Nationalism of oppressed countries, again! (was Re: MSStatement on > the Intifada

Xxxx Xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx at
Sun Feb 18 11:06:19 MST 2001

  Both Andy and Nestor have raised legitimate points.Although I have some
disagreements with him in the past over the issue of who should carry the Arab
nationalist struggle (Hamas or secular Arab nationalist movement?), I still wish
Julio Pino were here to contribute to the debate. In any case, it seems that
Nestor is saying that we can not expect anything from the Israeli working class
to fight for the Palestinian cause, because they are the working classes of the
imperialist nation. They are incorporated by their own bourgeoisie--Israel. They
intentionally, or unintentionally, share with their own bourgeoisie the idea
that Arabs should be part of the Israeli state. They are pro-nationalist;
pro-Zionist etc.. So any cooperation between the Jewish and Arab masses on the
basis of socialism will not benefit Arabs. I think this perception totally
depends on the political character of the working class movement in Israel (or
in any ! ! nation). If  the working classes (or masses) of two nations are
struggling for socialism, anti-imperialism and dissolution of the Israeli state for
Arab liberation (a sincerely on the part of  Jewish working class which needs
*strong* empirical verification), there is no reason to dismiss such a
progressive alliance. I am not  an expert on the Israeli working
class.Accordingly, I don't know if they are truthful about the Palestinian
cause. We should always look up to reality to see if such an alliance can work
in practice.   If we can not hope anything from the working classes to fight for
the Arab liberation, who should we look for? Arab national bourgeoisie,
considering the fact that Palestine working class is weak and can not carry its
historic mission.? This was true in the past, but at the moment the Palestinian
bourgeoisie can not fully carry its historic mission either. The bourgeois
establishment in Palestine has become a neo-colonial administration of
imperialist powers, turning against its own people and maintaining the divided status
of  Palestinians . Arafat has compromised with the LAbor Party. He accepted the
OSLO agreement, turned to UN  resolutions, and abandoned the armed struggle. He
also urged Arabs in Israel to vote for Barak in previous elections. If I
understand Lenin correctly, he was saying that the oppressed masses of
materialized nations should strategically ally with their own  bourgeoisie to
gain! ! national self determination *first*, and then struggle against their own
bourgeoisie for socialism. He did not mean compromise, not he meant uncritically
relying on nationalist bourgeoisie who has become a comprador. At the moment, PA 
has compromised after having some small concessions from imperialist powers.
Frankly, I don't know who we should look for to carry the Arab nationalist
movement further.May be a new popular uprising, en masse...Hamas and Hizbullahi
seems to be doing this. For this, however, Arab community is still divided over
the nature of national struggle--religious or secular? A puzzle I can not
solve..     Xxxx         --- Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx Ph.D Student Department of
Political Science SUNY at Albany Nelson A. Rockefeller College 135 Western Ave.;
Milne 102 Albany, NY 12222        

More information about the Marxism mailing list