How do we solve the Israel-Palestine issue?

[spartan]

Okay so how do we on the left see the Israel-Palestine issue ending or being solved?

Personally i believe that the two communities need to become intergrated to kill off all the hatred that the forced (Though it should be pointed out quite popular) seperatism on both sides has created.

The trouble is how to get the two communities to integrate, especially when you consider that a sizeable majority of people on both sides have reactionary religions and political beliefs holding them back from progressing?

I also find (Disturbingly) that alot of the pro-Palestinian lot here on revleft seemingly support any Palestinian group regardless of their ideology.

Some of these groups hold reactionary homophobic and sexist beliefs whilst others hold racist beliefs against Jews in general (Even going as far as using Nazi like rhetoric with their belief that the Jews run the world).

The fact is the situation in Israel-Palestine is such that one state cannot be allowed to prevail and be the dominant one in the future IMO.

Both sides have their fair share of hardliners who command a great deal of support and thus prevent any progress being made when both sides come together for peace talks.

What these two peoples need is moderates in power who arent afraid to make promises and actually stick to them.

Their has to be a large degree of give and take on both sides as the issue isnt the same as it was 10, 20 or even 50 years ago.

Jews have settled on this land and some are now third generation Israelis.

I have found that what some (Not all or even a majority) of these Palestinian groups advocate is tantamount to forcing these people out or killing them in a genocide.

The situation just isnt that simple anymore.

What the Jews did to the Palestinians right after WW2 is unforgivable but the Palestinians should be setting an example by not resorting to Israeli tactics to get what they want and deserve.

So IMO there needs to be no more terrorism and rocket attacks by some of the Palestinians and no more bulldozers, settlements in lands promised to the Palestinians and raids into Palestinian lands by some of the Israelis.

Neither side should be allowed weapons as this gives one side a distinct advantage over the other and prevents peace in this region.

[Dros]

I don't support any reactionary groups. I think what you are reffering to is that many on Revleft would "root" for the reactionary anti-imperialists (Hezbollah, Hamas, et. all) over the reactionary imperialists (Israel). And I would support that.

[jake williams]

You're acting like the situation is symmetrical, which it isn't remotely. What happened was this - in 1947 the "United Nations", which was at that point basically the Britain, the States and I believe the Soviet Union, partitioned a British protectorate, Arab land recently separated out of the Ottoman Empire, with recent Jewish immigration. The new "Jewish state" was ethnically cleansed and settled. The surrounding Arab states, repulsed, ended up fighting a couple wars in which that new State occupied what was left of the Palestinian Mandate. The brutal occupation, settlement, slow marginalization and destruction of the Palestinian nation and people continues to the day.

The anti-Semitism on the part of the Arabs, Palestinian and non-Palestinian, is sick. But I know that if I had my house bulldozed and my brother shot and my mom died because she couldn't get to a hospital and I had tank tracks all down my road, I'd be doing a hell of a lot more than throwing stones.

[Kaboly]

The history of the situation is well known, at least in leftist circles. Let’s start talking about practical solutions. Integration is desirable for all nations but specifically for Israel-Palestine. The question is how do they get to that stage. The situation is too complex for them to just ram together into one state when there are clear divisions between the two nationalities. I think a two state solution is in order in which both sides maintain sovereignty within recognized borders which amount to more than just basically Bantustands for the Palestinians. Slow and peaceful movements towards integration could then be made in a mutual manner as any form of integration should be. This is not a radical idea, it is supported by the UN, Hamas (who is the rightful representative of the Palestinian people), the arab states and Iran, Israel / the US have been blocking this course of action for years. A huge burden falls on the American people to try and influence their government’s policies on supporting Israel as they could not be imposing these horrible conditions on the Palestinians without US support. So what we or more importantly Americans ought to focus on now is doing whatever they can to organize popular knowledge and support in favor of the already conceded 2 state solution.
For more info. on the subject read, Perilous Power by Noam Chomsky and Gilbert Achar.

[Tower of Bebel]

The whole Middle East is just one of the finest examples of "socialism or barbarism". The capitalist stage of imperialism has done its best to stabilize the region in favor of capitalist exploitation. The instability we see today is the best form of stability imperialism can create. Imperialism is afraid of revolution in the middle East, since it is the most important geo-political
region in the world.

To translate this to the Palestinian question:


The main concern of the imperialist powers has always been to suppress the threat of revolution from the exploited Arab masses. While British and later US imperialism have maintained their alliances with reactionary Arab rulers, the cornerstone of their policy has been to build up the Jewish state as a bastion of capitalist power in the region.

from: http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/mideast/.

Capitalist messurements are a dead end, since imperialism is strangling every opportunity by the Arabs to turn their countries into relatively stable nations with democratic parliamentary bodies and a strong bourgeoisie. The Arab bourgeoisie are agents of imperialism and only contribute more to exploitation of the working class.
Terrorism is also a dead end. The past years it always made things worse and it diverted the workers from class struggle.

Palestinian (Arab) and Israëli (Jewish) liberation (don't forget, neoliberal policies and wartime messures have exploited the Israeli workers for years) must be linked to international socialist revolution.

[Forward Union]

I don't support any reactionary groups. I think what you are reffering to is that many on Revleft would "root" for the reactionary anti-imperialists (Hezbollah, Hamas, et. all) over the reactionary imperialists (Israel). And I would support that.

Then you're an imbecile.

While I totally support the efforts of the working class to fight off the imperialist armies, I do not support organisations who attempt to root that manifestation of class anger, into reactionary and nationalist causes. And as a communit, you shouldn't either.

And who also wish to harm the Israeli working class.

:mad:

[Random Precision]

Well, I think that the Israel/Palestine issue is a very special case for us socialists. In addition to what Rakunin said, which I mostly agree with, it is important that we have a clear view of the Israeli state. From what we see there, it fits the pattern of being a typical settler colony. It is true that there are now second and third-generation Israelis, but the same was the case for the French Algerians, the Afrikaners, et cetera. Also, up until very recently there were no domestic industries in Israel, during the 1960s above 80% of the capital entering the country was from the United States and Europe. Combine this with all the foreign aid, especially in the military from the US today and we see that the Israeli state is almost completely parasitical.

I think socialism is definitely the answer to this issue (as it is to pretty much all of them). But because of the position of the Israeli working class and the Palestinian working class, it is obvious that revolution is far more likely to come from, or at least begin with the latter. I would hope that in the case of such a revolution, the Palestinian workers would welcome their Jewish brothers and sisters to form a new socialist society with them. I think if this happened, the Israeli bourgeoisie (along with many workers) would flee en masse to the United States.

Just my $0.02...

[R_P_A_S]

What the Jews did to the Palestinians right after WW2 is unforgivable but the Palestinians should be setting an example by not resorting to Israeli tactics to get what they want and deserve.

what? nah.. so in other words get pushed and pushed.. but don't push back? I don't think so.

I'm sure palestine and israle have their leftist factions, non sectetarian and non religious. I believe these people will raise to the cause when the call is made.

[Janus]

Okay so how do we on the left see the Israel-Palestine issue ending or being solved?
The two state solution is the one that has been pursued the most and considered the most practical. However, I doubt it will achieve the type of peace that many people want/envision and it certainly won't be as effective as a longer-term one state solution.


I don't support any reactionary groups.
Yet you support "the reactionary anti-imperialists"?

[Zurdito]

Spartan, didn't you say, like , two weeks ago, that you wished Israel and Iran would nuke each other? And now you're suddenly concerned about reducing bloodhsed and defending the lives of the Israeli working class?

I support the right of every single Palestinian refugee to return immediately to their homeland. Israel is a colonising state. If you want to talk about harming the Israeli workign class, that's laughable - with the amount of money the US capitalists give to Israel, they could house every single Israeli in the US in mansions.

The ideology of Palestinian groups shouldn't matter when it's an external struggle against an unjust occupation, against genocide.

The KLA is nationalist, and pro-imperialist. Does that mean we shouldn't have supported their right to armed struggle against the genocide of Milosevic's forces? I supported them even though they were pro-NATO bombing of Serbia, because self-determination is not something you pick and choose, national liberation isn't something you deny to a nation on the basis of disliking what it would do if you gave it freedom from foreign opression.

Many Irish freedom fighters against the British were chauvinistic against Brits. Does that mean we wouldn't support them when they are shooting guns at occupying soldiers? Hmmm I wonder if their chauvinism might have actually come from being occupied, starved, raped and killed? Nah, that would be too materialsitic an explanation for so-called marxists.

Zionism is a racist ideology and right now is colonising the land of another nation, this is like Manifest Destiny all over again, and some people on here choose to oppose Palestinians "fascism". Ridiculous. What if some black South Africans hated white people, would we equate those groups to the apartheid state?

Most Israeli's are colonisers and the Palestinians have every right to drive them out. I hope they succeed.

[Reuben]

If you want to talk about harming the Israeli workign class, that's laughable - with the amount of money the US capitalists give to Israel, they could house every single Israeli in the US in mansions.



Not quite. US aid works out and about $750 per annum per israeli citizen. But the real point here is not what could be done with the money were it spent on the israeli working class but what actually IS done with the money. I would venture the opinion that most of it is not spent on improving the lives of israeli workes. Interestinglyan comparably large recipient of US aid in recent times has been egypt. Does this mean it is a nonsense to talk about defending the egyptian working class.

[Zurdito]

Not quite. US aid works out and about $750 per annum per israeli citizen. But the real point here is not what could be done with the money were it spent on the israeli working class but what actually IS done with the money. I would venture the opinion that most of it is not spent on improving the lives of israeli workes. Interestinglyan comparably large recipient of US aid in recent times has been egypt. Does this mean it is a nonsense to talk about defending the egyptian working class.

The aid to Israel keeps a lot of land in the possesion of Israeli's at the expense of the Palestians who were expelled from it. The Egyptian working class isn't in the same situation, in fact, not even a comparable situation.

[BobKKKindle$]

I support the struggle of the Palestinian people against the oppression of the Israeli state and urge members to dispense with the idea that the sides should be treated as equals, and thus should both be condemned for the use of violence to achieve their goals, as clearly the brutal crimes committed by the Israeli state make an armed struggle in response a fully justified course of action. I have no objection to Jewish people (of, for that matter, any other person) living in the Levant, but I see no reason as to why Jewish people should be given their own state, when this infringes on the well being of the region's occupants.

Spartan's support for 'give and take' on both sides shows that he simply does not understand what life is like for Palestinians living in the occupied territories. Israel is, at least in part, responsible for the current economic crisis, as the imposition of restrictions on freedom of movement, primarily through the system of checkpoints and military outposts prevents the delivery of agricultural goods to market before the goods are no longer fresh enough to be sold. Israel has also engaged in a program of systematic housing demolition in the occupied territories, as part of a campaign to impose collective punishment on communities which are suspected of harboring militants who have conducted attacks against the Israeli state and to assist the expansion of Israeli settlements. Residents are not notified of demolition in advance, and are often unable to retrieve important possessions, such as personal identification documentation from their homes.

Faced with a situation like this, and the unwillingness of Israel to make any concessions and acknowledge the existence of a Palestinian identity separate from the rest of the Arab world, how can you criticize the Palestinians from engaging in armed struggle? I do give support to Hamas and other armed groups, not because I agree with their ideas on the role of women and whether homosexuality should be legal, but because these groups form the core of the resistance. It is idealist to expect the emergence of a group that will conform to socialist principles in every way, and so long as you continue to maintain your non-committal position, you are letting down the Palestinians that suffer every day because of Israeli occupation and the refusal of western governments to provide aid to the Palestinians because of Hamas' refusal to renounce the use of violence.

Socialists need to take a strong stand on this issue and not follow Spartan's example.

[Tower of Bebel]

Israel is a colonising state. If you want to talk about harming the Israeli workign class, that's laughable - with the amount of money the US capitalists give to Israel, they could house every single Israeli in the US in mansions.

Israel is not a workers' state. When the US supports the Jewish state, then it doesn't mean they support the israeli working class.
Btw, not every Israeli is a coloniser. Amongst Israeli youngster there is a growing support for solidarity with Palestinians and the withdrawel of Jewish settlements on Palestinian grounds.

[Kaboly]

[quote=Janus;1050138]The two state solution is the one that has been pursued the most and considered the most practical. However, I doubt it will achieve the type of peace that many people want/envision and it certainly won't be as effective as a longer-term one state solution.


The 2 state solution has never been pursued in any meaningful way. Since the first camp david accords in 1978 it has been the policy of Israel/US to deal with the issue of a palestinian home land in a way similar to Blacks in South Africa under apartheid. They have only ever been offered land with very limited access to resources which does not meet their economic needs. The 2 state solution which has been supported by the UN, Hamas, the arab states and Iran but Oppposed by US/Israel (which means that basically it has just been shut down every time it has been brought up) is a solution which calls for a Palestinian state equal to that of Israel in terms of resources and economic oppourtunity. As far as achieving peace goes, I don't see why the 2 state solution wouldn't, it is supported by practically everyone except US/Israel.

[Kaboly]

[quote=bobkindles;1050217] the brutal crimes committed by the Israeli state make an armed struggle in response a fully justified course of action.



Palestinian armed struggle (not terrorism) against the Israeli govt. is absolutly justified, the problem is that it has not worked and has only justified massive repression against the Palestinian people in the eyes of US/Israel. I think the Palestinian leadership needs to focus on gainning international support mainly among the American population, that's the only way to stop US support of Israel. Once the US stops backing Israel then the Palestinians have a fair shot at dealing with these issues and if armed struggle is still nessesary, then at least overthrowing the Israeli govt. would be within the realm of possible.

[Tower of Bebel]

Palestinian armed struggle (not terrorism) against the Israeli govt. is absolutly justified, the problem is that it has not worked and has only justified massive repression against the Palestinian people in the eyes of US/Israel.

What armed struggle (with the exclusion of terrorism and military intervention)?

[Zurdito]

Israel is not a workers' state. When the US supports the Jewish state, then it doesn't mean they support the israeli working class.
Btw, not every Israeli is a coloniser. Amongst Israeli youngster there is a growing support for solidarity with Palestinians and the withdrawel of Jewish settlements on Palestinian grounds.


I specifically said mst Israelis are colonisers. Some in fact (especially many muslims but also a significant number of Jews) would be living there even if it hadn't been for the creation of the state.

You say some Israelis object to settlements on Palestinian land - the trouble is that ALL the land is Palestinian. So the state of Israel founds itself on genocide and exiling the Palestinians, sets itself up borders, and then we're expected to be grateful when some of them ineffectually campaign for the state to within its own borders?

[Dr Mindbender]

by rights, the state of Israel should not be tolerated due to the circumstances by which it was militarilly siezed. Unfortunately its too late to go back since several generations of the zionist diaspora have made their homes there.
I see 2 solutions, firstly but most unlikely to happen -Keep a permanent israeli settlement around the sites which are significant to judaism, (something similar to the relationship between roman catholicism and the vatican city) then one of the states which are friendly to israel such as the UK or USA should sanction some of their land for the purposes of resettling the zionists. Then of course, give the remaining islamic sites and land back to the Palestinians.
The other solution i see is simply a power sharing solution between the jewish and islamic authorites, creating a joint jewish-muslim state and give equal rights and representation between the 2 peoples. The only problem then would be deciding what to call the country...

Im not optimistic about a dual state solution because i dont necessarilly think it will stop the violence and the israelis would use an economically challenged palestine as a source of cheap labour. Much like the relationship between the USA and Mexico.

[BobKKKindle$]

I think the Palestinian leadership needs to focus on gainning international support mainly among the American population, that's the only way to stop US support of Israel. Once the US stops backing Israel then the Palestinians have a fair shot at dealing with these issues and if armed struggle is still nessesary, then at least overthrowing the Israeli govt. would be within the realm of possible.

Palestine already commands significant support in the imperialist states, especially amongst the student body - many universities in the U.k. are now tied to similar tertiary institutions in Palestine and have made efforts to retain contact with Palestinians. It is idealistic to argue that public support, even if such support extended to the general population beyond groups that have limited political influence, could actually change the United States' policy on this issue, given the strategic importance of Israel, within the broader context of American hegemony in the middle east, and the strength of the Israeli lobby. Armed struggle within Palestine (and, eventually, in the Imperialist states) is the only way.

[Dr Mindbender]

Palestine already commands significant support in the imperialist states, especially amongst the student body - many universities in the U.k. are now tied to similar tertiary institutions in Palestine and have made efforts to retain contact with Palestinians. It is idealistic to argue that public support, even if such support extended to the general population beyond groups that have limited political influence, could actually change the United States' policy on this issue, given the strategic importance of Israel, within the broader context of American hegemony in the middle east, and the strength of the Israeli lobby. Armed struggle within Palestine (and, eventually, in the Imperialist states) is the only way.
on that note, as a response there actually has been a growing pro-zionist movement within the UK student lobby.
http://www.oxfordstudent.com/tt2002wk3/News/students_in_pro-israel_march

http://www.betar.co.uk/

[Dimentio]

Execute all political leaders.

Create a direct-democratic federation of cantones, with Jerusalem as capital.

Threaten to send out both peoples in the desert if they continue to fight.

[Dr Mindbender]

Execute all political leaders.

Create a direct-democratic federation of cantones, with Jerusalem as capital.

Threaten to send out both peoples in the desert if they continue to fight.

Where would the borders of these cantones end? Would they be pan global? I think the buddhists, shintoists, hindus etc would have something to say about having jerusalem as their capital.

[Dimentio]

They would cover all of the mandate of Palestine except Transjordan.

The Golans should return to Syria.

[Zurdito]

the attitude thast outsiders need to tell these people what to do is extremely right-wing IMO. The only group which can liberate an opressed group is itself. There's no "outside solution" to be imposed. The Palestinians are imprisoned and exiled from their land, and suffering a genocide. There's no peace without justice.There is nothing "wrong" with the manner of their resistance - the problem is that there is an opressor to resist, and that's the only evil in this case.

[Dimentio]

The Palestinians are closer to being wiped out of the map than to being able to solve their own situation.

[spartan]

You say some Israelis object to settlements on Palestinian land - the trouble is that ALL the land is Palestinian.

No you are completly wrong.

No land belongs to a specific nationality, it belongs to everyone!

Stop being a Nationalist by splitting people up into non-existent nationalities.

The workers have no country.

[Wanted Man]

No land belongs to a specific nationality, it belongs to everyone!
Obviously. But imperialism and zionism are not interested in any of that. The Israeli settlements encroaching into Palestine are quite a bit different from "land that belongs to everyone". The land controlled by the "Palestinian Authority" is a prison with Israeli guards on the outside. Israel is a nuclear-armed outpost of imperialism, a state that occupies lands. Its well-oiled PR machine consistently puts Israel at an advantage in the western mass media by actively controlling their contents.

A revolution in the oppressed nations that does not get rid of imperialism, is not a revolution at all. Such a revolution would also be easily repressed by the forces of imperialism. In other words, socialism is not on the agenda as long as the oppressed nations remain oppressed. That doesn't mean that the enemy of our enemy is our friend, but it doesn't change their status as our enemy's enemy, which is enough at this point.

Of course, we hold that the workers have no country, and that we want a world without such divisions. But at this point, they do exist, socially constructed by the society in which they exist, including the development of imperialism. As long as that is not smashed, the workers still have countries.

[Zurdito]

Stop being a Nationalist by splitting people up into non-existent nationalities.

Go tell a Palestinian who is the victim of ethnic cleansing, apartheid treatment, exile from his home and starvation in refugee camps/the West Bank/Gaza Strip that nationalities are "non-existent". Nationalities can be constructed by material reality, just like class is constructed by material reality.

I'm not splitting them up for fucks sake, the Israeli state is doing that.

If you really objected to this then you would support the Palestinians resistance to the colonisation of their land.

I couldn't care less if they are nationalistic. Maybe native Americans who fought against white settlers weren't marxist, maybe they were chauvinsitic against whites and also nationalistic. Would you have opposed them too Spartan? Do people only get your support against opression if they are fully-formed marxists?

[Dr Mindbender]

No you are completly wrong.

No land belongs to a specific nationality, it belongs to everyone!

Stop being a Nationalist by splitting people up into non-existent nationalities.

The workers have no country.
i almost rofl'ed when i read that.

I had an image in my head of that picture of the palestinian kid chucking a rock at the israeli tank with the tank driver shouting out ''stop being a nationalist!''
:D

[Comrade Rage]

the attitude thast outsiders need to tell these people what to do is extremely right-wing IMO. The only group which can liberate an opressed group is itself. There's no "outside solution" to be imposed. The Palestinians are imprisoned and exiled from their land, and suffering a genocide. There's no peace without justice.There is nothing "wrong" with the manner of their resistance - the problem is that there is an opressor to resist, and that's the only evil in this case.As a matter of fact, the main problem with Palestinian resistance isn't the resistance itself, or the manner in which they are fighting. Their main issue is foreign intervention on behalf of the Israeli regime.

My personal opinion:
All of Israel should go back to the Palestinians, with the annexed territories (i.e. Golan Heights) going to their former nations, and special minority rights for Jews.

[spartan]

I couldn't care less if they are nationalistic. Maybe native Americans who fought against white settlers weren't marxist, maybe they were chauvinsitic against whites and also nationalistic. Would you have opposed them too Spartan? Do people only get your support against opression if they are fully-formed marxists?

I can safely say (And i think that Marx and Engels would agree with me on this one) that primitive cultures and societies (Such as the native Americans in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries) shouldnt be defended against the progressive force (At the time) that was Capitalism.

You cant have Socialism when there are primitive cultures and societies with un-Capitalist modes of production still around.

Marx said that even Capitalism is a progressive force when doing away with these backward primitive cultures and societies.

The way things happened and ended up with the native Americans was horrible but i would rather have a Capitalist society, that will lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism, then some primitive society which still practices its own form of caste oppression via its backward beliefs.

NOTE: This has nothing to do with the Israel-Palestinian issue so please dont try and connect them.

[Comrade Rage]

I can safely say (And i think that Marx and Engels would agree with me on this one) that primitive cultures and societies (Such as the native Americans in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries) shouldnt be defended against the progressive force (At the time) that was Capitalism.

You cant have Socialism when there are primitive cultures and societies with un-Capitalist modes of production still around.

Marx said that even Capitalism is a progressive force when doing away with these backward primitive cultures and societies.

The way things happened and ended up with the native Americans was horrible but i would rather have a Capitalist society, that will lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism, then some primitive society which still practices its own form of caste oppression via its backward beliefs.

NOTE: This has nothing to do with the Israel-Palestinian issue so please dont try and connect them.
That is more of an economic question than one about market economy.

And if it has naught to do with the Zionist issue, than why post here?

[Kaboly]

If terrorism is all that has been carried out by the PLO and other organizations than absolutly a change of tactics is required, however I still seriously doubt that it would make a difference. Israel is basically an extension of the US in the middle east which means that it comands the same military might. Another question should be asked, if all the Palestinian armed struggle has amounted to is terrorist attacks that have gone nowhere and caused massive retaliation then why haven't they taken on the Israeli govt. itself? Could it be that they can barelly handle the retaliation that they recieve in response to their terrorist activity and that a full scale war would simply destroy them?

[spartan]

And if it has naught to do with the Zionist issue, than why post here?

It was just a point Zurdito brought up which i wanted to argue.

Anyway like i said before the Israelis and Palestinians need to integrate to kill off all the hatred that the forced (Though very popular with both sides) seperatism has created.

Its just how to make that integration happen which is the hardest part of this whole issue.

[Comrade Rage]

It was just a point Zurdito brought up which i wanted to argue.Oh, OK.

Anyway like i said before the two peoples need to integrate to kill off all the hatred that the forced (Though very popular with both peoples) seperatism has created.

Its just how to make that integration happen which is the hardest part of this whole issue.They had been living together with much success prior to all of this shit. If they can't return to that state of affairs, then the Palestinians should recieve all of their territory back, as it wasn't them who are responsible for the current bullshit.

[Faux Real]

If terrorism is all that has been carried out by the PLO and other organizations than absolutly a change of tactics is required, however I still seriously doubt that it would make a difference. Israel is basically an extension of the US in the middle east which means that it comands the same military might. Another question should be asked, if all the Palestinian armed struggle has amounted to is terrorist attacks that have gone nowhere and caused massive retaliation then why haven't they taken on the Israeli govt. itself? Could it be that they can barelly handle the retaliation that they recieve in response to their terrorist activity and that a full scale war would simply destroy them?
What exactly do you mean by terrorism? "Terrorism" is not all that has been carried out by mass-base parties in Palestine. These populist parties try to provide for the people in allocating the as many of the few resources they receive.

The armed resistance cannot "take on" the Israeli govt itself because Palestine is a virtual prison with all the checkpoints and whatnot. If Israel saw that there was a large standing army of resistance fighters they could just send in their jets to bomb indiscriminately, as they usually do in the cases of one or two fighters in an area, before they even reach the border. I guess that is why fighters more often than not ambush the IDF when in their territory.

And if they could "barely handle the retaliation" the resistance would have died out a long time ago.

[Kaboly]

What armed struggle (with the exclusion of terrorism and military intervention)?
__________________





If terrorism is all that has been carried out by the PLO and other organizations than absolutly a change of tactics is required, however I still seriously doubt that it would make a difference. Israel is basically an extension of the US in the middle east which means that it comands the same military might. Another question should be asked, if all the Palestinian armed struggle has amounted to is terrorist attacks that have gone nowhere and caused massive retaliation then why haven't they taken on the Israeli govt. itself? Could it be that they can barelly handle the retaliation that they recieve in response to their terrorist activity and that a full scale war would simply destroy them?

[Comrade Rage]

What armed struggle (with the exclusion of terrorism and military intervention)?
__________________





If terrorism is all that has been carried out by the PLO and other organizations than absolutly a change of tactics is required, however I still seriously doubt that it would make a difference. Israel is basically an extension of the US in the middle east which means that it comands the same military might. Another question should be asked, if all the Palestinian armed struggle has amounted to is terrorist attacks that have gone nowhere and caused massive retaliation then why haven't they taken on the Israeli govt. itself? Could it be that they can barelly handle the retaliation that they recieve in response to their terrorist activity and that a full scale war would simply destroy them?
Did you completely ignore comrade in arms's post?

[Kaboly]

[quote=comrade in arms;1050777]What exactly do you mean by terrorism? "Terrorism" is not all that has been carried out by mass-base parties in Palestine. These populist parties try to provide for the people in allocating the as many of the few resources they receive.

I agree, I was just responding to someone else who was questioning wether armed struggle has taken place besides terrorist attacks.

[Kaboly]

The armed resistance cannot "take on" the Israeli govt itself because Palestine is a virtual prison with all the checkpoints and whatnot. If Israel saw that there was a large standing army of resistance fighters they could just send in their jets to bomb indiscriminately, as they usually do in the cases of one or two fighters in an area, before they even reach the border. I guess that is why fighters more often than not ambush the IDF when in their territory.



That's true, and that goes hand in hand with the fact that US/Israel power is no match for any Palestinian militant organizations.

[Comrade Rage]

The armed resistance cannot "take on" the Israeli govt itself because Palestine is a virtual prison with all the checkpoints and whatnot. If Israel saw that there was a large standing army of resistance fighters they could just send in their jets to bomb indiscriminately, as they usually do in the cases of one or two fighters in an area, before they even reach the border. I guess that is why fighters more often than not ambush the IDF when in their territory.



That's true, and that goes hand in hand with the fact that US/Israel power is no match for any Palestinian militant organizations.
Just so you know...


Text Here.
That's how to use the quote function.

Now... how are Palestinians 'no match' for the US military? They aren't supplied as well, but they have the speed and cunning that a standard army lacks. History is replete with superior armed forces being defeated by guerilla warfare.

[Kaboly]

Palestine already commands significant support in the imperialist states, especially amongst the student body - many universities in the U.k. are now tied to similar tertiary institutions in Palestine and have made efforts to retain contact with Palestinians. It is idealistic to argue that public support, even if such support extended to the general population beyond groups that have limited political influence, could actually change the United States' policy on this issue, given the strategic importance of Israel, within the broader context of American hegemony in the middle east, and the strength of the Israeli lobby. Armed struggle within Palestine (and, eventually, in the Imperialist states) is the only way.



The United States (or any of the other imperialist countries for that matter) while being nowhere close to a perfect democracy is still resposive to popular opinion, that is why the elites put so much energy into the public relations industry to keep that opinion margenalized and generally conformed to their interests, they are always scared that the majority of the population are going to change their minds and thus influence policy. However knowlege is not enough people also need to have their voices heard which means protesting. It is outrageous to even think about armed struggle in the imperialist countries, it is not justified as they are also in many ways some of the most free places on earth which is due to non violent struggle against elite power throughout the centuries. Public knowlege on the matter has to reach out to more than just groups of leftists in universities.

[Kaboly]

Just so you know...

That's how to use the quote function.

Now... how are Palestinians 'no match' for the US military? They aren't supplied as well, but they have the speed and cunning that a standard army lacks. History is replete with superior armed forces being defeated by guerilla warfare.



Thanks for the tip.

You're right there have been many admirable guerilla movements throughout history that have defeated major powers, if I was unclear before I apologize I'm not saying that it is impossible, what i am saying is that it is not probable and that they have been in this situation for aproxiametely 60 years without any real progress, I think that they have come to the same conclusion as me, that is why Hamas (Who represents the Palestinian population) is in favor of the almost unanimously conceded 2 state solution which US/Israel opposes.

[Zurdito]

I can safely say (And i think that Marx and Engels would agree with me on this one) that primitive cultures and societies (Such as the native Americans in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries) shouldnt be defended against the progressive force (At the time) that was Capitalism.

I'm not defending the culture, I'm defending the people. Can't you tell the difference? They themselves can change their culture, through the process of self-empowerment, by resisting opression.

I haven't read Marx and Engels defending genocide of an ethnic group such as happened to the Native Americans. If they did, they are wrong. I'm a communist because I want to improve the lives of the poor, not because I want to commit genocide against them so a more advanced culture can take their place. No bastardised intepretation of Marx and Engles will change that basic question.


You cant have Socialism when there are primitive cultures and societies with un-Capitalist modes of production still around.

You can't have socialism while there is anything other than, erm, socialism, it's self-evident, you keep repeating the same mistake in every thread. However, the point is for the poor to arrive at socialism via their own liberation, as a reaction to the attempts to opress them.


Marx said that even Capitalism is a progressive force when doing away with these backward primitive cultures and societies.

It's progressive for a society to develop from capitalist opression, towards socialism. Therefore when imperialism (capitalism) is opressing a nationality, we should support that nationality's fight to overthrow their opressors.

Also, are you racist? Because the native Americans could have integrated into a capitalist economy and then overthrown it, why not? Why do you assume they had to be wiped out in order for that coutnry where they lived ever to progress? Weren't they capable of progress from pre-capitalist society to capitalist exploitation under imperialism to socialism? Like all "cultural" theories, yours displays your true colours underneath.

I don't know if Marx thought the same as you. If he did, he had the excuse of living in the 19th century. What's yours?


NOTE: This has nothing to do with the Israel-Palestinian issue so please dont try and connect them.

Well I will connect them, I already did, and it has everything to do with it, because the Israelis today are doing the same thing to the Palestinians, and Zionism is a lot like Manifest Destiny. Unlike you, I think Northern America could have reached modernity without the genocide of its native population. So no, I don't see what happened necessarilly as "progressive", to see it like that is highly deterministic, and it is vulgar, dogmatic marxism as opposed to the real marxist method, which doesn't just say "Marx said X, therefore X is true".

Out of interest do you think Africa would be better of if the native populationhad been enitrely wiped out?

How about South America?

Is Bolivia's relative backwardness compared to Argentina due to its large indigenous population?

ok we are getting sidetracked here, but when you start syaing genocide is progressive, you can only blame yourself.

[ArabRASH]

The problem is Israelis don't want a solution. They never have. They like the position they're in now and wouldn't give it up for anything.

I don't know about Hamas, but here in Lebanon Hezbollah is a strong ally of the left. General Secretary Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah praised Chavez after the war and called him our brother. In the Hezbollah-Israeli war of 2006 the armed faction of the Lebanese Communist Party fought and twelve communist soldiers died. Ppl may think these parties are Islamofascist, but from my experience with them, they are much more open-minded than other so-called "democratic" parties, and yes they are religious, but they respect all sects.

[Marsella]

Are there any differences between the colonization of America and the colonization of Palestine?

For if we uphold that the Palestinians have the right to return to their land, then we should also extend that to native Indians (correct me if that term is not the appropriate term).

The only difference it seems is that the American colonization acheived its purpose - i.e. they have truly decimated the original inhabitants.

I am sure we could apply this analysis to dozens of colonized countries.

So, American comrades, would you be willing to 'hand over your lands' to the original inhabitants? ;)

[Tower of Bebel]

No you are completly wrong.

No land belongs to a specific nationality, it belongs to everyone!

Stop being a Nationalist by splitting people up into non-existent nationalities.

The workers have no country.

You wont get much support with this phrasing. There are peoples, and every people has the right to have a place to settle.
I suggest we campaign for the right of both Palestinian and Jewish workers to have their own land, through a campaign for revolutionary socialism. Eventually, in a socialist society borders become/are obsolete, though you will still have several peoples concentrated in certain territories.

[spartan]

I'm not defending the culture, I'm defending the people. Can't you tell the difference?

I couldnt.


They themselves can change their culture, through the process of self-empowerment, by resisting opression.

Yeah but the trouble is they never did as far as i know.


I haven't read Marx and Engels defending genocide of an ethnic group such as happened to the Native Americans. If they did, they are wrong. I'm a communist because I want to improve the lives of the poor, not because I want to commit genocide against them so a more advanced culture can take their place. No bastardised intepretation of Marx and Engles will change that basic question.

Where did i say that genocide was acceptable?

All i said was that there primitive cultures and societies needed to be destroyed as it was holding them back from Capitalism (Which leads to Socialism).

What happened to the native American people was terrible and unforgivable and i would never advocate the destruction of a people just so that Capitalism can be achieved!


You can't have socialism while there is anything other than, erm, socialism, it's self-evident, you keep repeating the same mistake in every thread. However, the point is for the poor to arrive at socialism via their own liberation, as a reaction to the attempts to opress them.

The point i was making was that you cant have Socialism implemented when your society is primitive or Feudal (Case in point being Tsarist Russia and China before Mao).

Socialism will only come about when the material conditions necessary for Socialism in a Capitalist society are a reality.


It's progressive for a society to develop from capitalist opression, towards socialism.

Its also progressive for a primitive or Feudal society to develop from that oppression towards Capitalism (This is what Marx meant when he said that even Capitalism can be a progressive force).


Also, are you racist?

What?


Because the native Americans could have integrated into a capitalist economy and then overthrown it, why not?

Yes but the point is they never did (As far as i know).

The fact is (The genocide of the people aside) would you rather have a primitive society, with its own cultural oppression and without the opportunity to implement Socialism, or would you rather have a Capitalist society with the opportunity of implemeting Socialism?


Why do you assume they had to be wiped out in order for that coutnry where they lived ever to progress?

I never said the people should be wiped out (What exactly made you think that?).

All i said was that there primitive backward culture should have been superseded by Capitalism (Hopefully in a peaceful manner though unfortunately things never really worked out like that).


ok we are getting sidetracked here, but when you start syaing genocide is progressive, you can only blame yourself.

Jesus Christ where did you pull that statement from?

I never said that the genocide of the native Americans was progressive!

I said that Capitalism (Which resulted in the genocide of the native Americans because of the fucked up policies of the US) was a progressive force (As it can lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism) when compared to the backward and primitive culture of the native Americans (Which cant lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism as they only exist in a society with a Capitalist mode of production which dont exist in primitive societies).

What happened to the native American people (Not its culture or society) was wrong and i would never defend the genocide against them as it was avoidable to say the least.

In conclusion Capitalism was progressive for America but how the US went about implementing it (Via the genocide of a people) was not progressive.

[MT5678]

Lets get back to the topic that this thread began with.

There is no way that Israel will give anything up to the Palestinians. Its violations of the GA and the Geneva Conventions occur now and will continue to the end of time. Israel will repeat its actions with farcical negotiations (like Annapolis, which refused to deal with bantustanization, right of return, or border-crossing rights, or settlement, see the ZNet stuff for more details) that only Palestinian Uncle Toms like Abbas will care about.

What we should do is back a popular, Marxist revolution against Israel like the PFLP have in mind. There can be no compromise between master and oppressed.

[Zurdito]

Are there any differences between the colonization of America and the colonization of Palestine?

For if we uphold that the Palestinians have the right to return to their land, then we should also extend that to native Indians (correct me if that term is not the appropriate term).

The only difference it seems is that the American colonization acheived its purpose - i.e. they have truly decimated the original inhabitants.

I am sure we could apply this analysis to dozens of colonized countries.

So, American comrades, would you be willing to 'hand over your lands' to the original inhabitants? ;)


How does that work?

I support the native Americans (and aboriginal Australians, native Argentinians, etc.) having land redistriuted to them from rich landowners.

The difference with the Palestinian situation is that there are 5 millions Palestinian refugees.

Don't they all have te right to return to their homeland?

[Zurdito]

Spartan - if you oppose what happened to the native Americans then I can't see what your disagreement was with what I said?

And no I don't necessarilly think backwards cultures need to e "wiped out". That is the language of mass murder.

I would rather see them take control of the material means needed to develop themselves, under their own leadership.

[spartan]

I would rather see them take control of the material means needed to develop themselves, under their own leadership.
Yeah i understand that but the point is that the native Americans never did that did they?

They resisted the colonalism of the US (Hey thats their right to resist) but they held onto their primitive culture, mode of production and society (Except for the adoption of firearms but that was only to be better able to resist).

This gave the US "justification" (Well thats how they saw it) to commit genocide against the "savages".

In a perfect world the native Americans would have adopted Capitalism and resisted the American colonials at the same time but they ultimately didnt.

Thus there resistance was for the preservation of their un-Capitalist primitive culture and society (Though later it became a struggle for their mere survival with the USA's genocidal actions).

That is why Capitalisms success was good as it would lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism to become a reality on the American continent (Where it never existed before).

Of course how the Capitalists went about making it a success, via the genocide of the native Americans, was wrong but that is a seperate matter entirely.

[jake williams]

My honest (and ultra-cynical, pessimistic) prediction about the future of Palestine?

I think it's just going to disappear, slowly. I think there'll never be a Palestine and eventually Israel will just swallow it whole, just like America swallowed half of Mexico. Assimilation and attrition, eventually you'll just get a singular state, nominally "binational", but with one nation so marginalized, the diaspora basically assimilated into Jordan and wherever else they find themselves. Bitter feelings, but acceptance. You already see it now.

[Nakidana]

Yeah i understand that but the point is that the native Americans never did that did they?

They resisted the colonalism of the US (Hey thats their right to resist) but they held onto their primitive culture, mode of production and society (Except for the adoption of firearms but that was only to be better able to resist).

This gave the US "justification" (Well thats how they saw it) to commit genocide against the "savages".

In a perfect world the native Americans would have adopted Capitalism and resisted the American colonials at the same time but they ultimately didnt.

Thus there resistance was for the preservation of their un-Capitalist primitive culture and society (Though later it became a struggle for their mere survival with the USA's genocidal actions).

That is why Capitalisms success was good as it would lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism to become a reality on the American continent (Where it never existed before).

Of course how the Capitalists went about making it a success, via the genocide of the native Americans, was wrong but that is a seperate matter entirely.

Wait let me understand this correctly. You're saying it was okay for Europe to occupy the American continent and implement capitalism, only the way they did it was wrong?


On topic: What do you all think of a one state solution with the return of all Palestinian refugees? In such a case wouldn't the Palestinians outnumber the Israelis? :D

[spartan]

Wait let me understand this correctly. You're saying it was okay for Europe to occupy the American continent and implement capitalism, only the way they did it was wrong?
I am not saying that it was "okay" for the colonization of the Americas, but the fact is for the material conditions necessary for Socialism to become a reality, Capitalism needs to prevail over backward societies that still have primitive and un-Capitalist modes of production (Which wont lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism).

We cant romanticize the native Americans of this period as they were resisting colonialism as a way of keeping their primitive way of life (Which wont lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism) not because they were anti-Imperialist or whatever.

Like Zurdito i wish that the native Americans would have adopted Capitalism and still resisted the colonialism but they didnt and they were eventually beaten for it.

Such is the way things are though i doubt Marx and Engels shed a tear over it (They probably saw it as Capitalism being a progressive force for the American continent by developing the land and building up industries that will eventually lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism to become a reality).

Besides these primitive societies had their own forms of oppression (Such as religious or in gender roles) so they were hardly worthy of defence (Especially when their primitive way of life wont lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism).

Jesus Christ i fucking said "Lead to the material conditions necessary for Socialism" loads of times in that post!

[Zurdito]

My honest (and ultra-cynical, pessimistic) prediction about the future of Palestine?

I think it's just going to disappear, slowly. I think there'll never be a Palestine and eventually Israel will just swallow it whole, just like America swallowed half of Mexico. Assimilation and attrition, eventually you'll just get a singular state, nominally "binational", but with one nation so marginalized, the diaspora basically assimilated into Jordan and wherever else they find themselves. Bitter feelings, but acceptance. You already see it now.

I'm not sure, about that, the US was never in the situation Israel is in. Apartheid South Africa is a better example - in fact didn't Olmert himself use thaat example?

Spartan - with respect, I think you are really confused.

There are all sorts of examples where brutal processes of social reorganisation coincided with material progress. It's impossible for us to know the extent to which one was dependent on the other.

However, for example, I wouldn't say I regret that the industrial revolution happened, but that doesn't mean that if we'd been alive at the time, we shouldn't have opposed the forced land-clearances and child labour and terrible conditions in the slums etc. It's extremely deterministic to say that this is the only way we could have ever arrived at the modern world. A marxists duty is to always be on the side of the opressed and exploited, to be among them, and to fight to their best of our ability to bring those groups to power, and along the way ahceive as many transitional reforms as possible.

So saying that in the indusrial revolution, any decent person would have had to oppose the treament of the working class at the time, is not the same as saying that we regret the industrial revolution.

Likewise, with the issue of Native Americans, it does not follow that because you opposed them having their land stolen and opposed the genocide against them, that you wish for them to live in the same way forever. In fact the act of uniting to defeat a coloniser would surely have led to a qualitative change in their consciousness, to a revolutionary consciousness in fact?

Now the same goes for the Palestinians. Excep of course that you can't even use the excuse that the Palestinians have a pre-capitalist society, because they don't. The imperialism they face is capitalist imperialism, which means they are already part of the capitalist system and opressed by it. If we don't stand for the opressed and exploited within the system overthrowing the system itself, what the hell do we stand for? It's very deterministic to say that every succesful blow against the third world and the working class at home to further the capitalist system is "progressive". Marxists can never be taken seriosuly like that, it's like standing in front of a dying man and telling him he is on his way to heaven.

[spartan]

Now the same goes for the Palestinians. Excep of course that you can't even use the excuse that the Palestinians have a pre-capitalist society, because they don't.

Yeah i wasnt trying to connect the two peoples situations.

I was treating the native American issue as seperate from the Palestinian issue.


The imperialism they face is capitalist imperialism, which means they are already part of the capitalist system and opressed by it. If we don't stand for the opressed and exploited within the system overthrowing the system itself, what the hell do we stand for? It's very deterministic to say that every succesful blow against the third world and the working class at home to further the capitalist system is "progressive". Marxists can never be taken seriosuly like that, it's like standing in front of a dying man and telling him he is on his way to heaven.

Yes i understand that but some of the Palestinians groups, with the more reactionary beliefs, should be educated to understand that this is wrong and wont help their cause.

Perhaps this education will come during their resistance to Capitalist Imperialism or after, if they win, but it has to come as it wont be fair on the people who will suffer under a reactionary Palestinian groups rule (Women forced to dress modestly, not have abortions and a liberated sexual lifestyle and homosexuals).

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Once again, comrade Zurdito proves to be one of the few who actually think through their head.

[spartan]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2240648,00.html

This is a nice bit of news where the famous Israeli pianist and conductor, Daniel Barenboim, has been given a Palestinian passport in light of his work at bringing together and promoting cultural exchange between Arab and Israeli youths.

This is the kind of integration that i am on about.

[Kaboly]

[quote=spartan;1051237]

All i said was that there primitive cultures and societies needed to be destroyed as it was holding them back from Capitalism (Which leads to Socialism).





Sorry to butt in here however in my opinion primative society is pretty much synonymous with Socialism albeit much simpler. I like like to think that as socialists we are actually very conservative in the sense that we are trying to go back to the original natural priciples of people, which are in my opinion: freedom, equality and solidarity and are also all prerequisites for democracy. I think the ideaology of Socialism was formed as a way to instill those natural principles in an advaced society which is very radical when compared to Capitalism. The primative native society in North America was as far I can tell a wonderful state.

"To understand what the state of society ought to be, it is necessary to have some idea of the natural and primitive state of man; such as it is at this day among the Indians of North America. There is not, in that state, any of those spectacles of human misery which poverty and want present to our eyes in all the towns and streets in Europe." " The life of an Indian is a continual holiday."

- Thomas Paine



Marx also agreed with the assumption that primative society was communism.

[spartan]

Marx also agreed with the assumption that primative society was communism.

Yes but he never said that we should go back to those societies.

Marx and Engels very openly supported Capitalist attempts at development in primitive regions as they understood that only Capitalism will bring about the material conditions necessary for Socialism (Not the primitive kind either).