Egypt: results and prospects
Posted on Monday 31 January, 2011
Filed Under International
NOT even people who live in Egypt – and I’ve spoken to several ex-pats this morning, now that mobile phone communications have been restored – seem certain about what will happen there next.
So let’s avoid the leftist parlour game of attempting to shoehorn all social upheavals into the model of the classic class struggles of the twentieth century, and try to develop some sense of the possibilities. Plainly the current stand-off cannot last indefinitely, and will resolve itself one way or another in the days ahead.
What we have so far is, by common consent, a cross-class ‘people power’ uprising in which liberalism has been the dominant note. The calls have been for democracy in the abstract, without a specified class or religious content.
Hosni Mubarak’s gamble in appointing secret policeman Omar Suleiman as vice president has failed to satisfy the clamour for change. Nor have his job creation and food subsidy promises convinced many in a country where half the population of 80m or so live on less than $2 a day.
Unions have declared a general strike tomorrow, and the expectation is that the stoppage will be widely heeded. We know that there is an active Egyptian far left, and Tuesday will presumably provide a pointer to the extent of its clout. The labour movement deserves our solidarity.
Popular self-organisation has so far most been on display in other sections of civil society, although community councils in which investment bankers play a leading role are something of twist hitherto unanticipated by revolutionary theory.
Washington has turned its back on Mubarak, which will be another setback for Egypt’s authoritarian ruler. However, the West would clearly prefer orderly transition to popular revolt. That must deal Mohamed ElBaradei – who counts on the domestic backing of both liberals and the Muslim Brotherhood – a notably strong hand.
Much now hinges on how the armed forces respond. While on the one hand there are reports of extensive fraternisation between civilians and soldiers, the fighter jets buzzing Tahrir Square and the columns of tanks controlling access to the landmark show that things could go the other way, too.
There is also the de Gaulle scenario. I have read reports that Mubarak does have a social base outside the cities, which could yet be mobilised in his support if only he can hold the fort in the days ahead, just as the French president was able to draw on the rural areas to win an election only one month after May 1968.
Thanks to everybody who is contributing to the high quality of the debate in the post below. Your thoughts on the hasty observations above – which are, of course, purely by way of thinking out loud and with no claim to special authority – are equally welcome.
<<Go back
Comments
64 Responses to “Egypt: results and prospects”
Leave a Reply
Great post!
“uprising in which liberalism has been the dominant note”
Bread seems to be a word most Egyptians have been using actually. Which tells me Liberalism is not the dominant idea, though it is prominent.
I think Washington will be very nervous about a Bolivarian type revolution spreading to their no.1 strategic region. They probably see that their favourite thugs days are numbered and will be doing all they can to bring about the best outcome in line with their special interests. That to me translates into as little change as possible.
although community councils in which investment bankers play a leading role are something of twist hitherto unanticipated by revolutionary theory.
I think there were ‘people’s councils’ in the 1918 German Revolution, out in the sticks.
The ‘De Gaulle moment’ has crossed my mind too; but some test of electral strength is needed, and it could form the peaceful coup de grace to Mubarak
When “democracy” is used without any “class” content then what we are really talking about is bourgeois democracy. In otehr words the class content of that democracy is already implicit. That should not be to denigrate it. Lenin was in favour of a political revolution for that bourgeois democracy in Russia in 1905. Another example, of a Capitalist economy, and Capitalist State, but this time with a Feudual/Absolutist Political regime. Trotsky was in favour of a defence of bourgeois democracy in France/Spain Germany in the 1930′s. We clearly have a vested interest in achieving/defending bouregois democratic freedoms, because they facilitate the organisation of the working class, and facilitate the development of its own self-government.
But, in doing so we should not fail to point out that bouregois democracy precisely because of its class content is a sham, that it is only form of political regime that represents the social dictatorship of the bouregoisie, and that if it fails to serve their needs they will once again discard it. We should not ask the workers to subordinate their interests or struggle to it, and we should argue for them to fight for/defend that bouregois democracy not by the chosen gound of the bosses, but by the means of proletarian struggle, through the use of factory organisation, industrial struggle and the extension of independent workers organisations such defence squads, militia, and local workers Councils.
If the bosses or one section of the Capitalist class bring about that democracy by defeating a more backward section of their own class, or the bureaucrats established by their class to run their State apparatus then we should welcome that, but we should not rely on them to do that.
We have to build the independent organisation and strength of the working-class in the same way that the independent strength of the Capitalist class was established vis a vis the feudal nobility. We have to build independent worker-owned property just as Capitalist property developed, and just as the bouregoisie’s political struggle developed alongside its development economically and socially, so we have to build the political strength of the working-class, in Marx’s words to develop the working-class to the point where it is worthy of becoming the ruling class.
The experience of previous attempts to launch Political Revolutions before the revolutionary class has achieved that level have all proved abortive, be they the example of the nascent bouregoisie in the English Civil War, or in the French Revolution, or the example of the workers in Russia in 1917. As Marx says in the Critique of the Gotha Programme the State is the creation of Civil Society, a reflection of the material conditions, the forms of property and social relations, not vice versa. Any attempt to first capture State power and then change those material conditions is bound to be doomed, it is a return to Idealism and rejection of Historical Materialism.
That was the advice of Marx and engels to workers in Germany, and to the workers in Paris in 1871. That being said, if the workers in Egypt were to engage in such a venture, then we like Marx and Engels on those previous occasions would be bound to throw our support behind them.
This will be the most fascinating thing to watch play out: How will a constitutional assembly be formed? How will a legitimate plebiscite take place? What role will wealth re-distribution have in demands and how will global banks react?
I love seeing the Guy Faulks masks mixed into the crowd!
Good post, ably sums it up:
“let’s avoid the leftist parlour game of attempting to shoehorn all social upheavals into the model of the classic class struggles of the twentieth century, and try to develop some sense of the possibilities. “
As is plain from below, NO one, but no one really knows what’s going to happen, and as can be seen from the other thread, few if any have any original thoughts on the matter.
Which is worth remembering, no one really knows, AFTER the event the sages will come forth and tell us why it happened that way and how events bore out their analysis, but the truth is, like us, they don’t really have a clue.
Respective rationalisations will become the order of the day in months to come, but we mustn’t forget that no one has a monopoly on prophecy or analysis as these unfolding events show.
So here is my tuppence worth:
Dave’s correct in all hinges on the Army, those just under Mubarak will want to assure their future and that will affect events. Mubarak is toast but the *after* Mubarak regime is still in doubt, the existing ruling elite might put up a fight if they think they’ve got a chance *or* no other options. The best way to defeat them is mass mobilisation, to make it very clear that they are yesterday’s men, and then they would be less tempted to use State violence to keep their positions.
The army is now under US command to manage the long drawn out process of organising a `democracy’ that guarantees their man, whoever he turns out to be, gets elected and Egypt remains enslaved.
But that is the generals, the rank and file are up for grabs and the army can still be consumed into the revolution. The petty bourgeoisie is split between the islamists and supporters of the regime holed up in their leafy suburbs and between the farmers and those who survive off tourism which gives the working class the opportunity to take the outright lead. Tomorrow’s Million Egyptian March and general strike needs to push through the demand for the immediate resignation of Mubarak and his new US approved cabinet and for immediate elections to a new constituent assembly in which all parties are legally entitled to participate. From there the working class must argue for power to be transferred to the organs of the revolution. The Egyptian National Democratic Revolution is reborn. It will end in working class power or it will be thrown back once again. That is not an option. Workers strengthen your rank and file organizations and do not let them go under any circumstances. You are going to need them.
As Boffy alludes to the Possibility of a Revolution led by sections of the Officer Corps in the thread below. This can also be a useful option as we have seen in the 20th century in Latin America and more recently In Venuezuela. In that case what may be needed is an extensive look at the Class nature of the Egyptian army. We have seen a General led Leftist govenment in this region before with General Nasser. I wonder if a new Nasserite faction now exists within the officer corps of the Egyptian Army?
“The army is now under US command to manage…”
It seems silly, bordering on stupid, to suggest that the Egyptian army is actually under US command.
Rather than acknowledge that the Egyptian army might have its own leadership, its own agenda in these circumstance and external force is seen to control things, which while influential is probably not the case.
To argue that it is, is to suggest that the Egyptian army, its leadership, officer class and men have no independent agency of their own, which is clearly erroneous and patronising.
Surely a piece of occidental thinking?
See: http://advant.blogspot.com/2011/01/soccer-clubs-central-to-ending-egypts.html
Soccer clubs are playing a central role in this revolution.
I wasn’t suggesting that an Officers Coup was likely. I was saying that the army could play an important role in being an organised force in ensuring that an orderly transition took place, rather than the organised force being the MB. I’d see an Officer’s Coup as a bad thing.
My point is this. In a Revolution/Insurrection such as 1917 in Russia or 1979 in Iran, at soem point some organised group seizes the leadership of a mass movement and gives it direction, and then imposes its own control. This organised Minority is usually precisely that a Minority. If an orderly transition were to occur through the elction of a Constituent Assembly then this Minority would not, in fact, form the Government. The Bolsheviks in 1917 had almost complete control even though initially they shared power with the Left SR’s. But, in reality the Bolsheviks only has the support of around 25% of the people as the Constituent Assembly elections showed. Yes, Lenin argues that the elections under represented support for the Bolsheviks, because of outdated electoral lists and so on, but even if we aree generous and say that the Bolsheviks might have gained 10% points had those anomalies been corrected it would still have only given them the support of around a third of the population. The same is true of the Khomeiites in 1979.
My point is that an orderly transition and real democratic elections to a Constituent Assembly would b unlikely to give the MB a Majority. So there would be an advantage in the Army acting as a stabilising force to enable such a transition to occur both for workers and, in fact, for the bouregoisie and for Imperialism.
The Big Push simply parrots the mechanical crude version of Permanent revolution that has proved wrong on so many previous occasions. As I’ve set out before PR does not apply under conditions such as those in Egypt. There is no reason why the situation in Egypt has to end in Workers Power or Reaction, any more than that HAD to happen in South Africa, Chile, Argentina, Brazil or the many otehr such cases where a transition from some form of bouregois dictatorship to bouregois democracy took place.
To Troutsky, I think you’ll find those masks are not Guy Ffawks masks but “V” masks from the film “V for Vendetta” that is also about a popular revolt against an oppressive Government.
Boffy,
the Tories would kill for the popularity of the Bolsheviks.
The mask worn by the hero in V for Vendetta was a Guy Fawkes mask.
On the Egyptian army, I am hearing different things. The situation seems confused, the army are probably confused! They were ordered onto the streets by Mubarak but don’t exactly know what to do while out there. The US are calling for an orderly transition, which translates into “People go back to your homes, simmer down and let us decide who rules you from now on” or in other words “No change!”. Now because these protests were sparked by economic factors I cannot see how some orderly transition to nowhere will cut it with sections of the Egyptian people. In which case the army may begin to crack down and the plain clothes thugs may soon reclaim the streets.
Orderly seems optimistic.
The US will just sit on the side lines and wait. Wait and watch. It is the US who will be pulling all the strings – silently, with the Israeli lobby breathing down their necks.
As illuminating as it is to debate the issues concerning Egypt with those that think the US commands the Egyptian army, we now have a bigot who thinks that the US is under the thumb of by the supposed “Israeli” Lobby.
It is a pity that such negative and conspiratorial points of view find any traction amongst those who consider themselves to be on the Left.
There is an Israeli lobby in the US, mainly fundamentalist Christians. A cursory glance at Fox news tells you this. So they are a factor in all of this. Whatever the outcome of these protests, I will make one prediction, the new Egyptian regime will not change its relationship with Israel, despite the majority of people desiring something different. Democracy will only go so far.
There are many lobbies in American politics, but the lobby that is most successful is one that isn’t talked about.
I doubt such a notion would occur to the bigots, flakes and ultralefts that drone on, ignorantly, around this topic.
I think it would be far better to concentrate on how the Egyptian people will free themselves from a nasty and repressive dictatorship, and pause with those tendentious conspiracy theories for the moment.
But, modernity, what would Dean have to talk about if he didn’t have the comfort blanket of his conspiracy theories?
It isn’t a conspiracy theory, but a well known fact. And Israel has a real stake in the future of Egypt, so this lobby has particular relevance to this subject. The gun lobby, for example, is irrelevant to the events.
And this lobby could have the power to counter (to an extent) the will of the Egyptian people.
So your war on bigots is actually a dogmatic attack on weighing up the facts.
Again, unless and until you acknowledge that lobbying in America is universal and that *all* groupings do it, then you haven’t even scratched the surface.
This perverse fixation with one particular “lobby”, and only that “lobby”, is an indicator of weird political priorities and display a decidedly non-materialistic grasp of politics.
I fully appreciate that those with a unhealthy fixation with one country in the Middle East cannot openly admit where this type of thinking leads, or where it comes from, but you would hope that with the real and legitimate struggles of the Egyptian people so prominent in the news that these bigots, political oddballs and “anti-imperialists” could focus on reality for the minute.
Well, at least that’s the hope.
Modernity,
You have spent the last few days trying to warn us all against the will of the Egytpian people! Your posts have been very defensive, you would think you were part of some lobby yourself. Glad you have suddenly, miraculously woken up to the ‘legitimate’ struggles of the Egyptian people!
Let us hope that the will of the people is fully realised, everyone join me in a minutes prayer.
Whoops, once again Modernity successfully trolls a thread. Egyptian revolution, what Egyptian revolution?
I have come to expect political illiteracy from Western “anti-imperialists”, but I would like to hope that most of these university educated, pampered individuals could, at least, read.
I am *very* pro-the people of Egypt.
I want rid of Mubarak and the other dictators in the Middle East.
I do appreciate that thse “anti-imperialists”, and the intellectual flotsam and jetsam that subscribe to conspiracy theories about the “lobby”, are often so inflicted with basic comprehension difficulties that they can’t grasp what other say, but I would at least hope that they by now had learnt to use a mouse.
If they clicked on my name, it would take them to my blog, where I’ve made it clear, even for these dunderheads that I want rid of Mubarak.
Further, I understand that the same difficulties which impede these “anti-imperialists” from having any subtle, or momentarily intelligent, grasp of the world will also mean that they won’t understand what I have just written, but once more I want RID of Mubarak.
I do hope that they will subscribe to a simple “how to use a PC and Mouse” course shortly, followed by some elementary geography and political studies, it would make their lives less complicated, and not burden the rest of us with explaining the elementary.
`I want RID of Mubarak.’
I doubt it.
The Israeli lobby is no conspiracy theory but a well established part of the US body politic, so is the gun lobby. And in the case of Egypt the Israeli lobby could influence US domestic policy in the region. Forget could they do! The gun lobby is unlikely to influence matters.
But I am glad your original hesitancy towards this popular uprising has made way for outright support for the revolution. We ‘anti imperialists’ were there days before you!
Now join me in prayer comrades.
Dean says ‘Let us pray’. Well, no Dean. Let’s not pray. But pray tell, which particular god would you be addressing?
modernity did show his support for the revolt on the previous thread, though his ranting demand for answers to the question of the class nature of the MB did make it easy to overlook, and his denial of the existence of the Israeli lobby in the US and his characterisation of those who point out its power as bigots makes it hard to regard him as worthy of generous interpretation, as he has a m.o. that distorts the facts and lies about the views of those he disagrees with.
I seem to remember Sewer mocking me for saying the Tunisian revolt could have a domino affect. I think she called that a conspiracy theory.
Sidmarx,
If you read the previous thread Modernity spent the first 70 or so comments arguing about the Muslim Brotherhood rather than celebrating the uprising. Hesitancy is the right word for it.
But it is good he finally got on board with the ‘anti imperialists’.
Was only the first 70? I began to think he was auditioning as a BBC Four presenter.
Interseting to see someone from the Square (Tahrir not Albert)telling the BBC News at lunchtime that even women she’d met wearing the veil said they didn’t want an Islamic state. For more on the MB see here.
Dean: I don’t think I did you know. It was a commonly held view that there would be a domino effect, so I hardly think that I would have accused you of holding a conspiracy theory. If I did, who would have been conspiring with whom? I merely said that teh otehr North African countries were less likely to implode due to the incorporation of Muslim parties within their political processes. So I was wrong, although it ain’t over yet. Now, who was it we are to pray to, again?
Sewer,
See this thread:
http://www.davidosler.com/2011/01/what-the-palestine-papers-say-about-netanyahu/comment-page-1/#comments
Sewer said in response to a comment I made on 25th January (very early into current events),
“The Americans are pretty confident there won’t be a ‘domino’ effect in the Middle East, due to a) the inclusion of moderate Islamist parties in most governments and b) the fear of the population if not so moderate Islamist took over. That’s what I have gleaned from reading the American papers on-line. But, you keep spewing your bile and schoolboy fantasies, Dean, you’ve obviously not lived through anything like this before.”
I responded,
“Well maybe there won’t be a domino affect (i never said there would be if you learned to read properly), though protests in Egypt and Jordan suggest some sort of affect.”
So my schoolboy fantasy was actually pretty bang on the money. and the Yanks were wrong! Dean 1 The Americans 0!
Not bad for an idiot anti imperialist.
“The Israeli lobby is no conspiracy theory…”
Well, I’m sure that Dean and other Western “anti-imperialists” probably have strange notions about dancing Israelis and 9/11, who knows?
The fact that they can’t interrogate the issue in any semi-intelligent way is indicative of the intellectual cul-de-sac that they find themselves in.
My point on the previous thread, was to elicit any knowledge on the Muslim brotherhood, and not unsurprisingly very little came forth.
The evidence from the previous thread shows frankly that most of the British “anti-imperialists” here know next to nothing about the Middle East yet they’re happy to share their stupidity, limited thinking and poor reasoning skills with others.
I’m not surprised that those who are so unoriginal and unthinking when it comes to Egypt and the Middle East, are also cat’s paws for conspiracy theories too, and oblivious to the racist undertones of those arguments.
“Well, I’m sure that Dean and other Western “anti-imperialists” probably have strange notions about dancing Israelis and 9/11, who knows?”
No, I accept the official version.
Your denial of an Israeli lobby is obscurantism dressed up as anti bogtry. Shameful, especially coming from someone like Modernity who is a genuine anti bigot. If it was Sewer, well I would expect her to have no respect for anti bigotry.
Dean,
I don’t really see what the lack of support for the tories has to do with the fact that the Bolsheviks only had the support of a Minority! The point I was making is that there is a different dynamic involved in an insurrection, and in some form of order transition to bouregois democratic elections, or those elections themselves. The Bolsheviks – or hte Khomeiniites for that matter, were able to lead and exert a controlling influence for the very reason that Lenin himself set out – to be victorious in a revolution you do not need the majority to be with you, you only need them not to actively oppose you! That is not generally true in bourgeois democratic elections. Its why in some chaotic situation the MB could play a similar role as the Khomeniites, and yet, if the army ushers in a transitional government, leading to free and fair elections, the MB would probaly not secure a majority.
On the US, they are inching towards telling Mubarak to go, and probably already have in the back channels. Already John Kerry, who by general consent was not speaking just for himself has said openly that Mubarak should go. The masses could go from the streets, and nothing change. It seems now unlikely, and it also seems unlikely – though we should not advise workers to count on it as opposed to building their own organisations including armed defence – that the Army will turn on them. More likely they will tell Mubarak to go, and turn to Elbaradei as what seems to be an agreed stop-gap figure for the Opposition groups including the MB.
On Israel and the US. Yes, there are all sorts of lobby groups in the US. Some are better organised than others. But, the best organised pressure group in the US is Big Capital. Its interests determine everything in the end. Israel is the tail being wagged by the US dog not vice versa. Israel is a means of the US intervening in the Middle East, not vice versa. If Us interests dictate getting rid of Mubarak, and introducing bourgeois democracy, and in the longer term that is the case, then that is the policy they will pursue whatever Israel wants.
The Tory comment wasn’t aimed at you Boffy, I just like to slag them off at every available opportunity. See my comment re the Tories don’t have friends in the North to see where I am coming from.
On everything else you have said, pretty much agree. Though the Fundamentalist Christian Lobby and the Fox news rightists do have influence over politics and the political discourse in the US. So the Israeli lobby are a lobby, do have influence and anyone challenging that influence will tread very very carefully. They have gravitational power over the US body politic. To point that out is not bigotry as Modernity is suggesting.
Latest news is that Mubarak wants to stay in power until elections. I can’t see that US plan going down well with the Egyptians, let us hope that attempts by the US to hijack this revolution are unsuccessful.
“So the Israeli lobby are a lobby, do have influence and anyone challenging that influence will tread very very carefully. They have gravitational power over the US body politic. “
The problem with this issue is there is NO engagement with any counterargument.
Again, there are hundreds of lobbies in America, that is the nature of the political scene but to make the case that one particular lobby has some nefarious purpose and is above all the most powerful,which is often implied, is to lose the plot completely.
The very idea that there might be COUNTER lobbies to the supposed “Israeli” lobby isn’t even acknowledged.
Further, there is no political or intellectual subtlety with this line of reasoning, it assumes 1) the worst possible motives of one group, and ONLY one group 2) that others are mere pawns in their machination 3) that there is little or no human agency 4) that there is no racist antecedents to these ideas.
It truly is an utter poverty of thinking, but such arguments are often to be found on the Far Night, amongst the demented and some “anti-imperialists” which tells you a lot about the resonance of these ideas.
They are the province of bigots, dullards and the malicious.
ops, should be: “such arguments are often to be found on the Far Right”
“Again, there are hundreds of lobbies in America”
Yes but none that are relevant to Egypt and the current situation, to point that out is just taking into account all the factors, not some form of bigotry.
What counter Lobbies? Name them and their relevance to Egypt?
If some racists point out there is a powerful Israeli lobby in America that just proves the old saying “Even a clock is correct twice a day”.
{sigh}
I can’t make up my mind, if the “anti-imperialists” here are drunk, just plain stupid or so parochial that it never occurs to them to look at a map.
What counter lobbies could there be ?
Oh yes, the rest of the Middle East and their allies. Hmm, hard one that!
At a minimum 22 countries.
Add to that their partners in America.
Plus their paid lobbyists, and that’s just a minimum, without anything else (and there’s plenty more), thus you have got a sizeable counterbalance.
Those who haven’t quite given up on dialectical materialism might remember how economic interests often carry the largest weight, and what is one of the most significant forces? Oh, yes, oil, that’s right, OIL.
Oil, the companies, oil, the countries, oil, their lobbyists, oil, their contacts in the US establishment and that’s just for starters.
But astute readers will notice that it didn’t occur to the nimble minded “anti-imperialists” at Dave’s to even consider those factors, so clouded are their minds with bigotry and conspiracy theories.
{sigh}
The Saudi lobby and the old Mubarak lobby are very much on the same page as the Israeli lobby, no counter lobby at all. The old Saddam counter lobby has been well and truely dealt with, very much to the satisfaction of the Israeli lobby I might add.
If you are talking about a Palestinian lobby you must be crazy. Maybe the new Egyptian regime will become the counter lobby, but not if the US can help it!!
I find discussing complex issues with bigots to be exceedingly tedious so I’ll finish with this particular notion:
1. Traditionally socialists would argue about anything, argumentation was a central pillar of socialist thinking, debating the issues and clarifying the points, etc
2. However, nowadays when you attempt to reason or suggest to modern “anti-imperialists” here that there may be a counterargument, you get no significant or logical argument from them.
3. And it’s obvious why, as reason, evidence and counter argument are not part and parcel of the “anti-imperialist” way of thinking
4. To them, there is NO counterarguments, ever.
And as the few remaining antifascists will testify, the type of argumentation which is aimed solely at one particular group, seeks perpetually to portrayed them in a negative light and will countenance no alternative argument, is essentially the bigot’s way of thinking.
That’s what you’ve got here.
You are not discussing complex issues but ranting like a pompous idiot. I will give you one thing, you are consistent!
1. The Israeli lobby exists and is a powerful force within the US body politic.
2. There are other powerful Lobbies within the US.
3. There are no significant counter Lobbies within the US that challenge the Israeli lobby.
4. It is appropriate to factor in the Israeli lobby’s influence in relation to events in Egypt when attempting to analyse the US position. That Lobby may have grown to serve the interests of capital but now it exists as a definite force and cannot easily be ignored in the short term.
5. The power of the Israeli lobby may diminish and counter lobbies may grow at some point in the future.
6. The other powerful lobbies, such as the Saudi’s, are more behind the scenes and do not penetrate the body politic or ideological discourse within the US. Or Fox news and Christain fundamentalists do not spout out pro Saudi propaganda.
I just knew that it would all come down to a fight between the usual suspects over Israel and the international Zionist conspiracy….
Brian Brothers, brothers. We should be struggling together.
PFJHead We are!
Brian We musn’t fight each other. Surely we should be united
against the common enemy.
All The Judean People’s front!!!
Even when there is some sort of real (albeit at best bourgeois and at worst clerical-fascist) revolution against a real dictator going on all we can do is resurrect the same tired old arguments that we’ve played through here and elsewhere hundreds of times before.
And incidentally real Israeli leftists have no problem identifying with the people in Cairo – look at the excellent overage at wwww.972mag.com frex.
Sorry about the screwed-up formatting but the middle section is of course dialogue from Life of Brian….
And overage should have been coverage – damn this keyboard…
Wodger. I think maybe Woderick could take power.
No – it really has to be Biggus Diccus as he does wank higher than any in Wome.
Wodger. Playing with your Todger can pass the time. But should not be just tossed away without an outcome.
Roger,
There is NO fight “between the usual suspects over Israel and the international Zionist conspiracy”.
It is between an antiracist and those with seriously fucked up ideas about “Israelis”.
It is between one-time Trots, now ultraleft anti-imperialists and an antifascist who opposes their nonsense.
I personally think that we should try to explain the world avoiding conspiracy theorists, racist notions and junk from the 20th century, however, anti-imperialists like Dean don’t.
They positively revel in the irrational. They push racist ideas without blushing, that’s how far they have fallen.
They pollute the political discourse with their bigotry.
I resent Modernity labelling the nutters on this thread (they know who they are) as Trots. Dean is not a socialist, he seems to lack any basic Marxist education, and to lack the moral impulse of a socialist. So I resent Modernity claiming that he is. Apart from that, I actually agreed with what Modernity said above about the way Dean conducts himself in debate. No doubt that other foul-mouthed piece of work, the gay council worker, is it Martin?, will be along soon.
This coming from the woman who not a week ago said the general view was that there would be no domino affect and called me a schoolboy fantacist for saying there could be and then yesterday saying everyone knew there would be a domino affect. A complete 360 degree turn in one week. You must have been the dunce at your Marxist education facility.
Modernity – FWIW I am mostly on your side in these debates.
But I am not piling in because I just can’t see the point of turning what could have been an interesting ‘Whither Egypt’ discussion into slanging match #999 between you and Dean (or me and Dean, or Sue and Dean, or any of us and any of the other anti-zionists) about Israel.
Sure, Israel is far from tangential in discussing this crisis – but the moment the zionist entity gets mentioned it invariably sucks all the political air out of the room and completely kills whatever topic we were actually meant to be discussing.
(see above).
It reminds not just of Monty Python but of an ancient joke once popular amongst diplomats:
An international class of school students are asked to write an essay on ‘the elephant’.
The French student writes about the sex life of the elephant.
The German about the historical use of the elephant in war.
The British student about the ivory trade.
(And so on inserting as many national stereotypes as needed).
The Polish student however writes an eloquent tirade on ‘The Elephant and the Polish Question’.
For much of the left Israel/Palestine is our Polish Question, to the degree that when we are living through a true global crisis of capitalism they still just keep returning to it like a dog returning to its vomit.
Comrades – get real: there is nothing you can say in any blog comment box that will have an iota of influence on what the Israeli government or Fatah or Hamas will actually do – the Israelis and Palestinians are bound together in a centuries-old marriage of hate that will probably only end when some idiot finally presses the big red button and reduces the Holy Land and all its inhabitants to radioactive ash.
Its tragic and horrible but short of physically going there and doing stuff that may get you tear-gassed, beaten and ultimately killed there is bugger all you or I can really do about it.
At least judging by your comments here you both seem to be rival reincarnations of Dickens’s ‘telescopic philanthropist’ Mrs Jellyby – working day and night to save the souls of benighted papists in Ireland while her own children starve in rags.
For the first time in 30 years we seem to be seeing a real opening for left-wing politics here and now – yes it may well be a false dawn just like that of 1979-80 (although at least this time there will be no SDP betrayal to derail it) – but while it lasts we should be out there fighting the class enemy at home.
But if we ever do get around to stringing up the bankers and storming Buckingham Palace I have little doubt that Modernity and Dean and their many, many counterparts will be sat safely at home engaged in typing out waspish exchanges about the zionist lobby or the Balfour Declaration.