====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Fred: > Manuel agrees with me, seemingly, and then complains: Me: Well, "complain" is a strong word. It would imply some emotional attachment to my being "peeved" at what appears to be condescension. You know, similarly to when Fred seems to think I have a problem with speaking (and writing) in English simply because I chose to register a protest in solidarity with my brothers and sisters who are undocumented and were calling for me (nosotros) to write (and speak) in Spanish for one day (on that occasion, I do confess a bit of "emotion", read humor, i.e., I LMAO) . . . no, I was just peeved. More to the point, yes, I am sure Palestinians are capable of making mistakes and perhaps Fred "May" be correct that there are multiple perspectives on solutions that are held among the Palestinian people. However, wouldn't that not simply be because of the "weak and disorganized" leadership of the PLO or Hamas? Wouldn't it also be because of the scale of terror and "prison"-like conditions to which the Palestinian people are being subjected; of a kind legitimately considered as "apartheid" and perhaps close enough to holocaust proportions? What exactly would any of us be willing to accept as the " real situation and consciousness their real level of unity, the strength or weakness of their alliances, and the strength of the enemy which is far from evaporating as yet" if we were being obliterated by U.S. and European funded, U.S. and European inspired, and Zionist implemented starvation and degradation at the point of all those guns and bombs? Wouldn't you do anything just to survive? Wouldn't any of us buckle under such pressure? Don't you think it is of monumental and historic proportion the heroism, courage, and the continuing willingness of the Palestinian people literally to throw up some of the most unrelenting albeit obdurate leaderships to challenge the Zionist and U.S. bullies? There is a reason for the responses that Palestinians make in the form of their opinions and the leaderships they choose to follow (all with the historic lack of a "traditional" revolutionary leadership) in the face of death and annihilation. Shouldn't we be at least willing to demand the "Cadillac" when such heroic people are literally forced to fight for just horses and buggies? I am reminded of the Vietnam war and some of the discussion we had regarding the Paris Peace Talks and the negotiations of the Vietnamese fighters. Then we maintained the principled demand for immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Vietnam regardless what the Vietnamese people were forced to accept. It worked; at least better than had we tried to follow along with whatever the Vietnamese delegation tried to negotiate at any given time. We cannot blame the Palestinian people for doing what they need to survive and maintain the ability to continue to fight "another day." But We Can Never Believe That What They Are Forced To Accept is the Same As Self-Determination! Today, if the Palestinian Will is to survive, we should not interpret that as what they actually want (you know, what E.V. Debs said about voting for what you want and not getting it being better than voting for what you don't want, right?). I, of course, can agree with Fred that the people of the solidarity movement, like the Palestinian people, and all us humans, are capable of making mistakes in making unrealistic or impertinent demands (including telling Palestinians what they should and should not do). The Palestinian people can accept or reject any and all advice, I am sure. What I am also sure of is that without "us" on the outside standing up to the bullies and murderers who kill and force a people into submission (or at least try to do so), with all our, let's say, "diversity" of solutions and demands, working in concert with the heroic defense of their right to exist from the Palestinian people on the "inside" . . . well, the consequences would be dire indeed. The Palestinian people and every oppressed people have every right to accept, reject, listen to, or ignore any advice or perspective "we" may give them. We can never reject what they are are willing to do in defense of their right to be even if we may not be willing to act in the same manner or consider some of their actions ineffective. They can chide us for our ignorance, but they will never see us stand away from them. I hope that is what Fred (and others) meant. > Fred responds: > Where did I suggest that the "apartheid Israel" slogan would lead > Palestinian fighters astray? Nowhere, although I admit that Palestinian > fighters are not unique in the world in being incapable of making mistakes. > > No, my concern is with the international solidarity movement, where there > are strong tendencies in many radical groups to see their pet "one-state > solutions" as the only way forward, and partial steps as Bantustans, > sell-outs, or hopeless "concentration camps," with all these conclusions > seen as flowing from the apartheid analysis. While Edmundsen claims to > reject this kind of thinking, his comments about Gaza show that he > nonetheless buys into it. > > I believe this is true not only in regard to Hamas but even the weak and > disorganized PLO leadership in the West Bank, where the mass fight against > the settlements is a fight to retrieve bits and pieces of territory for a > potential Palestinian state, which the Israeli ruling class continues to > block despite the alleged advantage of the "Bantustans" that would > supposedly surely result. Israel has a ruling class, by the way, and it is > not just all Jews, to put it mildly. > > The fact is that single state solutions (including the "democratic secular > state," logical and inevitable as they MAY prove to be as ultimate > solutions, do not have a mass base today among either the Palestinians (most > of whom think they are utopian at best) or the colonial-settler population. > > The fight has to begin from where the Palestinians are, from their real > situation and consciousness their real level of unity, the strength or > weakness of their alliances, and the strength of the enemy which is far from > evaporating as yet. > > Many non-Palestinian radicals assume that Hamas rejects a two-state > solution, favoring a united Islamic Israel, free of all Jews. But this > "militant" position is yesterday's paper. Hamas clearly favors a two-state > agreement. Of course, they do not believe this should involve only Gaza but > also the West Bank, where they attempt, whether in the best way or not is > beside the point in this context, to find some common ground with the PLO > that wants to fight. > > It may be true, as Manuel speculates, that only the most implacable foes of > Israel gain popular support in Palestine, but for them this is expressed in > struggle, not in programmatic positions. There is no sign at all that the > majority of the Palestinian population insists on a one state solution or > nothing. All signs are to the contrary. Those who fight get support and > sympathy. Those who seem to cave in GENERALLY (not absolutely and > unanimously) are viewed with contempt. > > Edmundson suggests that Gaza cannot be independent in any sense because the > Palestinians and Gazan are not strong enough to prevent Israeli violations > of their borders and so forth. But this would apply as well to independent > to "independent" North Vietnam or "independent" North Korea or even (future > tense quite possibly) "independent Iran" which were not strong enough to > prevent their territory from being invaded and attacked by the imperialist > powers. Since Cuba could be blockaded militarily and is still b > > That's why I brought forward Arafat's 1975 (at the UN) perspective of > establishing a state on any territory that can be liberated from Israel, > which still seems sound to me. And counterposing such rhetorical "final > solutions" to the partial struggles that go on and must go on today to > assert Palestinian sovereignty wherever it can be asserted seems to me like > complete sectarian nonsense. > Fred Feldman > > > > > ________________________________________________ > Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/mtomas3%40hotmail.com ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
