MURDER OF JEWISH STUDENTS (1)

by Felix Quigley

The callous and cowardly murder by an Islamofascist Arab antisemite in Jerusalem two days ago raises the most revolutionary questions in front of us on 4international, representing as we do alone the revolutionary socialist tradition of Leon Trotsky before he was murdered by a Stalinist assassin. We interrupt our series of articles on Srebrenica in our defense of the Serb people against Islamofascists and Imperialists like Hoare and Kamm, in order to analyse the implications of this horrific event in Jerusalem. We will return to those asap.

Part 1

The word Shoah is very well known in the wider especially political and literary world. By far the most important documentary ever made about the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews was called precisely that… “Shoah”. In an interview with the Media a member of the Olmert Cabinet used the word “Shoah” to threaten the Arabs of Gaza. We on 4international have no problem with threatening the Islamofascists of Hamas and Fatah but…This has stirred up the antisemitic invective throughout the whole world and has created a situation of enormous tension.

This is the report of this from the anti Israel Guardian newspaper of England:

begin quote here

“The more Qassam [rocket] fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves,” Matan Vilnai, Israel’s deputy defence minister, told army radio.Shoah is the Hebrew word normally reserved to refer to the Jewish Holocaust. It is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi extermination of Jews during the second world war, and many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other events.

end quote here http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/29/israelandthepalestinians1?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront   Did this man Matan Vilnai use the word deliberately in order to create conditions for Civil War in the Middle East, in a general sense is this the main “strategy” of the Olmert regime working hand in hand with the American CIA, to create conditions of Civil War inside Israel, and of general crisis in the whole of the region, to make it imperative that NATO troops are deployed?

That question has to remain unanswered because the alternative explanation made by he himself and his Government is also possible, that he used the Hebrew word with its meaning in a pressured interview situation. We cannot answer it but we can refer to the extreme duplicitous nature of the Israeli ruling class, especially when one has also studied the role of the Serbian ruling class, who actually traded their elected President Milosevic to the hated ICTY Kangaroo Court in the Hague.  

The lesson of Yugoslavia will have been internalised by many of these, including the Olmert Cabinet. Is it accidental that the Olmert Government plans to recognize the Islamist Fascist state of Kosovo.

Why does Olmert, the US State Department and the EU Antisemites feel they have to take this circulatory route to their goal, which is the creation of what some Jews like Olmert like to believe is a Palestinian Arab state at peace with itself and therefore more importantly with a truncated Israel.

The power of ideology is considerable and this was the false ideas that underpinned the Jewish state of Israel when it was set up in 1948. That it would be possible to reach an accommodation with Islam.  Of course no accommodation with Islam is ever possible. Islam is an Imperialist and reactionary religio cum openly politico ideology whose clear aim is to conquer the world for Islam by whatever means are necessary.  

So an accommodation with Islam is therefore a hopeless quest! Does that mean that the setting up of Israel in 1948 was a foolish enterprise? Far from it, and apart from the aims of Jewish nationalism itself a national liberation struggle of the first order we should also turn to the political position of the main representative of revolutionary socialism, Leon Trotsky.

Trotsky was thus making a leap in the field of revolutionary socialist theory in opposition to Stalinism and Social Democracy. National movements such as that of the Jews, or that of the Serbs especially in the past 25 years, are of the utmost importance to socialist revolutionaries and it is on the position of socialists to these that they are going to be judged.  There had always been a tendency within the Marxist tradition to see the Jewish issue as interlinked with antisemitism. Solve the issue of antisemitism through a socialist reorganization of society (revolution) and thereby the Jewish issue would be solved.

This left out that the Jewish issue was an issue of national liberation and was not simply one of oppression by antisemitism. It was correct for Marx to emphasize the class struggle, he was after all the pioneer in an understanding of the new phenomenon of capitalism, but he made a mistake in ignoring the issue of national liberation in general.

Marx tended in this direction while his friend Engels with his close association with the Irish race began to make the first moves to deepen the understanding of Marxists towards national liberation movements.  

The Marxist movement went through many phases in general puzzlement of this issue. Lenin tended to recognize and respect national liberation movements with the proviso that they would assist the proletarian revolution. The great strength of Leon Trotsky in the 1930s was that he recognized the Ukrainian demand for independence from Russia with no strings attached as valid and he did indeed do so explicitly. But his position on the Jewish issue of nationalism was even more powerful.

In clear terms Trotsky spelled out that the Jews were a nation, scattered or not, that they had to have a land to effect this nationalism, that this land was Palestine, that the Jews had to escape from Nazi Europe and making their way to Palestine had to set up their JEWISH state and they had to make this Jewish state free from antisemitism.

It had to be a place where antisemitism must not exist. In the same breath Trotsky talked about the Arab anti Imperialist movement and the role towards the Jews of the “Reactionary Mohammedans”. In doing this latter Trotsky held out the hope and perspective that Arab people must become themselves revolutionary through a break from Islam.

But it was the fact that at this very early stage Trotsky was well aware of the huge danger to the Jews in the Middle East from Islam that tends to demarcate Trotsky from the present “Left”, some of whom misuse his name, and who in fact can be termed as Fake Leftists who support Antisemitic Fascists.  

The political position of Leon Trotsky was resting on a dialectical knife edge. First of all Trotsky was adamant that the Jews had to save themselves by escaping from the Nazis. He knew better than most the role of the Imperialists in assisting the Nazi Holocaust and he, along with all of that revolutionary Russian and European Socialist movement, knew extremely well the utterly reactionary nature of the British Imperialists.

Yet the Jews had to get out of Europe and there was only Palestine. Trotsky understood fully that the setting up of the Jewish state had to be fought for against the British Imperialists and against the Islamists. Trotsky was approaching the issue from a tangent which was completely different from that of the religious Jews, and from the so-called “Zionists” like Weizman.

In the context of the setting up of Israel being a matter of struggle and war Trotsky was much nearer to the Revisionist (so called) movement of Jabotinsky, in spirit in any case, because Trotsky was a socialist revolutionary, but unlike Jabotinsky he never believed that an answer to the Jews lay down the road of capitalism. And indeed so it has proved.  

Before moving on it is necessary to point out to my Jewish and Serbian friends the full reality and consequences of the action of Stalinism as a direct representative of Imperialism in the action that they carried out on in Mexico.

The Stalinists and the Imperialists had set out not just to assassinate one man, but to destroy a movement. This was the movement for revolutionary socialism because if you wipe out the head and brain you also wipe out the movement. That was their aim and in many strikes against the Trotskyists the movement was literally totally destroyed. That it was totally destroyed is seen in the evidence before our eyes, as mentioned above.

These assassinations in Europe and the Gulag in Russia were thus attempts by Imperialism to destroy the revolutionary socialist movement. We have spent some time on this site 4international studying the relevance to today of the rather archaic document by Lenin “What is to be done?” and have discovered that it contains a wealth of wisdom relevant to today.

There cannot be a socialist revolutionary consciousness without science, without a party based on revolutionary theory, which includes not just the theory of class struggle, but of all theory, including all the wisdom of the bourgeoisie itself. That is what was removed from the Jews with the assassination of Trotsky in 1940.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s