Re: AUT: Re: Palestione, Israel and other ghettoes

[Scott Hamilton <s_h_hamilton@xxxxxxxxx>]

I began my contribution to this thread by comparing
the attitude of Harald toward the Palestinian
revolution to the attitude of Kautsky, the Menshevik,
and Otto Ruhle, the ultra-leftist, towards the
Bolshevik revolution.

Both Kautsky and Harald reject real revolutions
because they do not meet an abstract model for a
post-capitalist society. Kautsky and Ruhle thought
that Russia was not advanced enough to break from
capitalism, and that the Russians should wait for
Europe. For them, the degeneration of the Russian
revolution was inevitable, because it took place in a
backward and isolated country.

For Harald and so many anarchists, the
pre-revolutionary situation and the intifada that has
produced it should also be put on hold, until the
whole East Mediterranean is ready to break from
capitalism. Any revolution that begins in Palestine
alone is doomed to failure. (Presumably Harald and co.
would oppose a revolution in Argentina alone, because
of the same objection to 'nationalism')

Here is Harald's rather hazy vision of the route to
socialism in the East Mediterranean:

Our project would as always be the
> encouragment of  direct- workers-to-workers
> solidarity; non-hierarchical self-organization,
> towards reopening up the Meditarrean Sea
> as a commons; towards the bringing together
> of three continents; and towards non-statist
> world citizenship. This of course also entails
> working towards freeing the Israleli Jews and
> Arabs from the narrow confines of Israel, and
> the Palestinans living on Gaza and the West
> and East Bank of Jordan, as well as in the
> refugee camps of Lebanon, from the narrow
> confines of these places.

These all seem intended as reforms to be won while
capitalism continues to exist. Winning them will bring
anti-capitalist revolution closer, by strengthening
the working class. Chris, Thiago and others who have
contributed to this debate appear to agree with
Harald's vision of gradually strengthening the working
class through reforms like these, but to differ from
Harald in thinking that the estabishment of a
capitalist Palestinian mini-state will push along
rather than impede this reform process.

In my view, what Harald is offering is not only
demands for reforms, but *reformism*. In other words,
Harald has faith in the ability of reforms to achieve
what only revolution can achieve. Let's have a closer
look at a couple of his reforms:

freeing the Israleli Jews and
> Arabs from the narrow confines of Israel

What this means, surely, is the destruction of the
state of Israel, and this is a worthy goal. But how
can Israel be destroyed? Since it is the main
beach-head of US imperialism in the Middle East, its
destruction would have to be a massive blow to US
imperialism in the Middle East, and therefore a
massive blow to capitalism in the region. Can such a
blow be achieved as a reform, on the road to
revolution, or would it require a revolution to
achieve?

Another step on Harald's road to revolution involves
freeing

the Palestinans living on Gaza and the West
> and East Bank of Jordan, as well as in the
> refugee camps of Lebanon, from the narrow
> confines of these places

This is another excellent goal, but can it be achieved
without revolution? If we accept that the return of
all the exiled Palestinians would have as its
corollary the destruction of Israel, then surely this
reform has to encounter the same objections raised
above?

Harald would also like to see

> towards reopening up the Meditarrean Sea
> as a commons

As far as I can tell, this would involve the free
movement of workers through the Mediteranean area.
This is another demand which in my view it is
impossible to achieve within capitalism. Capitalism
struggles today even with the stringent control of the
labour market. I cannot see how it could grant freedom
of movement for workers.

Do I oppose Harald's demands? Not at all! What I'm
arguing is that, far from being preludes to
revolution, they can only be realised by a revolution.
They are not 'immediate' demands, which would
strengthen the working class without overthrowing
capitalism, but 'transitional demands', which cannot
be met without the destruction of capitalism.

So where is capitalism in greatest crisis, closest to
destruction, at the moment, in the region Harald wants
to free from capitalism?  The answer, of course, is
Palestine, where all of the features of a
pre-revolutionary situation arguably exist. An East
Mediterranean revolution is not going to begin at the
same time everywhere in the region - it is likely to
start in one country. The nation state will not be
reformed out of existence within capitalism, it can
only disappear with the destruction of capitalism.

In the name of revolutionary purity, Harald is
counterposing to a real revolutionary situation
demands which cannot be realised without revolution.
Harald argues that the Palestinians should abandon the
institutions of dual power and the armed struggle, and
try to reform the Israeli state out of existence. In
the short term, this means becoming second-class
citizens of Israel, vulnerable to all the attacks of
the Israeli state! To do this would be suicidal, and
the Palestinians know that.

In effect, those who hold Harald's views bloc with
those later-day Kautskys - Pilger, Chomsky, and much
of the 'Porto Allegre' left - who counterpose reform
to revolution in Palestine and elsewhere.

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---