Bulletin N° 954
Subversive 1992 BBC documentary film on the McCarthy Era in America, now censored on the Internet,
produced by Archie Baron
plus "Frank Wilkinson and FBI Surveillance" @ https://youtu.be/wMAE8iun_RU ]
Subject: "The first time is tragedy; the second time, farce."
January 26, 2021
Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
Long before Dachau (1933), Auschwitz (1940) and Treblinka (1942), concentration camps were developed by the Spanish in Cuba during what became the Spanish-American War, “to inflict new cruelties on civilians and fighters alike.” In 1895 the Spanish Governor-General of Cuba wrote to the Spanish Prime Minister in Madrid advocating the isolation of rebels from the peasants who sometimes fed or sheltered them, by relocating hundreds of thousands of rural inhabitants into Spanish-held “cities behind barbed wire,” a strategy he called reconcentración. For centuries, the Spanish had treated the Native American population in a similar fashion as part of their “Mission-Presidio System” to quell resistance. And again, the British used concentration camps during the Boer War in South Africa (1899-1902) to demoralize mobilization and guerrilla warfare against the British invasion of the Boer republics.
“The Gulag Archipelago,” a Soviet network of some 30,000 forced labor camps set up by order of Vladimir Lenin, reaching its peak during Joseph Stalin's rule from the 1930s to the early 1950s, was the modern extension of the traditional prison camps that had been employed under the rule of Russian Tzars for centuries.
But, the genocidal strategy of concentration camps was perfected in Fascist Germany, where Jews, Gypsies, Socialists, Communists, Gays and other “undesirables” were systematically exterminated by the millions, as “a surplus population”, in an industrial operation called “social cleansing.”
The history of concentration camps and today’s global confinement share certain similarities: entire populations are deemed “non-essential” and are reified and acted upon accordingly; this concerted action which has been concocted by a small number of self-appointed directors is orchestrated by a managerial strata of “Kapos,” whose mission it is to subdue the population and “maintain order” at all costs.
In the third chapter of his book, Overcoming Zionism, entitled “The Spectre of Shoah,” Joel Kovel discusses the role of self-professed Zionists at the moment of catastrophe. He starts the chapter by describing the response of two prominent international intellectuals who were familiar with the early Zionist ideology: Leo Tolstoy and Mahatma Gandhi.
Zionism has never lacked detractors, among whose ranks we can find some of the great moral leaders of the age. Tolstoy, although an inspiration to the back-to-the-land pioneers, was harshly dismissive of their project, telling them, as Lacqueur puts it, ‘that Zionism was not a progressive but basically a militarist movement; the Jewish idea would not find its fulfillment in a territorially limited fatherland. Did the Jews really want a state on the pattern of Serbia, Rumania, or Montenegro?’ In 1938, Gandhi was even harsher in his assessment. Fully aware of the ‘inhuman treatment meted out’ to these ‘untouchables of Christianity,’ and despite his ‘lifelong’ friendships with Jewish comrades from the days of struggle in South Africa, Gandhi nevertheless wrote that such ‘sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice. The cry for a national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me.’ For it is ‘wrong and inhumane to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct … The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred.’ As for the Jews in Palestine (at the time the Arabs were waging a fierce but losing battle against what seemed to be an entente between the British forces and the Jewish settlers),
‘I have no doubt that they are going about it in the wrong way. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.’
These words are eerily continuous with the predicament of the Second Intifada and the latest wars in the region. But Gandhi was also writing just after Kristallnacht, the most violent episode of a Nazi pogrom until the Holocaust, proper, and he was obliged to call attention to the looming shadow of ‘the German persecution of the Jews [which] seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone.’ How, then are the Jews to resist this ‘organized and shameless persecution’? Gandhi, true to himself, sees the clear path as one of spiritual affirmation and resistance.
‘No person who has faith in a living God need feel helpless and forlorn … [such a God] is common to one and all … as the Jews attribute personality to God and believe that He rules every action of theirs, they ought not to feel helpless. If I were a Jew and were born in Germany … I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon … [with] confidence that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example.’
Similar advice is given to the Jews in Palestine, once it is realized that the
‘Same God rules the Arab heart who rules the Jewish heart. They can offer Satyagraha* in front of the Arabs and offer themselves to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea without raising a little finger against them.’
Gandhi also wrote a letter to Hitler around this time, a forlorn copy of which can be seen in the museum that was his home in Mumbai, India, asking the Nazi dictator to desist from the warlike path. No response is known, and the horror unfolded: a worst-case scenario that puts to the test all powers of human comprehension, and still reverberates.
*The Gandhian practice on ‘insistence on truth’ – showing tolerance and goodwill coupled with firmness in one’s cause through non-violent passive resistance and non-cooperation. (pp.64-66)
Each genocide is unique in its own way, whether that of the indigenous in the New World, the Africans in the Congo under Leopold of Belgium, the Armenians under Turkish rule, and so on to genocide in Cambodia and Rwanda. It is grotesque to compare genocides saying, in effect, the mass slaughter of my people is worse than yours. However, they all have their signatures, which in the case of Shoah drew itself into a long-wrought narrative and concentrated the affect or unfathomabiliity, thus rousing all the monsters set down over (three thousand years. This complex of feeling still persists, an, turned into guilt, shadows the debate on Israel, making even committed anti-imperialists and champions of justice into crypto-Zionists, who despite themselves, end up following the Israeli line. The complex has crippled a good deal of politics in Europe and the United States.
Those to whom befell the task of sorting through the wreckage after the Second World War had to contend with the agitated state of mind and the shock waves it represented.(p.67)
. . .
The chief themes set forth by the discourse surrounding the Holocaust were first, the essential victimhood of the Jews and their essential innocence; second, and contradicting this in part, an endlessly accusatory debate over collusion and resistance that fractured Israeli politics for many years; third, the essential guilt of the Christian West for not helping Jews in their hour of need and more deeply, for spawning such a monster within its borders as Nazism – for the conclusion could not be avoided that this was no fluke, nor a peculiarly German mutation, but rather expressed something systemic that the Nazis exploited to the hilt. And finally, that the trail ends in the ancient land of Palestine, from which the Jewish people had been expelled and through the return to which they would be saved, at least protected, by their state, form the beast that had hunted them down through centuries of exile. The supreme corollary was that the magnitude of the Holocaust trumped all competing moral claims, including certainly those of the displaced Palestinians whose actual suffering could readily be seen as peripheral to the great drama over the appropriation of the memory of Jewish suffering.
The Shoah did not determine the inner drive and logic of Zionism, but it had the highly important result of allowing this to be shown outwardly in a benign light that drew in vast degrees of support for what had hitherto been considered a marginal and dubious idea. Both the Jewish community and world opinion were greatly affected. In the outpouring and the rescue, the considerations developed in the previous chapter, that Zionism had developed a forward, terroristic strategy to achieve its goals, which in both means and ends was inherently violative of the ethical integrity of Judaism, became blurred and largely lost from view. The Shoah, in other words, allowed the perception of a highly evolved Zionist aggression which dated from before the war, to become eclipsed, turned around, and seen as defensive and therefore necessary. Once Israel had been established as the sole guarantor of the survival of the Jewish people, it was granted a blank check: anything it was to do could be automatically justified by the immensity of what it stood against. In the same gesture, what had been inflicted by the Nazis became seamlessly transferred to the threat posed by the bloodthirsty Arab hordes surrounding little Israel and ever threatening to drive its Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. All this was achieved despite warning not to politicize the catastrophe, even though this had already happened because the extremity of events had worked to suppress critical thought.
Mindful of the tremendous moral weight this notion still enjoys, we are yet obliged to question its foundations. For it must be asserted as a moral axiom that the unfathomability of a collective trauma by no means translates into a blank check to do whatever one presumes necessary to prevent its recurrence. Because one is deeply injured does not, in effect, make it all right to injure someone else in return – especially when that someone had committed no injury beyond trying to shake off the invasion of his land. Yes, Israel had provided a tremendous forum for those who had suffered Nazi brutality, a place where the Holocaust could be brought into active awareness. But this boon cannot provide more than the beginning of an assessment. We need to go further and ask: what does the concurrence of the formation of the State of Israel with its role in providing a haven for victims of the Holocaust tell us about its fundamental legitimacy, popularly expressed as its ‘right to exist’? If in fact the claim of Israel as the savior of Holocaust victims and the defender against Holocaust recurrence is warranted, this would tend to force the legitimacy of the Jewish state no matter what else had transpired. For such to be the case, however’, all of the following claims often made on behalf of Zionism need to be substantiated:
· That the Holocaust sprang from an immemorial and essential judaeophobia, that could only be accounted for in this way, and that its recurrence is a never-ending potentiality. If this was the case, then inasmuch as the key detouring factor is Jewishness as such, only a Jewish state, with its mobilization of Jewish force and perpetually on guard against anti-Semitism, can suffice to guard against a recurrence ;
· That Israel, and before its founding, the Zionist movement, has proven its bona fides as the provider of a haven, in other words, that protectiveness toward Jews facing oppression was based on more than momentary or instrumental factors but was inherent to Zionism itself ; and that
· Israel has made good on its promise to safeguard and liberate the Jewish people.(p.70)
Kovel begins by the examining the first claim made by Zionists, that judaeophobia is the universal cause for the creation of Israel.
One of the first problems with the idea that the Holocaust was essentially an orgy of judaeophobia resides in the fact that Jews shared victimhood with others such as homosexuals, leftists and ‘mental defectives.’ Nor were Jews the only ethnic group singled out for genocidal extermination, given the inclusion of Romani in that category. According to propagandists for Israel like Elie Wiesel, Jews still are special, for even if not all the Holocaust’s victims were Jews, all Jews were the victims of the Holocaust, from which the conclusion must be drawn that Jews should use the experience for the purposes of drawing together as a nation, under, it goes without saying, the aegis of a Jewish state.
But if I stand in horror at what the Nazis did to Jews, why should this diminish the horror of what they did to Romani and the rest? And should I not grant an equal measure of horror to the other cases, especially if by doing so I will break with the tribalist tendencies that, corrupting the German mind, spurred the Holocaust itself? Does not the extension of an equivalent collective worth to all the victims break with the cycle of vengeance, and beyond that, enhance the worth of the real individuals sacrificed to this beast, Jews and non-Jews alike? Why should I not want each of three classes of victims –to experience the same fellow feeling toward the Jews who perished? But if I do so then I must ask the Jews to reciprocate, and not remain locked into a nationalism that, like all elements of the Zionist complex, has been generated for the occasion rather than form the complex of lived history.
. . .
The point may be further developed: if we want to eliminate phenomena like the Holocaust, we should work to overcome those attitudes from which the Holocaust was constructed – in particular, the national chauvinism of the sort that split the Aryan Nazi from the non-Aryan subhumans. These reside not in the immediate human ties, not in the universal, but in artificially exploited intermediate formations such as the nation. Neither the nourishment of directly caring for another person nor the affirmation of human right that give dignity to each person before God and the Laws, the intermediate formation relates the self to a fictive and potentially aggrandizable Other, for example, the Nazi construction of the Volk.While both the direct and the universal regard for others are necessary for the goodness of will upon which justice stands, the intermediate strata, which affirms one social body for denigrating another, is as dangerous as it is existentially powerful. Ordinarily, it can be sublimated in a universal direction by diversions such as sporting events. But under historical circumstances such as we are looking at here, the attitude can harden and take on a life of its own, becoming tribal or national chauvinistic. These fall between immediate and universal human relations and undercut both of them: chauvinisms limit authentic human relations to those within the tribe and constrain those relations by tribal law, and they radically exclude the human rights of outlanders. The Nazis were the greatest offender in this regard in the whole history of the human species. But why should Jews follow in this path, splitting themselves from the rest of humanity, instead of using their greatest tragedy as a lesson giving them the chance to break through to new ethical ground by building on their ancient heritage of justice?(pp.68-73)
Kovel then turns to the second claim and examines how Zionists actually behaved with respect to the Shoah.
Did their behavior merit the trust and confidence the world placed in the State of Israel as guardian against supreme evil? There are two questions to be differentiated here: How many Jews were saved from the Holocaust itself? And How many survivors of the Holocaust were able to end up in Israel? The second enterprise was more successful than the first. Tom Segev has written:
‘There had been about nine million Jews in Europe on the eve of he war; about six million were killed, leaving three million alive. Most of these were saved by Germany’s defeat in the war. Some were spared thanks to help they received from various governments and organizations such as the Joint Distribution Committee and from thousands of good-hearted people in almost every country – the ‘righteous gentiles.’ There were dramatic rescue operations such as the flight across the Pyrenees from France to Spain and the convoys of Jews that sailed from Denmark to Sweden. Only a few survivors owed their lives to the efforts of the Zionist movement.’
In good measure this was due to the weak position of Zionism during this period, beset as it was with problems concerning Great Britain and the Arabs. But it would be foolish to ignore the following remark made in 1938 by the ever-outspoken David Ben-Gurion:
If I knew that it was possible to save all the children in Germany by transporting them to England, but only half by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second – because we face not only the reckoning of those children , but the historical reckoning of the Jewish people.
. . .
There have been two aspects to the problems faced by Zionism: the question of acquiring sufficienjt people of the right sort – ‘good human material’ was the preferred Zionist construction, with ominous overtones – to build that nation state upon the land, and keep it Jewish. Chaim Arlosoroff, in his letter to Weizmann, is explicitly aware of the dual nature of the problem. And in the ruin disclosed by the downfall of Nazism Zionists found an unprecedented opportunity for capitalizing upon Jewish grief.
But there is something else. For the fact that no one would expect Ben-Gurion to actually sacrifice Jewish children on the altar of Zionist nation-building does not mean that he didn’t in fact set out to do just that on a smaller scale. Indeed, the Zionist apparatus did exercise just such an option when the opportunity arose to bring ‘good human material’ to Eretz Israel in the wake of Nazi collapse.
An overture appeared toward the close of the wr when FDR, mindful of the difficulties in opening the doors of the United States to refugees from Nazi persecution, estimated that there were some 500,000 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and conceived a bold scheme to bring them to now homes around the world after the surrender of the Third Reich. The plan had two components: to win commitments from a number of nations to accept Jewish refugees; and to administer the program so that every refugee had a free choice within the framework of quotas. These included a total of 200,000 from an assortment of nations, and 150,000 each from the bellwethers of the Allies, England and the United States. The British agreed readily; but the United States was another story. Knowing he would have his work cut out to persuade his chronically isolationist and nativist Congress to ratify his humanitarian idea, Roosevelt delegated the prominent Jew (thought non-Zionist) lawyer, Morris Ernst, to travel about the country to help build support for the plan among Jewish leaders. This Ernst set out to do, full of enthusiasm because he knew that his cause was just and that the most popular and charismatic president in modern American history was behind him. We may follow the story in his own words.
‘It did not work out,’ Ernst writes in his memoirs. The sticking point was not, as anticipated, the gentile natvists and their anti-Semitism, however, but the Jewish leadership. ‘I do not intend to quote F.D.R. … But to me it seemed that the failure of the leading Jewish groups to support with zeal this immigration program may have caused the President not to push forward with it at the time.’ For despite the fact that ‘no Jews . . would be compelled to go anywhere and certainly not to any assigned nation’ according to the plan, it received a cold shoulder. Worse, ‘I was amazed and even felt insulted when active Jewish leaders decried, sneered and then attacked me as if I were a traitor. At one dinner party I was openly accused of furthering the plan for freer immigration in order to undermine political Zionism. Those Jewish groups which favored opening our doors gave little more than lip service to the Roosevelt program. Zionist friends of mine opposed it.’
This odd reaction makes perfect sense according to the logic of Zionism. The mass of Jewish refugees at the end of the war constituted more than half the population of the Yishuv in Palestine. Getting all, or the great majority, of these to emigrate to Israel would be an incalculable boon for the cause; contrariwise, to see the refugees slip out of Zionist hands, especially if they were to find their way to hated England, would have been a serious blow to both ideology and demographics. And so a no-holds-barred campaign under Ben-Gurion’s leadership was launched in the refugee camps to persuade, insist upon, organize and even force refugees in the direction of Palestine. This encountered, yet also overrode, two serious problems; first, conditions in the camps were by and large dreadful, especially for a people who had gone through such an ordeal as had the Jews; and second, that many of the survivors didn’t want to go to Palestine. Some were not interested in Zionism, or even hostile; some gave token support for the purposes of helping Israel, but had other plans in mind; still others were too broken to choose. As individuals, they would have been better served by going where they wanted or would have their survival needs better met in the more developed countries willing to take them in – all the more so, as there were ample Jewish agencies and rabbinical associations eager to supervise the process and preserve Jewish identity in the doing.
These ordinary human concerns were swallowed in the ‘historical reckoning’ of Zionism and its totalizing logic. As one functionary said of the orphaned children whose fate hung in the balance: ‘Only immigration to Palestine will guarantee their existence and their future as Jews and human beings. . .’ In other words, there was only one way of being a Jew and one way of being fully human – the Zionist way; all others need not apply, and hence Jews who preferred a different way were no longer Jewish or even human. This trope is usually associated with the radical Orthodox but here becomes the province of Labor Zionists, another one of whom said of the children that ‘Only this land can absorb them, heal them, turn them into citizens and restore their national and human balance – no other place or land will do so, except our Yishuv and country.’ In this way, several thousand orphans recently rescued from the extremity of judaeophobic evil were forbidden to leave the camps after all arrangements had been made, and were thereby denied a Jewish haven in England and France that many had expressly asked for.
Later, as the war that was to launch the Jewish state loomed, another use was found for refugee ‘human material.’ By 1947, Haganah operatives began working in the camps, often clandestinely. Their presence signaled the coming to fruition of a common assumption, one first articulated by Jabotinsky and later installed within Labor Zionism by Arlosoroff – that it would some day come to armed warfare with the Arabs. There is no doubt that the Zionists had long been preparing for this and that the die became cast with the UN Partition of 1947, after which the only questions were the timing of combat and who would win it. Nor is there any question that Zionists organization of the war was brilliantly carried out, a wonder of boldness, foresight, detailed planning and coordination.
One consideration was manpower for the nascent Israel Defense Force. There was great anxiety lest Yishuv be unable to summon up enough troops for the challenges ahead. Thoughts turned immediately toward the refugee camps in the American Zone, swollen with suffering Jewish bodies brought over from the East. A strenuous effort was made to recruit volunteers for the cause. And when this failed, for easily understandable reasons – for how many Jews , newly rescued from the horrors of the Holocaust? Would be enthusiastic for military duty in a strange land? – the Zionist apparatus moved rapidly into a higher gear, and proceeded to forcibly recruit some ten thousand soldiers and ship them to fight for a country that none of them knew or belonged to. The force was chiefly exerted through the administrative control Zionists has gained over the camps, each of them a more or less total institution. Summary loss of employment for recalcitrants, followed by summary denial of food rations, usually did the trick, thought quite often beatings and other forms of violence had to be used.
By treating its ‘human material’ in this way Zionism revealed just how advanced its ‘identification with the aggressor’ had become. As the Advisor on Jewish Affairs to the American Supreme Commander in Europe wrote a week after the proclamation of the new state, ‘the pressure exerted on the people [who had resisted the draft] was crude, at times reflecting the techniques they had learned from their own oppressors.’ Or as an editorial in the Paris-based Bundist journal Unser Shtime (our voice) stated, it was ‘unbelievable that Jews, the standard victims of Fascism and terrorism, would be capable of the kinds of violence Zionists in the camps exercise toward their Bundist and other non-Zionists political rivals.’
Though it is beyond dispute that many Jewish survivors of the Holocaust successfully ended up in Israel, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that taken as a whole, there are many dubious features of the relationship between Zionism and the Shoah. Certainly, we cannot take as axiomatic the reflexive claim that somehow the founding of the Jewish state was necessary for the survival of the refugees. FDR’s plan of early 1945 estimated 500,000 refugees, and that the US would take 150,000 of them. In the event, there proved to be 330,000 refugees and the US ended up with some 120,000. The remainder could well have been worked into the provisions of the plan using countries other than Israel, especially given unified cooperation from the Jewish community, needless to say, a very big ‘if,’ but still a real possibility, and indeed a certainty were Zionism not a factor.
In any event, though Zionism was not necessary for recuperation from and prevention of, the Holocaust, the Holocaust definitely became a necessity for Zionism, which has processed it right through the present day as a kind of ur-event to certify its inner absolutism. The forbidding of children’s immigration to Europe, the forced recruitment of DP’s, the vilification and abuse of Jewish refugees who failed to see the wisdom of the Zionist program – all this showed how tragedy could become folded into aggression and used to legitimate the Zionist way.(pp.77-83)
Chapter 3 concludes with an examination of the third claim on behalf of Zionism, namely that “Israel has made good on its promise to safeguard and liberate the Jewish people.”
How has this state, he Jewish state, fared in fulfilling its promise to provide a better, safer life for all Jews? We may summarize:
· Today, more than a half-century after its founding, Israel is by far the most dangerous place on earth for Jews, simply because it has been set up to be perpetually at war.
· The behavior of the Jewish state has provoked both a worldwide outpouring of rational condemnation and a resurgence of judaeophobia. Zionists tend to claim, first, that there is no such thing as rational condemnation of Israel, hence that all criticism is antisemitic; and second, that antisemitism, as ever, is a virus that springs from the twisted heart of the goyim irrespective of what Jews, or Israel, may do. We must reject this grossly ideological view once again, which flies in the face of the elementary facts of human agency and interconnectedness. If an imperial power invades, occupies, and destabilizes another society, denying its people normal and autonomous means of self-expression, then it can expect with the certitude of a law of nature that the whole spectrum of human responses will be evoked, ranging from emancipatory and nonviolent expression to crude atavisms including racist belief, and in the case when the invader is set up as Jewish state, antisemitism. Needless to say, what begins in one place can readily spread around the world if the conflict in question is of sufficient general interest. It is an intellectual barbarism to remove such phenomena from their historical context, to single out the less rational elements of the spectrum from the rest and to absolutize them under the rubric of antisemitsm. This is to abstract from the various manifestations of hostility to Israel an essence of judaeophobia that arose under vastly different circumstances. It draws from a time when Jews were, if not blameless, at least powerless, and were made to pay to debts demanded by the anti-communism of the fascist state and by Christendom’s bad conscience.
· Despite the enormous aid given to it by its American protector and the benefits of the international Jewish community, Israel remains a society in grave social and economic crisis, with rampant unemployment, pockets of outright hunger, and many sighs of social disintegration; as we shall take up further in Chapter 5, it now had the greatest gap between rich and poor in the whole industrialized world. More than half of Israeli families cannot meet their monthly bills, and 14 percent cannot buy an adequate diet. In a 2004 Ha’aretz op-ed, Michael Melchoir, a member of the Knesset, observed that: ‘We live in a society in which a million and a quarter people – 40 percent of them working people – are below the poverty line. This is a society that abandons 366,000 of it children-at-risk and throws them into the street; a society that treats its foreign workers like animals; a society that despises its elderly and sends them to rummage through the garbage. It is a society, according to information given the Knesset Community for Children’s Rights, where in the absence of standards, a social worker has to devote an average of two minutes to a family in distress. It is a society among the leaders in the world trafficking in women.’ The immediate cause is a fierce neoliberal assault on the poor and public sector led by Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. This is no accident but the result of the drift to the right inherent in the dynamics of the Zionist project.
· Israel provides the worst primary and lower secondary education in the Western world, despite having budgeted adequate funds. It also scores below many poorer countries, for example, Malaysia, Thailand and Romania, which provide it with cheap textiles and labor.
· All this has left the original socialist ideal in ruins. Today, extreme right-wing religious fundamentalism plays a far larger role in Israel than the enlightened socialism that was to have been the emblem of the new Jewish society.
· As an immediate result of these woes, and comprising a tremendous threat to the ever-precarious demographic question, a serious degree of outmigration of Jews from Israel is taking place. As of mid 2004, some 760,000 Israeli Jews were living abroad, an increase of 40 percent since the Second Intifada began in 2000. Those with a taste for irony may contemplate the following: the preferred destination of Jews leaving the former Soviet Union is no longer Israel but . . . Germany! This had prompted another round of Zionist attacks on the fiendish Germans, now for ‘enticing’ Jews to settle there.
What kind of state has Zionism wrought?(pp.83-85)
Joel Kovel’s book is a rigorous examination of the inner contradictions embodied in the ideology of Zionism as well as an examination of the primary function of the state of Israel, on a pragmatic scale of “who benefits and who loses….”
The 15 + items below reflect the material and ideological contradictions that are developing in the context of massive capital accumulation and new applied technologies for population control. Social class struggles remain the engine of historic change; despite the frequent political ploys and cultural distractions, the social inequalities, the leverage and the mechanisms of change have become abundantly apparent.
Professeur honoraire de l'Université Grenoble-Alpes
Ancien Directeur de Researches
Université de Paris-Nanterre
Director of The Center for the Advanced Study
of American Institutions and Social Movements
The University of California-San Diego
“The Great Covid Class War”
by Alex Gutentag
The pandemic has created the perfect pretext for enacting economically destructive policies.
The Economics Lesson Taught by the Pandemic
with Richard Wolff
How Capitalism Exploits You
with Richard Wolff
Class Solidarity or ‘Deplorables’? -- The Left's Failed Messaging
with Jimmy Dore
“Populist Right & Left Joining Forces Against Establishment”
with Jimmy Dore
“Need A Domestic Terrorist? Dial 9-1-1”
with Michael Moore
Jan. 6 Was An Inside Job
with Abby Martin
The Capitol Hill Riot: “Capitalism's Last Gasp?”
with Richard Wolff
The New Domestic War on Terror is Coming
by Glenn Greenwald
How Republicans, Democrats, and the Media Have Weakened US Democracy
with Chris Hedges
Jan. 19, 2021
Renowned journalist and author Chris Hedges talks about the many ways traditional media, digital media, and the two political parties have worked to prevent progressive movements and give rise to the growth of the extreme right
Biden’s inauguration takes place under tight security & pandemic
with Chris Hedges and George Galloway
Kamala Harris’ History
“Biden Economics, Teamsters Strike VICTORY,
FBI Spy Planes”
with Richard Wolff
“REVEALED: Biden Wants To Overthrow Venezuela”
with Jimmy Dore
“Farmer Gates, Biden Swamp, I Am Open” – New World Next Week https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1612-new-world-next-week-with-james-evan-pilato/
with James Corbett and James Evan Pilato
“The Work Continues”: Cornel West & Maria Hinojosa on the Promise
& Dangers of the Biden Admin
with Cornell West and Maria Hinojosa
FAILED Biden Advisor says $2000 Checks is Crazy Idea!
with Jimmy Dore
Biden Admin - Redux Deep State, Empire & Censorship
with Chris Hedges and Glenn Greenwald
The Obama-fication of “The Squad”
Strengthens the Right at the Expense of the Left
by Danny Haiphong
Freedom Rider: Why the Left Don’t Protest
by Margaret Kimberley
20 Jan 2021
The Crisis of White Squatters Rights
by Too Black
“America Has The Tinder To IGNITE Social Uprising”
with Jimmy Dore and Chris Hedges
“Entering the Biden Era”
with Thomas Frank
with Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper
H-PAD [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Jim O'Brien via H-PAD
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021
Subject: [H-PAD] H-PAD Notes 1/18/21: Links to recent articles of interest
Links to Recent Articles of Interest
By Lawrence Wittner, History News Network, posted January 17
A capsule history of nuclear-weapons policies, with emphasis on the role of popular pressure in securing such steps that have occasionally been taken to reduce the risk of catastrophic war. The author is a professor emeritus of history at SUNY Albany.
By Matthew Avery Sutton, New Republic, posted January 14
"How 150 years of apocalyptic agitation culminated in an insurrection." The author is chair of the History Department at Washington State University and author of American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism (Harvard U. Press, 2017).
By Lisa McGirr, New York Times, posted January 13
"Donald Trump Is Not an Aberration But a Blueprint." The author teaches history at Harvard University and is the author of Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right (updated edition Princeton U. Press, 2015).
By Julilly Kohler-Hausmann, Dissent, Winter 2021 issue
On the multiple tactics that have been employed in the interest of voter suppression. The author teaches history at Cornell University and is currently writing a history of US democracy since the 1965 Voting Rights Act focusing on nonvoters.
By Ray McGovern, Consortium News, posted January 12
The author, who served in the CIA for 27 years under nine presidents, relates past history in considering whether the longtime diplomat William Burns, appointed head of the agency, can change its culture.
By David W. Blight, New York Times, posted January 9
A warning from the "Lost Cause" of the Confederacy after the Civil War. "All Lost Causes find their lifeblood in lies, big and small, lies born of beliefs in search of a history that can be forged into a story and mobilize masses of people to act politically, violently, and in the name of ideology." The author teaches history at Yale University and has written many books on the Civil War era.
By Karen L. Cox, New York Times, posted January 8
The author teaches history at the University of North Carolina. Her book No Common Ground: Confederate Monuments and the Ongoing Fight for Racial Justice is forthcoming from the U. of North Carolina Press.
By Geraldo Cadava, The New Yorker, posted December 29
On the diverse reasons why a larger-than-expected minority of Latino voters supported Donald Trump in the 2020 election. The author teaches history and Latino Studies at Northwestern University.
By Rebecca Gordon, TomDispatch.com, posted December 17
An overview of the "war on terror" in its ramifications. The author is a longtime antiwar activist who teaches at the University of San Francisco and is the author of American Nuremburg: The U.S. Officials Who Should Stand Trial for Post-9/11 War Crimes (Simon & Schustert. 2016).
By Elliott Young, Washington Post, posted December 10
"The president’s immigration regime is the culmination of 140 years of harsh policies." The author teaches history at Lewis & Clark College and is the author of Forever Prisoners: How the United States Made the World’s Largest Immigrant Detention System (Oxford U. Press. forthcoming in January).
Thanks to Rusti Eisenberg and an anonymous reader for suggesting articles included in the above list. Suggestions can be sent to email@example.com.
The Making of US Empire at the dawning of its end
by Pepe Escobar
Biden’s ‘Unity’… By War?
by Finian Cunningham
BIDEN Ramps Up Troops Into SYRIA On First Day As President
with Jimmy Dore
Newly installed senior counterintelligence official names China as top long-term threat
by Jenna McLaughlin·National Security and Investigations Reporter
Biden’s secretary of state praises Trump’s achievements on Israel
by Philip Weiss
A Large US Military Convoy Rolled Into Syria On 1st Day Of Biden Presidency
by Tyler Durden
Two separate reports from Middle East news sources at the end of this week strongly suggest that both Russia and the United States are building up their forces in war-torn Syria within the opening days of the Joe Biden administration.
First, Syrian state media is alleging a major US build-up and reinforcements sent to "illegitimate bases in Hasakah countryside". The report in Syria's SANA details:
"...that a convoy consisted of 40 trucks loaded with weapons and logistical materials, affiliated to the so-called international coalition have entered in Hasaka countryside via al-Walid illegitimate border crossing with north of Iraq, to reinforce illegitimate bases in the area."
The Separate Regimes Delusion
by Nathan Thrall
Palestine in Pictures: December 2020
From: Global Research Newsletter [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021
Subject: The New Domestic War on Terror Is Coming
Reset Conspiracy Smoothie
by Naomi Klein
conspiracy theory blends together legitimate critiques with truly dangerous
anti-vaccination fantasies and outright coronavirus
Big Tech is censoring Covid debate
with Glenn Greenwald
MLB legend Hank Aaron dies two weeks after getting COVID-19 vaccine
Covid-19 Vaccine Side Effects World Map - HPV-VACCINE-SIDE-EFFECTS
Fauci Now Says COVID-19 Vaccine May Become Mandatory
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
While Moderna and Pfizer have been granted emergency use authorization for their respective vaccine candidates, they still haven’t even completed Stage 3 clinical trials yet.
Video: Senator Jensen Under Investigation For Telling the Truth About COVID-19
with Senator Scott Jensen
“The cancel culture is happening, … but the fact of the matter is COVID-19 has opened a door into a tremendously vicious political non-discussion.”
“COVID-19 will likely be with us forever.”
- Here's how we'll live with it.
by Michael Greshko
Who was Jeff Bezos BEFORE Amazon?
Edward Snowden: How Your Cell Phone Spies on You
with Edward Snowden
“Red Pill Your Friends: Hollywood”
Red Pill Your Friends Vol. 2 is about the inner-workings of Hollywood, Disney, Netflix, and news media--particularly the blurred lines between corporations, governments, and entertainment. The videos in this series are a mixture of clips from old videos with a few new segments thrown in to fit the overall theme. All claims made in this video are sourced and pinned as the top comment under the original videos.
“How Capitalism Exploits You”
with Richard Wolff
At the very heart of capitalism is a system of exploitation. That is not a pejorative label: it’s an objective definition of what work actually means. In order for capitalists to make a profit, their workers have to earn less than the value they produce, and that extra value has to go to their bosses. You’re being robbed – and it’s the system called capitalism that’s doing it
Meet the Censored:
Mark Crispin Miller
with Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper
NEWS FROM UNDERGROUND – Mark Crispin Miller
News Stream Shut Down! Reporter SILENCED Covering
Right Wing Rally
with Jimmy Dore
"State of American Empire"
with Chris Hedges and Noam Chomsky
Despair, depression, and the inevitable rise of Trump 2.0
by Chris Hedges and Glenn Greenwald
Why Donald Trump Had to Go
by Peter Koenig
Catherine Austin Fitts on “The State of Our Currencies”
with James Corbett
With the global technocrats taking the world through the “Going Direct” Reset into the abyss of the End of Currency and the ultimate transhuman slave state, things could not be more dire. But, as Catherine Austin Fitts of Solari.com tells us, there are options on the table for taking things in a completely different direction and unlocking the incredible abundance of the planet. The choice is our, but for how long? Don’t miss this important, solutions-focused discussion on The State of Our Currencies.
Davos 2021: to achieve a ‘great reset’, we can’t count on the same old globalists to lead the way
by Jonathan Michie
The 51st World Economic Forum starts on January 25, but with a major difference. Whereas this is famously the annual gathering at the Davos ski resort in Switzerland of global leaders from business, government and civil society, this year’s event will take place virtually because of the pandemic.
Inevitably, the event for the 1,200-plus delegates from 60 countries aims to respond to the apocalyptic events of the past 12 months. “A crucial year to rebuild trust” is the theme, built around the “great reset” that World Economic Forum (WEF) founder Klaus Schwab and Prince Charles launched last year.
The event will be accompanied by virtual events in 430 cities across the world, to emphasise the fact that we face global challenges that require global solutions and action.
Prof. Wolff on Hatred of Government - and How to Fight It
with Richard Wolff