Since it's been a while since we had an Israel/Palestine thread...

[dilbert1]

I’m not in any “anti-left” phase. I’ve never identified more than I do now with the Left as a historical category (as opposed to a contemporary demographic contingent), in fact. And personally, I’m not so convinced that the sentiment “the personal is political,” so prescient to the pre-history of wokeness, taken along with the subjective connotation “liberation” has donned in our culture, necessarily renders incoherent the notion of a liberatory politics. When unfreedom masquerades as freedom, the latter hasn’t been coopted, ready to be tossed aside with the rest of the master’s tools. “Left” and (human social and political) “freedom” are two interconnected concepts whose historical pedigree I am more or less dedicated to studying probably for the rest of my life.

 

[thirdform]

I’m not in any “anti-left” phase. I’ve never identified more than I do now with the Left as a historical category (as opposed to a contemporary demographic contingent), in fact. And personally, I’m not so convinced that the sentiment “the personal is political,” so prescient to the pre-history of wokeness, taken along with the subjective connotation “liberation” has donned in our culture, necessarily renders incoherent the notion of a liberatory politics. When unfreedom masquerades as freedom, the latter hasn’t been coopted, ready to be tossed aside with the rest of the master’s tools. “Left” and (human social and political) “freedom” are two interconnected concepts whose historical pedigree I am more or less dedicated to studying probably for the rest of my life.

I do not think freedom has been co-opted. What I think is that people see a politics of emancipation as following, more or less, the same parliamentary and democratic mechanisms of the present society. Cutrin is right here to highlight this re: people demanding Biden commit to a ceasefire, but then he goes way off into provocation about how the bad Palestinians didn't except a two state solution. I mean, the oslo accords and the zones of occupation seem to have eluded him.

Are hamas Netanyahu's loyal opposition, also yes, I agree with that.

But in the hypothetical situation that Israeli and palestinian workers unite (in which I am in agreement with him) are we really going to decry it if said workers use violence against, say, yellow union thugs or representatives of the Israeli labour party?

Freedom and unfreedom comprise a dialectical unity, in the same way that violence and non-violence do. You can't be for freedom without exercising repression against those who oppress, and you cannot be for non-violence without deploying a sharp, tactical and strategic violence against the ruling class which exercises its violence daily.

In this sense, the violence exercised by a proletarian power is but a drop in the ocean.

 

[dilbert1]

That most people’s horizons concerning what counts as “liberatory” and “emancipatory” are today drastically etiolated won’t prevent me from upholding the crystalline meaning those words used and ought to have for socialists, even if the context for the original formation of such a meaning has all but disappeared. To the contrary, and with a vigilance toward amnesia, it should encourage one to do so.

 

[thirdform]

If the proletariat is to learn, it can only learn from its mistakes and its defeats. This is another provocation I find extraneous to understanding what is going on.

Palestinians should accept that they lost. I mean, so what? So what if they do?

They probably knew they lost long before the Platypus society was founded.

 

[thirdform]

and then we have this complete idiocy


In this deranged wet dream, the Israeli govt and IDF are left, ethical, humanitarian capitalists, relative to hamas the savage right wing capitalists. But it is still the same capitalism, still the same class terror, and still the immense shedding of the blood of those rendered surplus.

And yet those citing Lash will not call this a culture of self-important narcissism, even though it clearly is.

 

[thirdform]

That most people’s horizons concerning what counts as “liberatory” and “emancipatory” are today drastically etiolated won’t prevent me from upholding the crystalline meaning those words used and ought to have for socialists, even if the context for the original formation of such a meaning has all but disappeared. To the contrary, and with a vigilance toward amnesia, it should encourage one to do so.

I agree with you, but Revolution is still the most authoritarian thing there is. If we are going to talk about liberatory politics, then the opposite of use of authority is not liberation, but of servility and compliance.

 

[thirdform]

the authoritarian-libertarian binary is false, in other words.

Even authority here is a mechanism, and authoritarian acts take on such a form by virtue of their nature. Neither authoritarianism nor libertarianism can be immutable principles for us, just as democracy can't. They are instrumental.

 

[dilbert1]

Revolution is still the most authoritarian thing there is

Yeah that’s straight from Engels, and coincidentally one of Cutrone’s favorite quotes regarding the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Again, when I use the phrase “liberatory politics,” I’m not concerned with something subjective, or opposition to authority and authoritarianism. Its opposites are reaction, tradition, complacency, decadence, status quo, etc. It’s basically shorthand for the modern idea of the Left.

 

[thirdform]

a mechanical adherence to a degenerated movement, such as that under Stalinism is of no use, even if it comes cloaked in respecting authority.

This goes back to crude schematism, an anti-dialectical approach.

More rather, the specific conditions in a specific local at a specific time must be taken into consideration. An organic solution cannot be valid for all times.

 

[thirdform]

Yeah that’s straight from Engels, and coincidentally one of Cutrobe’s favorite quotes regarding the dictatorship of the proletariat. Again, when I use the phrase “liberatory politics,” I’m not concerned with something subjective, or opposition to authority and authoritarianism. Its opposites are reaction, tradition, complacency, decadence, status quo, etc. It’s basically shorthand for the modern idea of the Left.

True enough, but even the hayday of the left, it was mostly reactionary, decadent and complacent. I mean one just has to look at 1914.

 

[dilbert1]

I’d mark that as the beginning of its century-long decline and regression. And sure, hence the split in the Second International etc., but to the extent the Left was those things, it was deficient as Left.

 

[thirdform]

i think what has changed is that the contemporary left has become unbuckled from the trade union bureaucracy. But it's not like the majority of the social democratic and labourist lefts in the 20th century were any more progressive than they are today, and any less chauvinistic. in some respects, worse. Todays internet activists are powerless, hardly like the Atley fetishising post-1945 socialists who happily supported a government who ran virtual concentration camps in Malaya to fund the NHS.

 

[thirdform]

I’d mark that as the beginning of its century-long decline and regression. And sure, hence the split in the Second International etc., but to the extent the Left was those things, it was deficient as Left.

hm I think the decline goes back even earlier to that even, way back to Proudhon and Bakunin. That's why in that sense Marxism has always been to the left of the libertarian currents.

In fact Marxism as proletarian science has always faced waves of attack from those claiming to be to the left from its outset.

 

[dilbert1]

BTW just to clarify, the reason I’ve gone to Platypus is for the curriculum. Take a look at the reading group page of their website. I’m using the shred of institutional support they receive, the extensive textual expertise of their pedagogues, and the accountability structure a weekly meeting provides to educate myself about the history of Marxism, left politics and bourgeois-cum-socialist thought more generally. And Platypus certainly has what some want to claim is a “line,” but what I think could be more accurately described as a particular hermeneutic. I’ve had a great experience without any intention of becoming a member, and they damn sure offer as rich and sophisticated an opportunity at enlightenment on such matters, academic as they may be, as anyone else out there.

 

[thirdform]

In general the only type of periodisation I have any truck with in this sort of thing is formal and real subsumption.

The former being when capitalism utilises old production methods to extract absolute surplus value (intensive accumulation) and real subsumption when capital dominates all parts of the production process to extract the most surplus value in the least amount of time (relative surplus value.) I.E: when capitalist technology ensures that the productivity of labour skyrockets.

This is actually tied to the agrarian question in the East.

Otherwise, I am not so down with the ascendent phase of the left gradually relapsing into decadence. I feel this is too political at the expense of other factors.

But this is probably something I will be studying for the rest of my life.

 

[thirdform]

BTW just to clarify, the reason I’ve gone to Platypus is for the curriculum. Take a look at the reading group page of their website. I’m using the shred of institutional support they receive, and the textual expertise of their pedagogues, plus the accountability structure a weekly meeting provides, to educate myself about the history of Marxism, left politics and bourgeois-cum-socialist thought more generally. And Platypus certainly has what some want to claim is a “line,” but what I think could be more accurately described as a particular hermeneutic. I’ve had a great experience without any intention of becoming a member, and they damn sure offer as rich and sophisticated an opportunity at enlightenment on such matters, academic as they may be, as anyone else out there.

ok, well, fair enough. I am not an academic and not tied to academic institutions. I would probably be called a crank in many left wing circles, but that accusation doesn't bother me, I am quite proud of it, actually.

 

[dilbert1]

I’m not an academic either, I meant that in the more informal sense, things concerning books, important dates, ideas, and what to so many may as well be ancient history

 

[thirdform]

I’m not an academic either, I meant that in the more informal sense, someone concerned with books, important dates, ideas, and what to so many may as well be ancient history

Right right.

Most of my education comes from Italian left communism. I had a brief flirtation with Dauve and the french post-68 currents, but I found them lacking. More of the Italian texts are being translated into English now. 13 years ago when I was first getting started my positions were a jumble.

The good thing about the italian left communist tradition is that all works are collective party patrimony. This is something I found very stifling with the academic approach to Marxism. The attachment to bodies of theoretical thought as the product of personal genius, rather than a collective and very real process of working out.

All that being said, this doesn't mean I support anti-intellectualism, I just take academic works with a helping hand of a table spoon of salt. Even the most correct of bourgeois academics are only *so* correct.

 

[dilbert1]

Interesting. Is that because you’re Italian or for another reason?

this doesn't mean I support anti-intellectualism, I just take academic works with a helping hand of a table spoon of salt. Even the most correct of bourgeois academics are only *so* correct.

Absolutely

 

[thirdform]

anyway back on topic

Can't post from grauniad for some reason.

Arms maker BAE Systems makes record profit amid Ukraine and Israel-Gaza wars
FTSE 100 company says global instability is making government focus on defence spending
Jasper Jolly and agencies
Wed 21 Feb 2024 10.33 GMT
Copy link
Increased military spending prompted by Russia’s war on Ukraine and the Israel-Gaza conflict helped the British weapons manufacturer BAE Systems to record profits last year, with further growth expected in the year ahead.
The FTSE 100 company made underlying profits before interest and tax of £2.7bn on record sales of £25.3bn in 2023.
Shares in weapons manufacturers have surged in the past two years after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 made governments reassess their plans for military spending.
There have also been increased tensions across the Middle East since 7 October, when Hamas, which runs Gaza, killed 1,139 people in an assault on Israel. Israel has responded with months of bombardment of Gaza, killing nearly 30,000 Palestinians.
BAE Systems’ sprawling interests include building nuclear submarines and fighter jets, tanks and ships, as well as guns and ammunition.
Charles Woodburn, the BAE chief executive, said the weapons manufacturer was expecting “sustained growth in the coming years”.
“Instability in Europe, the Middle East and other parts of the world brings into sharp focus the vital role that we play in protecting national security,” he told reporters on Wednesday.
“While most of our order volume was driven by existing programme positions that predate the Ukraine conflict, orders to restock and upgrade heavy armour and munitions are starting to come through.”
Jarek Pominkiewicz, an equity research analyst at Quilter Cheviot, said BAE would benefit from a “growing recognition of the need to bolster defence spending”, particularly in eastern European and Baltic countries close to Russia’s borders.
BAE’s share price dropped by more than 3% on Wednesday morning because margins were slightly lower than expected, but remain close to record highs, valuing the company at almost £38bn. Its shares have more than doubled in value since February 2022.

https:// www. the guardian .com /business/2024/feb/21/bae-systems-profit-ukraine-israel-gaza-wars-ftse-100