Palestinian Leftist parties discuss unity negotiations at Gaza summit

[luchtoibre]

Leftist parties discuss unity negotiations at Gaza summit
Date: 07 / 11 / 2008 Time: 19:54


Gaza – Ma’an –
The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) said that the success of the upcoming Cairo talks is conditional on whether or not the parties actually form a unity government.
Ramzi Rabah, a leader within the DFLP, said that such a unity government would require political, professional and independent figures capable of lifting the siege of the Gaza Strip and supervising the hypothetical presidential and legislative elections.
The elections “would be held simultaneously according to full proportionate representation to build a comprehensive partnership of all parties, factions and national figures,” Rabah said.
Rabah called for “reforming and upgrading” the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), as well, by “electing a new unified national council for all Palestinians inside Palestine and in the Diaspora.”
The statements came during a political forum organized by Palestinian leftist parties in the Sheikh Rudwan neighborhood of Gaza. The DFLP’s Rabah joined Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)-member Usama Ahmad and Tal’at As-Safadi, an executive committee-member of the Palestine People’s Party (PPP). Other Gazan residents joined in, as well.
Leaders called for rebuilding the security departments on a professional and non-partisan basis, in order to serve previously signed agreements in Cairo and Damascus that largely call for replacing party-monopolization of the security forces. Rabah blamed that disunity for the so-called Palestinian Civil War and what he called Hamas’s “military coup.”
Rabah also rejected the ongoing “bilateral dialogue” between Fatah and Hamas, calling for a “comprehensive national dialogue that includes all Palestinians.”
“After all, they are the real losers of the state’s division,” he added.
But Rabah sharply criticized the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s visit to the region, as well as the International Quartet’s meetings planned for during the Cairo summit as “efforts to abort the Egyptians’ efforts during the national Palestinian internal talks.”
Tala’at As-Safadi, of the PPP, called for forming an Arab committee affiliated with the Arab League to examine attempts by outsiders to influence the outcome of the unity talks in November. He also said the Egyptian proposal was a “good foundation for beginning the national comprehensive dialogue.”
PFLP leader Usama Ahmad called for ending the dark history of political imprisonment, halting “media incitement” and generally improving the atmosphere for success in Cairo, warning, in particular, of the consequences of its failure.

[Yehuda Stern]

Should we continue to suck up to European imperialism, or should we just go ahead and support the Americans and Zionists like Fatah? Should we continue betraying our own people by staying in the PLO, or should we do so by becoming cheerleaders for Hamas? Should we still claim to be Marxists, or should we just dump Marxism officially, since there's basically no difference? These are only some of the questions facing those who want unity with the kinds of the PPP and the Fatah left.

[KurtFF8]

^I don't think I've ever seen you say a positive thing about any existing leftist organization. (although in this case the criticism is valid, yet quite pessimistic)

Anyway, the Palestinian left needs to reorganize. The PLO went down quite a questionable path (terrorism that is of course). The Marxist wing ought to actually become Marxist again.

[Revy]

The PFLP carried out a fatal attack on an Israeli supermarket in February 2008 so they haven't stopped. I can't defend that. Then again, I've gotten into debates with a "socialist" who supported the Palestinians' right to blow up Israeli civilians. I really can't see what place that kind of view can come from other than anti-Semitism.

[manic expression]

The targeting of civilians is tragic and horrible I agree, but if you look at how the Palestinian people are treated it is not without reason. The South African liberation movement also attacked civilian targets; that was unfortunately part of the legitimate armed struggle and I think the case is quite similar here. That has nothing to do with anti-Semitism and everything to do with a reluctance to deny the Palestinians an ability to counter imperialism.

I admit, I may be wrong on this. However, when I see Israel explicitly (and unapologetically) murdering women and children and civilians, it makes me think twice about denouncing Palestinians when they fight fire with fire.

[Revy]

The targeting of civilians is tragic and horrible I agree, but if you look at how the Palestinian people are treated it is not without reason. The South African liberation movement also attacked civilian targets; that was unfortunately part of the legitimate armed struggle and I think the case is quite similar here. That has nothing to do with anti-Semitism and everything to do with a reluctance to deny the Palestinians an ability to counter imperialism.

I admit, I may be wrong on this. However, when I see Israel explicitly (and unapologetically) murdering women and children and civilians, it makes me think twice about denouncing Palestinians when they fight fire with fire.

Look, you can bring up the South African movement, but many of the victims of suicide bombings are in fact black Jews from Africa.

Is it about "fighting fire with fire"? WHERE is the socialism? WHERE is the appeal to common class interest?

All I see is attacks on innocent people. What if that Israeli is someone who actively speaks for the Palestinians? This kind of logic sounds like the same kind of logic used to justify the Hiroshima bombings - oh but the Japanese did brutal things to the Chinese!

[manic expression]

The ethnicity of the victims was never the point. The purpose of targeting civilians is in question, and the situation the Palestinians face is very similar to that of the people of South Africa during apartheid.

My point is about opposing imperialism, which is very much about the working class. National liberation and the defeat of imperialism interests in the Middle East (which is what Israel represents) is what is at stake. That would signal progress for the working class, and that is what socialists everywhere must realize. If you cannot see the common class interests here, you need to take a second look.

Attacks on innocent people? Yes, but you could not be more wrong about the context of the thing. First, the possibility that one of the Israeli targets speaks for the Palestinians is so mathematically low that it needn't concern us. Second, the nuclear bombings of Japan during WWII was carried out by a vastly superior force, the US military, with the express intent of liquidating vast populations. Palestinian bombings, as tragic and terrible as they are, possess neither the scale (that you would ignore this incredible difference is absurd) nor the intent; in addition, they are almost always in response to attacks from the Israeli military, which has the luxury of utilizing the best equipped and trained forces in the region.

And it is fighting fire with fire, as Zionist attacks against Palestinian civilians are met with Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians. As the context is an incredibly powerful force oppressing the entire Palestinian nation through unspeakably barbaric methods, tell me: how is the Palestinian resistance so unreasonable in responding to the crimes committed against them?

Again, I admit that I could very well be wrong. However, the history of Zionist aggression against the Palestinian people does give validity to what I'm arguing.

[Revy]

Why do you keep saying that you could be wrong? This is about opinions, not facts.

You keep on talking about fighting fire with fire, but if that were the case, the Palestinians would fight the military and state instead of innocent people.

Not to mention that suicide bombings kill the bomber also, so I fail to see how it even makes sense, when a person is killing themselves to kill other people, this is not "legitimate resistance", it is a tragedy.

It's not "progress for the working class" if they are blown up. I don't see the connection. What I do see is an atrocity that is used to validate even more atrocities against the Palestinians. It also keeps the anti-Palestinian sentiment in Israeli minds. Clearly, it's not ending the occupation when these groups have been sending young people to their "martyrdom" for decades.

[manic expression]

I keep saying that I could be mistaken because this is, after all, a question of tactics. I do not pretend to be a particularly qualified judge of such things, and so I make qualified statements instead.

Fighting fire with fire means doing to the enemy what the enemy does to you. If the enemy targets civilians, you target civilians. It's not that difficult of a concept.

Yes, I agree that such acts are tragedies. However, your argument doesn't fly because suicide bombs (in this case, mind you) aren't just supposed to kill people, they're meant to respond to the actions of the IDF. Besides, regular resistance also includes the sacrifice of lives, sometimes more lives if you can't compete with the enemy's conventional forces (which no one in the Middle East can).

The armed struggle is in the interests of the working class because it is resistance to imperialism. I am not arguing that suicide bombings are, in and of themselves, progress, that would be silly; I AM arguing that such distasteful tactics may be an important part of a legitimate challenge to capital in the region. Please don't put words in my mouth.

The anti-Palestinian sentiment existed in Israeli minds in 1947, in 1968, in 1973 and so on and so forth. The Palestinians are reacting to oppression; to blame them for anti-Palestinian sentiments is both ludicrous and patronizing.

And if you payed attention to the history of the region, the Palestinian struggle has been very important. After 1973, virtually no one wanted to (or could) support the Palestinian nation, and so armed struggle has been their sole means of checking the Zionist menace. I'm not saying they've won at all, I'm saying it's legitimate, and you keep avoiding this for some reason.

[chegitz guevara]

Why do you keep saying that you could be wrong? This is about opinions, not facts.

You keep on talking about fighting fire with fire, but if that were the case, the Palestinians would fight the military and state instead of innocent people.

You direct your fire where it is most effective. Any strategy of direct confrontation with the Israeli military is doomed to failure. As immoral as the strategy of attacking civilians is, unfortunately, it is the only tactic the Palestinians have that could possible hurt Israel. I'm not justifying it. I'm just explaining it.

[Yehuda Stern]

I don't think I've ever seen you say a positive thing about any existing leftist organization.

You probably haven't. Many of these organizations have some good people and some of them in their ancient past even took some pretty good positions, but on the whole their political outlook is reformist and I have nothing good to say about that.

Mind you, there are some left groups I very much approve of, but seeing as my organization has no direct links to any I do not want to give the wrong impression.


(although in this case the criticism is valid, yet quite pessimistic)


Why pessimistic? You yourself admit that this "left" is a heaving pile of shit. Nothing will be achieved from uniting with pro-Zionist traitors like the PPP, who are basically subordinated to Fatah and the Israeli CP.

Manic expression: I see where you're coming from, but as I've said in the past, the question is - what do you want? Do you want some miserable and useless imaginary "revenge" against every Israeli man, woman and child, or do you want a working class revolution? If you want the latter, you want to convince Israeli workers that their interest is in supporting the Palestinian cause, not push them into the arms of the reactionaries.

[manic expression]

Why pessimistic? You yourself admit that this "left" is a heaving pile of shit. Nothing will be achieved from uniting with pro-Zionist traitors like the PPP, who are basically subordinated to Fatah and the Israeli CP.

Quick question: I know you talked briefly about Hamas upthread, but what do you think Hamas represents for the Palestinian people at this point? I have heard that they do not promote an Islamist social program, and if that is the case, are they not simply an anti-imperialist group? Basically, I'd like to know if you regard Hamas as reactionary.


Manic expression: I see where you're coming from, but as I've said in the past, the question is - what do you want? Do you want some miserable and useless imaginary "revenge" against every Israeli man, woman and child, or do you want a working class revolution? If you want the latter, you want to convince Israeli workers that their interest is in supporting the Palestinian cause, not push them into the arms of the reactionaries.

Your point is well taken. However, it's not about what I want, it's about what the Palestinian resistance deems appropriate. I am in complete agreement with you: Israeli workers must find solidarity with the Palestinian struggle, but how much relevance does this have to the reality on the ground? When I see Israeli warships shelling Palestinian families at a picnic, it is difficult for me to ask that Palestinians NOT respond with any means necessary. The work that your organization is involved with, spreading working-class consciousness throughout the Israeli population, is incredibly noble and I can't begin to tell you the admiration I hold for that, but we must also realize that this won't counter the crimes of the IDF.

Again, I find such tactics terrible and horrific, and so this is certainly not about revenge. I simply find it unreasonable for any of us to deny the Palestinians any method of struggle given the menace they face every day.

[Bronsky]

The targeting of civilians is tragic and horrible I agree, but if you look at how the Palestinian people are treated it is not without reason. The South African liberation movement also attacked civilian targets; that was unfortunately part of the legitimate armed struggle and I think the case is quite similar here. That has nothing to do with anti-Semitism and everything to do with a reluctance to deny the Palestinians an ability to counter imperialism.

I admit, I may be wrong on this. However, when I see Israel explicitly (and unapologetically) murdering women and children and civilians, it makes me think twice about denouncing Palestinians when they fight fire with fire.


Your post is closer to reality than the post you replied to. Anti-Semitism is used almost as much as a bullet against the Palestinians and those who support their struggle, but Marxist can never countenance terrorism against civilians, even as a retaliation to oppression. The polarisation of races in Palestine/Israel is strengthened by these actions. The best way forward is to support those organisations within Israel itself who seek to unite Arab and Jewish workers. In spite of the oppression there it is still a lot easier to have unity in Israel than it is within the occupied territories.

My opinion is as socialist we should dismiss any support for a two state system. It will only leave the power with the Zionists in Israel and the White House. Our aim should be a one state for all, living in peace under the same flag, the Red flag of a socialist state.

It is claimed this is a pipe dream, yet given the backing and leadership it would be a lot easier to achieve than a two state system. In both cases the Zionist grip on Israel and American politics would be the first step, so if that can be achieved for a two state solution why not take it a step further and have a lasting peace under a socialist flag. Two states will never create peace, it is the carrot for the donkey tactic, as soon as the donkey is where it has to be it gets beaten with the stick.

[Bronsky]

The fight in S Africa was one of a bourgeois nationalist regime against the remnants of Colonialism. The principled support for the ANC was critical support, many Left organisations gave full support without reservations turning a blind eye to the acts of terror against not just the white population but Blacks from other organisations which was wrong at the time and is the result of the situation today in S Africa and Zimbabwe and so it will be with a nationalist regime in Palestine

[BobKKKindle$]

All I see is attacks on innocent people

That's because you have a complete lack of class analysis. The Palestinian liberation movement does not use attacks directed civilians because they take pleasure in the deaths of people who have no direct connection to the military apart from their obligation to undergo national service, but because they possess no other means of fighting against the brutal occupation which denies the Palestinian people their basic rights. If the Palestinian movement was equipped with the kind of military hardware the Israelis are using to maintain their system of oppression and intimidate the Palestinian masses, then they could pursue their struggle in a different way and would not be forced to resort to the kind of attacks you are so eager to condemn. Based on your statement, can we assume that you would tolerate the resistance if the Palestinians were using jet fighters and tanks instead of bombs strapped to the bodies of young alienated men?

[Yehuda Stern]

what do you think Hamas represents for the Palestinian people at this point? I have heard that they do not promote an Islamist social program, and if that is the case, are they not simply an anti-imperialist group? Basically, I'd like to know if you regard Hamas as reactionary.


I don't think there can be any doubt that Hamas is reactionary: it does promote Islamism, though it knows it has no basis for the setting of an Islamic state like in Iran. However, its politics are those of Islamism, and inasmuch as they do not advocate overthrowing imperialism and capitalism in a revolutionary way, but try to win a place as part of the imperialist order, they are textbook reactionary.

From the point of view, Hamas is another party whose function is to block the development of an independent working class revolutionary party, which used to be the function of Fatah and its other cheerleaders in the PLO. Revolutionaries should work to win the leadership of the Palestinian resistance from them and should expose them at every possible chance as people who would betray it the moment they'll be able to, just like the PLO did.

That doesn't mean that in certain military situations, revolutionaries shouldn't favor the victory of Hamas forces. But that has nothing to do with the leadership of the group or its ideas, but with its basis in the Palestinians and the fact that sometimes it finds itself in a military conflict with Israeli-American imperialism.

About terrorism: first, thanks for your kind words. Second, I deny anything that in my opinion serves as a brake on the development of revolutionary consciousness among workers. Therefore I oppose completely terrorist attacks on civilians. Soldiers and government are a different matter of course.

BTW, I know very well that most Jewish workers will never be able to become revolutionaries - but that just makes the job harder, and makes terrorism directed at civilians all the more damaging to the cause of socialism.

[manic expression]

The fight in S Africa was one of a bourgeois nationalist regime against the remnants of Colonialism. The principled support for the ANC was critical support, many Left organisations gave full support without reservations turning a blind eye to the acts of terror against not just the white population but Blacks from other organisations which was wrong at the time and is the result of the situation today in S Africa and Zimbabwe and so it will be with a nationalist regime in Palestine

This isn't fully true if you look at the history of South Africa. Apartheid was not just the "remnants of Colonialism". Yes, it is true that officially formalized racial segregation began in the British mining system, but the Purified National Party didn't just keep the British racist regulations, they created an entire apparatus of racial oppression after colonialism. Apartheid had everything to do with their alignment with western imperialist interests; the END of colonialism (1948) is what signaled the beginnings of apartheid. I think it's misleading to call apartheid colonialist in light of these facts.

And no, the SACP, one of the most accomplished communist parties around, supported the ANC because they recognized the importance of national liberation. All communists, in fact, support such struggles, and that is why the SACP remains an ally of the ANC. Is the ANC perfect? Certainly not. However, it does represent a bulwark against imperialism, and that is not to be tossed aside in favor of ideological purity.

Let's not forget Lenin's support of James Connolly when the latter was attacked for uniting with Irish nationalists.


Anti-Semitism is used almost as much as a bullet against the Palestinians and those who support their struggle, but Marxist can never countenance terrorism against civilians, even as a retaliation to oppression.True, anti-Semitism is used by the right wing, but that is not our fault. If they want to lie about us, let them; don't let our enemies determine our own path.

Secondly, I have always said this is a tactical question. If terrorism is deemed necessary by the Palestinian resistance, I see no reason to deny them this method of struggle. The South African liberation movement did much the same, and they were rightfully defended by all revolutionaries. I have never doubted the horror of these activities, but when faced with desperate times people cannot rule out appropriate measures.


The polarisation of races in Palestine/Israel is strengthened by these actions. The best way forward is to support those organisations within Israel itself who seek to unite Arab and Jewish workers. In spite of the oppression there it is still a lot easier to have unity in Israel than it is within the occupied territories.The "polarisation of races" has been well accomplished by the Zionist state. We need not give credit to anything else. The entrenched policy of racial segregation has set the tone, and the Palestinian resistance has simply responded to that.

And Arabs inside Israel are treated like dirt, to speak of unity between them and Jewish workers is beside the point. My entire premise here is that the Palestinian liberation movement is responding to the situation on the ground today, not to the hypothetical conditions everyone keeps throwing out. Deal with the first and less with the second.


My opinion is as socialist we should dismiss any support for a two state system. It will only leave the power with the Zionists in Israel and the White House. Our aim should be a one state for all, living in peace under the same flag, the Red flag of a socialist state.I very much agree with this, and I think all here would as well. In the meantime, however, how do you propose to combat IDF crimes? That is what I am talking about, the methods of resistance to the daily atrocities of the IDF.

[KurtFF8]

You probably haven't. Many of these organizations have some good people and some of them in their ancient past even took some pretty good positions, but on the whole their political outlook is reformist and I have nothing good to say about that.

Mind you, there are some left groups I very much approve of, but seeing as my organization has no direct links to any I do not want to give the wrong impression.

It just seems that whenever you point to a weak organization that doesn't currently have the opportunity to continue the promotion of a revolutionary consciousness that they are automatically reformist for you.

I may be exaggerating a little though



Why pessimistic? You yourself admit that this "left" is a heaving pile of shit. Nothing will be achieved from uniting with pro-Zionist traitors like the PPP, who are basically subordinated to Fatah and the Israeli CP.

I wouldn't say that I think the "left" is a heaving pile of shit (unless you're talking about in Israel specifically, because right now it certainly seems to be). There certainly are groups around the world doing great things.


BTW, I know very well that most Jewish workers will never be able to become revolutionaries - but that just makes the job harder, and makes terrorism directed at civilians all the more damaging to the cause of socialism.

Why do you believe that most Jewish workers will never be able to become revolutionaries. That seems like quite an odd claim.

[Devrim]

That's because you have a complete lack of class analysis. The Palestinian liberation movement does not use attacks directed civilians because they take pleasure in the deaths of people who have no direct connection to the military apart from their obligation to undergo national service, but because they possess no other means of fighting against the brutal occupation which denies the Palestinian people their basic rights. If the Palestinian movement was equipped with the kind of military hardware the Israelis are using to maintain their system of oppression and intimidate the Palestinian masses, then they could pursue their struggle in a different way and would not be forced to resort to the kind of attacks you are so eager to condemn. Based on your statement, can we assume that you would tolerate the resistance if the Palestinians were using jet fighters and tanks instead of bombs strapped to the bodies of young alienated men?

There is no class analysis is this statement whatsoever.

Devrim

[Yehuda Stern]

It just seems that whenever you point to a weak organization that doesn't currently have the opportunity to continue the promotion of a revolutionary consciousness that they are automatically reformist for you.

Not at all. In fact, I am a member of a weak organization, but that doesn't stop us from promoting a revolutionary consciousness and Marxist propaganda. In fact, small numbers are more often than not just an excuse - the SWP is certainly big enough to advocate an openly revolutionary program. They won't, though, because they are reformist - not the other way around.


I wouldn't say that I think the "left" is a heaving pile of shit (unless you're talking about in Israel specifically, because right now it certainly seems to be). There certainly are groups around the world doing great things.

I was talking about the left in Palestine, but then again...


Why do you believe that most Jewish workers will never be able to become revolutionaries. That seems like quite an odd claim.

It has to do with their aristocratic position in respect to Palestinian workers specifically and Arab workers in general. Although the living standards of Israeli workers are lower than those of workers in other imperialist states, owing to the low level of class struggle, they are much higher than those of Arab workers, and are given to the workers by the Zionist state. This is a significant counter-tendency to these workers' revolutionary interests and makes it very hard to recruit them to the revolutionary party. I'm sure there will be significant exceptions to this rule, but most workers will only leave behind their support for Zionism after the revolution.

[Revy]

You direct your fire where it is most effective. Any strategy of direct confrontation with the Israeli military is doomed to failure. As immoral as the strategy of attacking civilians is, unfortunately, it is the only tactic the Palestinians have that could possible hurt Israel. I'm not justifying it. I'm just explaining it.
I am aware of that fact. But here in the West we have socialists trying to legitimize it. I know often it is a desperate way to react to the suffering endured by Palestinians. But it is not the right thing to do.

I would say the same for any kind of national liberation movement. Like the IRA's attacks on civilians. It is easy to defend when you are not the one being blown up.

It is a cycle of violence in which the blame lies squarely on Israel. I think people like bobkindles fail to think outside the box of their own party line. The concept of "workers of all countries, unite" will never translate to Israeli workers if they are told in the same breath that they are legitimate targets for suicide bombings.

[Devrim]

The concept of "workers of all countries, unite" will never translate to Israeli workers if they are told in the same breath that they are legitimate targets for suicide bombings.

Seems quite reasonable to me, After all Marx didn't call on workers of the world to bomb each other on behalf of different anti-working class factions.

Devrim

[Yehuda Stern]

Actually, Marx outright called such actions stupid and counterproductive when they were used by Irish nationalists against British workers.

[KurtFF8]

Seems quite reasonable to me, After all Marx didn't call on workers of the world to bomb each other on behalf of different anti-working class factions.

Devrim

Indeed, and I think we can all agree that "intra-working class violence" is counter-productive and stupid as Yehuda Stern pointed out. But I think if this were the thread on "are the police part of the working class", some of you would take a different perspective on this.

[manic expression]

Seems quite reasonable to me, After all Marx didn't call on workers of the world to bomb each other on behalf of different anti-working class factions.

Devrim

And I'm sure Marx would have agreed with you in asking Palestinians to sit there and be easier targets for the IDF. You show a remarkable capacity to misunderstand the context: no one is asking workers to bomb workers, the point is that such tactics (as horrible as they may be) are oftentimes some of the only means available to Palestinians to counter imperialist aggression. Invoking what *you think* Marx *would have said* when the issue is self-defense against imperialism is as irrelevant as it is pretentious. It's the empty-headed puritans such as yourself that would talk down to the anti-apartheid movement for fighting apartheid's bombs in kind.

Leave it to the ultra-lefts to bad-mouth anti-imperialist struggles whilst offering not a single viable solution themselves. Just vintage stuff.

[KurtFF8]

But the problem is that engaging in reactionary acts like bombing schools, buses, etc. only makes it easier for the Israeli government to further justify the oppression of Palestine.

[Devrim]

And I'm sure Marx would have agreed with you in asking Palestinians to sit there and be easier targets for the IDF. You show a remarkable capacity to misunderstand the context: no one is asking workers to bomb workers, the point is that such tactics (as horrible as they may be) are oftentimes some of the only means available to Palestinians to counter imperialist aggression. Invoking what *you think* Marx *would have said* when the issue is self-defense against imperialism is as irrelevant as it is pretentious. It's the empty-headed puritans such as yourself that would talk down to the anti-apartheid movement for fighting apartheid's bombs in kind.

There are no class politics here at all. The issue is not 'self-defence against imperialism' at all. It is dragging workers into fighting on behalf of various bourgeois factions.

It is quite clear that whenever there are real workers movements in Palestine, such as last years public sector strike, the nationalists are the first to attack and condemn them.


Leave it to the ultra-lefts to bad-mouth anti-imperialist struggles whilst offering not a single viable solution themselves. Just vintage stuff.

I think that the real point is that there is no solution in Israel/Palestine. I don't think that it is an issue that is likely to be solved within capitalism, and I certainly don't see one of the regions weakest working classes being the spark for a revolution.

Devrim

[Yehuda Stern]

And I'm sure Marx would have agreed with you in asking Palestinians to sit there and be easier targets for the IDF

Bullshit demagogy. I can't speak for Devrim, but to me the idea that condemning attacks on civilians is the same as telling the Palestinians to do nothing can only be hatched by a mind that is truly bent on supporting such actions. Palestinian workers have a lot more they can do than just kill themselves to take 'revenge' on innocent workers.

[manic expression]

But the problem is that engaging in reactionary acts like bombing schools, buses, etc. only makes it easier for the Israeli government to further justify the oppression of Palestine.

Rest assured, the Zionists have an unlimited amount of justifications for their oppression of Palestine. The last ceasefire Hamas abided by was broken by Israel, who shelled a beach where a family was having a picnic. Did they lack justification then? Don't underestimate the bottomless delusion of the Zionists: take away one justification and they'll invent five more to thake its place.


There are no class politics here at all. The issue is not 'self-defence against imperialism' at all. It is dragging workers into fighting on behalf of various bourgeois factions.

First, imperialism is inherently a class analysis, so you're wrong off the bat. The Zionist state is part-and-parcel to American imperialist ambitions in the region, it has been since its inception. Why is Palestine occupied? It gives the Israeli imperialists more power through its use as a buffer zone, the natural resources within those territories, cheap labor in Palestinian workers, etc. In order to enforce its interests, the Zionists have used stark brutality to suppress the entire palestinian population; imperialism has invested itself in this regard. Therefore, it is in the interests of the international working class to oppose these ambitions at every turn.

It boils down to the fact that Israeli aggression generates profit for American and Zionist capitalists. Frustrating said aggression frustrates said capitalists. To call the Palestinian resistance to Israeli oppression a "bourgeois faction" cavalierly ignores the entire class characters of both the Israeli ruling class and their enemies.


It is quite clear that whenever there are real workers movements in Palestine, such as last years public sector strike, the nationalists are the first to attack and condemn them.

It is also clear that whenever any groups struggle for the liberation of the workers from imperialism, ultra-lefts are the first to offer self-righteous criticisms. The ANC, for instance, is also guilty of stalling on workers' interests, but the ANC did in fact represent monumental progress for the South African working class, and the SACP's support for them is enough to validate this. While this is common knowledge to all communists, I'm sure you'll find some way to deny it.

Oh, and since you're obsessed with projecting yourself onto Marx, you'd do well to remember that no less a Marxist than Karl Marx himself supported the Union (which was clearly a "bourgeois faction") during the American Civil War. Ultra-left purity, again, is nonsense.


Bullshit demagogy. I can't speak for Devrim, but to me the idea that condemning attacks on civilians is the same as telling the Palestinians to do nothing can only be hatched by a mind that is truly bent on supporting such actions. Palestinian workers have a lot more they can do than just kill themselves to take 'revenge' on innocent workers.

I pointed out the fact that Devrim has failed to offer any alternative solutions to this pressing and urgent problem. Until he proposes something, my statement remains valid because that's what would happen if Palestinians were unfortunate enough to follow his advice.

Further, I have consistently said that I find these actions undeniably horrific and horrible and tragic and worse. I have only claimed, with reservations, that they may be necessary in certain situations. Even here I have remarked that I very well may be wrong. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be on this, and yet people continue to assign motivations to my words.

[Devrim]

First, imperialism is inherently a class analysis, so you're wrong off the bat.

I don't think that your analysis of imperialism is a class analysis. It is exactly the same analysis as many middle class liberals.


To call the Palestinian resistance to Israeli oppression a "bourgeois faction" cavalierly ignores the entire class characters of both the Israeli ruling class and their enemies.

What I actually said was:


It is dragging workers into fighting on behalf of various bourgeois factions.

Of course it is a fight on behalf of bourgeois factions, particularly the Iranian and Syrian states. That is why they fund them.


I pointed out the fact that Devrim has failed to offer any alternative solutions to this pressing and urgent problem. Until he proposes something, my statement remains valid because that's what would happen if Palestinians were unfortunate enough to follow his advice.As I said, I don't think there is a solution within capitalism. Do you really see the Palestinian national movement triumphing? I think another sixty years of the same is much more likely. Do you think that bombing Israli workers offers a solution? Personally, I think it can do nothing but add to the spiral of sectarian/religious/ethnic/national violence that the whole region is being dragged into.

Again, the point is about the Palestinians, not about Palestinian workers. There is no class analysis here.


Further, I have consistently said that I find these actions undeniably horrific and horrible and tragic and worse. I have only claimed, with reservations, that they may be necessary in certain situations. Even here I have remarked that I very well may be wrong. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be on this, and yet people continue to assign motivations to my words.Not only a liberal, but a liberal with a bleeding heart whilst he is calling on workers to murder each other.

Devrim

[Revy]

Manic expression, you're throwing out names, acting like you're more anti-imperialist. But your plan of action is merely an individual killing themselves to kill other workers. They're not even striking the people responsible, the IDF, the state, etc.

And yet you believe this is the legitimate course of action. Palestinians cannot work toward their own liberation when they are engaging in such actions. There is no unity in that, there is no way forward from that.

Your solution is not only strategically inept, it is empty of any kind of empathy for the lives of Israeli workers. Now, you're gonna ignore everything, because I've already dealt with someone with the exact same opinion, and they weren't changed. All I can say is imagine yourself a Palestinian. Now do you attempt to organize for a proletarian resistance movement, or do you simply become the pusher of a button, blowing yourself up and others. Which is more meaningful?

Was 9/11 legitimate resistance against US imperialism? Or does it deserve rightly to be recognized as a tragedy in which thousands of innocent people died?

You attempt to differentiate between suicide bombings against Israeli civilians and the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings based on their scale or the strength of their perpetrator. But that was never my argument. It is the same abuse-excuse rationalization. Defenders of the Hiroshima bombings will point to the brutal Japanese assault on the city of Nanking, and other horrific attacks. After all, those people's lives didn't matter, it was only the question of how strategically to win the war.

[manic expression]

I've been quite busy lately, so I won't be able to respond very much.


I don't think that your analysis of imperialism is a class analysis. It is exactly the same analysis as many middle class liberals.

I don't think you know what a class analysis entails. The analysis of imperialism is a class analysis, chiefly because it explains the changes in capitalist society since the late 19th Century and further because it pinpoints the interests of the capitalist class.

Interestingly enough, I happen to clash with middle-class liberals all the time. I'm sure you'll find some way to put me in the same pot, though, because that's what puritans do.


What I actually said was:

Of course it is a fight on behalf of bourgeois factions, particularly the Iranian and Syrian states. That is why they fund them.

You're reaching far too far, far too often. Iran and Syria, to varying degrees, are willing to see opposition to Israel because of national defense against an imperialist country. Does that color all resistance to Israel as inherently pro-Syrian or pro-Iranian? No. That multiple parties have converging interests when it comes to common defense against an imperialist aggressor does not prove your point.


As I said, I don't think there is a solution within capitalism.

Me neither. However, it is absurd to suggest that the workers cannot make progress in the here and now. That means opposing imperialism at every turn, and that means refraining from criticizing the Palestinian resistance for defending itself.


Do you really see the Palestinian national movement triumphing? I think another sixty years of the same is much more likely. Do you think that bombing Israli workers offers a solution? Personally, I think it can do nothing but add to the spiral of sectarian/religious/ethnic/national violence that the whole region is being dragged into.

The South African liberation movement triumphed, and it faced similar odds at one time. Terrorist activities are not a solution, and I've never said as much, please re-read what I've written about this.

If you haven't noticed, the entire region HAS been dragged into conflict 30 times over. Why? Imperialism: the forcible acquisition of markets, the subjugation of all nations to the American capitalists' heel. Why do you think Egypt has cozied up to the US since Nasser? You can't answer that unless you think about the dynamics of capitalism itself.

Blaming Palestinian actions for the cycle of violence is plainly ignorant. The Zionists hold all the cards, the Palestinians can only hope to chip away at the menace in front of them.


Again, the point is about the Palestinians, not about Palestinian workers. There is no class analysis here.

You would deny that there are points to be made about the Palestinian nation?


Not only a liberal, but a liberal with a bleeding heart whilst he is calling on workers to murder each other.

I think that breaks the previous ultra-left record for meaningless slogans in one sentence. While you're forming your next empty rhetorical phrase, you'd do well to look at what your actions: obliviously spitting on the struggle of the working class. Your insipid ideology teaches you to view everything that doesn't completely agree with you as "bourgeois" (or, in the above case, "liberal"); any serious analysis shows that the actual struggles of our time are likely beyond your understanding.

Oh, and leave it to you to completely ignore Karl Marx's own words and actions. He felt the cause of the Union during the American Civil War was in the interests of the workers. Your argument becomes all the more unsustainable the more we know about how actual Marxists view the world.


Manic expression, you're throwing out names, acting like you're more anti-imperialist. But your plan of action is merely an individual killing themselves to kill other workers. They're not even striking the people responsible, the IDF, the state, etc.

They are striking IDF and the state. The issue is over a relatively marginal portion of the Palestinian resistance's activities, which I hesitate to fully condemn because I recognize they may not be unnecessary.


And yet you believe this is the legitimate course of action. Palestinians cannot work toward their own liberation when they are engaging in such actions. There is no unity in that, there is no way forward from that.

I have repeatedly said that I fully admit that I could be wrong here. However, my position is that denouncing it is unhelpful because of the conditions at hand. If the IDF continuously strikes civilian targets in Palestine, are we supposed to demand the Palestinians do nothing? The Palestinians are working with one of the most dire and dark challenges we could imagine, and yet some are eager to paint them as the trouble-makers. Like I said, I am not going to tell desperate people to refrain from desperate measures.


Your solution is not only strategically inept, it is empty of any kind of empathy for the lives of Israeli workers.

I have always said that such actions are horrific and horrible. How is that empty of empathy toward the victims? Each terrorist act is a TRAGEDY.


Now, you're gonna ignore everything, because I've already dealt with someone with the exact same opinion, and they weren't changed. All I can say is imagine yourself a Palestinian. Now do you attempt to organize for a proletarian resistance movement, or do you simply become the pusher of a button, blowing yourself up and others. Which is more meaningful?

OK. Let's imagine being a Palestinian. Imagine having every aspect of your life (when you can leave your town, when you can go to school, when you can visit family, when you can buy food) controlled by a vastly superior force who hates you. Imagine seeing Zionist settlements with all the luxuries of American suburban life while you live in mud and squalor. Imagine coming home and finding a friend or relative shot dead. Imagine being shot at because Israeli soldiers consider pubescent boys potential threats. Imagine having your house bulldozed because your family is Arabic.

Then imagine someone on the internet talking smack about the only people willing to defend you.


Was 9/11 legitimate resistance against US imperialism? Or does it deserve rightly to be recognized as a tragedy in which thousands of innocent people died?

No, it wasn't. Do you really think the situation between Islamic fundamentalists (who are so fundamentalist they make Saudi Arabia look like liberal-land) hating America for a variety of reasons (American troops in the "Holy Land", American culture, etc.) is the same as the Palestinian resistance? I think the history of al Qaeda is that of a group of lunatics who were once sponsored by the US imperialists and who are now the enemy of them. The history of the Palestinian resistance has not the history nor the interests nor the ideology of al Qaeda, and not surprisingly one is reactionary and the enemy of human progress while the other only asks for an end to Zionist oppression of an entire region.


You attempt to differentiate between suicide bombings against Israeli civilians and the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings based on their scale or the strength of their perpetrator. But that was never my argument. It is the same abuse-excuse rationalization. Defenders of the Hiroshima bombings will point to the brutal Japanese assault on the city of Nanking, and other horrific attacks. After all, those people's lives didn't matter, it was only the question of how strategically to win the war.

Well, that and the fact that one was done by a conventional army who already had destroyed Japan's ability to fight...while the other is done by a very desperate people who have been deprived of every right and comfort for the last century.

And the fact that one was done mostly to test how it would work, and to send a message to Big-Bad-Stalin...while the other is usually done when there are virtually no other avenues for resistance: the political climates of the 70's and late 90's, when most terrorist activities were at their height, are proof enough of this. During those periods, NO ONE wanted to help the Palestinians, and so they unfortunately felt compelled to turn to one of the only methods they had left.

And the fact that one was done as collective punishment...while the other is done in response to unilateral crimes on the part of a superior military force.

Those are some other differences that are important. Listen, if you want to compare the most furious display of instantaneous mass-murder in human history with Palestinian suicide bombings, be my guest. Just don't expect it to fly very far because this is a practical argument on my part. I'm not arguing that the bombings are morally justified, probably because I find them morally reprehensible; the circumstances are what count for me, and the circumstances could NOT be more different.

[luchtoibre]

The PFLP carried out a fatal attack on an Israeli supermarket in February 2008 so they haven't stopped. I can't defend that. Then again, I've gotten into debates with a "socialist" who supported the Palestinians' right to blow up Israeli civilians. I really can't see what place that kind of view can come from other than anti-Semitism.
that last sentence speaks volumes ...

Look, you can bring up the South African movement, but many of the victims of suicide bombings are in fact black Jews from Africa.

Is it about "fighting fire with fire"? WHERE is the socialism? WHERE is the appeal to common class interest?

All I see is attacks on innocent people. What if that Israeli is someone who actively speaks for the Palestinians? This kind of logic sounds like the same kind of logic used to justify the Hiroshima bombings - oh but the Japanese did brutal things to the Chinese!there appears to be a lack of logic in most of what you've said on this thread ..
to claim most of what you've wrote as 'armchair socialism' would be an exaggeration...
your arguments in part, are basically lightweight zionist....

[BIG BROTHER]

that last sentence speaks volumes ...
there appears to be a lack of logic in most of what you've said on this thread ..
to claim most of what you've wrote as 'armchair socialism' would be an exaggeration...
your arguments in part, are basically lightweight zionist....

now don't get me wrong but since when is it Zionist to uphold class internationalism and condemning attacks on civilians?