rest of the Middle East, such a "solution" is a utopia.

I do agree with radical anti-nationalism and opposition to anti-semitism. Nationalism and anti-semitism both tend to sneak into the revolutionary left. Nationalist tendencies include European leftists saying that their country is just a "US puppet" and needs to be freed from US influence, even though these countries are usually imperialist themselves. As for anti-semitism, it fucking pisses me off when someone goes: "The way Israel is acting now, they are really asking for it if something[another genocide against Jews] happens to them". It's a cancer. Not one that immediately kills the left, but it still has to be gotten rid of somehow.

[Autonome-Antifa]

Some friends of me are Anti-Germans and there a pretty ok group. Also you have a other anti german group that is not so ok they also have a bad opinion about the suburbans in paris they think it should be bombed.

[Hiero]

They are first world chauvinist. For instance take this comment


A European
debate on the condition of Iran has only started as a consequence of a possible
nuclear threat that Iran is posing to Europe,

They got that straight from the CIA and NATO's propoganda unit. Iran's building of nuclear weopons, like the DPRK are in direct retaliation to imperialist agression. The tactic of the imperialists is to switch the situation. When the imperialist attack it's portrayed as defensive, and when the 3rd world people defend it is portrayed as aggression. The end result is that 1st world people begin to think 3rd world people are barbaric idiots who need to shown the light.

Now when so called "leftist" groups repeat this bullshit, they beomce traitors to the international proleteriat. I wouldn't be surprised if these groups were originaly set up by the CIA and other 1st world terrorist organisations, either way they do them a favour.


as well as the ongoing denial of the Holocaust by Ahmadinejad.

This is obviously wrong, however we should really look at the reasoning behind this. I don't think that personally deep down Ahmadinejad really believes what he says. Though I think the point he is trying to say is "we don't really give a fuck, we have our own problems". Basically you could say that at least 90% of first worlders are deniers of imperialist crimes of oppression and genocide of the 3rd world populations and have been for a long time. Look at settlers nations such as Amerikkka and Au$$tralia, they can't even admit that they commited genocide against the indigenous nations.

I think when Ahmadinejad says "the holocaust didn't happen" the point really is "you gon't give a fuck about us, so we don't give a fuck about you, we have our own problems". Maybe when memorials are built for the victims of imperialism, 3rd world people will be bit more sympathic to the grief and mounring of WW2.

This is the problem, people complain that Ahmadinejad denies the holocaust happen. Yet this same people ignore the fact that the 1st worlds goes everyday without much thought to 3rd world suffering and often condemnation when these people attempt to change their situation.


By the way, why are they called ant-germans? I am very tired and may have missed the obvious.

[Devrim]

...Amerikkka and Au$$tralia...
When will Maoists learn to spell?
Don't they realise tha this sort of thing makes them look slightly absurd?
Devrim

[Revolution Until Victory]

Malte, if you "support Israel's right to exist" it means you got to support Rhodesia's "right to exist" or French Algeria's "right to exist" or Portugese Angola "right to exist" or Apartheid South Africa "right to exist". For ANY rational human being, let a lone a "radical leftist", does colonialism have a right to exist????
Israel's right to exist = the zionists' right to steal and colonize Palestinian lands. Malte, please explian to me, how do the zionists have a "right" to steal and colonize Palestine?? I don't get. Do they, or anyone else, have such rights?? really? since when? Would you give Japan the right to colonize and steal German lands? would you give it such a right? would you defend its "right to exist" :lol:

If you "support Israel's right to exist", you support land theft and colonization, and is equal to supporting the "right" of other colonial experiences to colonize and uspur other people across Africa, Asia, and Latin America.


Others would argue for a "two state solution". The idea behind that is nice, but in the current context, such a "solution" would not change much. After all, Israel is still a military power with imperialist support. Even now, we see Israel whipping up and intervening in the struggle between Fatah and Hamas.
If a two state solution is ever possible, it would only be in the context of equal relations between the two, without foreign intervention. Of course, in this world, where the US is allied with Israel, occupies Afghanistan and Iraq, and is threatening the rest of the Middle East, such a "solution" is a utopia.

the so-called "2 state solution" doesn't work coz of the current situation only, rather, it doesn't work from the very moment it was proposed.
First of all, there is NO SUCH THING as "2-state-solution"

1- there were countless attempts at implimenting it, but didn't work, means it is no "solution"

2- It's a fraud to claim it will be a 2 state. what will happne is similar to colonial plans in South Africa. An "independent state" on the native's bantustans, and a settler-colony for the colonizers. a "2 state solution" means the Palestinians will be cofined to Bantustans that are less than 20% of thier original homeland (if we assume the Apartheid wall, checkpoints, and settlments are removed, which is unlikely. If they weren't removed, then Palestinians will form a "state" on less than 10% of thier original homeland), and a settler-colony for the zionists. I'm sure no one here would support a "solution" that would confine the South African natives in thier bantustans and let them form an "independent state", while the Europeans would keep thier settler-colony. The South African people rejected the Bantustan "solution" and revolted, why should the Palestinians accept the Bantustan "solution" and have to put up with shit like "the only solution is a 2 state blah blah blah"??

the ONLY solution is JUSTICE. TOTAL justice. In other words, TOTAL end of colonialism. As a comrade said once on this website, when will people understnad there could be no compromise with colonialism??
The only solution is just what happned in Algeria, South Africa, or Zimbabwe. A total end of European colonialism and and establishment of a secular democratic state for all of its citezens with equal rights and responsiblities. In the case of Palestine, a total end of zionist colonialism, I repeat, total, and a secular democratic state for all of its citezens. Anything less than that is a blatant compromise with colonialism.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 03:05 am

...Amerikkka and Au$$tralia...
When will Maoists learn to spell?
Don't they realise tha this sort of thing makes them look slightly absurd?
Devrim
When will Trots and liberal learn to understand the significance of misspelling oppressor names?

This style of writing began with the Black Panther Party. It is meant to deface the appearance of innocence in oppressors. It does look quite silly to begin with, but eventually I belive I began to understand why the BPP used such language.

Now stop trolling.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

What is your opinion of these Marxist-Leninists who support Zionism and the war in Iraq?

I think they are scum.


In my opinion their analysis that the capitalist governments and intellectuals who oppose the war and Israel's actions do so because of anti-Semitism that is deeply entrenched especially to the German society is correct.

Your opinion on this matter is bilge.


However, this does not necessarily imply that the war and Israel's oppressive policies are justified even if the mainstream opposition is morally even more reprehensible.

How can mainstream opposition to the Iraq war be morally reprehensible? Since when did opposition to imperialism become morally reprehensible?

You're no Marxist-Leninist. You're a right-opportunist.

[Revolution Until Victory]

I have a rather neutral position on the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict

tell me Malte, what kind of a "leftist" would say "I have a rather neutral position on the current Zimbabwen-Rhodesian conflict"? or "I have a rather neutral position on the current Algerian-French conflict"??
seriously, what kind of a leftist would have a "neutral position" on colonialism? what kind of a "leftist" would be neither against nor with the colonizer??? what kind of crap is that??

[Vargha Poralli]

IMO it is purely Liberal Guilt trip nothing else. There is nothing revolutionary or radical with it.


Originally posted by Hiero
When will Trots and liberal learn to understand the significance of misspelling oppressor names?

When will you learn to Label people appropriately ? And what is in a name ?

[Spirit of Spartacus]

@ Revolution Until Victory


Israel's right to exist = the zionists' right to steal and colonize Palestinian lands. Malte, please explian to me, how do the zionists have a "right" to steal and colonize Palestine?? I don't get.

You don't get it, but the "anti-German" leftists do get it. Let me explain, comrade.

You see, five or six decades ago, the Nazi regime in Germany massacred millions of Jewish people in the Holocaust.
As a result of this, some German leftists have realized (decades later) that they really, REALLY regret the Holocaust.

They have also reached another conclusion: Palestinian Arabs should be punished for Nazi crimes. After all, it was the Palestinian Arabs' fault that a German racist regime murdered so many Jews, right? The Palestinians ARE guilty of the Holocaust, and we all have to admit it, right? And if we don't admit it, we're anti-Semitic, right?

In fact, this is a verdict which ought to have been pronounced at the Nuremberg Trials, but unfortunately, the Allied Powers who won WW2 were anti-Semites, and therefore they didn't officially recognize the Zionists' right to deprive Palestinian people of their lands, homes and lives.

[Revolution Until Victory]

thanks for the explanation!

unfortuantly, that seems right.

[An archist]

Originally posted by Spirit of [email protected] 30, 2007 04:38 pm
@ Revolution Until Victory


Israel's right to exist = the zionists' right to steal and colonize Palestinian lands. Malte, please explian to me, how do the zionists have a "right" to steal and colonize Palestine?? I don't get.

You don't get it, but the "anti-German" leftists do get it. Let me explain, comrade.

You see, five or six decades ago, the Nazi regime in Germany massacred millions of Jewish people in the Holocaust.
As a result of this, some German leftists have realized (decades later) that they really, REALLY regret the Holocaust.

They have also reached another conclusion: Palestinian Arabs should be punished for Nazi crimes. After all, it was the Palestinian Arabs' fault that a German racist regime murdered so many Jews, right? The Palestinians ARE guilty of the Holocaust, and we all have to admit it, right? And if we don't admit it, we're anti-Semitic, right?

In fact, this is a verdict which ought to have been pronounced at the Nuremberg Trials, but unfortunately, the Allied Powers who won WW2 were anti-Semites, and therefore they didn't officially recognize the Zionists' right to deprive Palestinian people of their lands, homes and lives.
:lol: genius

[Marion]

Originally posted by Dick [email protected] 30, 2007 10:15 am
All of this leads to their strange behaviour. "Anti-nationalists" obsessively waving the national flags of imperialist countries. Self-declared "communists" objectively ending up in the same camp as Bush, Blair, Balkenende and Berlusconi. The reduction of politics to either liberal capitalism or anti-semitic barbarism. While they claim to support women's and gay rights, they do not want to fight for them at home, because that would undermine bourgeois society, and if you do that, the terrorists have won. You don't want the terrorists to win, do you?

To my mind, the anti-Deutsche are really interesting, partly because of their own positions and partly because they are merely one pole of much of leftist opinion. The paragraph above could be easily amended to satirise the views of certain sections of the left:

All of this leads to their strange behaviour. "Anti-nationalists" obsessively waving the national flags of various countries. Self-declared "communists" objectively ending up in the same camp as Bin Laden, Atta and Saddam Hussein. The reduction of politics to either liberal capitalism or social-democratic waffle. While they claim to support women's and gay rights, they are happy to pander to anti-female and anti-homosexual views if it will gain them a few votes. It's all necessary, because otherwise Bush and Blair/Brown will win. You don't want them to win, do you?

Obviously not all left groups are guilty of all or most of these views, but in their anti-imperialism many do have a tendency to merely reverse the anti-Deutsche position rather than break out of the imperialist vs oppressed mindset.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 04:05 pm
Don't they realise tha this sort of thing makes them look slightly absurd?
Or perhaps they do, and hope that this ridicule will spill all over the left?

Luís Henrique

[Marko]

Originally posted by Spirit of [email protected] 30, 2007 04:21 pm
How can mainstream opposition to the Iraq war be morally reprehensible? Since when did opposition to imperialism become morally reprehensible?

You're no Marxist-Leninist. You're a right-opportunist.
Bullshit. The governments of Germany and France supported Saddam because they were right-wing and chauvinist. It benefited their own bourgeois "national interests". Saddam was an important trade partner for them.

They supported Saddam for the same reason Americans supported Islamofascist Taleban against the Soviets in the 1980s.

Is it so difficult to understand that even right-wing countries can have conflicting interests and thus one of them can end up "opposing" imperialism like Nazi Germany opposed British imperialism?

[BreadBros]

Bullshit. The governments of Germany and France supported Saddam because they were right-wing and chauvinist. It benefited their own bourgeois "national interests". Saddam was an important trade partner for them.

They supported Saddam for the same reason Americans supported Islamofascist Taleban against the Soviets in the 1980s.

Is it so difficult to understand that even right-wing countries can have conflicting interests and thus one of them can end up "opposing" imperialism like Nazi Germany opposed British imperialism?

Nazi Germany didn't "challenge" British imperialism in the way Marxists formulate anti-imperialism. They vied for the power (whether it be territorial, financial, whatever) that their rival did. Anti-imperialism from a Marxist POV indicated an opposition to the very structure of imperialist exploitation.

More importantly, your argument is very confused. I doubt many people here consider Iraq to have been an anti-imperialist state. Even if it isn't though, thats not why most here oppose the war. The war is undoubtedly one of imperialist aggression. So you are ultimately trading one form of exploitation for another and in the process hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis who had nothing to do with the rise of Hussein end up dying. Not to mention that your comparison doesn't even make sense. Iraq was far from being some kind of German or French-supported state. It was the US after all that put Hussein in power and gave him significant armaments. The German and French interest in Iraq is purely economic, while the US interest is not only economic (by opening up new markets) but geopolitical.

I do think your group is guilty of right-populism, at the very least it is not Marxist. This is based on your views of the Islamic populace of the world. First of all, Christian worldwide aggression is just as pervasive as Islamic and potentially more dangerous due to it's strength. Yet you opportunistically target one (which is in the minority) and actively support the other (by supporting the US, which is ruled by a Christian-guided party and Israel, whose expansionist tendencies emerge out of certain elements of Judaism). Secondly, the fact that you use culture to justify anger and antagonism against certain groups shows that you are unable to look at culture and social development from a purely materialistic viewpoint, as even Lenin urged and did.

Anyway, this whole thing sounds kinda bizarre. Somewhat like the neo-con Trotskyists in the US but with a liberal guilt-trip added in. I have to wonder if anti-Semitism is really that much of a problem in Germany or is this based on made-up paranoia? I know that here in NY, about 1/4th of the anti-Israeli activists I know are Jewish (well, Jewish in ethnicity/heritage, not necessarily practicing) so I think this might be a purely German phenomenon.

[Never Give In]

I suppose "Anti-German" views wouldn't be acceptable here, since we're not racists.

[Marko]

Nazi Germany didn't "challenge" British imperialism in the way Marxists formulate anti-imperialism. They vied for the power (whether it be territorial, financial, whatever) that their rival did. Anti-imperialism from a Marxist POV indicated an opposition to the very structure of imperialist exploitation.
Exactly. The US started an imperialist war in Iraq. France and Schröder's German government opposed it but this was certainly not anti-imperialism.

There is a power struggle between the US and Germany which is similar in character to the power struggle between Britain and Germany in the 1930s. Britain was the lesser evil then and the US is the lesser evil now according to the anti-Germans.

[BreadBros]

1. I think you're really overstating any divide between the US and Germany. In the 1930s Britain and Germany had different spheres of geopolitical interest and were headed in drastically different ways ideologically. Today Germany and the US had a disagreement over Iraq. Germany is still pretty much wholly committed to the American/NATO vision of global order. They may have disagreed with the precise action but there is practically no difference between them over other vital issues such as free trade or the wider goals in the Middle East. I really don't foresee any American-German war or even any overt antagonism, so IMO that's a grossly misstated comparison.

2. If the US started an imperialist war and France and Germany offered opposition that wasn't anti-imperialist how does that lead to the US being "the lesser evil"? Even if France and Germany are not anti-imperialist, if we want to look at gradations then we could say the US is overtly aggressive/imperialistic while France and Germany represent a more liberal or social democratic restraint. If you are against imperialism then it seems to logically make sense that you would perceive the restrained social democratic route as more progressive as it would prevent the invasion to begin with.

I suppose this somehow all makes sense in your warped viewpoint since even though you are somehow "anti-imperialist" you are actually in favor of imperialist wars? Except that while you don't perceive France and Germany as being anti-imperialist, they are a greater evil because they aren't AS imperialist as the US? And this is all based on the false dichotomy that somehow Germany is a counterweight or rival to American power? :-S Sorry, but I think ya'll got a screw loose.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

What is your opinion of these Marxist-Leninists who support Zionism and the war in Iraq?

they are confused .... obviously no marxist in his right mind would support colonial nationalist racist imperialists like Zionists ....

the war in Iraq is a bit different, while i wouldn't support Islamists i would support marxist insurgents, perhaps these guys: http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/..._Group_Declared (http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/2790/Iraqi_Marxist_Insurgent_Group_Declared)


BTW, as a newcomer I must ask whether anti-German opinions are acceptable here.

i don't really understand what "anti-German" means here ... is it German people (like myself) or the German Government .... if its the German people (or any people) i would say you are a racist or an idiot ... if you mean the government then that would be ok with me ...


my support of Israel's right of existence,

this is troubling ...


something which is shared by a majority of the German, radical Left

sounds like a bunch of idiots


I have a rather neutral position on the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict

notice Malte hasn't responded yet (suprise) but anyway i agree with the previous poster who said:


Israel's right to exist = the zionists' right to steal and colonize Palestinian lands. Malte, please explian to me, how do the zionists have a "right" to steal and colonize Palestine?? I don't get. Do they, or anyone else, have such rights?? really? since when? Would you give Japan the right to colonize and steal German lands? would you give it such a right? would you defend its "right to exist"

what possible reason would you have for supporting the right of israel to exist, as a Marxist i can't think of a single one .....

if it's about proving that germans aren't nazis anymore or aren't anti-semetic then that is near the height of stupidity ... if its about holocaust guilt then thats wrong too .... as i would wager that most of the people in the german-left were not responsible for the holocaust or even lived at the time .....

[Marko]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 09:07 am
1. I think you're really overstating any divide between the US and Germany. In the 1930s Britain and Germany had different spheres of geopolitical interest and were headed in drastically different ways ideologically. Today Germany and the US had a disagreement over Iraq. Germany is still pretty much wholly committed to the American/NATO vision of global order. They may have disagreed with the precise action but there is practically no difference between them over other vital issues such as free trade or the wider goals in the Middle East. I really don't foresee any American-German war or even any overt antagonism, so IMO that's a grossly misstated comparison.

2. If the US started an imperialist war and France and Germany offered opposition that wasn't anti-imperialist how does that lead to the US being "the lesser evil"? Even if France and Germany are not anti-imperialist, if we want to look at gradations then we could say the US is overtly aggressive/imperialistic while France and Germany represent a more liberal or social democratic restraint. If you are against imperialism then it seems to logically make sense that you would perceive the restrained social democratic route as more progressive as it would prevent the invasion to begin with.

I suppose this somehow all makes sense in your warped viewpoint since even though you are somehow "anti-imperialist" you are actually in favor of imperialist wars? Except that while you don't perceive France and Germany as being anti-imperialist, they are a greater evil because they aren't AS imperialist as the US? And this is all based on the false dichotomy that somehow Germany is a counterweight or rival to American power? :-S Sorry, but I think ya'll got a screw loose.

1. I think you're really overstating any divide between the US and Germany. In the 1930s Britain and Germany had different spheres of geopolitical interest and were headed in drastically different ways ideologically. Today Germany and the US had a disagreement over Iraq. Germany is still pretty much wholly committed to the American/NATO vision of global order. They may have disagreed with the precise action but there is practically no difference between them over other vital issues such as free trade or the wider goals in the Middle East. I really don't foresee any American-German war or even any overt antagonism, so IMO that's a grossly misstated comparison.
In this case Germany's policy was anti-American, anti-Israel and based on its own national interests. However, America has even done considerable harm to its own economy and prestige when it has altruistically helped Israel against Saddam and Islamic extremists.

There are still strong anti-Semitic, Fascist elements in Germany and because of the weakness of the Marxist left cultural exports from Hollywood are the only practical way to combat them. Anti-Americanism is a threat to the success of this strategy.


2. If the US started an imperialist war and France and Germany offered opposition that wasn't anti-imperialist how does that lead to the US being "the lesser evil"? Even if France and Germany are not anti-imperialist, if we want to look at gradations then we could say the US is overtly aggressive/imperialistic while France and Germany represent a more liberal or social democratic restraint. If you are against imperialism then it seems to logically make sense that you would perceive the restrained social democratic route as more progressive as it would prevent the invasion to begin with.
This "imperialist" war succeeded in removing a Fascist, anti-Semitic dictator Saddam Hussein from power. It's sensible to support liberal democracies against Fascists.

Saddam threatened Israel with German poison gas technology and supported Palestinian suicide terrorists.

The structurally anti-Semitic German state opposed the war and the leftist activists who opposed it ultimately served the state. After the Holocaust advancing German national interests at the expense of Israel qualifies as anti-Semitism.

[Edelweiss]

Would you give Japan the right to colonize and steal German lands?

I certainly wouldn't have mind if "the zionists" would have stolen German land, but since I do give a shit about the national construct of Germany, I certainly don't give a shit whoever "steals" it. Germany puke off!

[NorthStarRepublicML]

anti-Semitic dictator Saddam Hussein

he was anti-semitic?

i looked at a couple of sites and all the ones that said Saddam was anti-semitic had big Israeli flags on them .... care to provide a source there?

[Marko]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 02:15 pm
I wouldn't classify today's anti-Germans as Marxists-Leninists BTW, although they did have their origins in Maoist sects.
Malte, Marxist-Leninist texts have appeared in the Bahama magazine.

For instance,

"Jenseits von Israel

Zur Klassenkampfpos(s)e der Antideutschen Kommunisten Berlin"

http://www.redaktion-bahamas.org/

[Edelweiss]

he was anti-semitic?

his $$$ reward for suicide bombers is enough for me to call him an anti-smite.

If you want to have an example what I meant earlier with mindless "anti-imperialists" who support whoever calls himself an enemy of the US in the name of "anti-imperialism" than people like Hiero are a good example who go as far as defending Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust, once again in the name of "anti-imperialism". Unfortunately such naive or plain stupid "leftists" seem to confirm many of the accusations of the anti-Germans against the Left, it's people like him who are giving them ammo again and again.

[Hiero]

than people like Hiero are a good example how go as far as defending Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust, once again in the name of "anti-imperialism".

I didn't defend it. I even said it is wrong. What I did try to do is understand why he and others in the Muslim world would promote such ideas. One way follows the imperialist, that Muslims are anti-semite by nature. The other tries to understand the history and current stage of imperialism.

[Marko]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 09:39 am
what possible reason would you have for supporting the right of israel to exist, as a Marxist i can't think of a single one ..
In the post-Auschwitz world Israel's right to exist is axiomatic.

[Andy Bowden]

How is the German state, today, structurally anti-semitic? IE what policies does the German state enact today that persecute Jews?

[Dimentio]

I would actually prefer a German-dominated European Union as a counterwight to the USA.

And if Europe would turn socialist, the natural centre is still the Germany-France-Lombardy axis. Those are the Core nations of Europe. Take it or leave it.

[Edelweiss]

I would actually prefer a German-dominated European Union as a counterwight to the USA.

That is a very narrow-minded, unsustainable "anti-imperialist" outlook. After all, it was your beloved "Germany-France-Lombardy axis" which made the imperialist, recent wars on the balkans possible. It would be naive and foolish to think that there is something like a lesser evil when it comes to imperialism, that of course also means I oppose the pro-US-imperialist stance of the anti-Germans. But to prefer EU/German imperialism over US imperialism is in no way better IMO. German nationalism has proofed to be one of the most chauvinist, aggressive and dangerous ones, and we should by all means oppose it. You shoudln't wait for another world war to realize that. I do strongly disagree with the stance that the German state is "structurally anti-semitic" though.

[Dimentio]

Yes, the EU would undoubtly be as imperialist as the US, but I did not make that stand from a purely, ideological, anti-imperialist reason, but from the fact that unilateralism breeds stability (just look at the decades when the British Empire was on it's peak).

Multilateralism, or a power vacuum, is preferable, since it creates instability. And nothing damages markets more than instability in the long run.

I am not friendly of German nationalism, since German nationalism (as all other nationalisms) are hurtful to the cause of a united Europe.

[Revolution Until Victory]

his $$$ reward for suicide bombers is enough for me to call him an anti-smite.

lol, a person is "anti-semetic" if he/she supports attacks against colonizers?!
so the ANC were racist and anti-white coz of thier attacks against the European colonizes? and the Algerian FLN was racist and anti-white coz of thier attacks against French colonizers? and the Zimbabwen resistance was racist and anti-white for its attacks against Rhodesian colonizers? really?? so, after all, and according to this "logic", this whole anti-colonial struggle was racist!! OMG!!! how on earth were I supporting such a thing :rolleyes:

[Revolution Until Victory]

In the post-Auschwitz world Israel's right to exist is axiomatic.

your stupidity is axiomatic. So coz there is a precieved and supposed danger that the Jewish people might face another genocide (which I don't believe is true), another people have to be colonized and opressed in order to prevent this supposed genocide??

great, thanks! you convinced me! Good job.

[Edelweiss]

lol, a person is "anti-semetic" if he/she supports attacks against colonizers?!

Don't be an idiot. I'm talking about suicide attacks against innocent people, which I don't consider any legitimate act of resistance (quiet brazen to compare that with the resistance of the ANC for example), but indeed racist, and in this case anti-semitic, attacks against innocent people based on their heritage, and driven by nothing than anti-semitic motives, commited by anti-semites and promoted by anti-semitic organisations.

[Edelweiss]

Yes, the EU would undoubtly be as imperialist as the US, but I did not make that stand from a purely, ideological, anti-imperialist reason, but from the fact that unilateralism breeds stability (just look at the decades when the British Empire was on it's peak).

Multilateralism, or a power vacuum, is preferable, since it creates instability. And nothing damages markets more than instability in the long run.

With this reasoning you might also support terrorist attacks such as 9/11 or hoping for natural disasters to come because it has a destabilizing effect. I don't think your position is a communist one, since it's a factual pro-imperialist position.

[Revolution Until Victory]

1- Let's just assume they are targeted at "innocent civlians" (which they aren't), this still doesn't make them "anti-semetic".

2-
Don't be an idiot. I'm talking about suicide attacks against innocent people

colonizers are not innocnet civlians

3-
which I don't consider any legitimate act of resistance

it is an act of legitamite resistance

4-
quiet brazen to compare that with the resistance of the ANC for example

you are either ignorant or simply lieing. The attack of the ANC and almost all other anti-colonial resistance are almost identical to that of the Palestinian one. A constant target for the ANC was European colonizers in shopping centers, markets, night clubs, bars, restaurants, etc. The FLN is no difference. They also targeted French colonziers in restaurants and night clubs. According to your logic, those European colonizers were "innocnet civlians". Oh, I guess the ANC were anti-white coz they were targeting those "poor innocent civilians" based on thier heritage!!! and let's see, the attacks of the native americans on European colonizers, were also racist, right? they were targeting "innocent people" based on their heritage? yup!
those were colonizers, and the acts of the resistance against them were justified. Same situation in Palestine. You can't support the acts of the ANC and oppose those of the Palestinian resistance

5-
but indeed racist, and in this case anti-semitic, attacks against innocent people based on their heritage, and driven by nothing than anti-semitic motives, commited by anti-semites and promoted by anti-semitic organisations.

they are not based on "heratige" or "race". They are not being targeted for being jews. The attacks on the ANC on European targets were coz they were colonizers, not white. Same situation in Palestine. It is dirven by anti-colonial motives, same as any other anti-colonial struggle, commited by anti-imperialists (not anti-semetic) and promoted by anti-imperialist orgnizations, not anti-semetic.

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 02:25 pm

Yes, the EU would undoubtly be as imperialist as the US, but I did not make that stand from a purely, ideological, anti-imperialist reason, but from the fact that unilateralism breeds stability (just look at the decades when the British Empire was on it's peak).

Multilateralism, or a power vacuum, is preferable, since it creates instability. And nothing damages markets more than instability in the long run.

With this reasoning you might also support terrorist attacks such as 9/11 or hoping for natural disasters to come because it has a destabilizing effect. I don't think your position is a communist one, since it's a factual pro-imperialist position.
What I hope for is not all-out chaos, but delicate situations where there is no real centre of political or economic power. From that position, there is a foundation to patiently build a counter-society.

[Edelweiss]

they are not based on "heratige" or "race". They are not being targeted for being jews.

You are seriously calling blowing up a school bus a "legitimate act of resistance"?! How are those school kids guilty? Guilty of being born in Israel? Guilty of being a Jew? How can you seriously call those school kids or generally people who are born in Israel in the third or fourth generation "colonizers"?! You must be kidding me. Do you seriously think that this can be a solution for the conflict? You should be ashamed of yourself being in support of cowardly child killers. You are disgusting me.

When I hear video statements by suicide bombers they nearly always hold anti-semitic speeches about blowing up some Jews in the name of fucking Allah. Don't try to fool us here, don't try to hide the fact that organisations like the Hamas have a anti-semitic agenda. If you deny that, this forum is clearly the wrong place, and you should rather move to Jihad.com or some other place promoting fucking political Islam.

Unfortunately much of the anti-Germans criticism of the Left is being proofed right again and again by people like you, RUV. Really sickening.

[Dimentio]

I have a question to Marko, and that is about German culture.

Germany is mostly known today for synth music. Most famous German bands have an electronic trademark.

I am of course thinking of everything from Alphaville to Kraftwerk and Rammstein.

What is the anti-desutsche position on German musical culture contra for example British and American pop culture?

Blutengel ~ Children of the Night (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=388ueg7ee0Q)

Kraftwerk ~ Robots (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXa9tXcMhXQ)

Most distinctively German bands have some sort of vaguely romanticist theme, akin to the largely German anti-rationalist movement of the 19th century.

[Revolution Until Victory]

You are seriously calling blowing up a school bus a "legitimate act of resistance"?! How are those school kids guilty? Guilty of being born in Israel? Guilty of being a Jew? How can you seriously call those school kids or generally people who are born in Israel in the third or fourth generation "colonizers"?! You must be kidding me. Do you seriously think that this can be a solution for the conflict? You should be ashamed of yourself being in support of cowardly child killers.

lol Malte, who the hell do you think I am??? I do NOT think the above acts are legitamite!! So, NO, I do not think blowing up a bus full of school schildren is legitamite. I'm against targeting of children and minors. Children are always innocent, no matter what they do. I would never hold those children accountable for ANYTHING, let alone being colonizers.

the only thing I disagree with you on is this:


people who are born in Israel in the third or fourth generation "colonizers"?!

now please be serious, you don't have to personally have came over from Europe to be a colonzier. The Europeans colonized Algeria for not a short 50 years, but for a 132 years, yet, the French were rightfuly considred colonizers, even though some have been born there, along with even their grandparents, and knew no home but Algeria. The Europeans colonized South Africa for around 500 years (!), yet they were still considred colonziers. Just coz you were born in a stolen house and on a stolen land, doesn't mean you are innocent of the crime of colonization, theft, and occupation. You are when you are still a minor, after that, when you are responsible for your action, your guilty of this crime. There is no difference being the first person to occupy this stolen house, and between being the 3rd or 4rth. It is even rediculis to claim such a thing. All colonziers before who stayed in their colonies much more than the zionists have done in Palestine were treated the same by the anti-colonail resistance.


When I hear video statements by suicide bombers they nearly always hold anti-semitic speeches about blowing up some Jews in the name of fucking Allah.

ok, that's just plain bullshit. There is this famous one that the zionists never stop barking about, but it's laughable to claim "nearly always". The mention of "jews" instead of "zionist colonizers" is for the same reasons the Native Americans at times called thier Eruopean colonizer the "white man", or when the South Africans called thier colonizers "the Whites". I'm sure they didn't mean the "white people" in general, same way as the Palestinians don't mean the Jewish people in general, rather, their opressor and colonizer.


Don't try to fool us here, don't try to hide the fact that organisations like the Hamas have a anti-semitic agenda

Hamas do not have an anti-semetic agenda, and thier leaders have made it more than clear. What came in their charter was explained a thousand times in the closed thread in OI, "Why is the Left Anti-Israel". you can reffer to it. Malte, don't be a colonial apologist. Do you realize you are using the same propaganda used by the European colonizers against the ANC?? they too claimed the ANC was racist and stood for the genocide of the white people!! some things never change, you know!


If you deny that, this forum is clearly the wrong place, and you should rather move to Jihad.com or some other place promoting fucking political Islam.

"Political Islam"?? didn&#39;t you recently accuse me of spreading propaganda for the marxist PFLP instead? so now it&#39;s political Islam? <_<


Unfortunately much of the anti-Germans criticism of the Left is being proofed right again and again by people like you, RUV. Really sickening.

that&#39;s not right.

btw Malte, before bashing political Islam, do realize that the most well know and major attacks on children (the Palestinian resistance had very few attacks against children, the vast majoirty unintentionaly, just as the ANC had a few attacks on schools) were by the Palestinian commies&#33;&#33;&#33; there are two very famous ones by the marxist-leninst DFLP. One at a school bus and another at a school.

[An archist]

Malte, you support Isreal&#39;s right to exist but not Germany&#39;s
Why? is Isreal special in any way or is Germany inferior? Do you support Belgium&#39;s right ot exist? Do you support Qatar&#39;s right to exist? They&#39;re all created by the elite and should all be gotten rid off.

[RevSouth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 04:41 am

1. I think you&#39;re really overstating any divide between the US and Germany. In the 1930s Britain and Germany had different spheres of geopolitical interest and were headed in drastically different ways ideologically. Today Germany and the US had a disagreement over Iraq. Germany is still pretty much wholly committed to the American/NATO vision of global order. They may have disagreed with the precise action but there is practically no difference between them over other vital issues such as free trade or the wider goals in the Middle East. I really don&#39;t foresee any American-German war or even any overt antagonism, so IMO that&#39;s a grossly misstated comparison.
In this case Germany&#39;s policy was anti-American, anti-Israel and based on its own national interests. However, America has even done considerable harm to its own economy and prestige when it has altruistically helped Israel against Saddam and Islamic extremists.

There are still strong anti-Semitic, Fascist elements in Germany and because of the weakness of the Marxist left cultural exports from Hollywood are the only practical way to combat them. Anti-Americanism is a threat to the success of this strategy.
To say that U.S. interests in Israel are &#39;altruistic&#39; is very, very far from the truth. The U.S. supports Israel out of geopolitical interest as much as anything. The idea that the U.S. is supporting Israel purely out of the goodness of it&#39;s little red, white, and blue heart is ridiculous, and sounds like something straight out of Bush&#39;s mouth.



2. If the US started an imperialist war and France and Germany offered opposition that wasn&#39;t anti-imperialist how does that lead to the US being "the lesser evil"? Even if France and Germany are not anti-imperialist, if we want to look at gradations then we could say the US is overtly aggressive/imperialistic while France and Germany represent a more liberal or social democratic restraint. If you are against imperialism then it seems to logically make sense that you would perceive the restrained social democratic route as more progressive as it would prevent the invasion to begin with.
This "imperialist" war succeeded in removing a Fascist, anti-Semitic dictator Saddam Hussein from power. It&#39;s sensible to support liberal democracies against Fascists.

Saddam threatened Israel with German poison gas technology and supported Palestinian suicide terrorists.

The structurally anti-Semitic German state opposed the war and the leftist activists who opposed it ultimately served the state. After the Holocaust advancing German national interests at the expense of Israel qualifies as anti-Semitism.
There is no doubt that Saddam was not a good guy, he was responsible for many crimes, and he was executed, rightly so, for these crimes. But to claim that the war made things better for the average Iraqi is stupid, all evidence points to the contrary. Iraq was at least stable, before the U.S. came and took control.

The idea that Saddam would have fucked around with Israel is stupid. Islamic nations have, for the most part, learned not to fuck with Israel. Even if it wanted to, Iraq was in no position to do so. Saddam was many things, but he wasn&#39;t stupid. To attack Israel would have been suicide, and he didn&#39;t want that. The only shots fired toward Israel were when he knew he was about to be invaded, as a feeble attempt at resistance to imperialist will.

[manic expression]

From my understanding, the anti-Germans are:

a.) Not communist

b.) Not leftist

c.) Weird

People can contradict me if they wish, however.

[BreadBros]

Malte,
I think the distinction is thus: while we may agree or disagree on the tactics suicide bombers employ (there is certainly room to disagree with them due to their targeting of civilians) they are not anti-Semitic because they launch their attacks based on political interests not racial or religious ones. Jews have lived in the Middle East for centuries and prior to the establishment of Israel there was relative peace. When a large wave of settlers arrived in the Levant is when economic and political differences emerged and violence followed. Do you seriously think that an anti-Semitic fervor suddenly emerged, coincidentally at the same time that political/territorial/economic differences manifested themselves? IMO, no, its very foolish to think that.

Certainly propaganda may be employed against the enemy, which in this case may take the form of anti-Semitic spiels, but I do not think that points to the source of the conflict. Think of it this way...during WWII in the US it was very common for patriotic cartoons/newsreels to be shown that portrayed Japanese and German people in a very racist overtly-hateful way in order to rally support and fervor for the war. However, was the cause of the war simple racism? Was the US Army a simple anti-Japanese/anti-German entity? No, there were very real geopolitical reasons why the war happened. The logic of the Japanese Empire and the US empires dictated that their co-existence was near impossible because their interests clashed. A similar situation (albeit not as extreme) exists in Palestine/Israel. And ultimately the US Army was guided by it&#39;s national/economic interests, not any kind of internal "anti-Japanese" logic...just like Hamas is guided by anti-imperialist/nationalist (depending on how you see it) sentiment and not "anti-Semitic" logic, regardless of whatever propaganda both groups use(d).


This "imperialist" war succeeded in removing a Fascist, anti-Semitic dictator Saddam Hussein from power. It&#39;s sensible to support liberal democracies against Fascists.

First off, this is based on a pretty unrealistic viewpoint. While liberal democracies may be more progressive than dictatorships, history demonstrates that imperialist interventions by liberal democracies are guided by economic/geopolitical interests and not ideological ones. In other words, just because a liberal democracy invades or effectively controls another state does not mean it will create a liberal democracy or act in a progressive way, it will act according to profit and political interest/motive. Case in point: the liberal democracy that is the United States (that you uphold as the lesser of imperialist evils) not only put the very fascist dictator you are complaining about (Saddam) into power, but all of the states it sponsors in the region are either extremely undemocratic (Egypt, Pakistan) or extremely unliberal and unprogressive (Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, etc.). It also brings up the question of how we are measuring "progress" or "liberal"-ity. For one thing, under Saddam women had the right to work and education and were not constrained by needing to wear veils or other religious/patriarchal social norms. Since the US has had to broker peace in Iraq following its invasion it has put an increasing number of religious politicians in office and consequently educational/work opportunities for women are drying up and archaic social norms are creeping back.

I see a whole host of inconsistencies in your argument:
1. If you support imperialist war because it intensifies class conflict, why wouldn&#39;t you also support fascist dictatorships instead of progressive liberal democracies, since they also intensify class struggle while liberal democracies tend to be bring complacency.

2. If there is some sort of dichotomy between Israel/US (Liberal democracies) vs. Islamic states/anti-imperialist dictatorships....then why are nearly all of the pro-Israeli states and American-sponsored states in the region fervently religious dictatorships? While several of the states with anti-Israeli viewpoints (Saddam&#39;s Iraq, Syria, PLO) are secular?

3. If you oppose anti-imperialism on the basis that all states (even supposedly anti-imperialist ones) are exploitative or oppressive (which is not a strange notion, somewhat common among Left Communists) then why would you base your foreign policy views on the basis that in effect some states, Israel and the US, are wholly better than others (which is completely inconsistent, and an extremely Orwellian twisted way of supporting your views)?

4. You base your support of the war on the fact that a liberal democracy (the US) was against a dictatorship (Iraq)...yet you ignore the fact that Germany, France and many of the states that opposed the Iraq War are themselves liberal democracies, so I&#39;m not sure what exactly makes the US stand out as distinct here. It seems like you would agree with the war no matter what and are trying to fit the world situation into your preconceived views.


The structurally anti-Semitic German state opposed the war and the leftist activists who opposed it ultimately served the state. After the Holocaust advancing German national interests at the expense of Israel qualifies as anti-Semitism.

No offense, but I think your view is a bit warped. As if there was some kind of dichotomy between Israel and Germany? Yes, Germany opposed the war, so did France, so did several other European countries, so did several Latin American countries, so did China, so did Russia, etc. The number of countries that opposed the war is even bigger than those that supported it. No offense but Germany is powerful/important but pretty far from being THAT important. No one else I have ever met has perceived the Iraqi War as being some sort of split between German and Israeli interests.

Also, how is it Antisemitism because of the Holocaust? You do realize the German state is pretty radically different in shape and content from what it was during the Holocaust? Keep in mind Israel is one of the main trade partners for Europe and thereby Germany.

I honestly think that your political viewpoints consist of thus:
1. Support Israel
2. Hate Germany
3. Twist Marxist-Leninist rhetoric/viewpoint any which way needed to fit that.

[Edelweiss]

I think most of you don&#39;t really understand the anti-German position, and are tending to simplify their views. As much as I oppose them, I have to admit that they are analytically brilliant and superior to most of their "anti-imperialist" counterparts, who are still repeating old, outdated phrases of the last millenium.

Read also my little article of a few years ago about the anti-German phenomenon: http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=21339

I&#39;m gonna reply to some posts tomorrow, I&#39;m too tired now.

[Marko]

If you support imperialist war because it intensifies class conflict, why wouldn&#39;t you also support fascist dictatorships instead of progressive liberal democracies, since they also intensify class struggle while liberal democracies tend to be bring complacency.
Because fascist dictatorships (Nazi Germany, Saddam&#39;s Iraq) are police states which suppress leftist activism so that revolutions become virtually impossible. The Communists were strong in the Weimar Germany but in Nazi Germany in concentration camps.

However, imperialist interventions committed by liberal democracies strenghten the internal socialist opposition to the regime.


2. If there is some sort of dichotomy between Israel/US (Liberal democracies) vs. Islamic states/anti-imperialist dictatorships....then why are nearly all of the pro-Israeli states and American-sponsored states in the region fervently religious dictatorships? While several of the states with anti-Israeli viewpoints (Saddam&#39;s Iraq, Syria, PLO) are secular?
No, the largest pro-American state Saudi Arabia is a secular monarchy despite the traditional anti-Semitic fanaticism of its population but the largest anti-Israel state Iran is a theocracy.


If you oppose anti-imperialism on the basis that all states (even supposedly anti-imperialist ones) are exploitative or oppressive (which is not a strange notion, somewhat common among Left Communists) then why would you base your foreign policy views on the basis that in effect some states, Israel and the US, are wholly better than others (which is completely inconsistent, and an extremely Orwellian twisted way of supporting your views)?
Because the German state is inherently worse than any other states because the essence of Germanity is so twisted that the Germans were capable to the Holocaust.


You base your support of the war on the fact that a liberal democracy (the US) was against a dictatorship (Iraq)...yet you ignore the fact that Germany, France and many of the states that opposed the Iraq War are themselves liberal democracies, so I&#39;m not sure what exactly makes the US stand out as distinct here. It seems like you would agree with the war no matter what and are trying to fit the world situation into your preconceived views.
No, I am supporting a war that is opposed by Nazis. The Baath party and Arab anti-Zionists have strong historical connections to Nazis. Saddam&#39;s regime served the interests of Nazis and the destruction of Israel would serve the interests of Nazis.

See this document for proof: (it is subtitled)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d51poygEXYU

Virtually all Nazis and other racists oppose the war in Iraq. Go to *************** and see it yourself if you don&#39;t believe.



Also, how is it Antisemitism because of the Holocaust?
Because when 6 million innocent Jews have been killed in a genocide it is damn anti-Semitic to say that they don&#39;t have a right a Jewish state.

[Dimentio]

Which bring up the issue of German culture.

I actually do appreciate German culture, because it&#39;s connection to 19th century romanticism (like for example Goethe&#39;s "The agonies of young Werther", the "Neuchswanstein" castle in Bavaria and Wagner). I also appreciate German musical styles, manifested through bands so different as Rammstein, Eisbrecher, Kraftwerk, Blutengel.

I have noticed that the fascination with vampires and werewolwes, but also with robots and other extremes, is connected to the particular German sonderweg. I mean, in what other countries would a band like Blutengel be a possibility?

Germany is actually the single most important country in Europe right now, and I think that if Germany abandons capitalism, Europe will soon follow.

I mean, ich bin Deutsch, at least spiritually. I cannot appreciate British or American culture, but I hold a great deal of love to the continental European culture and then especially German culture (I do love Japanese culture, except manga-anime of course, as well). So by abolishing German culture, I feel personally attacked due to my German-ness.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 12:48 pm
I would actually prefer a German-dominated European Union as a counterwight to the USA.

And if Europe would turn socialist, the natural centre is still the Germany-France-Lombardy axis. Those are the Core nations of Europe. Take it or leave it.
Supporting a capitalist EU over the USA merely amounts to the same old social chauvinism that dominated many "leftists" when WWI broke out. There is no good imperialism or a progressive bourgeoisie; capitalism is no longer capable of developing the productive forces as it did in the past.

A united capitalist Europe, as Lenin correctly put it, would be a "reactionary utopia;" reactionary because it would be agianst the workers if it did happen, and utopian because it can&#39;t happen, as Europe is made of different captialist nations with differing and antagonistic interests.

Anti-German ways are prue nonsense; it seems to be hatred of Germans as a whole. The working class has no nation, obviously, so it is anti-left to take any kind of such stance based on nationality.

The conflict between Israel and Palestine can only be solved on the basis of a socialist federation of the two nations. Israel is heaviliy funded by foreign imperialism and is there to stay. Palestine must abandon the counter-productive tactics of individual terrorism that only serve to strenthen Israeli reaction. The workers of Palsetine and Israel have common interests, and only when they both turn on "their" bourgeoisies will progress be made. Contrary to a common heap of nonsense amongst the left, Israel is also a class society; it is not one reactionary bloc.

The Jews and the people of Palestine lived together millenia ago. The division between them brought about by imperialism (chiefly by British, I think...correct me if I am wrong here.) is not a fixed thing, as proven by the past. The ruling class of Palestine and the ruling class care not one iota for the workers of those nations.


Because the German state is inherently worse than any other states because the essence of Germanity is so twisted that the Germans were capable to the Holocaust.

Yeah, forget about the German bourgeoisie and their small groups of henchmen that actually carried such things out. All of the Germans are responsible, you know. :rolleyes:


This "imperialist" war succeeded in removing a Fascist, anti-Semitic dictator Saddam Hussein from power. It&#39;s sensible to support liberal democracies against Fascists.

And the imperialist war removed this "fascist" and made Iraq infinitely worse than it was under Saddam&#33; Saddam also used to be the US&#39;s little buddy until he stepped on their toes with his own plans for Middle Eastern oil. They just used the gassing of the Kurds and the like as an excuse to get public support for the dirty war in 1992, and the post-9/11 hysteria as an excuse to get public support for the now widely-hated war going on now.

[Edelweiss]

Are you trying to be a smart ass, serpent, or are you joking?&#33; I never heard the term "German sonderweg" in connection with "vampires, werewolfs, robots and other extremes". :lol: Your view on Germany is rather distorted, to say the least...Sorry, but what you say is utterly absurd, and dominated by stereotypes like the stupid, kittchy Neuschwanstein castle, and on top of it your crazy fantasies about Germany being the vanguard to destroy capitalism&#33; You do know shit about German culture, it&#39;s very regionally divert, and most of it sucks. I&#39;m glad for a certain degree of "American cultural imperialism" here, otherwise I would have to simg Polka songs in lederhosen now (to serve your stereotyoical imaginations), instead of listening to some good rock&#39;n&#39;roll music&#33; :lol:

[Dimentio]

I was not talking about German folk culture, which is really more of a tourist attraction. I was talking about the synth and goth scenes of Germany. Of course, synth music exists in most countries today, but Germany is exceptional in that issue.

And yes, I am walking between seriousness and lunacy here. On purpose.

[Edelweiss]

Yeah, forget about the German bourgeoisie and their small groups of henchmen that actually carried such things out. All of the Germans are responsible, you know.
Most Germans either did took part in the holocaust actively or passivly, or did tolerate or did approve it, just like the Nazi dictatorship in general. Without a broad working class support the Nazi dictatorship wouldn&#39;t have been possible. "small group of henchman", what a completely ignorant, foolish and naive view, a distortion and idealisation of history&#33;

[Revolution Until Victory]

If there is some sort of dichotomy between Israel/US (Liberal democracies)

Israel isn&#39;t a liberal democracy. It discrimnates in the law against the arab population


The Baath party and Arab anti-Zionists have strong historical connections to Nazis.

:huh:

oh, I forgot, anti-zionist colonialism = anti-semetic = anti-jewish = racist = nazi = hitler = holocaust, you name it&#33;


Saddam&#39;s regime served the interests of Nazis and the destruction of Israel would serve the interests of Nazis.

:blink:


Because when 6 million innocent Jews have been killed in a genocide it is damn anti-Semitic to say that they don&#39;t have a right a Jewish state.

Marko, do you ever get sick of your bullshit? seriously??
it&#39;s damn anti-semetic to reject colonialism? get it in your thick skull, the oppression of the Jewish people 60 years ago doesn&#39;t justify the opression of the Palestinians today. No one said the Jewish people, or anyone for that matter, don&#39;t deserve a homeland. This is not the issue. The issue is that not the Jewish people, not anyone, no matter how opressed, got the right to colonize others. For example, I support the right for the French people to have a homeland, but damn sure I wouldn&#39;t support this "right" to have it in Algeria&#33;&#33;&#33; I would never "support the right of the French for a homeland" in Algeria, coz then, it wouldn&#39;t be self-determination, rather, colonization. Anyone on the face of earth might get a right to a state, but no one on the face of this earth got the right to establish a "state&#39; on the expense of others, no one got a "right" to colonization.

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 10:27 pm

Yeah, forget about the German bourgeoisie and their small groups of henchmen that actually carried such things out. All of the Germans are responsible, you know.
Most Germans either did took part in the holocaust actively or passivly, or did tolerate or did approve it, just like the Nazi dictatorship in general. Without a broad working class support the Nazi dictatorship wouldn&#39;t have been possible. "small group of henchman", what a completely ignorant, foolish and naive view, a distortion and idealisation of history&#33;
Hitler did actually not need to abolish free elections. If he had gone to election in 1938, he would undoubtly have been reelected again by a sweeping margin.

[Revolution Until Victory]

The conflict between Israel and Palestine can only be solved on the basis of a socialist federation of the two nations.

no this is not the solutoin. I wouldn&#39;t propose a federation between Zimbabwe and Rhodesia to end the conflict, nor would any rational person, let alone a leftist. I repeat it for the last time, when will people get there could be no compromise with colonialism??? compromise with imperialism and colonialism will get you no where. The only solution is the TOTAL end of colonialism = TOTAL justice. One democratic secular state for all of its citezens.


Israel is heaviliy funded by foreign imperialism and is there to stay

couldn&#39;t be any more mistaken. This rediculis statment have been debunked sooo many times in history. The French in Algeria kept saying French Algeria is here to stay, it&#39;s a fact of life, live with it, and the next thing, those colonial scum left Algerian after a long 132 years. Colonialism can&#39;t presist.


Palestine must abandon the counter-productive tactics of individual terrorism

lol, I bet many colonial apologists said such things about the South African ANC, "the ANC must abandon the counter-productive tactics of individual terrorism"
no way for freedom but popular guerilla warfare.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 10:27 pm

Yeah, forget about the German bourgeoisie and their small groups of henchmen that actually carried such things out. All of the Germans are responsible, you know.
Most Germans either did took part in the holocaust actively or passivly, or did tolerate or did approve it, just like the Nazi dictatorship in general. Without a broad working class support the Nazi dictatorship wouldn&#39;t have been possible. "small group of henchman", what a completely ignorant, foolish and naive view, a distortion and idealisation of history&#33;
The support that Fascism got was largely due to the Comintern&#39;s betrayal of the revolution, the Comintern being headed by Stalin. He had created a rift in the anti-fascist movement by branding some of them, particularly Trotskyists, as "social-fascists." Stalin had even remarked that "progress was made against the social-fascists" when Hitler came to power&#33; Hitler himself admitted that his movement could have been easily smashed at one point, but he ended up coming to power "without breaking a pane of glass."

There are crucial points when the leadership can make or break a revolution.

Fascism in Germany had been largely assisted by the problem of leadership of the left.

Many in the US at first had tolerated US imperialism after 9/11, but things have changed. To merely point the finger at the Germans in general is to avoid internationalism. An internationalist approach of the USSR at the time of WWII could have easily cut the ground from underneath Hitler&#39;s feet and perhaps end the war in a matter of months (the Bolsheviks were greatly assisted by internationalism in repelling the foreign armies.). Instead of this, Stalin&#39;s "the only good German is the dead one." line made the Germans fight harder and helped Hitler&#39;s propaganda cause (he had even distributed Stalinist propaganda to German troops.). Could you imagine the German high command doing this during the internationalism of Lenin and Trotsky? Obviously not, for obvious reasons&#33;

The conditions of Germany at the time and the rapid repair of German industry after Stalin&#39;s betrayal had initially gained support for Hitler amongst the masses, particularly the frenzied petty-bourgeoisie (the social basis for fascism.). Rising living standards in reactionary capitalist nations can gain support for reactionary leaders and policies for a time (take the post-war boom for a great example&#33;) Stalinism itself had played a criminal role in this (just like how it greatly assisted Fascism in Spain&#33;), first by the betrayal of a merciless fight against fascism, which could have crushed Hitler, and secondly by the Stalinist nationalist line repelling Germans instead of using internationalism to win them over.

[Dimentio]

Axel, now you are a GOG-henchman ;)

[Axel1917]

no this is not the solutoin. I wouldn&#39;t propose a federation between Zimbabwe and Rhodesia to end the conflict, nor would any rational person, let alone a leftist. I repeat it for the last time, when will people get there could be no compromise with colonialism??? compromise with imperialism and colonialism will get you no where. The only solution is the TOTAL end of colonialism = TOTAL justice. One democratic secular state for all of its citezens.

You need to make note of how I said socialist federation. Only when the bourgeois parasites are swept clean in both nations can any kind of peace happen, and socialism would spread internatioanlly and undermine colonialism everywhere. Only socialism can end colonialism, as only socialism can bring down the imperialism of the USA.


couldn&#39;t be any more mistaken. This rediculis statment have been debunked sooo many times in history. The French in Algeria kept saying French Algeria is here to stay, it&#39;s a fact of life, live with it, and the next thing, those colonial scum left Algerian after a long 132 years. Colonialism can&#39;t presist.

How are you going to overthow Israel if your individual terrorism repels the Israelis? At the very most, you could only drive them out of Palsetine, but not take Israel itself.


i bet many colonial apologists said such things about the South African ANC, "the ANC must abandon the counter-productive tactics of individual terrorism"
no way for freedom but popular guerilla warfare.

And what has this individual terrorism accomplished after all of these decades? Piles of dead bodies and providing fuel for the Zionist hawks in Israel? Only the working class of Palestine and Israel can end the problems by putting an end to the bourgeoisie of both nations, while having a socialist federation respecting rights to self-determination. To end colonialism, you need to pull out the capitalist root.

[Edelweiss]

Axel, your paraphrasing of Trot propaganda has nothing to do with my prior statement on the Nazi dictatorship and the holocaust being supported by a majority of Germans. But I guess after all, it was Stalin who was responsible for the holocaust, and not Hitler and it&#39;s willing German executioners&#33;

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 10:48 pm
Axel, your paraphrasing of Trot propaganda has nothing to do with my prior statement on the Nazi dictatorship and the holocaust being supported by a majority of Germans. But I guess after all, it was Stalin who was responsible for the holocaust, and not Hitler and it&#39;s willing German executioners&#33;
I tried to clarify this in my last post; correcting and stating that the majority German support for Hitler had been a result of the Stalinist betrayal of the revolution and rising living standards, and further support for Hitler was provided by Stalin&#39;s nationalism.

Many people are duped into supporting capitalism as well, in addition to many that were supporting Hitler. This line of yours does not make much sense; it is almost like the MIM line being applied to "AmeriKKKan" workers today to German workers back then. Had the USSR been at least relatively healthy with an internationalist line, the conditions of a world war could have very quickly turned the Germans against Hitler. Yes, there was majority support for Hitler, but we should ask what casued this support and what could have undermined it?

[Marko]

I am sure Stalin had no idea in 1933 that Hitler would be crazy enough to start the Holocaust. He probably hoped that Hitler would cause a war between the capitalist powers. His prediction was correct.

It was reasonable to estimate that after the capitalist armies and economies had been destroyed by the long wars it would be an easy task for the Red Army to liberate Europe.

[Edelweiss]

don&#39;t you see Axel, for RUV the only viable solution for the conflict is to drive the fucking Jews in the sea&#33;

RUV, you make me sick. But go ahead, put on your bomb belt, and try to blow up some Jews because these criminals dare to not move out of the country where they grew up after they turn 18, like all your anti-semtic buddies tried before. The only thing I&#39;m hoping desperately is that you are one of the idiots who is even too stupid for that, and who is bombing himself to death on the way to your cowardly, mass murder, ideally together with some of your Jihad buddies.

[Revolution Until Victory]

How are you going to overthow Israel if your individual terrorism repels the Israelis? At the very most, you could only drive them out of Palsetine, but not take Israel itself.

it have been proven that popular guerilla warfare would eventually bring down colonialism. It have been proved before in history, and a good example would be South Africa.



And what has this individual terrorism accomplished after all of these decades? Piles of dead bodies and providing fuel for the Zionist hawks in Israel?

Again, anyone can use this argument to condemn the ANC claiming "what had this individual terrorism accomplished after all of these decades? piles of dead bodies".
Besides, the Palestinian modern armed revolution was started in 1965 until 1982 when it was hybernated due to the lack of military and commando bases, and was then re-launched in 2000. I wouldn&#39;t call that a long time period.

[Revolution Until Victory]

don&#39;t you see Axel, for RUV the only viable solution for the conflict is to drive the fucking Jews in the sea&#33;

haahaaaa :lol: :lol:

I&#39;m not gonna even bother to argue with such crap


RUV, you make me sick. But go ahead, put on your bomb belt, and try to blow up some Jews because these criminals dare to not move out of the country where they grew up after they turn 18

"blow up some Jews"??
for the last time, those people are being targeted NOT coz of thier race or relegion, but coz of thier actions, coz they are colonizers. And I&#39;m sorry, colonizers have faced this similar fate in almost all other colonial experiences.


like all your anti-semtic buddies tried before

getting more pathetic by the time.

ok Malte, now I know why you didn&#39;t want to publish my PFLP newswire, you are a colonial apologist, and throwing out the words "anti-semetic" and "Jihadi" wouldn&#39;t change this fact.

[BreadBros]

Because fascist dictatorships (Nazi Germany, Saddam&#39;s Iraq) are police states which suppress leftist activism so that revolutions become virtually impossible. The Communists were strong in the Weimar Germany but in Nazi Germany in concentration camps.

However, imperialist interventions committed by liberal democracies strenghten the internal socialist opposition to the regime.


Well, first of all, Communists were strong in the Weimar republic because it was a tenuous government, established to attempt to smooth over the contradictions/tensions present in German society at that point. For that reason both the Left and Right were very strong and the collapse of the government was inescapable. This was because of it&#39;s historical situation, not the structure of the government. The same is far from true for nearly every subsequent liberal democracy, including modern-day Germany and including the modern-day US.

As for your thesis, there are multiple examples to the contrary. Class struggle reached a peak in Chile when a fascist dictatorship (Pinochet) was established. Subsequently, when the US intervened and helped fuel the Dirty War (an imperialist intervention) the internal socialist opposition was systematically destroyed with vast parts of the left being killed.

However, my point is not that you&#39;re viewpoint is diametrically wrong, but that its wrong because it assumes that either a dictatorship or imperialist intervention alone will have have a singular causative effect on class struggle. The reality is far too complex to boil it down so simply, as evidenced by history.


No, the largest pro-American state Saudi Arabia is a secular monarchy despite the traditional anti-Semitic fanaticism of its population but the largest anti-Israel state Iran is a theocracy.


Sorry, but I have to assume that you are trolling me here. How is Saudi Arabia in any way secular? Saudi Arabia is one of the main sponsors of Mosque and Quaranic school building around the world. Ulema (religious scholars) form part of the advising corps for the King. The Saudi King must act within the limits of Islamic Sharia law. You are operating under an extremely bizarre definiton of "secular" is this state qualifies yet Iraq was an Islamic state.

And yes, Iran is a theocracy. That still does not address the fact that the primary opposition to Israel historically has not come from Iran but from the PLO (Fatah/PFLP) a secular left-wing organization, Syria a once-Soviet sponsored secular dictatorship and secular Arab nationalists in the past. The rise of Islamic resistance to Israel came about in great part due to the destruction of the secular resistance by Israel, leaving a vacuum. Nor did you explain how the supposedly altruistic and benevolent US somehow sponsors an entire legion of undemocratic/reactionary states. This isn&#39;t a minor point, it seems to fly in the face of your entire theory/basis of thought.



Because the German state is inherently worse than any other states because the essence of Germanity is so twisted that the Germans were capable to the Holocaust.

And the country that you support (the US) would not exist without an even larger genocide: the extermination of the native Americans. So under your logic the American people are also twisted?

The reality is that I think you have a highly unrealistic view of the Holocaust. Have you ever actually studied the topic in-depthly? Read about it? If not, I highly suggest Raul Hilberg&#39;s The Destruction of the European Jews or anything by Hannah Arendt. There is nothing special about Germans or "Germanity"...under the right conditions any population group is capable of such heinous things. Seriously, for being an "anti-German" you sure seem to give a lot of credit and value to Germany and German culture. You are aware that the Holocaust is not a singular event but that genocide and mass murder has a recurring role in modern society right?


No, I am supporting a war that is opposed by Nazis. The Baath party and Arab anti-Zionists have strong historical connections to Nazis. Saddam&#39;s regime served the interests of Nazis and the destruction of Israel would serve the interests of Nazis.

See this document for proof: (it is subtitled)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d51poygEXYU

Virtually all Nazis and other racists oppose the war in Iraq. Go to *************** and see it yourself if you don&#39;t believe.


1. The Baath Party was created in 1947 and came to power in 1963. Any connection to the Nazis exists solely in your distorted view of history.

2. What you are likely thinking of are various Middle Eastern leaders who supported Germany during WWII. Except all of these leaders a. had very little significance and b. supported Germany on the basis of it&#39;s opposition to Britain which ruled the region and not on it&#39;s racial policies. Similarly, there were also several mid-century Jewish leaders who supported the Nazis out of the twisted belief that the more anti-Semitic hate in Germany, the more support for a distinct Zionist homeland would emerge. It is in fact quite similar to the same twisted shit you are peddling about imperialism being good because it makes conditions worse for the proletariat and thus encourages revolt.

3. If you are concerned with opposing Nazis and Nazi-connected groups, then your adulation for the US is a bit bizarre concerning the entire post-WWII American military structure was heavily indebted to the importation of Nazi scientists, many of whom had helped construct the Nazi military-industrial complex. Once again proving that the US was guided by it&#39;s geopolitical interests (opposing it&#39;s primary rival, first Germany then the USSR) rather than any ideological foundation as you claim.

4. Nazis also oppose gun control, certain elements of the State and occasionally certain elements of capitalism. These are things that we might share in common with them. Does that mean all of the Left is Nazi or that these issues are somehow defined as being Nazi? No. These are all common criticisms of industrial society and they emerge out of completely different basis. Yes, various people on Scumfront oppose the war. They do so out of a White nationalists and American-protectionist basis. We oppose it on an anti-imperialist basis, completely different and with different ramifications. Trying to peg these as Nazi based on similarity is, quite honestly, ridiculous and child-like. By that logic all vegetarians are Nazis because Hitler was. Please&#33; Not to mention that just like the anti-German phenomenon seems to be specific to Germany, I also highly suspect that the Nazis-in-support-of-Palestine phenomenon is also distinctly German. I have heard of a few White supremacists who support Bin Ladin or terrorism on the basis of attacking the US government, but I have never encountered any who support Palestinian nationalism or the Arab people. You are likely to find just as much anti-Muslim hate on Scumfront as you are anti-Semitic hate.


Because when 6 million innocent Jews have been killed in a genocide it is damn anti-Semitic to say that they don&#39;t have a right a Jewish state.

First of all, Zionism existed before the Holocaust as did mass migration to the Levant. Secondly, its not anti-Semitic at all. What you are trying to do is moralistically justify one injustice on the basis of another, despite the fact that the causal relationship isn&#39;t even 100%. What the Holocaust mandated was that global order change to prevent fascism and genocide, in other words, prevent a recurrence of what had just happened. It does not in any way lead to the conclusion that kicking out millions of people from their land, taking it over, and then systematically preventing the formation of an autonomous government by those people all the while using brutal militaristic tactics against them.

[Dimentio]

I will start an anti-luxemburgian front soon. :D

[Genosse Kotze]

Originally posted by Marko+July 30, 2007 12:47 pm--> (Marko &#064; July 30, 2007 12:47 pm)
Dick [email protected] 30, 2007 12:21 pm
So the war in Iraq is going to bring a socialist revolution? Okay.

Anyway, there is a fact that the Antideutsche (and you, supposedly a "Marxist-Leninist" :rolleyes: ) fail to understand: a nation which oppresses another nation cannot be free itself. In other words, socialism can not be brought about in America while US troops are enforcing the brutal exploitation of Iraq. Likewise, this occupation will not bring socialism in Iraq, either. Israel is also not "free" as long as Palestine isn&#39;t.

What basically makes the Antideutsche position so dubious is that they seem to have taken the "stage theory" to the extreme: not only must capitalism first fully develop, according to them, leftists should also support the increasing grip that imperialism holds over the world, while denouncing any kind of national liberation. That, somehow, will lead to socialism. :wacko:
Without World War I October Revolution would not have happened. Imperialist wars can increase the probability of revolution.

The war has weakened capitalist authorities both in America and in Iraq.

All capitalist forms of government are intrinsically oppressive. Anti-imperialist and "Social Democrat" forms of capitalism are even more dangerous because in softer forms of capitalism the life of the working class is more bearable. This reduces the will of the Proletariat to revolution.

To a certain point, "worse" is actually better. [/b]
AHHHH&#33;&#33;&#33; How come so many people are going in for this ironically stupid line, where they make it seem that, as Communists, Anarchists, etc., it&#39;s our duty to make people&#39;s lives so servile and miserable that we have to support imperialist wars, and cheer the opening of every new sweatshop in the hopes that it will hasten revolution. Fighting against Capitalism isn&#39;t like recovering from drug addiction in that the whole world doesn&#39;t have to hit "rock bottom" before progress can be made. Yes, many social welfare concessions the pigs have made did, in fact, serve to divert people from overthrowing the current order, but even though these gestures aren&#39;t much, I&#39;m not viewing the current erosion of these programs with glee, like some people are, because, as trivial as they are, they do manage to help people, at least marginally.

Here we&#39;ll often condemn fellow revolutionaries who fall into choosing the "lesser of two evils" candidates in elections, but it&#39;s incredible that there are an equal amount of people on the Left who, out and out, support the "greater of two evils" fuck wad. It astounded me how many, normally, revolutionary minded people I know actually voted for Bush in 2004, in the hopes that he would fuck the world up so bad that there would have to be a revolution.

And I&#39;m sure you must have spoken to at least one person here who is eagerly awaiting the news that America has begun bombing Iran&#33; The logic goes that, when that occurs, the US will re-institute the draft and then Americans will finally wake up and oppose what their govt is up to. So, these people want to pay America&#39;s way out of apathy in Iranian blood&#33; How nice of them&#33;

Are these people so concerned about colon cancer that they have to shove their heads so far up their own asses where they could conduct a real thorough screening for polyps?&#33;?&#33; I mean, God damn it&#33;

[peaccenicked]

I cant see how pointing out that Anti-semitism is deeply entrenched in German society unless the statement is false. It appears that it might be the case http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...26/ixworld.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/26/wfilm26.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/26/ixworld.html) that anti-semitism is a big part of German society, but the again is there artistic licence in exageration of torture. How far can torture be exagerated. http://www.stoptorture.org.il/eng/press.as...menu=1&item=291 (http://www.stoptorture.org.il/eng/press.asp?menu=6&submenu=1&item=291)

I am not anti-Isreali, nor anti American, I am anti imperialism, that means I am for equality between nations, so long as nations exist, and I daresay they may exist long into a socialist transformation but not in a bourgeios sense(To use Marx&#39;s terminology)

In the struggle against imperialism, we may have allies who are reactionary but as long as they are doing more damage to imperialism than to us, they are own our side, if they are doing more damage to us (the anti-imperialists)than the imperialists then the rectionaries have chosen the side of the imperialists. This is the only criterion anti-imperialists can use. Ideology is a luxury in war.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 10:58 pm
don&#39;t you see Axel, for RUV the only viable solution for the conflict is to drive the fucking Jews in the sea&#33;

RUV, you make me sick. But go ahead, put on your bomb belt, and try to blow up some Jews because these criminals dare to not move out of the country where they grew up after they turn 18, like all your anti-semtic buddies tried before. The only thing I&#39;m hoping desperately is that you are one of the idiots who is even too stupid for that, and who is bombing himself to death on the way to your cowardly, mass murder, ideally together with some of your Jihad buddies.
This is the conclusion that I seem to be drawing.

The Apartheid regime was also brought down by a mass movement of oppressed blacks, not by individual terroristic attacks.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

@ Malte


RUV, you make me sick. But go ahead, put on your bomb belt, and try to blow up some Jews because these criminals dare to not move out of the country where they grew up after they turn 18, like all your anti-semtic buddies tried before. The only thing I&#39;m hoping desperately is that you are one of the idiots who is even too stupid for that, and who is bombing himself to death on the way to your cowardly, mass murder, ideally together with some of your Jihad buddies.

Pathetic, Malte, just pathetic. I didn&#39;t expect this sort of thing from you.

RUV is with the PFLP. They aren&#39;t "jihadis" by any stretch of imagination.

In any case, for you to refer to ANY member of the Palestinian resistance as a "jihadi" or "coward" or "mass-murderer" is totally reactionary.

I have an idea for you. Since you sympathize with these "anti-Germans" so much, and so does that reactionary troll Marko, why don&#39;t you guys support a Jewish state in Germany or Austria?

I&#39;d really like to see you come up with enough guts to call for a Jewish state in Westphalia or Bavaria or some place in Germany.

Anti-German? My ass. This is just a pathetic excuse to further the Zionist cause.

Why not start an armed group of anti-German "leftists" and drive all the Germans out of Munich and then hand it over to the Jews?

It&#39;s really easy to pretend to be "anti-German", while all the time, its the Palestinian Arabs living thousands of miles away who pay the price.

And NO, the Holocaust does not automatically entitle the Jewish people to punish the Palestinian Arabs for a German crime.

[Marko]

I have an idea for you. Since you sympathize with these "anti-Germans" so much, and so does that reactionary troll Marko, why don&#39;t you guys support a Jewish state in Germany or Austria?

I&#39;d really like to see you come up with enough guts to call for a Jewish state in Westphalia or Bavaria or some place in Germany.
Was it not progress that an independent state replaced a British colony in Palestine?
The founding of Israel was an anti-imperialist event. It also helped the Israeli Arabs progress from a feudal system to a capitalist system. Israel hardly exploits the Palestinians economically so the state of Israel can hardly be called imperialist.

And what makes you think I would oppose the establishment of a Jewish state in Germany provided that it was in the wishes of the Jews? Such an experiment would just end in failure like Stalin&#39;s experiment Birobidzan, though.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 11:38 am

I have an idea for you. Since you sympathize with these "anti-Germans" so much, and so does that reactionary troll Marko, why don&#39;t you guys support a Jewish state in Germany or Austria?

I&#39;d really like to see you come up with enough guts to call for a Jewish state in Westphalia or Bavaria or some place in Germany.
Was it not progress that an independent state replaced a British colony in Palestine?
The founding of Israel was an anti-imperialist event. It also helped the Israeli Arabs progress from a feudal system to a capitalist system. Israel hardly exploits the Palestinians economically so the state of Israel can hardly be called imperialist.

Do you mean to say that British imperialism being replaced by a Jewish apartheid-state is somehow progress?

Did you just arrive here from Topsy-Turvy-Land?

And no, the Arab Israelis have not been "liberated" from feudalism. They are only a SMALL percentage of the Palestinian Arabs. The majority of Arabs were driven from modern-day Israel and now live in neighboring Arab countries, or the bantustans of Gaza and the West Bank.

Go read up on what a bantustan was in South Africa.

Furthermore, the "Israeli" Arabs that you speak of are also discriminated against:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3429070,00.html



And what makes you think I would oppose the establishment of a Jewish state in Germany provided that it was in the wishes of the Jews? Such an experiment would just end in failure like Stalin&#39;s experiment Birobidzan, though.

Are you some sort of global real-estate agent?&#33;

Can you just walk up to a populated territory and offer it to the persecuted Jews escaping the Holocaust, and support the ethnic cleansing of the native population so as to provide a Jewish-majority state?

[Edelweiss]

RUV is with the PFLP. They aren&#39;t "jihadis" by any stretch of imagination.

His defense of Hamas was enough for me to call him that, admittedly that was a bit polemic, but nevertheless justified.



In any case, for you to refer to ANY member of the Palestinian resistance as a "jihadi" or "coward" or "mass-murderer" is totally reactionary.

Oh, really, how so? it&#39;s reactionary now to oppose suicide bombings and political Islam?&#33; I guess it&#39;s really just the other way round&#33; How is a suicide bombing not being cowardly? Would you deny that the current Palestinian resistance is being dominated by reactionary powers promoting political Islam? Fuck the Palestinian armed resistance, and fuck the the Israeli apartheid regime (as self-contradictory this may sound for you...)


I have an idea for you. Since you sympathize with these "anti-Germans" so much, and so does that reactionary troll Marko, why don&#39;t you guys support a Jewish state in Germany or Austria?

First, I don&#39;t sympathize with the anti-germans at all, as I have made very clear in this thread. It just happens that I don&#39;t share the leftist mainstream "anti-zionist" position, but do acknowledge the right of Israel to exist as a result of the holocaust. Opposing cowardly suicide bombers and not being a cheerleader of the current Palestinian resistance, doesn&#39;t make me a anti-German.

Second, actually I did just what you demand earlier in this thread:


Originally posted by "me"
I certainly wouldn&#39;t have mind if "the zionists" would have stolen German land, but since I do give a shit about the national construct of Germany, I certainly don&#39;t give a shit whoever "steals" it. Germany puke off&#33;

I would gratefully give German lands to "zionists" or to share it with them, I woudln&#39;t have a problem to move out of my home for that. But I guess most "zionists" doesn&#39;t want to love in the land of their former oppressors, so that never was an option, unfortunately.

[Andy Bowden]

The holocaust happened because the German "essence" is evil? This is the flip side of fascism, a belief that a specific national/ethnic group are fundamentally evil. It takes no account of even the most basic ABC&#39;s of Marxism.

Its as false as it was for the Jews as it is for Germans - after all, if Germans are unaviodably evil, why not just kill them all? Or at the very least wipe the German nation off the map.

And also, why was the German "essence" so bad? Because of the number of people they killed? You better add the American crimes against the Native Indians, Indonesian crimes against East Timor as other fundamentally "evil essences" as well then.

Its true to say that a lot of the Left has gone blindly into supporting anyone who&#39;se against America, which has placed them with odd bedfellows to say the least. But to side with Imperialism in the belief it will bring "democracy" and oppose the basic rights of self determination of the Palestinians is just as fundamental a betrayal of cardinal socialist principles as the antideutsche claim others on the left have done.

[Edelweiss]

Or at the very least wipe the German nation off the map.

good idea indeed&#33;

As we say here: Deutschland von der Karte streichen - Polen muss bis Frankreich reichen&#33; (Wipe Germany off the map - Poland has to reach til France&#33;) ;)

[Revolution Until Victory]

This is the conclusion that I seem to be drawing.

oh really Axel? you believe I want to "drive the fucking jews to the sea"??


The Apartheid regime was also brought down by a mass movement of oppressed blacks, not by individual terroristic attacks.

the Apartheid Setter-colony was brought down by many factors, the MOST MAJOR ONE, was guerilla warfare. mass movment can&#39;t bring down, alone, a settler-colony, at least in the case of South Africa and Palestine. It can, through civil disobedience, in the case of British colonized India, or Jim Crow US, but not in the case of Palestine or South Africa. The Palestinians have been imploying many tactics, including civil disobedience, especially during the first popular uprising. But throwing a bunch of rocks and empty bottles wouldn&#39;t alone bring down the Zionist settler-colony.


Was it not progress that an independent state replaced a British colony in Palestine?

it was a colony replacing the other.


The founding of Israel was an anti-imperialist event

Marko, no one takes lunatics like you seriously anymore, but the founding of Israel was as anti-imperilaist, as the founding of Rhodesia. It was established by the British colonizers as an outpost of "civilization" and furthering thier imperialist goals. Nothing is more imperialist than the founding of Israel.


His defense of Hamas was enough for me to call him that, admittedly that was a bit polemic, but nevertheless justified.

no it wasn&#39;t justified. All colonial apologists like yourself would demonize the anti-colonial resistance as "racist". The Europeans in South Africa accused the ANC of being anti-white, and today, the Zionist colonizers accuse the Palestinian resistance of being anti-Jewish. I defended Hamas from the right-wing, colonial line you were using.


Oh, really, how so? it&#39;s reactionary now to oppose suicide bombings and political Islam?&#33;

1. How the hell were YOU opposing "political Islam" and how the hell was I promoting it??

2. stop this obsession with "sucidie bombing". The only difference with suicide bombing and any other attack is that the attacker would die in the operation. that&#39;s the only difference. So I don&#39;t see how can you call the operations of the Palestinian revolution "reactionary" yet won&#39;t call the operations of, say, the ANC or the Algerian FLN thus. They had the exact same targets. do you get this? the only difference, is they didn&#39;t use "sucide bombing", in other words, they would plan the bomb and run away, not wait with it. But somehow, this major difference for you would classify the Palestinian resistance as "cowardly" but not the South African or the Algerian.


How is a suicide bombing not being cowardly

"suicide bombing" is the uttter opposite of cowardly. FYI, the first faction of the Palestinian revolution to do a "suicide bombing" was the marxist-leninist PFLP-GC during the late 70&#39;s. were they Jihadies too??


Would you deny that the current Palestinian resistance is being dominated by reactionary powers promoting political Islam

1. what does that got to do with anything?

2. After the fall of the USSR, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad emereged. They started strenghning thier position in the 90&#39;s. However, until now, the seculr "moderate leftists" al Fatah are the most major side, followed by Hamas, and then by the communist PFLP. Hamas got a strong position in the movment coz it&#39;s extrememly anti-imperialist and active. That&#39;s the only reason.


but do acknowledge the right of Israel to exist as a result of the holocaust.

I have already explained what this means, and it would calssify you as nothing short of a colonial apologist, oh, a "radical leftist" colonial apologist :rolleyes:


I would gratefully give German lands to "zionists"

why do you put zionists between quotes??? do you happen to be one of those stupid pro-imperialists that think the word "zionist" is an insult (well, it is, for any rational person, let alone a leftist)? Zionists is what they call themselves and they are proud of it. It is not an insult invented by the anti-zionists or something. that&#39;s what they call themselves and they love it. No need to put it between quotes. But if I wasn&#39;t mistaken, I believe that the world "zion" in Hebrew means dick...
But it&#39;s not my problem if the colonial racist ideology you support literaly means dick&#33;?

[Spirit of Spartacus]

RUV has said what I would have wanted to.

We need to think as Marxists, i.e. materialists, and not like liberals.

The idea that there is some special German "essence" which caused the Holocaust is utterly ridiculous.

Is there a similar evil American "essence", which caused the mass-murder of Native Americans?
Is there a similar evil Spanish "essence" which caused the genocidal crimes of the colonialists in South America?
Is there an "evil essence" to the Pakistani nation, because its military carried out a mass-murdering campaign in Bangladesh?

Then there is an evil essence in everything we don&#39;t like.

Back to materialism for heaven&#39;s sake.

[Edelweiss]

oh really Axel? you believe I want to "drive the fucking jews to the sea"??


well, that&#39;s a logical conclusion of your comments. It doesn&#39;t seem a two state solution seems to be an option for you, nor a socialist Jewish-Arab workers state. Your perfect example of how this conflict should be solved was the algerian one, to quote you:


Originally posted by "RUV"
The French in Algeria kept saying French Algeria is here to stay, it&#39;s a fact of life, live with it, and the next thing, those colonial scum left Algerian after a long 132 years. Colonialism can&#39;t presist.

So what&#39;s the conclusion of this looking at the Israeli-Pleastinian conflict? That the "Jewish scum" leaves after a long 60 years? The result of this would indeed be another anti-Jewish expulsion out of Israel, as I&#39;m sure people who was born there, grew up there, have all their social environment there would object, no matter how many civilians you and your buddies are gonna blow up. Your comparison with South-Africa and Algeria is historically and morally false anyway. The situation is completely different, the Jewish zionists where seeking for a homeland, a state which in our fucked up world order guarantees a certain degree of security, something which they "earned" after two millenniums of anti-Jewish expulsion, progroms and genocide which culminated into the holocaust. After the holocaust no serious person could deny the need for a Jewish state in a land which is in no way arbitrarily colonized, but with a long, Jewish cultural history, even to some extent on the cost of the Palestinians, but of course not to the degree of repression we have now.


stop this obsession with "sucidie bombing". The only difference with suicide bombing and any other attack is that the attacker would die in the operation. that&#39;s the only difference. So I don&#39;t see how can you call the operations of the Palestinian revolution "reactionary" yet won&#39;t call the operations of, say, the ANC or the Algerian FLN thus. They had the exact same targets. do you get this? the only difference, is they didn&#39;t use "sucide bombing", in other words, they would plan the bomb and run away, not wait with it. But somehow, this major difference for you would classify the Palestinian resistance as "cowardly" but not the South African or the Algerian.


suicide bombing" is the uttter opposite of cowardly. FYI, the first faction of the Palestinian revolution to do a "suicide bombing" was the marxist-leninist PFLP-GC during the late 70&#39;s. were they Jihadies too??


if you repeat your bullshit comparison over and over again, it doesn&#39;t make it any more right. Yes, I do oppose attacks on civilians, no matter by whom, including the ANC. Tell me, how is blowing a defenceless, unarmed person, often even children (BTW: your statement that children often getting killed in suicide attacks "unintentionally" puts you on the same moral level as George Bush when he speaks about "unfortunate collateral damage" when bombing another village), not being cowardly, no matter if the attacker dies as well, or if it&#39;s done in the name of Allah or "anti-imperialism"? For me a suicide attack on civilians is a text book definition of cowardly. Once again, tell me, what is the crime of those "colonizers"? Being born at the wrong place, and dare not to leave Israel, the land where they have been born, their home, when they turn 18 (as you gratefully oppose attacks on minors...)?&#33; Don&#39;t you see how utterly morally wrong that is? Maybe in your distorted world view blowing up a disco is "guerilla warfare", but in reality it&#39;s a shameless, cowardly attack on innocents. And no matter how often you deny it, no matter how often you lie to yourself about it to give those attacks some moral justification, the only criteria of those attacks is the heritage of the innocent victims. You simple seeing them as "colonizers who deserve to die", or what ever sick position you have on this, is morally fucked up, and a cynical simplification of the situation.

Oh, about your ANC/south-Africa comparison: If I&#39;m not mistaken, the struggle of the ANC ended in the end of apartheid, but not with the expuslions of white citizens in South Africa, who, rightfully or not, lived their for many generations. Your goal seems to be to drive out all "colonizers" (=Jews) out of their "colony", this is something different.

[Revolution Until Victory]

well, that&#39;s a logical conclusion of your comments. It doesn&#39;t seem a two state solution seems to be an option for you, nor a socialist Jewish-Arab workers state.

no that&#39;s not. I can&#39;t reject the "2 state solution" coz it doesn&#39;t exist in the first place. I wouldn&#39;t support the Bantustans solution (aka 2 state solution) in South Africa, so I wouldn&#39;t suport it in Palestine. I do suport a socialist, secular, democratic, workers, one state for Arabs and jews, I just thought axel meant 2 federations in Palestine, which I would defenatly reject.


Your perfect example of how this conflict should be solved was the algerian one, to quote you:

another false conclusion. I brought up Algeria to show how former colonizers kept saying they are "here to stay" and the next thing we know is that colonialism was eradicted.


So what&#39;s the conclusion of this looking at the Israeli-Pleastinian conflict? That the "Jewish scum" leaves after a long 60 years?

I didn&#39;t say nor imply such a thing. I made more than clear: a secular democratic state for all of its citezens.


Your comparison with South-Africa and Algeria is historically and morally false anyway. The situation is completely different

no it isn&#39;t. It might be for colonial apologists like yourself though.


the Jewish zionists where seeking for a homeland, a state which in our fucked up world order guarantees a certain degree of security, something which they "earned" after two millenniums of anti-Jewish expulsion, progroms and genocide which culminated into the holocaust

that&#39;s utter bullshit. It doesn&#39;t matter if you were "seeking refuge" coz you were opressed, or if if you came for a total different reason. For your information, the zionists are not the only colonizers who came escaping relegious persecution and looking for a homeland. It happned in South Africa, for example, when some calvanists escaped persecution in Europe to colonize South Africa. Again, the opression a people faced doesn&#39;t justify thier colonization of others. They are still colonizers.


After the holocaust no serious person could deny the need for a Jewish state

that&#39;s a different issue. anyone can have a legitamte state, but no one got the right to colonize the other, no matter how previously opressed


a land which is in no way arbitrarily colonized, but with a long, Jewish cultural history

again, a typical imperialist excuse. It doesn&#39;t matter what their holy book says about it, nor the fact that they once were there 2000 years ago (and plz don&#39;t repeat the myth of "continual prence" since at the very begning of the zionist colonial project there was less than 3% jewish population...). Accocrding to this logic, the Palestinians can claim they are opressed and have been facing genocide, they need a homeland, so they can go now to Spain, and they defenatly won&#39;t be colonizing it, since they have a "long cultural history"&#33;


even to some extent on the cost of the Palestinians

no that&#39;s not accepatble. Again, I can use this same excuse to justify any other colonial experience, saying it&#39;s only "to some extent on the cost of the native".



if you repeat your bullshit comparison over and over again, it doesn&#39;t make it any more right

1. My comparison isn&#39;t "bullshit"

2. It is right and I have explained it



Yes, I do oppose attacks on civilians, no matter by whom, including the ANC.

you sould have said this from the beging. I have been posting my posts based on the fact you support the attacks of the ANC for example, something which I believed you were implying. Ok now, if you don&#39;t support the attacks of the ANC then it&#39;s natural for you to oppose the attacks of the Palestinian revolution, and almost all other attack of almost all other anti-colonial resistance. I just thought you were contradicting yourself.


BTW: your statement that children often getting killed in suicide attacks "unintentionally" puts you on the same moral level as George Bush when he speaks about "unfortunate collateral damage" when bombing another village

No it&#39;s not. I&#39;m simply saying that I do not agree with harming children, and if it happned, mostly it&#39;s unintended.


Tell me, how is blowing a defenceless, unarmed person, often even children (BTW: your statement that children often getting killed in suicide attacks "unintentionally" puts you on the same moral level as George Bush when he speaks about "unfortunate collateral damage" when bombing another village), not being cowardly, no matter if the attacker dies as well, or if it&#39;s done in the name of Allah or "anti-imperialism"?

coz those are not attacks on innocent civlians, rather colonizers, occupiers, land thieves. They live on stolen homes and lands = theives denying the right of return to thier oweners. They are not innocnet. Colonized people consider any colonizer who lives on their home or land and deny them the right to return to be thier enemy. This is the way colonizers were treated by the resistance in almost all other colonial experiences. I defenatly supported the attacks of the Native Americans agianst the European colonizers, even if unarmed. Again, it&#39;s one thing to be an innocent civilian, and a total different thing to be a colonizer and theife. That&#39;s the first time I realize theives are innocnet...


Once again, tell me, what is the crime of those "colonizers"? Being born at the wrong place, and dare not to leave Israel, the land where they have been born, their home, when they turn 18 (as you gratefully oppose attacks on minors...)?&#33;

There crime is occupation of stolen lands. They occupy and live on stolen homes and lands. They are colonizers. They are thieves. And should face the same fate almost all former colonizers faced before them, on the hand of the anti-imperialist resistance. Malte, take this example. Suppose the US decides to turn Iraq into a colony. It ethnicly cleanses the Iraqis from most of Iraq and confisicate thier properties, homes, lands and farms. Then it brings waves of US "innocnet civlians" to live on those stolen lands and homes. Would you deny the right of the Iraqi resistance to target those colonizers and occupiers??


Maybe in your distored world view blowing up a disco is "guerilla warfare", but in reality it&#39;s a shameless, cowardly attack on innocents.

in your colonial apologist distored world, attacking colonizers at a disco is "terrorism, shameless, cowardly attack on innocents" (same propaganda of colonizers throught out history), but in the mind of the anti-colonial resistance, from the ANC (many attacks on night clubs), FLN (many attack on night clubs), and almost all other anit-colonial resistance, it&#39;s a popular guerilla warfare against colonization.


Oh, about your ANC/south-Africa comparison: If I&#39;m not mistaken, the struggle of the ANC ended in the end of apartheid, but not with the expuslions of white citizens in South Africa, who, rightfully or not, lived their for many generations. Your goal seems to be to drive out all "colonizers" (=Jews) out of their "colony", this is something different.

no, I have made if very clear. I don&#39;t believe in "drive out all "colonizers" (=Jews) out of their "colony""

[tambourine_man]

(Revolution Until Victory)



Once again, tell me, what is the crime of those "colonizers"? Being born at the wrong place, and dare not to leave Israel, the land where they have been born, their home, when they turn 18 (as you gratefully oppose attacks on minors...)?&#33;


There crime is occupation of stolen lands. They occupy and live on stolen homes and lands. They are colonizers. They are thieves. And should face the same fate almost all former colonizers faced before them, on the hand of the anti-imperialist resistance.


i don&#39;t really understand. you seriously think that being born and raised, by chance, in israel, is a real "imperialist crime" (except of course if youre under 18...)?
what makes you assume that once someone turns 18 ("adulthood") he is automatically privileged with the flexibility, monetary or otherwise, to leave his job, home, school, etc. in the name of "anti-imperialism," especially if he is just a regular working class person already trying hard enough to get by?

[Revolution Until Victory]

don&#39;t really understand. you seriously think that being born and raised, by chance, in israel, is a real "imperialist crime" (except of course if youre under 18...)?

tambourine_man, I believe that colonization is a crime. A child colonizer is not responsible for this crime, since he/she is a child and are not responsible for anything they do, let alone being colonizers. But adults are a different issue.


what makes you assume that once someone turns 18 ("adulthood") he is automatically privileged with the flexibility, monetary or otherwise, to leave his job, home, school, etc. in the name of "anti-imperialism," especially if he is just a regular working class person already trying hard enough to get by?

I never made such an assumption. I never sugested that by being adults they have the priviledge and flexibility to leave "his" home. I said that by being adults, unlike minors, they are responsible for thier actions. Rembmer, this is war. People would pay the price of thier actions, not thier opnions and thoughts. Many European colonizers who colonized North America were also working class and couldn&#39;t even afford to move off native lands, but they were still colonizers, and they were still targeted by the Native Resistance. Likewise, many US soldiers don&#39;t really want to harm or occupy Iraq, many have few options, but again, this is war, and they can&#39;t be treated based on their thoughts, rather, actions. I feel sorry for those colonizers who have good intentions, yet are still targeted coz of their colonial actions, but as I said, this is war, and the resistance can&#39;t afford to treat people based on their thoughts.

All I&#39;m saying is that there is a natural relationship between colonized and colonizer that have occured almost in all other colonial experiences. The colonized rightly view his colonizer (wether armed or not) as his/her enemy. And in almost all other former colonial experiences, colonizers were targeted by the Natives. No reason to think the situation in Palestine is any different

[Mister Marx]

now please be serious, you don&#39;t have to personally have came over from Europe to be a colonzier. The Europeans colonized Algeria for not a short 50 years, but for a 132 years, yet, the French were rightfuly considred colonizers, even though some have been born there, along with even their grandparents, and knew no home but Algeria. The Europeans colonized South Africa for around 500 years (&#33;), yet they were still considred colonziers. Just coz you were born in a stolen house and on a stolen land, doesn&#39;t mean you are innocent of the crime of colonization, theft, and occupation. You are when you are still a minor, after that, when you are responsible for your action, your guilty of this crime. There is no difference being the first person to occupy this stolen house, and between being the 3rd or 4rth. It is even rediculis to claim such a thing. All colonziers before who stayed in their colonies much more than the zionists have done in Palestine were treated the same by the anti-colonail resistance.
You do realize that at least half of the "colonizers" are Jews who came from Arab and Muslim countries, most of them expelled after 1948.
Do you think that after 60 years, they their children and grand children can return to countries like Iraq, Iran, Morocco and Egypt?
They will be massacred on sight. Jews from European origin (like myself) won&#39;t be very welcomed in countries like Russia, Poland or Germany either.
This is why you can&#39;t win no matter how brutal you become, We have no other place to go to, no home country. For you it&#39;s colonialism, for us it&#39;s life and death.

[Revolution Until Victory]

You do realize that at least half of the "colonizers" are Jews who came from Arab and Muslim countries, most of them expelled after 1948.

defenatly, many zionists came to colonize Palestine from Morocco, Iraq, and other middle Eastern countries. I prefectly acknowledge this. The issue of expulsion is a bit complicated. There have been many attacks by the Zionists on Jewish centers in the middle east to convince them to go to Israel, as well as zionists forcing jews to go there.


Do you think that after 60 years, they their children and grand children can return to countries like Iraq, Iran, Morocco and Egypt?

1. This is irrelivant

2. You are talking as if I was advocating the expulsion of all the jews from Palestine. NO, I believe in a one state solution, total end of colonialism, and the liberation of BOTH arab AND jew from imperialism and zionism.


They will be massacred on sight

not sure about that.


This is why you can&#39;t win no matter how brutal you become, We have no other place to go to, no home country.

again, it&#39;s irrelivant were the colonizers will go to. Not to mention, I DO NOT ADVOCATE YOUR EXPULSION. "win" for me is the end of zionist colonialism.


For you it&#39;s colonialism, for us it&#39;s life and death.

sure, for me and my people, it&#39;s colonialism. But that was the case with other colonial expereiences. Many European colonizers who colonized North America were poor and working class, they didn&#39;t have bad intentions, for them, it probably wansn&#39;t colonialism, but they were still colonizers. Same with some European colonizers who came to South Africa and colonized it coz they were escaping persecution. For them too, it was a matter of life and death, while for the natives, it was colonialism.
I repeat, the Palestinian movment aims at liberating both Arab and Jew from imperialism and zionism. Zionism and imperialism have been exploiting the Jewish people and thier sufferng for decades, and thier liberation is the goal of the Palestinian revolution.





Where are you from?

[Mister Marx]

2. You are talking as if I was advocating the expulsion of all the jews from Palestine. NO, I believe in a one state solution, total end of colonialism, and the liberation of BOTH arab AND jew from imperialism and zionism.
Ok so you don&#39;t advocate the expulsion of Jews but you advocate killing them because they are colonizers, in what universe does that make sense?
I have no problem with a one state solution as long as it is a secular democracy and all my rights are guarantied. But no way that is going to happen, most of you are going in the way of radical Islam and the rest want an independent Palestinian state.
Again I have no problem with you having your own state either, as long as rockets aren&#39;t falling on my head and suicide bombers aren&#39;t blowing up my street.
As for your question I&#39;m from Tel Aviv.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Ok so you don&#39;t advocate the expulsion of Jews but you advocate killing them because they are colonizers, in what universe does that make sense?

it makes sense to any rational person. I&#39;m not saying all colonizers should be killed but not expelled. Those Palestinian homemade rockets and human bombs won&#39;t kill all of the colonizers. I&#39;m not advocating their expulsion, but at the same time, I believe colonialism, in the case of Palestine at least, can only end through popular guerilla warfare, not any "peaceful solution". If you have any other solution, tell me. Besides, the South African resistance too wasn&#39;t aiming at exeplling the Euroepean colonizers, yet it continued to target them. Same thing with the Palestinian revolution.


I have no problem with a one state solution as long as it is a secular democracy and all my rights are guarantied

that&#39;s what me and the Palestinian revolution aims at.


But no way that is going to happen, most of you are going in the way of radical Islam and the rest want an independent Palestinian state.

that&#39;s just plain bullshit. Most Palestinian, like any colonized people, demand a total end to colonialism. Some, who are sellouts, demand a Palestinian "state", which as much a state as the proposed ones on the South African Bantustans. So no, most Palestinians are not going the way of "radical Islam", nor the Bantustan solution that the South Africans rejected (aka, "2 state solution).


Again I have no problem with you having your own state either

how genours of you&#33;&#33;


as long as rockets aren&#39;t falling on my head and suicide bombers aren&#39;t blowing up my street.

the Palestinian armed revolution will continue until the total end of colonialism

[Revolution Until Victory]

Mister Marx or shall I say MisterMarx???? ;)

aren&#39;t you the same as the BANNED MisterMarx, who commented before at the thread "What Does Israel Want", and called me "a terrorist sympathizer if not a terrorist himself"???

[Mister Marx]

I did and as far as I can tell you are, you support killing innocent civilians (only some of them not all, thank you for that).
still don&#39;t know why I was banned

[Mister Marx]

You are firing rockets at Sderot, one of the poorest cities in the country. The only people who are still there after two years of bombing are poor working class people who can&#39;t afford to get out.
How can you even claim to be a leftist?

[BreadBros]

i don&#39;t really understand. you seriously think that being born and raised, by chance, in israel, is a real "imperialist crime" (except of course if youre under 18...)?
what makes you assume that once someone turns 18 ("adulthood") he is automatically privileged with the flexibility, monetary or otherwise, to leave his job, home, school, etc. in the name of "anti-imperialism," especially if he is just a regular working class person already trying hard enough to get by?

It&#39;s not a matter of personal culpability or morality, at all. Most members of the bourgeoisie were born into their class. Yet the very structure of society necessitates that if a classless society is ever to be achieved, their property would have to be expropriated - even if many or most of them were personally inculpable or incapable of leaving their situation. Similarly, Israel&#39;s current position is incredibly oppressive to the Palestinians, regardless of personal sentiment or culpability.


You do realize that at least half of the "colonizers" are Jews who came from Arab and Muslim countries, most of them expelled after 1948.
Do you think that after 60 years, they their children and grand children can return to countries like Iraq, Iran, Morocco and Egypt?
They will be massacred on sight. Jews from European origin (like myself) won&#39;t be very welcomed in countries like Russia, Poland or Germany either.
This is why you can&#39;t win no matter how brutal you become, We have no other place to go to, no home country. For you it&#39;s colonialism, for us it&#39;s life and death.

Well, first of all, you have to differentiate between a populace and a State. The State of Israel is incredibly oppressive, and in the eyes of many for that reason it must be destroyed. That does not equate to population expulsion, let alone mass-murder or something heinous of that sort. Think of it this way, the German state in WWII was destroyed, but the populace was not mass-deported or killed. It is the nature of the Israeli state that we object to. For that reason you will probably find many on here who support the &#39;2-state solution&#39;. Several things do have to change however, primarily the end of Israeli militarism, autonomy and political/civil rights for the Palestinians, right of return for all Palestinian refugees, end of American imperialist support for Israel, etc.


Was it not progress that an independent state replaced a British colony in Palestine?
The founding of Israel was an anti-imperialist event. It also helped the Israeli Arabs progress from a feudal system to a capitalist system. Israel hardly exploits the Palestinians economically so the state of Israel can hardly be called imperialist.

1. While Jewish immigrants to the region may have initially rebelled against British rule of the area, the establishment of Israel itself would have been impossible without British support. See the British white papers on the topic.

2. Any anti-imperialist nature of Israel ended incredibly soon. As soon as Nasser began buying arms from the Warsaw Pact states the United States provided Israel with political, economic and military support transforming Israel into one of the most brazen examples of a proxy state for an imperialist power.

3. Its difficult to see the establishment of Israel as a an anti-imperialist event since they merely replaced one imperialist power for another, but I doubt that makes any difference to you.

4. Israel certainly does exploit the Palestinians economically. It manages blockades and embargoes on the territories, significantly limits economic activity and transportation in the territories, continually destroys infrastructure in it&#39;s incursion, limits international trade and uses military endeavors to support settler enterprises. This is why the comparison to apartheid is brought up, because it is a similar type of economic exploitation and marginalization.

5. The Arab world already had capitalism. Feudal-to-capitalist progress occurred in the late 1890s and early part of the century as reformers led the division of land estates and establishment of small-scale production, this was accelerated under British rule. If you read about the early period of Jewish migration, one of the main grievances of the Arabs and the cause of the 1st Arab revolt is the fact that the Jews established their own wage system and refused to hire Arabs, not only an example of out-right racism but reflective of the settler/occupation agenda.

Oh, and kudos to Andy Bowden. He said what I wanted to say in a much more succinct and eloquent way :).

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 03:22 am
BTW, as a newcomer I must ask whether anti-German opinions are acceptable here. :D
[QUOTE]I would hope NOT&#33; Germany was the birthplace of Communism and many other forms of intellectual/leftist thought. That&#39;s part of what made the Third Reich so horrible.
Germany (particularly E. Germany) has a wonderful history of tolerance and of harboring refugees, including Jews before the mid-1920&#39;s, and Chileans during the 1970&#39;s. As a matter of fact I plan to move there if America slides further down the Fascist wormhole. My family is German and I am proud to be expanding my German vocabulary.
Please do not mistake every German as some kind of stormtrooper. It&#39;s a stereotype that doesn&#39;t even come close to being current.

[Edelweiss]

"a terrorist sympathizer if not a terrorist himself"

well, that&#39;s what you are in my book as well. Going on the street and cowardly blow up yourself and kill some Jews will get you nowhere but digging your own grave more deeply. That tactic hasn&#39;t worked for you, is deeply immoral, you are targeting innocents no matter how often you repeat your ridiculous bullshit rhetoric about "land thief and guilty colonizers". As long as you won&#39;t accept the reality of an Israeli state, and as long as the supposed "progressive" people on the Palestinian side like you are having a blind eye on the danger of political Islam and the wide spread existence of anti-semitism in occupied territories and the Arab world in general (admittedly an European "import"), you still will hold the same speeches in a hundred years. You don&#39;t have my solidarity, I&#39;m sick of watching wackos like you and Sharon ripping each other apart for decades going nowhere, and I don&#39;t think nor me nor any other rational human being can understand what sick motives are driving you.

No question, a common secular, democratic Jewish-Arab state is the ideal, socialist solution, but one would be foolish to think this is any realistic option right now, especially not if people like you are advocating murdering civilians at the same time, and having a blind eye on the danger of political Islam, instead of combating it. That&#39;s not really a good basis for a trustful relationship, is it?

[Revolution Until Victory]

I did and as far as I can tell you are, you support killing innocent civilians (only some of them not all, thank you for that).
still don&#39;t know why I was banned

no I didn&#39;t support the killing of innocent civlians&#33;&#33; I support the killing of colonizers and their military, in order to eradict colonialism. I supported the attacks of the Native Americans on the European colonizers (of which you, and all imperialists, also probably call "innocent civlians"), the attack of the Algerian FLN on French colonizers, the attack of the Zimbabwen ZAPU and ZAUN on Rhodeisan colonizers, the attacks of the Namibian SWAPO on European colonizers, the attacks of the Congolese resistance against the Belgiueq colonizers, the attack of the Angolan resistance against Angolan colonizers, and the attacks of all the native resistance against colonizers. Provided I support all of the above, why on earth wouldn&#39;t I support attacks of the Palestinian resistance against Zionist colonizers?


You are firing rockets at Sderot, one of the poorest cities in the country. The only people who are still there after two years of bombing are poor working class people who can&#39;t afford to get out.
How can you even claim to be a leftist?

Many European colonizers of North American were poor working class. Does that mean I oppose the Native resistance and labell them terrorists??

[Edelweiss]

As a matter of fact I plan to move there if America slides further down the Fascist wormhole.

lol, you might slip right into the next fascist wormhole, especially if you plan to go to east Germany, where fascist violence against foreigners, homeless people, punks, leftists etc. is every day business in some areas. sorry, but I have to destroy you illusions about Germany here&#33;

[Edelweiss]

The rhetoric of RUV reminds me more to the Nazi&#39;s "blood and soil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_and_soil)" bullshit, than on arguments of a rationally thinking leftist. Pathetic.

[Mister Marx]

Well, first of all, you have to differentiate between a populace and a State. The State of Israel is incredibly oppressive, and in the eyes of many for that reason it must be destroyed. That does not equate to population expulsion, let alone mass-murder or something heinous of that sort. Think of it this way, the German state in WWII was destroyed, but the populace was not mass-deported or killed. It is the nature of the Israeli state that we object to. For that reason you will probably find many on here who support the &#39;2-state solution&#39;. Several things do have to change however, primarily the end of Israeli militarism, autonomy and political/civil rights for the Palestinians, right of return for all Palestinian refugees, end of American imperialist support for Israel, etc
I find the compression between Nazi Germany and Israel to be offensive and unwarranted but other then that I agree with you completely.
The only thing that is making all that impossible is terrorism
You need to remember that the Israeli public had voted for peace and a Palestinian state time and time again, despite the bitter experience we had with the Oslo peace process, we supported the Gaza pullout and in the last election voted for a similar pullout from the west bank.
But then came the recent war and the area we left in Gaza in the pullout is now being used to fire rockets at us, things like that have a way of changing public opinion.
BTW wasn&#39;t this topic about Germany? Anti Germans, something like that? I don&#39;t see how the middle east conflict got involved.

[Revolution Until Victory]

well, that&#39;s what you are in my book as well

what?? I can&#39;t believe this&#33;&#33;&#33; I&#39;m shocked&#33;&#33; how am I gonna sleep tonight&#33;&#33; :rolleyes:

Just for your information, if what I talk about for you makes me a "terrorist blah blah blah", then you also got to consider the ANC, FLN, SWAPO, Angolan resistance, Congolese Resistance, Zimbabwen resistance, and almost all other native, anti-colonial resistance as "terrorist"
hmmm....let&#39;s see, who were those people that called the native resistance "terrorist" during French colonization of Algeria, Rhodesia, etc??
no one other than the racist pro-imperialists.
So in MY book, you are a colonial apologist. It might be easy to label the Palestinian resistance as "terrorist&#39; and get away with it, but it&#39;s not as easy to label the other anti-colonial struggles in Africa and Asia as such...


but digging your own grave more deeply

not at all.


As long as you won&#39;t accept the reality of an Israeli state

not me nor any rational human being will accept the "reality" of the zionist settler-colony. I&#39;m sure the Algerians were told to "accept the reality" of France in Algeria, but colonialism will never presist.


you are having a blind eye on the danger of political Islam

keep on spouting your utter bullshit


the wide spread existence of anti-semitism in occupied territories and the Arab world in general

<_<


No question, a common secular, democratic Jewish-Arab state is the ideal, socialist solution, but one would be foolish to think this is any realistic option right now

please spare us your crap


btw Malte, I might today send a piece of news about the marxist-leninst DFLP to the Newswire today, would you publish it? it&#39;s about them fighting in Zionist Special forces invading Gaza and one of them was killed.

[Edelweiss]

RUV, are you able to make one single post without ridiculous elusions and comparisons with Algeria, Rhodesia, whatever, to distract from the murderous, cowardly actions you advocate? What a brave guerilla man you are, buddy&#33; I guess opposing mass killing of civilians is making me a racist for sure&#33; Maybe Che Guevara should have wrote about how to blow up night clubs instead of military guerilla tactics against a stronger army.

Maybe the native Americans should go out and kill some "white colonizers", as well as the black south-africans should kill some colonizers, or maybe we should wipe off all south-american countries off the map because they are the result of colonisation. Maybe I should go ahead and blow up some Prussian colonizers? I guess you have found the right tactic for all problems on earth, just go out and kill somebody who is a descendant of a "colonizer", that&#39;s the way get rid of imperialism, to world revolution and a class-less society&#33;

Anyway, go to hell&#33;

[Revolution Until Victory]

I find the compression between Nazi Germany and Israel to be offensive and unwarranted

:lol:


The only thing that is making all that impossible is terrorism

I agree with you. Zionist Imperialist terrorism is a major problem


You need to remember that the Israeli public had voted for peace and a Palestinian state time and time again, despite the bitter experience we had with the Oslo peace process,

total bullshit.


But then came the recent war and the area we left in Gaza in the pullout is now being used to fire rockets at us, things like that have a way of changing public opinion.

please stop this rideculs typical victimhood. the zionists simply moved their soldiers around in Gaza. they didn&#39;t pullout. they still control it. Besides, after that, settlments started expanding in the West Bank, as well as zionist imperialist terrorist attacks


The rhetoric of RUV reminds me more to the Nazi&#39;s "blood and soil" bullshit, than on arguments of a rationally thinking leftist. Pathetic.

really?

the rhetoric of Malte reminds me more of a NewsReal bullshit I saw of the Rhodesian state media talking of capturing some native zimbabwen "terrorists", than an argument of a rationaly thinking leftist. Pathetic.


RUV, are you able to make one single post without ridiculous elusions and comparisons with Algeria, Rhodesia, whatever, to distract from the murderous, cowardly actions you advocate

I constantly bring them up to:

1. Try to get anything into your thick skull

2. expose colonial aplogists and hypocrits like yourself.


I guess opposing mass killing of civilians is making me a racist for sure

I didn&#39;t say you are a racist.


Maybe Che Guevara should have wrote about how to blow up night clubs instead of military guerilla tactics against a stronger army.

the issue of Che is totally different and even rideculs for you to bring it up.


Maybe the native Americans should go out and kill some "white colonizers"

no they shouldn&#39;t. I&#39;m not talking of today.

[Edelweiss]

no they shouldn&#39;t. I&#39;m not talking of today.

where&#39;s the difference between you killing a Jew for being born in Israel and being a descendant of a "colonizer" from 60 years ago, and a native American killing some random white person on the street for being born in America and a descendant of a colonizer/settler of 100, 200 or 300 years ago? where do you draw the line? In both cases you are fighting against finished facts which can&#39;t be reversed any more, no matter how many more people you are murdering.

Your arrogant laughing at MrMarx for pointing out that comparisons between Nazi Germany and Israel are offensive for every Jew, no matter if zionist or not, and I think actually also anti-semitic by nature, only shows how close you are to anti-semitic ideology yourself.

You not even remotely understanding the viewpoint of your supposed enemy (and the other way round), your dogmatic, uncompromising, murderous positions, is the reason why you guys will continue to kill each other for another hundred years. I hope it will be a few people on the Left more then who realize that neither side isn&#39;t worthy of any solidarity any more.

If your mission to come here was to promote the Palestinian cause, than you failed miserably.

[Demogorgon]

I have to comment on the comparison between Israel and Rhodesia. This may sound harsh, even as though I am belittling the suffering of the Zimbabwean people, but that is not my intention, but I have to say that the situation there wasn&#39;t nearly as bad as it is in Israel. What I mean is that Rhodesia was basically a flimsy state that supported a small white population by expoiting pre-existing problems in African society to keep the Africans at arms length.

The upshot of this was that they could ultimately be gotten rid of through a guerilla campaign like is suggested for the problem with Israel. That isn&#39;t to say it was easy or that the Zimbabweans didn&#39;t suffer terribly, but ultimately the Rhodesian state was flimsy enough to be done away with.

Israel isn&#39;t like that. It is far too embedded to be removed in that manner. Things like suicide bombings won&#39;t get rid of Israel. All they do is add pointless casualties to all sides. The Israeli state needs to be dismantled and removed. You can&#39;t just hope it can be driven off.

As for Jewish people living in Israel. I don&#39;t see the problem there. Jewish people have always lived in that part of the world and as far as I am concerned, should have the right to live anywhere they choose the same as other people. When Israel is gone and there is a single state there (a socialist workers state I naturally hope), Jewish people must be free to live there alongside Palestinian people and any other people who choose to live there.

There is little point in trying to rive the Israelis out because the situation is so messy that that isn&#39;t going to happen. Rather the priority has to be eradicating the Israeli state, so there can be an egalitarian, non-racial state to replace it.

[Marko]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 03:01 am
There is little point in trying to rive the Israelis out because the situation is so messy that that isn&#39;t going to happen. Rather the priority has to be eradicating the Israeli state, so there can be an egalitarian, non-racial state to replace it.
I am sorry to break your little fantasy but Jewish people are not a race. Jews and Arabs belong to the same race and it is not possible to tell the difference between an Arab and a Sephardic Jew.

Therefore, Zionism is not a form of racism and cannot be compared to South African racist apartheid.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by Marko+August 02, 2007 01:22 am--> (Marko @ August 02, 2007 01:22 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 03:01 am
There is little point in trying to rive the Israelis out because the situation is so messy that that isn&#39;t going to happen. Rather the priority has to be eradicating the Israeli state, so there can be an egalitarian, non-racial state to replace it.
I am sorry to break your little fantasy but Jewish people are not a race. Jews and Arabs belong to the same race and it is not possible to tell the difference between an Arab and a Sephardic Jew.

Therefore, Zionism is not a form of racism and cannot be compared to South African racist apartheid. [/b]
And in turn I am sorry to break it to you, but if you are hoping o find some kind of biological definition of race to prove me wrong, you will be there a very long time, as you will never find it. Race is defined in social terms. In Israel they tend to think of Jews as one race and Palestinians as another, though I cannot help but notice they manage to treat white Jews better than other Jews.

If you are hoping to claim that oppression of the Palestinians is fine because you regard them as part of the same race then you are on very shaky ground indeed.

[Edelweiss]

I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 02:02 am
I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.
JDL and JTF :D

www.jtf.org

[Marko]

People should consider that the class pyramid of Jewish people is "inverse" so that the Jewish proletariat is very small but the number of Jewish capitalists large.

This makes the class struggle of the Jewish people impossible unless they immigrate to their own nation in which the working class needs to be Jewish.

Though some people seem to think that most Jews should be forced to remain bourgeois European and American capitalists (so that they can be slaughtered in a revolution). I wonder what is the cause of that line of thinking unless anti-Semitism? <_<

[Revolution Until Victory]

where&#39;s the difference between you killing a Jew for being born in Israel and being a descendant of a "colonizer" from 60 years ago, and a native American killing some random white person on the street for being born in America and a descendant of a colonizer/settler of 100, 200 or 300 years ago?

1. Stop calling those colonizers "Jews". Not all of them are.

2. They are not targeted for being "born in Israel and being a descendant blah blah blah". I don&#39;t give a shit about thier descendants. They are targeted for what they are NOW in this VERY MOMENT. They are colonizers, and no reason to treat them differently than almost all other colonizers were treated before.

3. It isn&#39;t my problem if your too thick to see the difference between colonizing a people in the 17th century, hundreds of years ago, and doing so in our modern times. One obvious issue is that no native American knows were his ancestors 400 or 300 years ago lived (provided he/she knows who his/her ancestors were in the first place), unlike the Palestinians who&#39;s not just there are people who have been expelled stil alive, but they have all the legal documintaion from the UN recording how much exactly they own and where it is.

4. The more time passes on a colonial experience, the more complicated it becomes. The situation now concering the European colonization of the native Americans is so complicated, it would be foolish to suggest the Native Americans can do what thier colonized comrades are doing today and in our modern times.
The Zionists have always been trying to pass as much time as possible, to complicate the issue, and make it similar to the Natie Americans. That&#39;s why they propose such retarded things as "peace talks and ceas-fire for 20 years", and that&#39;s why any Palestinian who accepts such a thing is considred a sellout (like Ahamd Yousef, the advisor of Hanniya)


Your arrogant laughing at MrMarx for pointing out that comparisons between Nazi Germany and Israel are offensive for every Jew, no matter if zionist or not, and I think actually also anti-semitic by nature, only shows how close you are to anti-semitic ideology yourself.

1. stop lieing. He didn&#39;t say that anology was offensive to "every jew, no matter if zionist or not", rather, he simply said it&#39;s offensive.

2. according to my expereince, fanatic zoionists usually use this excuse to prevent any comparison of Israel with the Nazis, and would be offended as zionists, not as Jews. Big difference. I would be happy for anything that offends any zionists. In other words, I laughed based on the fact that this comparison is offensive to Zionists, not jews in general. I know of many jews who are not offended by this, but even draw this anology themselves.

3. spare us your basless accusations that you have been throwing around from the begning. Anti-semetic, nazi, "jihadi", political Islam, PFLP propgandist, etc.

4. By using such crap as "your anti-semetic" and the Palestinian resistance is "anti-semetic&#39; you are yourself repeating imperilaist racist propaganda, which get YOU closer to being a racist.


If your mission to come here was to promote the Palestinian cause, than you failed miserably.

1. I didn&#39;t come here to "promote the Palestinian cause"

2. I&#39;m not waiting for colonial apologists, pro-imperialists sacks of shit like you to tell me if I promoted anything right or not

[tambourine_man]

(revolution until victory)


2. They are not targeted for being "born in Israel and being a descendant blah blah blah". I don&#39;t give a shit about thier descendants. They are targeted for what they are NOW in this VERY MOMENT. They are colonizers, and no reason to treat them differently than almost all other colonizers were treated before.

i&#39;m against zionism too, but this just doesn&#39;t make any sense... youre using "logic" like this to justify and legitimize violence against regular working class people whose only "imperialist crime" is being born in israel, and who personally have no influence over what the israeli state does. as a marxist why would you ever encourage violence and disunity amongst and within the working classes of the world? on the other hand, i would support attacks against the IDF or the actual institutions of the israeli state, for example.

[Revolution Until Victory]

tambourine_man, I already gave this example before. Many colonizers who colonized North America, for example, were working class. does that mean I sould reject the Native attacks on them and label them terrorist?


whose only "imperialist crime" is being born in israel,

their crime is being colonizers, not simply "born in Israel".

[Marko]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 06:31 am
their crime is being colonizers, not simply "born in Israel".
If we follow your logic all "colonizer" Cubans who are of European or African descent should move out and leave the country to the approximately 50 descendants of the original inhabitants.

The things Fidel Castro&#39;s Spanish ancestors did to Cuban natives were much worse than anything Israelis have done to the Palestinians.

You are absurd as this example shows.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Marko, I refuse to argue with a racist, pro-imperialist troll like you.

added to that, you seem to be truly stupid.

I didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the the present day zionists, in the first place, for you to draw this idiotic anology that got nothing to do with the situation.

[Marko]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 08:18 am
Marko, I refuse to argue with a racist, pro-imperialist troll like you.

added to that, you seem to be truly stupid.

I didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the the present day zionists, in the first place, for you to draw this idiotic anology that got nothing to do with the situation.
Oh, you just advocate killing them and oppose expulsion. In that respect you are similar to Hitler.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Oh, you just advocate killing them and oppose expulsion. In that respect you are similar to Hitler.

that&#39;s the last time I will attempt to argue with you (before you will get restriced anyways ;))

Yet another totally irrelivant and competley false anology.

according to this logic, Nelson Mandela was a South African Hitler. Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa, but didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the Europeans. That&#39;s exactly what me and the Palestinian revolution is advocating.

[Marko]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 08:46 am

Oh, you just advocate killing them and oppose expulsion. In that respect you are similar to Hitler.

that&#39;s the last time I will attempt to argue with you (before you will get restriced anyways ;))

Yet another totally irrelivant and competley false anology.

according to this logic, Nelson Mandela was a South African Hitler. Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa, but didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the Europeans. That&#39;s exactly what me and the Palestinian revolution is advocating.
Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.

So again you make a false analogy.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by RevolutionUntilVictory+--> (RevolutionUntilVictory)Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa, but didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the Europeans. That&#39;s exactly what me and the Palestinian revolution is advocating. [/b]

Originally posted by [email protected]
Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.


Marko
So again you make a false analogy.
You falsely claim to understand what he wrote.

[Marko]

Originally posted by rev0lt+August 02, 2007 09:01 am--> (rev0lt @ August 02, 2007 09:01 am)
Originally posted by RevolutionUntilVictory+--> (RevolutionUntilVictory)Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa, but didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the Europeans. That&#39;s exactly what me and the Palestinian revolution is advocating. [/b]

[email protected]
Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.


Marko
So again you make a false analogy.
You falsely claim to understand what he wrote. [/b]
Bullshit. RUV said "Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa."

Then he makes an analogy between ANC guerrilla warfare and Hamas terrorism.

That analogy is false because the the armed forces of apartheid SA were a legitimate target in the liberation struggle whereas the innocent Israeli civilian victims of suicide bombers are not.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.

So again you make a false analogy.

Mandela was a member of the ANC and co-founder of the MK, its military wing. I&#39;m not sure if he opnely opposed any attacks on colonizers(do you have any prove? speech, quote, interview?) but this is irrelivant, since the ANC was constantly bombing night clubs, restaurants, shopping centers, bars, markets, etc. So according to your "logic", the ANC was Nazi, since they had almost identical targets with the Palestinian resistance. And of course, I mentioned the ANC just as an example among many other anti-colonial resistance that would also classify, according to your crap, as "Nazi".

[Revolution Until Victory]

Then he makes an analogy between ANC guerrilla warfare and Hamas terrorism.

ok, now things are clear. I thought you meant Nelson Mandela himslef, not his party, refused attacks on colonizers. But obviously, added to the fact you are a complete idiot, you are truly ignorant. A constant target of the ANC was colonizer night clubs, restaurants, shopping centers, markets, bars etc. Very similar to the attacks of the Palestinian armed revoltuion, and the attacks of almost all other anti-colonial movments. In no way were the ANC attacks restriced to government infrastructure. Learn your history.
What Hamas is doing isn&#39;t terrorism. And no need to mention Hamas only, and ignore the other factions, such as the communist PFLP that have launched among the most unique operations of the Palestinian revolution.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by Marko+August 02, 2007 12:16 am--> (Marko &#064; August 02, 2007 12:16 am)
Originally posted by rev0lt+August 02, 2007 09:01 am--> (rev0lt &#064; August 02, 2007 09:01 am)
Originally posted by RevolutionUntilVictory
Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa, but didn&#39;t advocate the expulsion of the Europeans. That&#39;s exactly what me and the Palestinian revolution is advocating.

[email protected]
Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.


Marko
So again you make a false analogy.
You falsely claim to understand what he wrote. [/b]
Bullshit. RUV said "Nelson Mandela advocated popular guerilla warfare to bring down European colonialism in South Africa."

Then he makes an analogy between ANC guerrilla warfare and Hamas terrorism.

That analogy is false because the the armed forces of apartheid SA were a legitimate target in the liberation struggle whereas the innocent Israeli civilian victims of suicide bombers are not.[/b]
So then, the Israelis who enter and patrol Gaza and the West Bank occasionally on military operations are civilians?

Hamas has condemned and rejected suicide bombings before they were elected, nevertheless directed towards civilians. The point is that Hamas, and all Palestinians want an end to their apartheid and occupation. They have no political authority, let alone say in Israeli policy. Without their voice heard and negotiated with, the &#39;terrorism&#39; against Israeli &#39;civilians&#39; does not have an end in sight.

[Marko]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 09:16 am

Nelson Mandela did not approve of killing innocent whites or blacks. Only military targets and infrastructure were targeted in the guerrilla warfare authorized by Mandela.

So again you make a false analogy.

Mandela was a member of the ANC and co-founder of the MK, its military wing. I&#39;m not sure if he opnely opposed any attacks on colonizers(do you have any prove? speech, quote, interview?) but this is irrelivant, since the ANC was constantly bombing night clubs, restaurants, shopping centers, bars, markets, etc. So according to your "logic", the ANC was Nazi, since they had almost identical targets with the Palestinian resistance. And of course, I mentioned the ANC just as an example among many other anti-colonial resistance that would also classify, according to your crap, as "Nazi".
"The armed struggle was founded on two fundamental principles: First, violence should not be directed against civilians but against property and military targets. This derived from the ANC’s history of non-violent protest, and its belief in the principle of non-violent political action to effect change as preached and practised by Mahatma Gandhi in fighting British rule in India. (Gandhi was an admired figure: He had lived in South Africa early in the century and led nonviolent protests against racial discrimination; his precepts were carried forward by an ANC ally, the South African Indian Congress).
Second, not killing whites was a pragmatic strategy aimed at keeping the door open for them to change. The argument was that violent and indiscriminate attacks would so frighten whites about their future that their determination to resist change would be deepened. Giving this approach even greater depth was the fact that whites were members of the ANC, and some occupied high leadership positions, alongside black, colored and Asian South Africans."

http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=87

The few attacks on soft targets happened while Mandela was in prison and thus obviously didn&#39;t have his approval. Also, they were committed by reactionary nationalists, not Marxist-Leninists. In the 1980s bourgeois nationalism had already replaced Marxism-Leninism which explains the sad state of South Africa today.

Furthermore, Nelson Mandela was a Marxist-Leninist in the 1960s and the war against the apartheid regime was a class struggle. It was not about race as white South African workers led by Joe Slovo were equal partners in the struggle.

Mandela&#39;s essay "How to be a Good Communist" is available online.

How can you compare Marxist revolutionaries to Islamic reactionaries? I doubt that you are even a Communist. Your brand of "Third Worldism" is ideologically bankrupt.

[Revolution Until Victory]

As I said, it&#39;s irrelivant, as long as the ANC were targeting European colonizers.


The few attacks on soft targets happened while Mandela was in prison and thus obviously didn&#39;t have his approval. Also, they were committed by reactionary nationalists, not Marxist-Leninists. In the 1980s bourgeois nationalism had already replaced Marxism-Leninism which explains the sad state of South Africa today.

that&#39;s totally irrelivant. You falsely claimed the ANC didn&#39;t target European colonizers, and that&#39;s just a plain lie.


How can you compare Marxist revolutionaries to Islamic reactionaries?

what kind of stupidity is that? stop changing the subject. You claimed the ANC isn&#39;t like Hamas, coz the ANC didn&#39;t target European colonizers. So your anaology, like always, was false and laughable.


I doubt that you are even a Communist. Your brand of "Third Worldism" is ideologically bankrupt.

look whos talking. "the anti-impeilaist colonizer"

[Marko]

As I said, it&#39;s irrelivant, as long as the ANC were targeting European colonizers.
So you think that the ANC was some fucking group of saints and everything they did was right?



that&#39;s totally irrelivant. You falsely claimed the ANC didn&#39;t target European colonizers, and that&#39;s just a plain lie.
No, I said that Mandela didn&#39;t authorize such attacks.



what kind of stupidity is that? stop changing the subject. You claimed the ANC isn&#39;t like Hamas, coz the ANC didn&#39;t target European colonizers. So your anaology, like always, was false and laughable.
No, YOU claimed that Nelson Mandela fought with same methods as Hamas. You lied. Mandela opposed terrorist attacks to civilian targets.

There were bourgeous nationalists in the MK, though. They committed terrorist attacks which were unjustified and strategical errors. Innocent black and white people who were in the wrong place in the wrong time died in those attacks but they didn&#39;t help to end apartheid.



look whos talking. "the anti-impeilaist colonizer"
I am not colonizing any country.

[Marko]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 09:24 am
So then, the Israelis who enter and patrol Gaza and the West Bank occasionally on military operations are civilians?

Hamas has condemned and rejected suicide bombings before they were elected, nevertheless directed towards civilians. The point is that Hamas, and all Palestinians want an end to their apartheid and occupation. They have no political authority, let alone say in Israeli policy. Without their voice heard and negotiated with, the &#39;terrorism&#39; against Israeli &#39;civilians&#39; does not have an end in sight.
It would be reasonable to stop the violence first and then start talking. Terrorism only hardens the Israeli policies and they won&#39;t negotiate with terrorists.

[Revolution Until Victory]

No, I said that Mandela didn&#39;t authorize such attacks.

that&#39;s a different issue. You also claimd the ANC didn&#39;t do such attacks, which was a plain lie, or pure ignorace.


No, YOU claimed that Nelson Mandela fought with same methods as Hamas. You lied. Mandela opposed terrorist attacks to civilian targets.

YOU lied. You claimed the ANC didn&#39;t use such methods as Hamas, which they did, which means you are a lier (or ignorant).


I am not colonizing any country.

I didn&#39;t mean letarly. I&#39;m just pointing out how much of a hypocrit you are, something that was exposed to everyone here and no one agree with with you or your anti-german crap.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by Marko+August 02, 2007 01:28 am--> (Marko &#064; August 02, 2007 01:28 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 09:24 am
So then, the Israelis who enter and patrol Gaza and the West Bank occasionally on military operations are civilians?

Hamas has condemned and rejected suicide bombings before they were elected, nevertheless directed towards civilians. The point is that Hamas, and all Palestinians want an end to their apartheid and occupation. They have no political authority, let alone say in Israeli policy. Without their voice heard and negotiated with, the &#39;terrorism&#39; against Israeli &#39;civilians&#39; does not have an end in sight.
It would be reasonable to stop the violence first and then start talking. Terrorism only hardens the Israeli policies and they won&#39;t negotiate with terrorists. [/b]
They tried that, it was called the "Peace Process". The PLO had as much authority and say in policy as the Israeli government allowed, with the possibility of revoking such freedoms. The displacement, economic disparity, and harassment continued thus the resistance resumed once more, this time after their elected government was not seen as legitimate by the West. They can call Hamas terrorists all they want but the root causes of the organization lie within the terrorist acts by their own government.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Every time we discuss Israel, Palestine and the Middle East in general, it becomes more and more apparent to me that there are some very ridiculous positions taken by people who pretend to be materialists and Marxist-Leninists.

The latest piece of bullshit comes from Marko, who is now talking about "Hamas terrorism" like any common liberal would.

But really, what can one say for someone who cheers for the imperialist offensive against the Third World?

[hajduk]

this people are NGO mercenaries who has mission to make confusion beetwen us comrades,so we must be wery careful with those kind movements

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 02:02 am
I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.
It depends what you mean by race. Certainly Jewish people tend to think of themselves as an ethnic group. Obviously i comes crashing down in places like Israel where White Jews push themselves to the top of the pile. But nonetheless Jewish people often think of themselves as belonging to a Jewish ethnic group regardless of their religious beliefs. Again in Israel anoit half the people who identify themselves as Jewish, also identify as non religious.

[Marko]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+August 02, 2007 02:26 pm--> (Demogorgon @ August 02, 2007 02:26 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 02:02 am
I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.
It depends what you mean by race. Certainly Jewish people tend to think of themselves as an ethnic group. Obviously i comes crashing down in places like Israel where White Jews push themselves to the top of the pile. But nonetheless Jewish people often think of themselves as belonging to a Jewish ethnic group regardless of their religious beliefs. Again in Israel anoit half the people who identify themselves as Jewish, also identify as non religious. [/b]
That is because according to the Jewish religious law also non-religious people who have a Jewish mother are Jews. Even followers of other religions can be considered Jews.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by Marko+August 02, 2007 12:32 pm--> (Marko @ August 02, 2007 12:32 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 02:26 pm

[email protected] 02, 2007 02:02 am
I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.
It depends what you mean by race. Certainly Jewish people tend to think of themselves as an ethnic group. Obviously i comes crashing down in places like Israel where White Jews push themselves to the top of the pile. But nonetheless Jewish people often think of themselves as belonging to a Jewish ethnic group regardless of their religious beliefs. Again in Israel anoit half the people who identify themselves as Jewish, also identify as non religious.
That is because according to the Jewish religious law also non-religious people who have a Jewish mother are Jews. Even followers of other religions can be considered Jews. [/b]
That is correct. That is why for example Marx is considered Jewish even though he was an atheist who was raised Christian.

Of course there are more modern reasons too. After long periods of anti-semitic repressions, Jewish people are obviously going to think of themselves as belonging to the Jewish group as an expression of Solidarity with one another.

Unfortunately this kind of thing can turn nasty when some of them decide to give their group a bit of a boost by pinching land from another group.

[Edelweiss]

their crime is being colonizers, not simply "born in Israel".

Where is the difference?&#33; What you say doesn&#39;t make sense at all and lacks of any logic.

Obviously RUV is not able to actually justify the crimes he is promoting against Israeli working class people without any comparison an distraction to native Americans or some other unhistorical bullshit. That is quiet telling, since he isn&#39;t able to justify his crimes using proper, socialist argumentation. You are a supposed socialist, and should know better. You are evading our questions. It only shows how few honest arguments you have, RUV, at least be honest, stop justifying your crimes with any kind of moral, but with a very cynical and cruel, but tactical reasoning which only goal it is to terrorize the civil society and to weaken Israel on the cost of the poorest of the poor and the weakest of the weak.

Also, if I&#39;m not mistaken, apartheid was ended when the ANC changed their tactics, and did not target any more civilians and did pretty much end armed struggle in general. The ANC would never have been legalized without that. Maybe you should fucking learn a lesson from that, instead of your mindless babbling about how your cowardly attacks are any similar to the ANC&#39;s struggle.

And you the Nazi-Israel comparison: It is anti-semitic by nature because it&#39;s usually used by fascists to play down and relativize Nazi crimes and the holocaust, to make culprits out of the victims of the shoa. What is happening in the occupied territories is not remotely comparable to the holocaust, which was an industrialized genocide. Of course you would never be able to reflect that, or even understand that, because you prefer to live on in your own, ideological ghetto, where is no place for any divert opinions away from your black and white "we are the good guys" star wars mentality.

[Edelweiss]

The latest piece of bullshit comes from Marko, who is now talking about "Hamas terrorism" like any common liberal would.

of course criticizing Hamas and political Islam is completely reactionary, and "liberal". You guys make me sick, you are confusing nationalism with class struggle.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 01:48 pm

The latest piece of bullshit comes from Marko, who is now talking about "Hamas terrorism" like any common liberal would.

of course criticizing Hamas and political Islam is completely reactionary, and "liberal". You guys make me sick, you are confusing nationalism with class struggle.
What do you mean by "terrorism", Malte? Is your definition of "terrorism" as vast as the one Bush uses, where any Muslim he doesn&#39;t like is a "terrorist"?

I can&#39;t really understand your position on Hamas.

First you were opposing Hamas simply because it uses suicide bombings as a tactic in its anti-colonialist resistance.

Now you&#39;re saying that you oppose it because it is inspired by the ideology of political Islam.

Would you like me to make a list of Islamist political groups who do NOT use "terrorist" tactics? If so, would you support their struggles against imperialism?

Or do you oppose anti-imperialist struggles on principle? Perhaps that can explain why you attacked the PFLP, who are Marxists and not Islamists at all?

[Revolution Until Victory]

Where is the difference?&#33; What you say doesn&#39;t make sense at all and lacks of any logic.

what I&#39;m saying is I don&#39;t care where the hell you were born. It isn&#39;t the matter of were you were born or not, nor is it the matter of who&#39;s your garndparent was and were he was born. That is totally irrelivant. the only thing what matters is who you are today, at this very moment. That&#39;s why I told him it&#39;s irrelivant if they "were born in Israel" rather, what they are now, colonizers, not innocent civlians.


Obviously RUV is not able to actually justify the crimes he is promoting against Israeli working class people without any comparison an distraction to native Americans or some other unhistorical bullshit.

I have clearly explained my position enough times and justified it. Anolgoies are used by everyone, and especially in such cases, were something is happning today, which have happned before, and people got contraditicng opnion on the two very similar events. What I mean is, as I said before, today, you can very easly label the Palestinian resistance as "terrorism", but you can hardly do so for the Native Americans, for example, even though both used the same tactics. It&#39;s only natural for me to use such comparisons.


You are evading our questions.

you serious? I haven&#39;t avoided even one point. YOU on the other hand, have been ignoring ENITRE POSTS&#33;&#33;&#33;


Also, if I&#39;m not mistaken, apartheid was ended when the ANC changed their tactics, and did not target any more civilians and did pretty much end armed struggle in general. The ANC would never have been legalized without that. Maybe you should fucking learn a lesson from that, instead of your mindless babbling about how your cowardly attacks are any similar to the ANC&#39;s struggle.

I believe it&#39;s the other way around. It was when the South African settler-colony accepted to negotiate, did the ANC stop it&#39;s attacks and was legalized. For your information, the ANC was banned from the very first moment is declared armed struggle, and only targeted government infrastructure. meaning that "terrorists" will be called "terrorists" by the imperialist scum no matter what.


And you the Nazi-Israel comparison: It is anti-semitic by nature because it&#39;s usually used by fascists to play down and relativize Nazi crimes and the holocaust, to make culprits out of the victims of the shoa. What is happening in the occupied territories is not remotely comparable to the holocaust, which was an industrialized genocide. Of course you would never be able to reflect that, or even understand that, because you prefer to live on in your own, ideological ghetto, where is no place for any divert opinions away from your black and white "we are the good guys" star wars mentality.

I, personally, do not use it for the above reasons. I use it to offend zionists, wether jewish or not, based on the facts they are imperialists. I do not intend to ofend the Jewish people with such a comparision. Neither do I claim the crimes of the zionist settler-colony are equal to the holocaust, although there are some tactics used exactly by the two. Again, your baseless accusations wouldn&#39;t get you anywhere.

[Mister Marx]

First you were opposing Hamas simply because it uses suicide bombings as a tactic in its anti-colonialist resistance.
That is the most absurd sentence I ever heard.
"simply because it uses suicide bombings " to you actually think before you write down those things? Do you know what suicide bombing is?
You strap explosives to your chest, you add nails and other sharp objects so you can kill and maim as many people possible. You go on a bus during rush hours, when people go to work and kids go to school, and you blow yourself up along with everyone you can (Not just evil Jewish "colonizers" but also any Arabs who happen to be in the bus, people discriminate bombs don&#39;t).
If you can&#39;t see anything wrong with that then no one can help you, and really there is no point in continuing this discussion.

[Revolution Until Victory]

MisterMarx, stop making "sucide bombing" look more horrible than bombing by F-16&#39;s and Apachies. They are the same, if bombing from thosuands of feet in the skay is not even worse.

[Mister Marx]

F 16 and Apachies don&#39;t target innocent civilians; they target suicide bombers and the people who send them.
Israel has some of the most advanced weapons in the world (and shhh don&#39;t tell anyone it also has nukes).
For Sudan a few Arab militia men with guns is enough to kill 200000 and expel millions in only a few years, not 60.
Do you honestly think that if we wanted to kill or expel Palestinian civilians, you would be alive right now writing all this horseshit.

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by Mister [email protected] 02, 2007 09:55 pm
F 16 and Apachies don&#39;t target innocent civilians; they target suicide bombers and the people who send them.
Israel has some of the most advanced weapons in the world (and shhh don&#39;t tell anyone it also has nukes).
For Sudan a few Arab militia men with guns is enough to kill 200000 and expel millions in only a few years, not 60.
Do you honestly think that if we wanted to kill or expel Palestinian civilians, you would be alive right now writing all this horseshit.
Oh Really ??? Yes the Apachies and F16 are very much accurate and pinpoint and kill exactly only the Suicide bombers. Even if the facts says otherwise &#33;&#33;&#33; Source (http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/remember2000.html)

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/images/children_by_year-lg.gif

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by Mister [email protected] 02, 2007 04:25 pm
F 16 and Apachies don&#39;t target innocent civilians; they target suicide bombers and the people who send them.
Israel has some of the most advanced weapons in the world (and shhh don&#39;t tell anyone it also has nukes).
For Sudan a few Arab militia men with guns is enough to kill 200000 and expel millions in only a few years, not 60.
Do you honestly think that if we wanted to kill or expel Palestinian civilians, you would be alive right now writing all this horseshit.
Israel is hardly going to use Nuclear Weapons on Palestine. Have a lott at a map and you will see why that would turn out to be a very bad plan. Neclear weapons certainly don&#39;t discriminate and they affect a very wide area indeed.

However the weapons Israel uses on Palestine certainly don&#39;t simply target terrorists or whoever else they have decided to kill. They blow up large numbers of people, mostly innocent. It is true suicide bombers do much the same thing, but you certainly can not put Israel on a higher pedastel.

[Mister Marx]

Oh Really ??? Yes the Apachies and F16 are very much accurate and pinpoint and kill exactly only the Suicide bombers.
I never said they are accurate
They are not, definitely not in such a dense area like Gaza or the west bank cities and at times I do think Israel is not doing it&#39;s best to avoid civilian casualties, although it does a lot more then coalition forces in Iraq.
But the difference remains and I cannot stress this enough, Israel does not target civilians, the Palestinians do.
What&#39;s most worrying to me is that most people in this forum with the exception of few seem to support that.

[Revolution Until Victory]

MisterMarx, please stop your lies. the Zionists TARGET innocent civlians. It isn&#39;t a matter of "they don&#39;t care enough", the issue is that they intentioly target innocnet civlians. This is a fact you can&#39;t deny. No one is taking you seriously, and no reason to start an argument over such basless nonsense.

[Mister Marx]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 05:02 pm
MisterMarx, please stop your lies. the Zionists TARGET innocent civlians. It isn&#39;t a matter of "they don&#39;t care enough", the issue is that they intentioly target innocnet civlians. This is a fact you can&#39;t deny. No one is taking you seriously, and no reason to start an argument over such basless nonsense.
No sir, it is you who are lying to yourself in order to justify the atrocities you are supporting.
But you know what, go ahead try us, stops launching rockets and sending suicide bombers and see if there any Apachies flying over your head.

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by Mister [email protected] 02, 2007 10:26 pm

Oh Really ??? Yes the Apachies and F16 are very much accurate and pinpoint and kill exactly only the Suicide bombers.
I never said they are accurate
They are not, definitely not in such a dense area like Gaza or the west bank cities and at times I do think Israel is not doing it&#39;s best to avoid civilian casualties, although it does a lot more then coalition forces in Iraq.

What&#39;s most worrying to me is that most people in this forum with the exception of few seem to support that.
No you said Israel just uses them to kill Suicide Bombers not Palestinian civilians. I proved you wrong with facts.



But the difference remains and I cannot stress this enough, Israel does not target civilians, the Palestinians do.



Through No Fault of Their Own: Israel&#39;s Punitive House Demolitions in the al-Aqsa Intifada

Principle findings:


The Since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, the IDF has demolished 628 housing units, which were home to 3,983 persons.


These homes were demolished because of the acts of 333 Palestinians. On average, 12 innocent people lost their home for every person suspected of participation in attacks against Israelis.


Almost half of the homes demolished (295 - 47%) were never home to anyone suspected of involvement in attacks against Israelis. As a result of these demolitions, 1,286 persons lost their homes even though according to Israeli officials they should not have been punished.


Contrary to its argument before the High Court of Justice that prior warning is given except in extraordinary cases, B&#39;Tselem&#39;s figures indicate that in only 3% of the cases were occupants given prior notification of the IDF&#39;s intention to demolish their home.


Extensive destruction of property in occupied territories, without military necessity, constitutes a war crime.






Poor Little Israeli govt. They don&#39;t even hurt a fly. Those evil Palestinians deserve what they got and get isn&#39;t it ? <_<

Source (http://www.btselem.org/english/Publications/Summaries/200411_Punitive_House_Demolitions.asp)

[Revolution Until Victory]

No sir, it is you who are lying to yourself in order to justify the atrocities you are supporting.

what an intelligent response. how much time did it take you to spout such crap?

I didn&#39;t and never lie. I don&#39;t need to justify myself or anything I support for colonial apologists like yourself.

[Mister Marx]

House Demolitions is wrong and it&#39;s criminal but it&#39;s a counter terrorism measure.
If we won&#39;t have suicide bombing we won&#39;t have House Demolitions and as far as I know we don&#39;t have it anymore anyway.
I know that as an ex soldier in the IDF that&#39;s an order I would never have obey to and thankfully it&#39;s an order I never received.
My good friend Revolution Until Victory, as you can see I&#39;m not only colonial apologist I&#39;m an Israeli soldier, the devil himself.

[Revolution Until Victory]

House Demolitions is wrong and it&#39;s criminal but it&#39;s a counter terrorism measure.

I mean at least TRY to SOUND a leftist. why do you have to expose yourself and use a typical right-wing imperialist line? you don&#39;t have to&#33;


If we won&#39;t have suicide bombing we won&#39;t have House Demolitions and as far as I know we don&#39;t have it anymore anyway.

There were house demolitions LOOOONG berfore there was any human bomb. If there was no Zionist colonization, there wouldn&#39;t be any kind of resistance in the frist place.

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by Mister [email protected] 02, 2007 11:02 pm
House Demolitions is wrong and it&#39;s criminal but it&#39;s a counter terrorism measure.
If we won&#39;t have suicide bombing we won&#39;t have House Demolitions and as far as I know we don&#39;t have it anymore anyway.
I know that as an ex soldier in the IDF that&#39;s an order I would never have obey to and thankfully it&#39;s an order I never received.
My good friend Revolution Until Victory, as you can see I&#39;m not only colonial apologist I&#39;m an Israeli soldier, the devil himself.
You know Mister Dickhead your counter Terrorism measure is waht that breeds Terrorism .


If we won&#39;t have suicide bombing we won&#39;t have House Demolitions

Well the Palestinians had more advanced Weaponry they would not resort to Sucide Bombing.


and as far as I know we don&#39;t have it anymore anyway.

And there is no assurance that you will not do it again.

[Revolution Until Victory]

and as far as I know we don&#39;t have it anymore anyway.

yes you do

[Mister Marx]

You know Mister Dickhead your counter Terrorism measure is waht that breeds Terrorism
No doubt and I&#39;m against it, try to listen sometimes it might help you in life

Well the Palestinians had more advanced Weaponry they would not resort to Sucide Bombing.
Right so they would kill people by other means.
You just don&#39;t get it do you, your way won&#39;t lead to anything but more suffering for everybody.
I&#39;m willing to call off the occupation today so is my government, that was it was elected to do.
Are you willing to call off your terrorist attacks?
No I didn&#39;t think so.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

@ Malte


You guys make me sick, you are confusing nationalism with class struggle.

For us as Marxists, everything must be viewed in its material and social context. Nationalism too must be viewed in the same light.

All kinds of nationalism have a context, based in the class struggle. Different kinds of nationalism represent different class interests.

The nationalism of an imperialist power is reactionary, because it expresses the class interests of the imperialist finance-capitalist ruling-class.

The nationalism of workers and peasants from an exploited Third-world neo-colony is progressive. When nationalism comes from workers who are exploited by imperialism, that nationalism is their way of expressing their position in the class struggle.

Mao explains this:

Can a Communist, who is an internationalist, at the same time be a patriot? We hold that he not only can be but also must be. The specific content of patriotism is determined by historical conditions. There is the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler, and there is our patriotism. Communists must resolutely oppose the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler. The Communists of Japan and Germany are defeatists with regard to the wars being waged by their countries. To bring about the defeat of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler by every possible means is in the interests of the Japanese and the German people, and the more complete the defeat the better.... For the wars launched by the Japanese aggressors and Hitler are harming the people at home as well as the people of the world. China&#39;s case, however, is different, because she is the victim of aggression. Chinese Communists must therefore combine patriotism with internationalism. We are at once internationalists and patriots, and our slogan is, "Fight to defend the motherland against the aggressors." For us defeatism is a crime and to strive for victory in the War of Resistance is an inescapable duty. For only by fighting in defense of the motherland can we defeat the aggressors and achieve national liberation. And only by achieving national liberation will it be possible for the proletariat and other working people to achieve their own emancipation. The victory of China and the defeat of the invading imperialists will help the people of other countries. Thus in wars of national liberation patriotism is applied internationalism.

Source: Mao Zedong, "The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War" (October 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 196.


The nationalism of a Yankee imperialist soldier is reactionary, because it is used to justify imperialist exploitation of under-developed countries.

The nationalism of an Iraqi insurgent is progressive, because it leads her/him to fight the imperialist occupation, and in doing so, attack the capitalist world-system.

Nationalism is an expression of class struggle.

[Mister Marx]

Since it looks like were not going to solve the Israeli Palestinian conflict today does anyone want to speak about Anti Germans?
I believe it was the original topic before we hijacked it (sorry about that Marko)

What is your opinion of these Marxist-Leninists who support Zionism and the war in Iraq?
Why do you need to be an anti-german to support those things?
Why be anti-german at all?

[Revolution Until Victory]

stop this bullshit about "occupation". This is not the issue. The goal here is the total eradiction of colonialism, not compromise with it. To make it simpler for you, the South African colonized masses weren&#39;t demanding some more space in thier bantustans, rather, total liberation. The South African people rejected the Bantustan solution, revolted, and got thier independece, why on earth are the Palestinian now expected to accept the Bantustans solution (aka, "2 state solution") and put up with shit like "2 state solution" "end the occupation"???
The attacks will not stop until the total end of colonialism.

[Mister Marx]

Don&#39;t you ever give up? Aren&#39;t you getting tired of saying the same things over and over again?
I don&#39;t give a fuck about colonialism and things that happened 60 years ago, long before either of us was born.
I live in the here and now, and here and now, we are here and you are here and we need to learn to live together OR we just can continue to shoot at each other and see who has a bigger gun.
Two state solution, one state solution, again I don&#39;t give a fuck as long as I have equal rights and my neighbors don&#39;t come at night and try to kill me.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Don&#39;t you ever give up? Aren&#39;t you getting tired of saying the same things over and over again?

Exactly&#33;&#33; that&#39;s what I have been thinking all along&#33; some people here are so stupid, I have to keep repeating the same thing a thousand times, and even then, they pretend they didn&#39;t read it, and ask the same question yet again. Do me a favor and get this shit into your thick skulls.


I don&#39;t give a fuck about colonialism and things that happened 60 years ago

we aren&#39;t talking of things that happned 60 years ago. It&#39;s not like the zionists stole and colonized Palestine some 60 years ago and then they left. The theft and colonization is continuing until this very moment.


I live in the here and now, and here and now, we are here and you are here and we need to learn to live together OR we just can continue to shoot at each other and see who has a bigger gun

that&#39;s what I have been saying from the very begning. we have to learn to live together as EQUALS, not as dominator and dominated, colonizer and colonized, slave and master, opresser and opressed. EQUAL CITEZENS. This will not happen until the eradiction of colonialism.


Two state solution, one state solution, again I don&#39;t give a fuck as long as I have equal rights and my neighbors don&#39;t come at night and try to kill me.

Good, I&#39;m glad to hear this. I&#39;m glad to know that you accept justice and an end of colonialism through a one state solution. And don&#39;t worry, as long as colonialism have been demolished, no one would be sneeking in the night to kill you. There is no reason to.

[Edelweiss]

@SOS


I don&#39;t give a fuck about Mao, dude&#33; That position end up exactly in the reactionary, bourgeois, pro-nationalist stance you are proposing, which is giving a card blance to every "anti-imperialist" movement in the world in the name of communism, no matter how reactionary it is, and no matter how much their goals contradict with ours. This can only end up in a catastrophe, and you supporting powers of political Islam is a fine example for that. Political Islam has to be fought just like US imperialism, they are two sides of the same, reactionary coin.

I share Luxemburg&#39;s view on the national question:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/...estion/ch01.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1909/national-question/ch01.htm)

Originally posted by "Rosa"
The formula of the "right of nations" is inadequate to justify the position of socialists on the nationality question, not only because it fails to take into account the wide range of historical conditions (place and time) existing in each given case and does not reckon with the general current of the development of global conditions, but also because it ignores completely the fundamental theory of modern socialists - the theory of social classes.

When we speak of the "right of nations to self-determination, " we are using the concept of the "nation" as a homogeneous social and political entity. But actually, such a concept of the "nation" is one of those categories of bourgeois ideology which Marxist theory submitted to a radical re-vision, showing how that misty veil, like the concepts of the "freedom of citizens," "equality before the law," etc., conceals in every case a definite historical content.

@ RUV:

You keep on repeating yourself, and you keep on being ridiculous. before I knew you I had certain sympaties for the PFLP, but now I see you defending attacks on innocents, I see how ideologically bankrupt they are as well. The conclusion of this for me is to just give up any hope in Palestinian resistance at all, and have a rather fatalistic outlook on the situation there.

[Edelweiss]

Good, I&#39;m glad to hear this. I&#39;m glad to know that you accept justice and an end of colonialism through a one state solution. And don&#39;t worry, as long as colonialism have been demolished, no one would be sneeking in the night to kill you. There is no reason to.

again, highly laughable and ridiculous. "I might come at night and kill you now, because you are an evil colonizer and my enemy, because you had the bad luck being born in Israel, or just be at the wrong time at the wrong place, but as soon "colonisation ends", and we have killed enough civilians, you begin to be my brother, and can generously stay here, but only if reactionary powers don&#39;t prevail, and you have to face another progrom&#33;". That is basically RUV&#39;s position and all his stupidity summed up in one statement.

And please, for once, try to answer without any unhistorical comparisons, but with actually dealing with the issue. But we all know you are not able to, right?

[Revolution Until Victory]

Malte, please stop talking about my anologies and "not having arguments". You have been ignoring entire posts from the begning.


again, highly laughable and ridiculous.

not as much as your imperialist position though.


"I might come at night and kill you now, because you are an evil colonizer and my enemy, because you had the bad luck being born in Israel, or just be at the wrong time at the wrong place, but as soon "colonisation ends", and we have killed enough civilians, you begin to be my brother, and can generously stay here, but only if reactionary powers don&#39;t prevail, and you have to face another progrom&#33;".

simply pathetic malte.

Is is very clear and simple. No colonization no resistance. No one is welcome to live as a dominator and colonizer. Only equals.


That is basically RUV&#39;s position and all his stupidity summed up in one statement.

look whos talking. "the Palestinian resistance is jiahdi and anti-semetic" lunatic.


And please, for once, try to answer without any unhistorical comparisons, but with actually dealing with the issue. But we all know you are not able to, right?

lol, I would expect this to come from anyone, but you. I have dealt with all the issues presented with and with out historical anologies which you can&#39;t refute. YOU on the other hand, have been all along avoiding, not simple points, but entire posts.

[Red Scare]

https://www.link-secure.net/thriftees/shop/images/COEXIST.jpg

[Edelweiss]

Tell me, RUV, how can the average Israeli worker control the actions of it&#39;s government? Like Mrmarx, he might want live in a common state with equal right for all, but obviously can&#39;t. What do you expect him to do to avoid your murderers? If he stay in Israel, and actively struggles for your common cause, he is guilty, and a "legitimate target" in your sick, murderous world view. If he leaves, there will never be a common state, because there never will be enough Israeli workers to fight for it, especially not if you continue to attack civilians, only a fool would be willing to fight for a state with his potential murderers.

Don&#39;t you see how unsustainable, illogical, immoral, and simply criminal your position is? It lacks of any international solidarity, the essence of the communist movement. But I guess you give a fuck about inernational solidaity anyway, and only care about your own egoistical, nationalist positions. People like you proof Mao wrong, and Luxemburg right.

There can&#39;t be any compromise with nationalism. Fuck you.

[Faux Real]

There have been several coalitions of Israeli-Palestinian human rights groups and the like. They plead for an international observer to watch an end to stop the violence a few years ago, though the UN didn&#39;t get the vote through cause of a US veto. Also, I am sure RUV doesn&#39;t want to harm the civilians living in homes who just emigrated, but the governmental officials and orchestrater&#39;s of the movement to settle in the newly claimed territories of Israel. It&#39;s not like militants can cross over into Israel anymore now is it? Most attacks are now on military personnel.

Also, on nationalism, how could Palestinians with as little resources they have, patrol over their borders/airspace/streets, aerial bombings, high-caliber shelling, and limited electricity form some kind of egalitarian society? They can&#39;t, they need true independence and reintegration in some form of the land stolen from them.

[Edelweiss]

Also, I am sure RUV doesn&#39;t want to harm the civilians living in homes who just emigrated, but the governmental officials and orchestrater&#39;s of the movement to settle in the newly claimed territories of Israel.

Wrong, RUV made it very clear that every adult living in Israel, or just staying in Israel while another of his murderer buddies decides to blow up himself, is a "legitimate target". That&#39;s why I declared ideological bankruptcy on him and his movement.

[BreadBros]

Don&#39;t you see how unsustainable, illogical, immoral, and simply criminal your position is? It lacks of any international solidarity, the essence of the communist movement. But I guess you give a fuck about inernational solidaity anyway, and only care about your own egoistical, nationalist positions.

The irony here is that just as political Islam might be the flip-side of the reactionary coin to imperialism...so too your own anti-German views are precisely the flip-side to the support-all-who-oppose-America camp. Which is why after 7 pages of bickering back and forth neither you nor Marko has demonstrated how it is consistent to be against all nationalism when your entire viewpoint rests on the support of precisely that, a variant of nationalism (Zionism). You claim to be against nationalism, yet are a fervent supporter of Israeli nationalism. You claim to be in favor of international solidarity, yet you believe the German people are inherently "wicked" or something thereabouts. You are just as inconsistent as those you are criticizing and your views are based on far more flimsy ground that has to warp Marxist ideas into bizarre new ideas (such as more suffering for proletariat = good, except in the case of Israel; anti-imperialism=good, but anti-imperialism must support imperialism in order to succeed, etc) in order to justify your views.

In terms of Israel: not only is Zionism a variant of nationalism, but it is one that is precisely defined around an extremely exclusive definition of identity centered around religion and lineage. You criticize RUV&#39;s ideas for bearing similarity to "Blood and Soil". Yet, his ideas of nationality and ties to the land are based on history and economics. While, the flip-side of that, the Israeli concept of Birthright, is far more reactionary and states that by the very virtue of being born to certain parents you are historically and divinely guaranteed the right to the land of Judea. How progressive&#33;

You yourself are more than guilty of the stuff Luxembourg was criticizing because you have put away class-analysis for nationalism. The fact is that the original migration of Jews to the Levant was less political than it is today and more heterogenous, including contingents of Labor Zionists and socialists. Those political groupings have been politically crushed by the same religious Zionists you support out of whatever German-guilt trip you are on about. Along those same lines, Marko interestingly talks about how imperialist intervention exacerbates class struggle. I pointed out that this was not universally true, I argued that class struggle could not be reduced to such a simple formula, but that it was true sometimes. One example of this is Palestine itself. Decades of imperialist subjugation have exacerbated the class struggle and essentially caused most of the Palestinian bourgeoisie to leave for other countries. As a result, historically the Palestinian opposition has been dominated by explicity leftist, secular forces. Even today, when the PLO has been more or less systematically destroyed and Hamas has filled the void, it&#39;s interesting to point that even Hamas&#39;s economic policies are to the Left of Israeli Labour or the dominant strains of social democracy. Presumably, even under the rubric you and Marko have proposed (imperialist intervention is good as it exacerbates class struggle; class analysis is primary over nationalism) support for Palestine would be logical...although, of course, I suppose everything is thrown out the window when it comes to Israel with you two.

I would also add, that your look at Luxemburg is somewhat disingenuous and based on selective quoting. What Luxemburg was criticizing in terms of nationhood was the partitioning of the USSR into self-determinating states based on shared ethnicity. She was not at all dismissing the idea of imperialism or castigating anti-imperialist warfare. Her analysis of the October Revolution explicitly states that the Russian revolution was a struggle against an imperialist bourgoisie.

I think, ultimately, this topic isn&#39;t that important. Its clear that this is an entirely German phenomenon and I doubt it will catch must steam anywhere else in the world (especially amongst the American revolutionary left, considering how the majority of pro-Zionists in the US are far-right Christian fundamentalists) and probably emerges out of deep-seated guilt or complexes about German history.

[Edelweiss]

The irony here is that just as political Islam might be the flip-side of the reactionary coin to imperialism...so too your own anti-German views are precisely the flip-side to the support-all-who-oppose-America camp.

I have stressed many times I don&#39;t see myself as an anti-German, and I don&#39;t share most of Marko&#39;s views, especially not the support of US imperialism&#33; Please don&#39;t mix my views with Marko&#39;s views, and reply properly. Again, I&#39;m not an anti-German&#33;&#33;&#33; Be fair at least.

I don&#39;t think any one here has really understood my position on Israel, although I tried to explain it. I&#39;m more than critical to any nationalist movement, and that certainly includes zionism. Unlike Marco I do see anti-zionism as a legitimate, leftist position, and in no way do I equate it with anti-semitism, although the borders are certainly fluent here.

No, my position to support the right of Israel exist, is rather motivated by realpolitik. My position is, and that is true for the Palestinians too, that a nation state does provide it&#39;s citizens a certain degree of security in our current world order, so after thousands of years of anti-Jewish pogroms and oppression which culminated into the holocaust, the need for a Jewish state was obvious, even to some extent on the cost of the Palestinian people, to prevent that another shoa can ever happen again. This is my sole reasoning to support the right of Israel to exist. That doesn&#39;t mean I do support today&#39;s criminal politics of the Israeli government, but at the same time I do also oppose lunatics like RUV, for reasons I have explained more than enough now. The ultimative goal of course only can be a common, socialist state, but I don&#39;t see that even remotely happening now, and until than Israel is a sad necessity.

I do disagree with your analysis of Luxemburg, I think her position on national self-determination is perfectly fitting here, and my quote of her is valid and stands for itself. But that would be another discussion, we also have gone too much offtopic...

[RHIZOMES]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+August 02, 2007 12:26 pm--> (Demogorgon @ August 02, 2007 12:26 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 02:02 am
I highly doubt any Jew in the world would claim that there is a "Jewish race", since that is the worst kind of Nazi ideology.
It depends what you mean by race. Certainly Jewish people tend to think of themselves as an ethnic group. Obviously i comes crashing down in places like Israel where White Jews push themselves to the top of the pile. But nonetheless Jewish people often think of themselves as belonging to a Jewish ethnic group regardless of their religious beliefs. Again in Israel anoit half the people who identify themselves as Jewish, also identify as non religious. [/b]
One time I said to a Jew that Jews were an ethnicity, not a race (Black, White, Caucasian, etc). But she got mad and told me they were a race.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Malte, referencing Luxemburg, is correct.

However, only in countries where the bourgeoisie is objectively capable of playing a progressive role should the working class ally with them. The slogan &#39;national self-determination&#39; is often a whitewashed catchphrase that ignores certain historical factors that are prevelant within local spheres, and as so, there is normally reactionary, destrucive concequences.

In Palestine, the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions has resisted the occupation also; they have been involved in several campaigns to release imprisoned members, have organized demonstrations against the barrier, have been targeted by Israel and their own bourgeois state alike, and have held strikes in the past year within the public transport and textile branch of industry. At their Palestinian Workers Challenging the Occupation Convention, they argued for increasing activity against the occupation, and there has been armed confrontations between police and workers in the past few months, which signifies that they will soon be able (hopefully) to integrate their sentiments into the armed resistance, which will morph it&#39;s class character as a whole.

They have taken the correct perspective here, and have showed an example of what we need to do; communists need to fight alongside bourgeois liberation movements while simultaneously fighting for working class leadership. The role of socialists should be to organize the working class at the head of these struggles, in opposition to the national bourgeoisie, as well as to coordinate internationally, especially with the workers of the oppressor country.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 04:03 am
My position is, and that is true for the Palestinians too, that a nation state does provide it&#39;s citizens a certain degree of security in our current world order, so after thousands of years of anti-Jewish pogroms and oppression which culminated into the holocaust, the need for a Jewish state was obvious, even to some extent on the cost of the Palestinian people, to prevent that another shoa can ever happen again. This is my sole reasoning to support the right of Israel to exist.
Good.. segregation, that will benefit the Jews.

I was at a doctor&#39;s office reading "The Struggle For Palestine" when a lady in her 50s or so walked beside me in the line.. she started talking to me, and noticed my book. She said it was important to know history, and that it was good I was reading it. We discussed the conflict, and I remarked that I was on the fence on whether or not Israel had a right to exist, but that its expansion and barring palestinians the right of return was wrong, etc.

Eventually she said "I&#39;m Jewish, so this is an important issue for me." She asked me who created Israel, and I was uncertain what she wanted me to say.. many Zionist Jews had taken land long before Israel was created, and many of them were militant. I knew England had a lot to do with it, but I was not certain that Churchill&#39;s anti-semitism, which drove his interests for creating this new ghetto, were the main thing. Eventually she said "England did&#33; They didn&#39;t care about the Jews at all, they just wanted to move them away." She said she didn&#39;t think the state had a right to exist.

The Israeli settlements and the land within its fluent borders are nothing more than Ghettos. The state was created to push Jews out of Europe and to maintain Imperial interests in the region - with quite a powerful ideology behind it. Many of the (especialy newcoming) settlers are poor immigrants who had little before being moved to Israel, and so they defend their homes with anger and force.


None of this changes the most relevant fact here, however: taking Jews and creating a zealotous, militant nation in which to confine them will not discourage a holocaust. It has already inflamed many arabs around the world to become racist, which is sad, because it&#39;s not the fault of Jews - it&#39;s the fault of imperialism. But the concept of Israeli nationalism is sick; if any nationalism should prevail it should be Palestinian - supported by both Israelis and Palestinians. The region needs a unified government with Arab - Jewish co-operation, including a right of return for all displaced Palestinians and an end to the disgusting militancy and expansionism of Israel - which is not only the very nature of the state from its onset, but a necessary precursor to any productive peace talks.

That would be the most ideal solution; obviously a two-state resolution is viable, but right of return must also be instated, and a return to the 1967 lines may be optimal. But claiming that "the Jews deserve a state" is disgusting; it is segregationist, theocratic, and any [insert religion / race] - only state supported, maintained or created for such a reason is going to result in antagonism.

[BreadBros]

I have stressed many times I don&#39;t see myself as an anti-German, and I don&#39;t share most of Marko&#39;s views, especially not the support of US imperialism&#33; Please don&#39;t mix my views with Marko&#39;s views, and reply properly. Again, I&#39;m not an anti-German&#33;&#33;&#33; Be fair at least.

I don&#39;t think any one here has really understood my position on Israel, although I tried to explain it. I&#39;m more than critical to any nationalist movement, and that certainly includes zionism. Unlike Marco I do see anti-zionism as a legitimate, leftist position, and in no way do I equate it with anti-semitism, although the borders are certainly fluent here.

Oh, sorry then Malte. I saw a few of your arguments intertwined with Marko&#39;s and assumed you were fairly close, I was wrong though. I didn&#39;t meant to misrepresent you. I would still say the above to Marko though. And I would say that while I disagree with you on several key points, your position is at least far more realistic than Marko&#39;s.