this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
136 points (85.8% liked)

Communism

9685 readers
4 users here now

Discussion Community for fellow Marxist-Leninists and other Marxists.

Rules for /c/communism

Rules that visitors must follow to participate. May be used as reasons to report or ban.

  1. No non-marxists

This subreddit is here to facilitate discussion between marxists.

There are other communities aimed at helping along new communists. This community isn't here to convert naysayers to marxism.

If you are a member of the police, armed forces, or any other part of the repressive state apparatus of capitalist nations, you will be banned.

  1. No oppressive language

Do not attempt to justify your use of oppressive language.

Doing this will almost assuredly result in a ban. Accept the criticism in a principled manner, edit your post or comment accordingly, and move on, learning from your mistake.

We believe that speech, like everything else, has a class character, and that some speech can be oppressive. This is why speech that is patriarchal, white supremacist, cissupremacist, homophobic, ableist, or otherwise oppressive is banned.

TERF is not a slur.

  1. No low quality or off-topic posts

Posts that are low-effort or otherwise irrelevant will be removed.

This is not a place to engage in meta-drama or discuss random reactionaries on lemmy or anywhere else.

This includes memes and circlejerking.

This includes most images, such as random books or memorabilia you found.

We ask that amerikan posters refrain from posting about US bourgeois politics. The rest of the world really doesn’t care that much.

  1. No basic questions about marxism

Posts asking entry-level questions will be removed.

Questions like “What is Maoism?” or “Why do Stalinists believe what they do?” will be removed, as they are not the focus on this forum.

  1. No sectarianism

Marxists of all tendencies are welcome here.

Refrain from sectarianism, defined here as unprincipled criticism. Posts trash-talking a certain tendency or marxist figure will be removed. Circlejerking, throwing insults around, and other pettiness is unacceptable.

If criticisms must be made, make them in a principled manner, applying Marxist analysis.

The goal of this subreddit is the accretion of theory and knowledge and the promotion of quality discussion and criticism.

Check out ProleWiki for a communist wikipedia.

Communism study guide

bottombanner

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

If I don't clickbait the title people don't click.

With the recent events happening in Gaza, I decided to first tackle this line of argument in my essay Zionism is antisemitism, and Palestine.

People were quick to say "yes Israel is bad, but Hamas..." (kidnapped 200 people, killed 1000, take your pick).

When you're saying this, you're actually saying that one israeli is worth 7 Palestinians. Read that again if you need to; it's an ethnosupremacist position.

What is the logical conclusion of this argument? What is it supposed to achieve except convey empty platitudes and declaring to the world that you just don't care enough to have any valuable input?

It's fine not to care. I'm not your dad, I'm not going to try and change you.

But don't declare it publicly. Don't proudly say "well actually both sides are bad". You don't look smarter or wiser than anyone else who is taking a clear stance. You're not taking the "middle ground". Everyone who has taken sides and is trying to be productive about this (and not just the Gaza genocide, but really any situation where you can apply "both sides") really doesn't have time for this holier-than-thou bullshit.

Gaza "kidnapped" 200 settlers and that's a war crime apparently. It's not really, but whatever. Let's say it is. Israel has killed 7000+ Palestinians in retaliation, now likely more than 10k as they cut off communications in Gaza last night.

Both sidesers: what's your solution to this. If you say anything other than "I should not get involved" then you don't actually believe both sides are bad and you are picking a side. It's time you realize where you stand.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 72 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Two things can be bad at the same time. For example, Isreal stealing land from Palestinians is bad, and Israel doing a genocide on Palestinians is also bad. Those 2 things are bad at the same time!

[–] [email protected] 31 points 10 months ago

Well that's technically correct

[–] [email protected] 46 points 10 months ago

I find that, more often that not, the people who say those words will later proceed to disproportionally condemn only one of those things and bother themselves little with the other. "Both China and the US can be bad", they say, and then proceed to spend infinitely more energy and time condemning the former and barely acknowledging the latter. Empty words, nothing more.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Both sides bad" is how liberals adapt to the cognitive dissonance of personally disliking the idea of killings while living in a society that requires ongoing killings to function. If they really didn't care, it's way easier be a full-throated Zionist in the empire. It's popular, it costs you nothing, and you don't even have to think about it. To acknowledge that the empire requires every death to maintain the imperial standard of living is to completely alienate yourself from the rest of imperial society. Well adjusted people that don't already hate their lives generally aren't in a huge hurry to completely alienate themselves from everyone they know in real life over an issue that only exists on TV for them. Their humanity is in conflict with their class interest, and the adaptation is to focus their attention on the killings that don't put them directly at odds with their imperial peers: You're allowed to cry for the civilians as long as you condemn Hamas. You can criticize Netanyahu as long as you support "Israel's right to defend itself". You can dislike war, police shootings, mass incarceration, and poverty, so long as you pay your taxes and keep voting for people who will keep doing those things.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 43 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I do agree with the liberals that it's bad when Hamas kills civilians in their fight against Israeli apartheid, which is why I believe Israel must be destroyed and replaced with a non-apartheid Palestinian state where Jews and Arabs can live together, so civilians stop dying. shrug-outta-hecks

The hostage thing is a great example of how liberals start from a conclusion and then find evidence to fit that conclusion: Hamas is bad not only because they killed people but also because they took old women and children hostage, the monsters. Meaning that, even if Hamas had not killed anyone, only taken hostages, they would still side with Israel. I have zero doubts that if Hamas had only kidnapped IDF soldiers libs would still be demanding unequivocal condemnations and talking about Israel's right to defend itself.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not to mention tiny little detail of Isntreal holding millions of hostages in Gaza.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 months ago

"Two things can be true at the same time" has the exact same energy and scent as "neither Washington nor Beijing"-- and I know for a fact no one who's ever said "neither Washington nor Beijing" meant the former part of the line.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 10 months ago (62 children)

Libs downvoting without responding… come on, at least tell us why?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Even libs on reddit had more of a spine than lemmy libs when it came to trying to debate my essay when I posted it. At least they commented.

Spoiler: they didn't even make a dent.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago

I saw that post. At least we did get a response here after I made this parent comment

load more comments (61 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Being bullied by zionists into condemning Hamas is weak shit tbh.

Actual zionist supporters live very ineffective political lives, and the most expression they have is online.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago

This is something I repeat often, because it needs repeating forever. You don't see any pro-Israel protests anywhere. At most they try to frame 100 people as 10000. Meanwhile London Bridge was completely full of people yesterday. Literally packed to the brim of people protesting for Palestine.

Our governments are completely disconnected from the common folks, they support Israel but nobody else does. That's the reason they make it so difficult to be pro-Palestine (declaring protests illegal, threatening vocal supporters into silence...), they don't want you to realize just how popular the Palestinian cause actually is.

I hope it ends up waking up progressives who protested for Palestine and realize that we don't live in democracies, and our governments take decisions between themselves without any regard for popular opinion.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When I first read the post title I thought it was gonna be about Hegelian Dialectics, very good post tho, especially the point about the “kidnappings” and hostage situation

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago

Hegelian Dialectics

When you make a decent argument but then ignore it entirely so you can come to a bad conclusion: literally Hegel

[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago

Whataboutism

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Thank you for the essay. I learned (or perhaps unlearned) a lot from it, and have more than enough links for further reading.

However.......

I hope that you will eventually find Hamas' line on the issue of state secularity, because "Hamas not secular!!!" honestly has been my biggest, like, liberal brainworm wrt the Palestinian liberation conflict, and the essay didn't manage to fully excise it from my noggin.

So my take on the war basically has been, "Support the PFLP and other explicitly secular leftist/anti-Zionist groups in the region; support the flight of Israeli refugees and their welcoming back to their true homelands around the world; support aid for Palestine, food, medical supplies, psychological support, so forth; support sabotage of Israeli infrastructure and economy; support strikes/resignations and sabotage at foreign weapons and munitions factories supplying Israel; agitate against Zionism; support Jewish and Palestinian communities around the world; etc." — so basically, every way to support the Palestinian cause except direct support for Hamas (which I guess is really just, like, indirect support for Hamas, anyways...)

I have seen comparisons between Palestine now and China under its occupation. Essentially the type of stuff that Lenin wrote about in A Caricature of Marxism & Imperialist Economism, which I recently listened to S4A's audiobook of. That the struggle for national liberation must be fought first before a socialist revolution can take place, and so all groups fighting for national liberation must be supported, including those which are not socialist or secular — that this lays fertile ground for socialist revolution later on. This is how things played out in China: the CPC and KMT fought alongside each other against Japan, and then the CPC fought against the KMT and pushed it to Taiwan.

This feels like a lot to gamble on, though — essentially that after the liberation conflict, there will be another conflict where the folks who we uncritically support will very definitely and certainly win — although... a free Palestine, even under a (")reactionary(") leadership, is still going to be better and more humane than the settler-colonial regime, so... What point am I even trying to make here?

...Honestly, I don't know.

Some final notes:

  • Some non-leftists seem to be under the impression that non-Jewish Palestinians want to expel Jews from Palestine, and I do not understand this. Aside from the fact that Palestinians are just not bloodthirsty savages, and that Palestine has always had Jews, and all that... Once the colonial system has been torn down, its last vestige would just be millions of highly skilled and educated immigrants, which is pretty useful to have after a liberation war, right?
  • The current war, I've heard, has allowed for more "parallel governance" or however you call it to emerge in the region. That as infrastructure is destroyed and the Israeli government focuses on the war effort, that common people are replacing government services with their own popular ones. I don't know much about this but it was mentioned in connection with anarchism.

I'm also curious about the history of Labor Zionism and of religious and ethnic minorities in the region, in particular Circassians. Can you point me to any good resources about these topics?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (11 children)

I should be able to find the Hamas charter and then comb through it eventually.

Some things to consider is that there are Christians in Gaza and they "even" have churches.

I think most people, some in good faith and some in bad faith, think that being non-secular means being intolerant. But secularism only means there is no promoted religion, there's the separation of church and state. Hamas has been clear that they they want a multireligious state of Palestine where Jews and Christians will be welcomed.

Indonesia is not secular for example and while as a tourist you should follow the laws (as in all countries), it's also a huge tourist spot where millions of Europeans and Americans go every year without any issues.

On Reddit, the bad faith Zionists (when I posted my essay) said that Hamas does not want a multiplural republic because they are not secular. But the two are not opposites, and in fact in history Islam was the most progressive of the three Abrahamic religions when it came to accepting the other two.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›