aut-op-sy
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]
Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

Re: AUT: Can 'entrepeneuring capitalists' save Palestinians?

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.

--=_97CB1887.86E7C11F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

>>> s_h_hamilton@xxxxxxxxx 10/30/02 03:43PM >>>
I think that the Palestinians should develop their
Popular Committees and militia into alternatives to
Arafat's PA, and continue to fight to protect
themselves from Israeli occupation and attacks. With
the help of massive solidarity led by workers in the
rest of the Arab world and the West, the sort of
solidarity that the Vietnamese received, the
Palestinians can succeed in defeating Israel and then
should go all the way to socialist revolution by
turning their Popular Committees into organs of direct
democracy over their liberated territory.

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.

Tahir

--=_97CB1887.86E7C11F
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="TEXT.htm"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT: 8pt MS Sans Serif; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px; MARGIN-TOP: 2px">
<DIV>&gt;&gt;&gt; s_h_hamilton@xxxxxxxxx 10/30/02 03:43PM &gt;&gt;&gt;<BR>I
think that the Palestinians should develop their<BR>Popular Committees and
militia into alternatives to<BR>Arafat's PA, and continue to fight to
protect<BR>themselves from Israeli occupation and attacks. With<BR>the help of
massive solidarity led by workers in the<BR>rest of the Arab world and the West,
the sort of<BR>solidarity that the Vietnamese received, the<BR>Palestinians can
succeed in defeating Israel and then<BR>should go all the way to socialist
revolution by<BR>turning their Popular Committees into organs of
direct<BR>democracy over their liberated territory.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>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&nbsp;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?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>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&nbsp;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&nbsp;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.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Tahir</DIV></BODY></HTML>

--=_97CB1887.86E7C11F--


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]