A Reply
to Trachtenberg's Remarks at the LRP/ISL Forum
by Boris W. Hammerschlag
[Trachtenberg's
Remarks] [Download]
Firstly,
allow me to thank you, comrade Trachtenberg, for attending our forum and taking
the time and effort to draft your critique of our position on Palestine. During
my visit to the US, I had the pleasure of enjoying your company and our
discussions. My impression of you, during the short time we had the opportunity
to spend together, was of a rather honest, yet very much mislead, subjective
revolutionary. This honesty has, in turn, earned you my time and effort in
drafting an equally blatant yet honest reply.
1.
Worshipers of the Accomplished Fact Indeed
It
strikes me as quite odd that an article titled "Worshipers of the
Accomplished Fact" should start with the following words:
"Revolutionaries
defend the Palestinians and of course opposed the founding of the state of
Israel, but six decades later one has to be blind not to recognize that an
indigenous Israeli Jewish nation [who at this stage can no longer reasonably be
classified simply as colonial settlers] has come into existence and whose
workers we must win the allegiance of for the Palestinians to be able to wage
any successful struggle to overthrow the Zionist state."
You
seem to tumble and fall into the very same pit you have dug for us, already in
your first paragraph. Stating that six decades after the fact, the crime of the
establishment of a settler-colonialist and later on imperialist state, those
who continue the legacy of colonialism, racism and oppression should be
considered en-masse as equals in the revolutionary struggle to abolish those
very same things, is nothing short of a devout worship of accomplished facts.
Wouldn't you agree, comrade?
You
then continue this line of argumentation by stating that: "This can
only be done by appealing to Jewish workers to transcend their national
consciousness in favor of their common class interests with Palestinian
workers, not by denying them their national rights." What is
completely ignored by your argument is the fact that the message of the LRP and
ISL to the Jewish workers is very similar to the way you describe it. The
difference, however, is that one of those class interests the Palestinian
workers have, which you choose to ignore throughout your article, is the right
to get back the land stolen from them by means of ethnic cleansing perpetrated
by the Zionist movement, which included the Zionist workers.
Ask
yourself, comrade, can you ask the Jewish workers in Palestine to transcend
their "national consciousness", yet promise not to deny them
their "national rights"? Shouldn't these be "transcended"
as well?! How would you explain to the Palestinian workers that their national rights of territorial unity
are to be denied in favor of their expropriators? You
accuse us of writing off the role of the Jewish proletariat in Palestine, yet
you might find yourself being accused of de-facto writing off the role of the
Palestinian one. I should believe that none of us is interested in neither of
both accusations.
What
the LRP and ISL offer to the Jewish workers in exchange for transcending their
racist and colonialist consciousness, is the right to live in peace and free of
discrimination in a workers' state in which the majority of the population will
be Arab-Palestinian refugees returning to their stolen land. This offer does
not mean the denying of cultural or religious freedom, but the denying of the
right to oppress, exploit and expropriate. Should this offer win over to the
revolution the majority of
the Jewish working class in Palestine, nothing could make us more happy. Yet we
recognize, through our experience and knowledge of history, that the chances of
that being the case are rather slim. Once again I stress, nothing would make us
more happy then this prediction being proven as wrong. Unfortunate as it may
be, at this point we believe that only a minority of the Jewish working class would
transcend their colonialist consciousness and join the workers of the region in
their struggle for socialism.
Should
one sunny day, Bill Gates, somehow bump his head against a blunt object and
decide to join the socialist revolution, he would have to give away all of his
privileges, including his land to be distributed among the masses. Some would
probably say: "Hey, this guy has so much power, why don't we buy him off
to the revolution by letting him keep his mansion?!" I am sure you would
not like to be one of those, yet this is exactly what you are suggesting. The
Jewish workers live on stolen land, their factories built on top of demolished
villages, the water they drink is taken away from Palestinian mouths, their
military bases built on top of Palestinian graveyards. What of all these
privileges would you allow them to keep as part of their "national rights"?
2.
Revolutionary consciousness
In
your article you compare our alleged writing off of the Jewish proletariat in
Palestine to the New Left's writing off of the American proletariat during the
60s:
"In the 1960's,
under circumstances where the white US working class appeared to be permanently
conservatized, and when much of the time a majority of it seemed to oppose the
civil rights, anti-war and women's liberation movements, the New Left wrote it
[and most of the working class in the economically developed countries as a
whole] off as permanently bought off. They called on a minority to “abandon
their white skin privilege” and projected the allegiance of the majority to
reaction. And today things seem similarly bleak no doubt with regards to the
Israeli working class to the LRP and ISL. The New Leftists at the time
therefore abandoned any perspective of an indigenous socialist revolution and
took up the utopian Maoist view that US imperialism would be overthrown
externally by Third World struggles."
By
this you suggest that the reason we say what we say is on the grounds of
consciousness, i.e. the Jewish workers and the American workers both suffer
from false and backward level of racist consciousness and that's why we've given
up on them in a defeatist manner. However, you fail to present any proof to
that and thus your argument appears to be one of the straw-man kind. To our
opinion, which could be deduced quite easily from the countless writings of
both aforementioned groups, our prediction that a mere minority (perhaps a very
much significant one, as in the case of the Bolshevik revolution) of the Jewish
workers in Palestine will turn to the side of the socialist future revolution
in the region, as well as the poor state of its revolutionary
consciousness, are caused by nothing other than class interests resulting from the dual role of the
Jewish proletariat in Palestine of exploited and (direct) oppressors. It would be
much wiser to compare them to the S. African white proletariat, rather than the
American one during the 60s.
However,
one important difference between the oppressed in S. Africa, is that the black
working class, unlike the Palestinian one, was strong enough to defeat the
white minority rule by means of socialist revolution (it has failed to do so
due to the betrayal of its opportunist leadership). Unfortunately, it seems
unlikely that the Palestinians, even under a revolutionary leadership, would be
able to defeat Israeli imperialism by themselves and without any help from the
proletariat of the region (the currently most advanced being the Egyptian
working class). Detaching our realistic analysis from its context you put forth
allegations at us for advocating passivism:
"But conceding
that as a possibility, at the same time it does not tell Palestinian and
Israeli revolutionaries what they should do in the meanwhile except perhaps
passively wait for Arab workers in other countries (and the LRP/ISL call for
“Arab Workers Revolution” leaves out not only Israeli Jews but also Kurds,
Persians, Berbers, Armenians and many other non-Arab groups in the region) to
come to their rescue. Any active revolutionary strategy is missing from such a
schema."
It
is amazing to see how you have managed to turn our internationalism and
rejection of 'socialism in one country' against us. However, you present me an
excellent opportunity to explain our position and practice in our region. As a
rule, revolutionaries do not ask any group of workers to sit still and wait for
any other group to take action before they do. Lenin did well when he refused
to wait for the German and French revolutions on account of Russia's weakness
and backwardness, and despite the fact that the success of the Russian
revolution depended heavily on the success of revolutions in more advanced
countries. He correctly anticipated, as do we in the case of Palestine, that
the Bolshevik revolution was imminent at the time, unlike the German or the
French, and that the Russian revolution should light the spark and inspire
revolutions in stronger countries, which could ensure the survival of the
Russian workers' state.
In
our region we have often seen that Palestinian uprisings inspire mass uprisings
in neighboring Arab countries, and while the Palestinians being robbed of their
land and kept as prisoners in refugee camps, are unable to develop a strong
enough proletariat to overthrow the Zionist state, their struggle which we
participate in, is an inspiration to all the oppressed masses of the region.
The more successful it becomes, the more defeats Israel suffers, the more
inspired will the workers of the middle east be, to take on their own
oppressors and exploiters and unite to vanquish capitalist imperialism in the
region.
Our
call for an "Arab revolution" is relevant to the region of Occupied
Palestine, were there are hardly any "Kurd, Persian, Berber,
Armenian" workers. We do mention all of the aforementioned
ethnic groups in the context of the middle east as a whole. You should log on
to the ISL website were I'm sure you'll find evidence for that. You should also
search within yourself for whether you yourself might not suggest in passing
that the Palestinians should wait for the Jewish workers for a socialist
revolution to be successful in Palestine.
3.
Accusations of Economic Reductionism
Next
comes along an accusation of economic reductionism regarding the support the
Zionist movement receives from the world Jewry and the privileged status of the
Jewish working class in Israel:
"[…] they […] tend to reduce what is,
ultimately, a self-destructive Jewish support to Zionism to questions of
economic privilege (in the process being somewhat blind to other involved
factors such as historical traumatization due to past oppression and the
horrors of the holocaust, fears of Arab national retribution, despair over
internationalist solidarity arising out of the history of Stalinist betrayals
etc.). But while it is true that the Israeli working class is significantly
privileged relative to the Palestinians, the US working class in turn is
significantly privileged relative to the Israeli working class and most of the
rest of the world for that matter."
While
I am quite sure that I could not possibly inform you of anything you don't
already know about dialectical materialist philosophy and its take on the
relationship between consciousness (including clinical psychiatric conditions
such as PTSD, paranoia and manic depression, you respectively diagnose the
world Jewry with) and reality, it does surprise me that you would think of us
as economic reductionists, blind to the action of human consciousness upon
reality. However, this is completely beside the point here, since support for
Zionism is not at all a solely Jewish phenomenon. For 2000 years Jews have been
persecuted, yet Zionism only surfaced in a certain era and under certain
material conditions. In fact, the originators of the Zionist idea were not Jews
but European Christian fundamentalists and anti-Semite chauvinists who, to this
day, continue to constitute the central pillar to the pro-Zionist movement
(especially in the US). They obviously suffer from very different
"psychiatric ailments," yet they present the same symptom.
It
is true that most of the world's problems have more than one contributing
factor. Yet a Marxist would not place all of the factors on the same level, as
some of which will be placed in front of others in the chain of causality. In
order to eradicate a problem, one must strike at its roots.
You
are correct when you say that both Jewish workers in Palestine and American
workers are relatively privileged, but there is a fundamental difference
between them which you ignore. There is privilege which results from having a
higher level of social production, which allows the bourgeoisie to let the workers
keep more of the produced value then the bourgeois class in poorer countries.
This type of privilege is characteristic to both workers in the US and Jewish
workers in Palestine. However, the privileges the Jewish workers in Palestine
have are derived directly from the expropriation of the Palestinians from their
lands, factories and jobs. You may wish to belittle this difference, but you
cannot ignore the fact that it causes different patterns of consciousness and
behavior. For example, when the US got defeated in Iraq, the workers moved to
the left, however, when Israel got defeated in Lebanon and then Gaza, the
Jewish workers moved to the right. Consciously and subconsciously, most of the
Jewish workers in Palestine know that the state protects their privileges by
directly oppressing and expropriating the native masses. Those who cannot do it
properly will be replaced by those who can.
Some
demagogues, liars and worshipers of accomplished facts (especially those who
are privileged by them and have an interest in keeping them unchanged) on the
left, criticize our slogan 'All of Israel is "Occupied Territory"' as
Utopian. They equate it to saying that all of the US is occupied territory as
well, after all, it also has been ethnically cleansed from its original
inhabitants. Thus, the democratic demand of the Palestinians to their right of
return to their stolen lands is as Utopian as a demand to allow the native
Americans return to the lands from which they were ethnically cleansed.
To
them we answer that while there is no active struggle by native Americans to
return to their historic stolen lands and restore their old way of life, a
demand of this sort by progressive leftists would indeed be Utopian. However,
the Palestinian struggle is not only active and alive, it is sending shocks all
over the world uniting millions of workers in solidarity. Moreover, the Zionist
project of land theft and
ethnic cleansing is by no means over and is carried through on a daily basis as
we speak. To this struggle, and all of its democratic demands, we must give all
of our support. It is evident that should this struggle fail, the Palestinians
will meet the same fate as the native Americans. Those who refuse to support
the right of return, are contributing to that scenario.
In
conclusion, the Jewish workers in Palestine are not the same as any other
working class in the world. They could maybe be likened to the South African
white workers, and yet they are still not entirely similar. Those who choose
not to apply Trotsky's call for a black
South African workers' republic to
the case of Palestine, fail to explain themselves in materialistic terms and
instead turn to psychiatric prognoses of the world Jewry. We will struggle
within any working class for a revolutionary leadership, be it Jewish, Arab or
other, but the revolutionary movement in Palestine will not give the Jewish
residents of Palestine any separatist rights of self determination on the
expense of the Palestinians. Those who claim that this could be done without
infringing onto Palestinian national rights fail to explain how this could be
done without neither land theft nor apartheid conditions.
And
thus, who are the worshipers of the accomplished fact? Those who advocate the
right to self determination of an imperialist colonialist state on the expense
of the expropriated Arab masses, or those who reject it? Those who portray a
caricature of Marxism by reducing any conflict to "class vs. class",
or those who offer a way forward in a world in which imperialism creates not
only oppressor and oppressed classes but also oppressor and oppressed nations?
Those who worship those with power, or those who call the masses to believe in
their own power to make radical significant social change?
Comradely,
Boris
W. Hammerschlag
Internationalist
Socialist League (Israel/Occupied Palestine)