marxism-digest V1 #6314
mstainsby at tao.ca
Sat Sep 6 23:53:23 MDT 2003
At 10:24 PM 9/6/2003, you wrote:
>From: Juan Fajardo <fajardos at ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: [R-G] "Tikkun Community Reaffirms Its Commitment to UFPJ"
>Well, for example, return to where precisely: Back to the Palestinian
>territories, or back to areas within the state of Israel?
You are describing a two state solution. Such a solution would be a
tragedy. There is no way around it: Israel itself, based on a racist
definition of a state, must be dismantled. A two state solution is based on
a theory of a group of people negotiating the right of return. It is an
individual right, inherent and not a chip on the table.
>Or, who can return? Do those born abroad have the right of "return"?
>If so, for how many generations? Is that right automatic, or are
>there conditions --proof of former residence, exit in or after 1947,
>renunciation of other citizenship?
I have my opinions and guesses as to how these things could work, I'm
certain you do as well. One thing is for sure: No Settler has any human
rights to be honored until they get out of Palestinian land. They can
negotiate with the Palestinians who can stay and who can't, but as a
federation (or similar variant).
There will not be justice until the dream of a Jewish majority and a Jewish
state are abandoned in place fo racial harmony and equity among peoples.
> What of the status of the "refugees"
>and "stateless" Palestinians in surrounding countries -- will they be
>forced back or allowed to remain in their present homes?
I hope you are not demanding a crystal ball. Those people need the right to
come home, and either decendants of the Palestinians expelled and those
remaining alive all have it. The old villages are likely gone for history,
but new mutli-ethnic and equal status based metropoles are what the future
will have in store. And when you think about what the result of homogenous
states in practice has been, this is a good thing.
There will not be two seperate states with "self determination"- ie
domination by Israel and the erasure of the Palestinain history of the
area-- but one state, secular and based on constitutional premises and with
>Most of these details will have to be worked out by the Palestinians
>themselves, but if the establishment of a Palestinian state presumes
>that there will be a recognition by the Palestinian authority of an
>Israeli state, then on some of those details the Israelis will have to
>be given a say.
This is not like negotiation between Turkey and Greece re Cyprus. We have
an abomination, an anti-human state pursuing a racially defined
expansionist program with Settlers from Europe who have a racially bound
system of value for human life and express this in laws and immigration
policy and worse openly sing songs to praise this. And then we have the
Palestinian indigenous resistance to that plan.
It makes the most sense where, on behalf of both peoples, the Israelis are
forced to climb down and build a non-racist state at least as differing in
outlook as the 1994 change over in Africa, still short enough of achieving
real justice. It will happen like the South African model due to the
resistance of the Palestinians (that makes sense in their situation) and
only false starts and media photo ops like the "Road Map" will take place
until then. I don't envisage a PA spokesman signing a "deal" with Sharon
that would be anything other than a major blow to the struggle against
imperialism the world over. Zionism must be defeated, not merely
checkmating a Zionist army/etc.
>Yes, of course, we take the Palestinian right of return as a given, but
>like any right it is bounded by social and practical limits in its
Those practical limits, should they exist (I'm not certain they do) fall on
the shoulders of the European Settlers since 1948, even inside the Greenline.
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism