Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == If only it was THAT easy. 2011/2/8 Matthew Russo : > > Israel == America in the Middle East. Memorize that formula. > > -Matt -- Néstor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autoría Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == It's more than just the "loyalty" of something otherwise "different": Israel is an extension, an annex, of the United States in the Middle East. The United State of the Middle East. All the "Jewish" stuff is just the blue and white paint-job. Why? Not because there is a mysteriously all powerful "Israeli Lobby" in Washington, but because the United States Congress IS the Israeli lobby! In the same way, and for essentially the same reason that the U.S. Congress is tout court the Pentagon Lobby. Because "Israel" is a big node in the so-called "military industrial complex", that sector of capital either wholly or substantially reliant upon the Pentagon "market", aka the core of the imperialist nexus. If the imperialist regime fights tooth and nail to not even lose a little face with a "premature" departure of a (from the racist imperialist POV) POS like the Mubarak family - you know, 'give 'em an inch, the masses will take a mile' - then imagine how they'll fight to preserve a key node like "Israel". It would be like surrendering Fort Bragg to the Infidel. Israel == America in the Middle East. Memorize that formula. -Matt Lajany Otum wrote The US is loyal to the Israeli state exactly because the Israeli state is loyal to the US in the way that no major Arab client or puppet regime can be, no matter how craven and servile. It is the fact that the very existence of Israeli state and society as a colonial outpost, against the will of the natives, depends in its entirety on the good will and largesse on the ruling imperial power of the day, Britain yesterday and the US today, that guarantees its utility as the bedrock of the imperial order in West Asia. By comparison, the Arab people (substitute any other semi-colonial peoples here), does not owe its existence to the imperial order and the puppet and client states which have been foisted upon it, but rather contains large majorities whose material interests are fundamentally at odds with the imperialist order, and who continue to live from day to day in spite of of that criminal order and its depredations. Egypt demonstrates this is the source of the instability and unreliability which is built into the foundations of the native puppet or client state, and why the US persistently regards the interests of its Israeli colonial garrison above those of even the most servile of its native clients in this important region. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Hi Lajany, ' yours was a formidable reply to my post. Let us start with what we agree on. We are totally one I think in acknowledging Israel's pro-imperialist role. We also agree that Imperialism is keeping the region in a state of abominable misery and poverty and uncertainty. Your point about the role of Zionism within the States is also well made and well taken. Where we disagree is on whether Israel is becoming a focal point of resistance - a stimulus to revolt. My thinking here is that there could be an American Imperialism in the region without Israel. Moreover I would still maintain that the expansionism built into the Zionist enterprise is an independent element in this set up. There can after all be more than one source for the tension and conflict that have marked the region. Now a minor point about Egypt's "stability". Well stability is always relative. All things pass away. Still I would have thought the period of 1970-2011 was long enough to warrant the term 'stable'. But of course the dialectic is as always remorseless and the factors that constituted relative stability are now producing its opposite. comradely regards Gary Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Lajany Otum wrote The US is loyal to the Israeli state exactly because the Israeli state is loyal to the US in the way that no major Arab client or puppet regime can be, no matter how craven and servile. It is the fact that the very existence of Israeli state and society as a colonial outpost, against the will of the natives, depends in its entirety on the good will and largesse on the ruling imperial power of the day, Britain yesterday and the US today, that guarantees its utility as the bedrock of the imperial order in West Asia. By comparison, the Arab people (substitute any other semi-colonial peoples here), does not owe its existence to the imperial order and the puppet and client states which have been foisted upon it, but rather contains large majorities whose material interests are fundamentally at odds with the imperialist order, and who continue to live from day to day in spite of of that criminal order and its depredations. Egypt demonstrates this is the source of the instability and unreliability which is built into the foundations of the native puppet or client state, and why the US persistently regards the interests of its Israeli colonial garrison above those of even the most servile of its native clients in this important region. (...) --- Succinct and helpful clarification, for someone who hadn't read Amin's Empire of Chaos or heard of this distinction. Thanks. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Gary wrote: > thank you for the very thoughtful comment on my post. I hope my tone came > across as tentative. It was certainly meant to. Now what do we agree on? > Quite a lot actually - above all we agree on the characterisation of Israel > as a settler nation beholden to a super power. I would add here the > ideological important absence of the "mother country". What makes Zionist > colonialism unique is that after some prevarication it settled on the myth > that it constitutes a return > > But where we part company is in the cost benefit analysis. I am genuinely > puzzled by what goods accrue to the USA because of Israel. The metaphor you > employ here of Israel as the "bedrock" tends I believe to somewhat mislead > you. Israel is anything but a bed rock. Rather I tend to see it as > something like the source of recurring infections. It is the guarantor of > continuing instability and war. Even when through bribery and corruption > leading Arab states are neutralised - rendered "stable" as the State Dept > would have it, the instability moves to another site and eventually even > stable entities like Egypt erupt into instability. > > The loyalty of Israel to the US is by no means an eternal given. Perhaps > the sinking of the USS Liberty was a 'tragic error' but there are other > signs that the Israelis are far from the grateful clients that the metaphor > of bedrock suggests. An interesting parallel to consider here is the use > that Stalin made of communist movements in the countries he was allied to. > He had a bargaining chip against Roosevelt and Churchill because important > sections of their societies were primarily loyal to the Soviet Union. > > Similarly with the Zionist entity, Netanyahu has significant elements within > the USA who are more loyal to him and Israel than to the USA. It seems to me > that Israeli leaders can and do use the Zionists within the USA to bully USA > politicians into prioritising the interests of Israel. > > Though here you would probably deny my basic premise that there are Israeli > interests which are not the same as American interests, even American > Imperial interests. > Gary, You are right there is is a recurring infection but wrong to identify Israel as the actual source. The root cause of the instability is the marginalisation, underdevelopment and poverty of the region, which is itself an outcome fact that those who control, exploit and waste the immense resources of the area cannot and will not meet not even the most basic interests and aspirations of the majority of the peoples there. Were Israel to vanish tomorrow this fundamental problem would remain. However, within this empire of chaos, Israel performs a valuable function for the imperialist powers -- that of the wrecker of the dreams and hopes of the people of the region for a future free from imperialist domination. Just think of the role that Israeli aggression played in thwarting Nasser's Egypt and Arab nationalism, compared to its foul record of collaboration with the likes of the Mubaraks, the Hashemites, the Saudis and Pahlavis, not to mention its support for the apartheid regime in South Africa, the Mobutus, Kenyattas, Houphouët-Boignys, the Guatemalan dictatorship, etc. When I look at Israel today I am reminded of the role of the South African apartheid regime, much of whose violence and aggression against neighbouring countries like Mozambique etc was designed to prop up native stooges while instructing the local people on the futility of resisting imperialism and attempting to construct their own futures. Thus Israel's wars and aggression are not the source of the instability of the region, but part of the strategy of imperialism for managing and containing the struggles of the people of the region to control their own futures. You can be sure that if a progressive popular government were again to come to power in Egypt tomorrow, the first task the US and Europe, and by extension Israel, would set themselves would be the destruction of this government. I would also hardly describe Egypt as having been stable before the present outbreak. The façade of stability, such as it was, was based only on fear of the police, the state thugs and torturers, hardly on the ability of the state to meet any the aspirations of the people over whom the Mubarak ruled. Lastly, within the US, the Zionist lobby has surely serves a useful domestic purpose for the ruling class as a whole, in promoting a generally reactionary, pro-imperialist and racist tenor in US politics, while weeding out opponents of the same. Lajany Otum Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.econom
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Hi Lajany thank you for the very thoughtful comment on my post. I hope my tone came across as tentative. It was certainly meant to. Now what do we agree on? Quite a lot actually - above all we agree on the characterisation of Israel as a settler nation beholden to a super power. I would add here the ideological important absence of the "mother country". What makes Zionist colonialism unique is that after some prevarication it settled on the myth that it constitutes a return But where we part company is in the cost benefit analysis. I am genuinely puzzled by what goods accrue to the USA because of Israel. The metaphor you employ here of Israel as the "bedrock" tends I believe to somewhat mislead you. Israel is anything but a bed rock. Rather I tend to see it as something like the source of recurring infections. It is the guarantor of continuing instability and war. Even when through bribery and corruption leading Arab states are neutralised - rendered "stable" as the State Dept would have it, the instability moves to another site and eventually even stable entities like Egypt erupt into instability. The loyalty of Israel to the US is by no means an eternal given. Perhaps the sinking of the USS Liberty was a 'tragic error' but there are other signs that the Israelis are far from the grateful clients that the metaphor of bedrock suggests. An interesting parallel to consider here is the use that Stalin made of communist movements in the countries he was allied to. He had a bargaining chip against Roosevelt and Churchill because important sections of their societies were primarily loyal to the Soviet Union. Similarly with the Zionist entity, Netanyahu has significant elements within the USA who are more loyal to him and Israel than to the USA. It seems to me that Israeli leaders can and do use the Zionists within the USA to bully USA politicians into prioritising the interests of Israel. Though here you would probably deny my basic premise that there are Israeli interests which are not the same as American interests, even American Imperial interests. comradely regards Gary Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Gary wrote: > > Will the tail continue to wag the dog and will Netanyahu and the Zionist > lobby remain in charge of what constitutes American interests? It looks > like it. But I have difficulty in believing that this will always be the > case. But first it would seem that the revolution must mature and really > threaten American business, before the relationship with Tel Aviv comes > under threat. > I don't think Gary's formulation is at all accurate. The US is loyal to the Israeli state exactly because the Israeli state is loyal to the US in the way that no major Arab client or puppet regime can be, no matter how craven and servile. It is the fact that the very existence of Israeli state and society as a colonial outpost, against the will of the natives, depends in its entirety on the good will and largesse on the ruling imperial power of the day, Britain yesterday and the US today, that guarantees its utility as the bedrock of the imperial order in West Asia. By comparison, the Arab people (substitute any other semi-colonial peoples here), does not owe its existence to the imperial order and the puppet and client states which have been foisted upon it, but rather contains large majorities whose material interests are fundamentally at odds with the imperialist order, and who continue to live from day to day in spite of of that criminal order and its depredations. Egypt demonstrates this is the source of the instability and unreliability which is built into the foundations of the native puppet or client state, and why the US persistently regards the interests of its Israeli colonial garrison above those of even the most servile of its native clients in this important region. Samir Amin has also pointed out in Empire of Chaos that Britain first recognised the utility of a settler colony in the Arab regions in the 1860s, when faced with the attempt by Mohammed Ali to industrialise Egypt (cf the Meiji restoration in Japan) and remove it from the semi colonial and dependent status to which it had already been assigned by Britain and France. Israel, under Netanyahu and gang, continue to perform their assigned functions today, though in the service of the US. Lajany Otum. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Fwd: Thoughts on the Egyptian Revolution
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The Angry Arab has been fretting about the possibility of stagnation in the Egyptian Revolt. He argues or rather hints that the occupation of Tahrir Square could become the be and end all of the strategy of the revolutionists and that could prevent them from breaking out. Certainly the regime is working closely with the Americans to undermine the revolution. That is a no brainer. Yet these are still early days. the Egyptian Army seems to be continuing its policy of not slaughtering the people,. but at the same time working to clear the streets and to render as much assistance as they can to the regime short of a brutal crackdown. Thus they pushed the people in Tahrir square but they met with determined resistance. There is a very moving photo of the crowd five deep standing in front of the tanks. This snip from debka.com is worth reading in this context: *Our Cairo sources further report that the effort to restore normal activity in the country was only partly successful. There were long lines outside the banks which had been closed for most of last week. And when account-holders finally reached a teller they were dismayed to find a $10,000 cap on withdrawals. Many of the ATM cash machines shut down after a short time. The markets reported deliveries of no more than 40 percent of their regular produce. The police presence was patchy, consisting mainly of traffic cops and officers on the beat at markets and stores. The Interior Ministry's security squads, the government's main law and order enforcers, were nowhere to be seen on the streets of Cairo. They feared a settling of scores for their brutal crackdown in the early stages of the protest.* If the security squads remain scared of the people, then the revolution is not yet in terminal trouble. What of the role of America? The initial reaction of the Americans can be summed up with one word "Israel". That was and still is the sole litmus test. What ever happens in Egypt must protect Israeli interests. What of American interests? Recently Gen Petraeus half muttered that pro-Israeli policies cost American lives. American lives though are cheap to the American elite. However what of business interests? Will the tail continue to wag the dog and will Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby remain in charge of what constitutes American interests? It looks like it. But I have difficulty in believing that this will always be the case. But first it would seem that the revolution must mature and really threaten American business, before the relationship with Tel Aviv comes under threat. comradely Gary Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
