Imperialism and Barbarity Reflected in the Faces of Israeli Children
Posted by Klement on 7/20/2006
Post Comment (10)
Rebellion Is Justified!
Countries Want Independence! Nations Want Liberation! People Want Revolution!
Thursday, July 20
10 Comments:
Wow -- that's disgusting.
I am a bit lost on this. Obviously, our stand point should be to oppose imperialism and support national liberation, but the rub comes in when we consider the reactionary political ideologies of Hamas and Hazbullah -- which also don't seem to care about the desctruction of life, as Hazbullah has gunned down civilians unapolgetically along with Israeli forces.
I don't really see it through the same lens. The masses who support Hezbollah are taking the right position: opposing imperialism. It's a sign of the weakness of the left that such a group is in the vanguard of the fight against imperialism. That doesn't mean Hezbollah isn't reactionary - or that it wouldn't crush revolutionary masses like the ayatollahs in Iran after 1979. But it does mean that communists need to first pose a real, concrete political alternative before launching attacks against such groups. And it does mean that those who are resisting Israeli occupation and aggression are fighting a just struggle.
The question of "civilians" is one argued about much. Are militarized Jewish settlers in the West Bank civilians? Or are they an extension of the Zionist state? They undoubtedly are agents of aggression, directly complicit in great crimes against the Palestinian people. These are interesting topics...
That's true. The Settlers question is an interesting one, but I was talking more about the general populations.
Celt,
I think the Mao essay on the peasant movement in Hunan would be a good reference point for this.
The important thing is to remember that the main enemy is U.S. imperialism, that the fundamental contradiction is that between imperialism and oppressed people all over the world, and that, as Mao said, we should support whatever our enemy opposes and oppose whatever our enemy supports.
Oh, and the role of Zionism in the middle east, which is that of a "loyal Jewish Ulster" (to draw an analogy to the Irish Republican struggle) and that Isreal is waging a proxy war for U.S. Imperialism.
It doesn't matter if we agree with every policy, or even most. Hezbullah and Hamas are progressive, if for no other reason than they are participating in a broad anti-imperialist united front. It is good that Marxist-Leninist forces such as the PFLP are also helping to lead the masses in the united front, but that is not the main thing. The main thing is the struggle against the main enemy, U.S. imperialism and its regional proxy, Israel, and the struggle of the Arab people for self-determination with the palestinian struggle for national liberation in the vanguard.
Or one could argue that the Iraqi Resistance (which is united, nationalist - i.e., anti-imperialist- and patriotic, and led by the Baathists) is in the lead of the struggle in the region.
I think we can agree that U.S. imperialism (which uses Israel as its regional proxy) is the main enemy in the Middle East. I thinki we can probably agree that the mideast is the focal point of the fundamental contradiction. But who is leading the struggle? That's an important question, whether the Iraqi struggle for independence (led by the Iraqi national resistance) or the palestinian people's struggle for self-determination (led by a broad united front of anti-imperialist forces) is the vanguard of the struggle in middle east.
What do people think?
I don't see much distinction between the Palestinian and Iraqi anti-occupation resistence movements in terms of their leading roles. I think it can be viewed as different aspects of a broader struggle. That struggle may link up in a concrete way as things become more extensive - Syria could be a junction of sorts.
I also thought of the Hunan peasant movement article. Some were saying "it's terrible!" Certainly, the peasants were not good models of revolutionary discipline. They were in many cases motivated by revenge rather than the desire to liberate humankind. But Mao said "it's fine" and it should be upheld, in essence because it's right to rebel against reactionaries.
You guys might also like to check out this interview which I think sheds some light on the issue.
This is very interesting site... » » »
Very nice site! video editing programs
Post a Comment
<< Home