Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 12:46:32 +0200
From: "Tahir Wood" <twood-AT-uwc.ac.za>
Subject: Re: AUT: On Palestine: summing up


This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to 
consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to 
properly handle MIME multipart messages.


Scott

I'm not an anarchist, but I did comment and pose certain questions to you which you didn't answer. They concerned the nature of this socialist revolution in Palestine which you are apparently advocating. They revolved around the notion of the 'socialist state' and how this relates to the existing state of Israel. You didn't answer them so here they are again:

"The comparison with Vietnam is not any more apt than the comparison with South Africa. The opposition to American involvement in Vietnam would have been much reduced if Americans were not being killed in Vietnam. The strategy with regard to Israel has never involved direct military assistance of that kind; it has always consisted of supporting Israel with weapons and money. The fiercest fighting in the middle east in the intifada and in the two conventional wars that were fought with other Arab powers never brought out the western working classes in anything near to this kind of support. Why would this happen now? Also all indications are that the Israeli working class itself would unite with the state against the Palestinian workers. And even if such a struggle could succeed, with the huge amounts of bloodshed that it would take, would this then lead to the same sort of 'socialism' as that of Vietnam? What you would have in this case is an encircled nation state, and a pretty small one at that, with a ruined economy, unsupported by neighbouring Arab states, who would be fearful of similar revolution in their own countries. The fact is that Israel is only able to prosper now because of American and other Zionist support. Needless to say that aid would not be forthcoming to some kind of Palestinian workers' state in the region. So how would this socialist enclave in the middle east survive?

I have to say that the 'destroy Israel' argument is a confusion between a socialist and a nationalist programme. When it was advanced many decades ago by the Palestinian nationalist movement you had people in Israel that were really settlers, and the anti-colonial nationalist project maybe had some sort of viability. Now you have generations of Israeli workers that were born in Israel, who constitute a majority there and who have nowhere else to go. If it is difficult to imagine Jewish and Arab workers uniting against the state, it is virtually impossible to imagine a military defeat of the state by three million palestinian workers. But as I have suggested a military victory of this kind is not necessarily the most desirable outcome either. At least a secular state without discriminatory laws, difficult as it would be to achieve, would be a genuine advance. Socialism will not come about in little nation states, I'm afraid."

I want you to answer particularly concerning the question of Jewish workers; everything in your previous posts seems to indicate that Palestinians are THE working class in that part of the world, and that's why I said you were confusing a nationalist slogan with a socialist one. Could you clarify please?

Tahir



>>> s_h_hamilton-AT-yahoo.com 11/05/02 05:28PM >>>

The argument against permanent revolution in Palestine
has now reached its absurd and logical conclusion,
with me being branded a fascist by Ilan. After being
called a statist, a friend of Uncle Sam, and an ally
of Sharon by Harald, I guess this comes as a crowning
honour.

What this kind of language shows, in my opinion, is
insecurity caused by the inability of some anarchists
to construct and defend an answer to the problem of
how to make revolution in the semi-colonies. If
anybody who advocates permanent revolution as a
solution to this problem is a leftist and a member of
the labour movement, then there is the possibility
that they may have something useful to say, and their
argument must be answered, or at least listened to
with some respect. But if they are a fascist, then
their argument can as a matter of course be ruled out
of court. What a relief, for those who cannot muster
any evidence for the uselessness of Zionism to Israeli
capitalism, or the progressive qualities of the EU!

Let us examine the criterion for fascism advanced by
Ilan and co and see whether my argument for permanent
revolution in Palestine is a fascist one. According to
the accusers, fascism involves the very violent
imposition of a sort of state capitalism on a society.

But not only do I not advocate state capitalism in
Palestine, I am the only person who has participated
in this thread who has advocated the abolition of the
state in Palestine! Following the SWL in Palestine and
Workers Democracy in Argentina, I have argued that the
intifada can be transformed into a socialist
revolution, with the popular commitees and militia
replacing the state and becoming the building blocks
of a new society.

Those who have disagreed with my argument have
advocated one or another form of capitalism (and
therefore statism) as an improvement for the
Palestinians, a sort of bridge to a post-capitalist
society. Ilan thinks that civil rights can be won for
the Palestinians within the bounds of Israeli society,
Harald and Nate think that Israel as well as Palestine
can be reformed out of existence if an EU-style
superstate can be nurtured in the East Mediterranean,
and  Chris thinks that an independent capitalist
Palestine can deliver the goods.

I have tried to argue that all of these positions are
based on a misunderstanding of the nature of
capitalism, aka imperialism, in the semi-colonial
world. In a long reply to Nate in the 'Destruction of
Israel?' thread, I tried to argue that capitalism has
never been able to deliver democratic rights to the
semi-colonies, because it cannot create a material
basis for these rights. Today it is even less capable
of providing any meaningful reforms than ever. Simple
demands for democratic rights and food on the table
drive it to the edge of collpase in palestine and
Argentina.  I won't repeat the whole argument here.
There is a wealth of empirical evidence - South Africa
is only one of scores of semi-colonies to have
achieved political independence - which can feed any
future discussions.

It is worth looking briefly at a couple of
implications of the definition of fascism arrived at
by several people on this list. If fascism is violent
capitalism making extensive use of the state, then it
seems there is a 'lesser' class of capitalism, a less
violent capitalism which offers more civil liberties
to its victims. This capitalism would seem closely to
resemble liberal democracy, the impossible model which
Ilan, Chris, and Harald and Nate all want Palestine to
follow in the short term.

I have argued that liberal democracy is a First World
commodity paid for by the superexploitation of
semi-colonies in the Third World. If this argument is
correct, then it seems self-evident that liberal
democracy *is* violent and authoritarian, just as
violent and authoritarian as Mussolini's fascism.
Western violence and the denial of civil liberties is
hidden in the Third World, not absent. Semi-colonies
like Palestine and South Africa could only ever
achieve liberal democracy by becoming imperialist, and
therefore negating the values which seem to be given
to liberal democracy by the definition of fascism I've
been discussing.

In my view, the definition of fascism I have been
criticising offers another example of the
imperiocentric line of thinking which is behind the
belief that the cause of Palestinian workers can be
advanced by one or another type of capitalist
government.

Cheers
Scott












=====
"Revolution is not like cricket, not even one day cricket"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com


     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

HTML VERSION: