Those of us that reject the ideology of petty-bourgeois nationalism, particularly as expressed in Maoism and Guevarism, and, so, who also reject the bourgeois notions of national self-determination, and its real meaning, "defence of the fatherland", have every right to criticise the actions of Hamas et al, as being reactionary, divisive, and counter-productive, because we do so on the basis of consistency, in applying the same standards to the actions of petty-bourgeois nationalists in Kosovo, Tibet, Ukraine and elsewhere, or indeed, in relation to Zionism and the creation of the Zionist state. The AWL have no such right, because they are highly selective in who they seek to condemn for such actions. And, for obvious reason, because, as seen with their attitude to Libya, they were quite happy to support the same kinds of jihadist forces, when they were allied to US imperialism, in overthrowing Gaddafi. They say, apparently with a straight face,
“Hamas is not, in any case, merely an abstract expression of “resistance”. It is a sophisticated paramilitary party, with a developed political programme and social project, allied to several of Israel’s regional-imperialist rivals, including the clerical-fascist regime of Iran. Means cannot be divorced from ends. Hamas uses brutal means because its ends, the imposition of a theocratic state, are brutal. Other Palestinians, women, LGBT+ people, atheists and others, have also been victims of that brutality. Some leftist commentators have celebrated Hamas’s actions as an advance for “democracy and human rights”. But democracy and human rights cannot be advanced by a political force that explicitly opposes both.”
Quite right, but, then, they should have opposed the creation of the Zionist state, itself, for those very reasons, rather than, belatedly, and retrospectively supporting it, because the Zionist terrorists of the Irgun and Lehi, used the same methods as those being used by Hamas today!!! Those Zionists, held racist, colonialist views, and worse, seeking alliances with the Nazis and Mussolini's Italy, and embracing the ideas of totalitarianism!
And, how can the AWL make their comment, with no sense of irony, when they simultaneously are allied with the Ukrainian capitalists state, an "organisation" if ever there was one, with an agenda of its own, linked to NATO imperialism, containing also the organised forces of the Nazis of the Azov Battalion and Right Sector. Only a gang that has isolated itself from the rigours of open debate and challenge, could put forward such clearly hypocritical garbage, and expect to get away with it.
As avowed Zionists, the AWL are part of a Zionist "party within a party", inside the Labour Party and labour movement that has grown used to getting away with such rubbish, and in typical totalitarian manner can broach no real criticism of the Zionist state, and must shout down any such criticism, drowning it out, as with this example from the deplorable Dame, herself, against Owen Jones.
But, that truth of Zionist war crimes against Palestinian babies and children is there for all to see.
US imperialism and NATO, is also a political force that explicitly opposes both democracy and human rights, as its history over the last century has, repeatedly, shown, as with its overthrow of the democratic regime of Mossadegh in Iran, and installation of the vile dictatorship of the Shah, or its coup, fifty years ago, in Chile, to overthrow the democratic government of Allende, and installation of the dictatorship of Pinochet that murdered tens of thousands, or its support for the Salvadorean Death Squads, and the dictators in numerous Latin American regimes. Across Central Asia, as in the past, in Latin America and South-East Asia, US/NATO imperialism is allied to, and props up one vile dictatorship after another! It is an indication of the disgrace of the AWL that not only would they have us believe that US imperialism/NATO is somehow not guilty of such hostility to democracy and human rights, but is, according to it, even defenders of the interests of workers!
In Libya, in 2011, they made the opposite argument to that they make now, as they supported those very same clerical-fascists, and jihadists, when they were the allies of US imperialism. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, was literally comprised of many of the same fighters who had just been fighting in Iraq! But, the AWL, at that time, apparently, had no concerns that its means could not be divorced from its reactionary ends, determined by its clerical-fascism, or its links to the feudal gulf monarchies – one of its members even claimed that the feudal Gulf Monarchies were the means by which bourgeois-democracy was being brought to the region! - Al Qaeda etc. On the contrary, they wrote, apologising for it,
“the Islamism is some parts of the Libyan uprising shouldn't stop us supporting their overthrow of Gaddafi."
And,
"Is the NTC led by unsavoury elements? Yes. Are Islamists involved in the revolution? Yes. But what do you expect? If you wanted to wait indefinitely for a revolution that was spontaneously socialist, in a country with no freedom of speech, no kind of independent labour movement, no civil society - you'd be waiting a long time."
The idea that, in that case, socialists should not have been giving any support to, or credence for such a reactionary “revolution”, i.e. really a counter-revolution, never seems to have crossed the AWL's minds!!! On that basis, they not only acted as apologists for the clerical-fascist allies of NATO, but even lied about the inevitable consequences of it, as was being manifest on the streets of Libya. They wrote,
"No-one's claiming things will be perfect now. We don't "support" the NTC. We've written (in the current Solidarity) about the battle the Libyan people now face against neo-liberal economic policies and, yes, Islamism. Things aren't so sewn up as you imply; the idea that "the flag of Al-Qaeda flies over Benghazi", as if ultra-Islamists have taken full control in Libya, is just untrue.",
But, it was true, and that was precisely the nightmare for Libyan workers that was happening, particularly for black workers, and workers employed by the Libyan state, as the jihadists took control, and, then, began fighting each other, destroying even the previous unity of the nation state. In the years that followed, the AWL, of course, dropped Libya like a hot rock, and never undertook any self-criticism of their thoroughly false and reactionary position. Indeed, they were following a similar false position in relation to Syria, before the events in Libya started to become apparent to all, and so, following the same course in Syria, risked exposing their bankruptcy even more starkly.
That is in stark contrast to the approach of the AWL's predecessor organisation, the I-CL, in relation to its errors over the Iranian Revolution. In 1979, I remember, as a member of the I-CL, that, along with the rest of the “Left”, we acted as cheerleaders of the Iranian Revolution. We were clearly wrong to do so, as the reality of the clerical-fascist regime of Khomeini, soon made clear. Not long after, our error was actually recognised by the I-CL, via a process of self-criticism, and the recognition of the error was analysed and set out, in our paper. No such self-criticism is possible in today's AWL, which has degenerated into an ossified confessional sect, headed up by its own infallible mullahs.
No comments:
Post a Comment