[Marxism] Re: Marxist analysis of US/Israel offensives

Brian Shannon Brian_Shannon at verizon.net
Thu Jul 27 17:57:59 MDT 2006

More importantly, since the Six Day War, the Tel Aviv-Washington axis
has scored a number of political victories, winning allies -- Egypt
and Jordan above all -- among the Arab regimes and even the
Palestinian power elite (the Mahmoud Abbas faction).  The axis could
have continued along the line and scored more victories -- in Lebanon
as well as elsewhere -- if they had been patient.

I’d say the Tel Aviv-Washington axis could win politically in Iran,
too.  There is no reason why it can’t find an Iranian version of Anwar
Sadat (imho, Rafsanjani or one of those reformists would be perfect
for this role).

But the Tel Aviv-Washington axis doesn’t want to do that.  It’s not a
matter of one political action defeating the other in either country.
On the invasion of Lebanon and sanctions on Iran, Labor and Likud, as
well as Democrats and Republicans, are united.

They are fighting wars of choice, paying higher costs for bigger but
less certain prizes, rather than paying lower costs for smaller but
more easily winnable prizes.

- Yoshie


There is a shift to permanent war or at least the permanent  
justification of it followed by the practice where needed. The  
difference with Bush is that he says that the only justification  
needed is that the attacking country perceives a need. No longer do  
we justify it with 40 or more communists as in the Dominican Republic  
in 1965, or students in Grenada, or drug trafficking in Panama. Of  
course, there is always some sort of danger or it can be  
manufactured. It doesn’t matter how shallow the reason, given time,  
and a little experimentation with what works or even a claim that no  
one believes, the assault can begin.

Republicans can do it with relative impunity, not fearing any  
permanent damage to their base. The Democrats join in with a mixture  
of “go get em” and “tut-tuts” because it is also their policy. Here  
the Neo-Cons may actually be playing a role, in the sense that they  
want to get to the root of the issue. The substitution of one regime  
for another doesn’t produce the kind of result that heavy bombing and  
the destruction of infrastructure does. If you take the Marxist  
analysis, which always aims for the root of the problem, and turn it  
on its head, you get some form of fascism. Not really fascism, but  
just as good. This may be the Neo-Cons greatest contribution,  
providing a social analysis of why material destruction will succeed  
while a revolving door of regimes may not.

In this case, it is not done with a social force that can reconstruct  
society for one or two generations, but with bombs that can set back  
a society for at least a generation. It is now twenty years since the  
first assault on Lebanon. One generation later, a new destruction.  
Whatever the occasion and whatever tools are used, the result is the  
same. It doesn’t matter to imperialism that Hezbollah may continue to  
exist in some form, so long as it can be driven back and forced to  

Let’s us not overlook the little dance that recently took place in  
Italy. Please end the killing says Europe. They don’t even bother to  
condemn the U.S. and Israel -- friends are expected to disagree.

The U.S. openly says that first Israel will lay waste to the towns  
and people of Southern Lebanon and destroy or drive out its social  
support. Then we can send a peace force. And if the destruction  
continues without a peace force? Hey, that will work too. Israel  
proclaims that the wasteland is a success and withdraws. Besides  
that’s cheaper and there won’t have to be any embarrassing debate at  
the United Nations.

Europe plays a similar role to the U.S. as the Democratic Party does  
towards the Republican. One difference is that sooner-or-later, the  
Democrats will actually have to carry out or continue the Bush  
Doctrine, naturally dressing it up in a different suit. The Europeans  
come along for the spoils, like hyenas or vultures after the lion has  
made the kill.

Is this a permanent solution for imperialism? Of course not, but then  
there never is.

Brian Shannon


More information about the Marxism mailing list