Jews of the world: denounce Zionism!

MFL notes: An excellent piece of Class Struggle on Zionism and the Jews, taken from www.marxist.com, the link is here and was written by an Israeli Communist. Having said Israeli Communist, it means that the comrade doesn't believe in identities, rather, simply the struggle of the working class. Due to the on-going blunders of the Zionists in Israel, along with their religious die-hards and Torah based fanatics, I was forgeting the ABC of Marxist thought towards the case of Palestine. Of course, coming from the other side of the borders, I have more to say on the issue, but it is always great to see our comrades fighting for the working class wherever they go. I am certain that this author is also under persecution in Israel because those religious fanatics cannot swallow what he said.



The crimes of the Zionist ruling class in Israel against the Palestinian people have been rightly condemned by all progressive and left people around the world. However, there are reactionary right-wing elements that try to exploit this to push an anti-Semitic agenda. Genuine socialists reject both Zionism and anti-Semitism. The solution to ethnic and national conflicts is to be found in the class struggle and socialism. We publish this contribution on the question from a Jewish Marxist living in Israel.

During and after the Israeli massacre in Gaza, the world was flooded by an overwhelming wave of resistance to the Zionist crimes. How could anyone not protest at such a grotesque crime against a whole people, a people that has been without a genuine homeland ever since Israel was created?

However, there is also another side to this situation, an attempt by small Fascist and neo-Nazi groups in Europe to exploit this wonderful display of international solidarity to their own advantage. These forces take advantage of Zionist crimes, such as the bombing and invasion of Gaza a few months back, to promote their own anti-Semitic propaganda. They claim that these crimes and the refusal of the bourgeois governments throughout the world to intervene against them are "proof" of an inherent evil nature of Jews in general. They also use this to spread filth about the supposed desire for “world domination” on the part of the Jews. This is all reminiscent of anti-Jewish Nazi propaganda.


This attempt to divert a progressive and justified struggle along racist lines has produced its effects. Anti-Semitic crimes have risen substantially recently, particularly in Europe. The Gaza massacre gave rise to anti-Semitic incidents, not seen in Europe for quite some time. Surprisingly, the reactionary forces behind these attacks are being aided by the Jewish leaders throughout the world: they were mostly silent in taking a stand against the Zionist massacre. Mostly they collaborated with the Zionist and anti-Semitic lie that portrays Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Zionism as the national movement and sole representative of the Jewish "nation".

The truth is, that ordinary Jews from within, and particularly from without Israel have nothing to do with the massacre. They have nothing to do with Zionism altogether. But as long as they continue to support the Israeli state and the Zionist movement that gave birth to it and its crimes, the anti-Semitism fuelled by the fallacious associations made between Zionist barbarism and the Jewish people as a whole is likely to continue, putting many innocent Jews in jeopardy.



(Zionism cynically regards any criticism, as sounded and justified as it may be, against its crimes, as anti-Semitism. Drawing by Latuff.)

Zionism and anti-Semitism

Zionism cynically regards any criticism, as sounded and justified as it may be, against its crimes, as anti-Semitism. This, in turn, helps to confuse the progressive struggle against Zionism with the reactionary forces behind anti-Semitism. Both Zionism and anti-Semitism benefit from that confusion. It would not be the first time that Zionism and anti-Semitism have collaborated against Jews and other people.

Contrary to Zionist propaganda, Zionism is not the answer to anti-Semitism. It is a form of anti-Semitism itself. Zionism began with the fear of West European petty-bourgeois Jews of a flood of Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe. They collaborated with anti-Semites on more than one occasion for a common goal: to cleanse Europe from its Jewish inhabitants (mostly poor workers) and keep them away from collaborating with the growing workers' movement, and particularly with Bolshevism.

Similar to anti-Semitism, Zionism claims that Jews are inherently different from their non-Jewish neighbours and that they cannot and should not integrate with them. So Zionism gives the anti-Semitic answer to the Jewish question: the Jews should be evacuated from Europe to a place far away.

Zionism and imperialism

Zionism in practice meant two things in the past. First of all, it promoted "Jewish" colonialism in Palestine, starting with a group of adventurers who took over Palestinian land in order to build a kind of "White settler" colony on it, and then they imported ordinary Jews as workers and soldiers to be exploited on that same stolen land. Secondly, it also embodies the practice of keeping the local workforce divided along ethnic lines, with “Jews versus Arabs”, fighting each other constantly rather than uniting against their common oppressors. This situation produced a unique opportunity for imperialism, which is the main reason why it survives until today.

After the Israeli state was created, it eventually received recognition and support from imperialism. As the Cold War developed, the Soviet Union (which had originally supported the partition of Palestine and the creation of Israel) threw its weight behind the Arab states, while American imperialism, in particular, came to understand the significance of such a state as Israel for its interests in the Middle East. Such an artificial state, which causes such antagonism amongst its neighbours will be forever dependent on imperialism, and will always need to depend heavily on the supply of arms for its survival. It thus serves as a garrison state in the service of global imperialism against the struggle of the Arab masses. This is the reason why Israel is so supported by the imperialist states. It is not because of some secretive "Jewish domination" over international capital as the anti-Semites claim. It is international capital itself, by its own logic, regardless of who "controls" it, which dictates the need for an artificial, disintegrated, hysterically violent and heavily armed state in the heart of the Arab world.

Why do Jews support Zionism?

How was it that Jews, who had always been at the forefront of the revolutionary forces in Europe, found themselves entangled in the most reactionary and barbaric forces in the world?

Initially, most Jews disregarded Zionism. Many of them loathed it. Only a minority of Jews migrated to Palestine. It took the rise of Nazi-fascism in Europe to radically change the picture. Jews that were being persecuted in Europe, their attempts to seek shelter in other countries being turned down, would go anywhere they could in search of refuge. Most of them still saw Palestine only as a last resort. They mostly fled to Latin America, North Africa, Russia, North America and other places. Only a minority found itself, not always willingly, moving to Palestine. In spite of this, an influx of Jews into Palestine did take place and it was sufficient to provide a solid base for the future Israeli state. After the Holocaust, many of the survivors were also evacuated to Palestine. The European bourgeoisie did not want to deal with the Jewish refugees and preferred their relocation to Palestine. Zionist delegations collaborated with that trend and persuaded the confused survivors to migrate to Palestine.

Today, it can be understood why the Jews who live in Israel support Zionism whether their ancestors wanted to migrate to Palestine or not. It is not just that they are constantly bombarded with Zionist propaganda from early childhood onwards. It is also because of the antagonism that Zionist colonialism has provoked in the surrounding Arab world, which pushes them to support the Zionist state as the only means for their protection.

It is less clear why Jews outside of Israel support Zionism. First of all, they do it to a far lesser extent than the Jews inside Israel. Many of the sharpest critics of Zionism are in fact Jews, and that is hardly surprising. Secondly, those who do support Zionism are doing it out for two reasons.

The first reason is that conservative Jews have come to understand that over time Jews will eventually integrate into the societies they live in. In this sense, Israel is regarded as the only place where Jews are incapable of “integrating” as there cannot be anything else but Jews.

The second reason and the more alarming one, is the vicious circle caused by the fear of anti-Semitism. Jews support Israel because they regard it as a shelter from a possible anti-Semitic resurgence, but that very support fuels anti-Semitism. This vicious circle must be broken if we want to rid the world of anti-Semitism. Zionism is not and cannot be a shelter for persecuted Jews. On the contrary, it is exactly what makes Jews easy victims of persecution. It is a convenient mechanism for keeping them apart from the societies they live in, and as long as they do not denounce this fact, loudly and clearly, it will be much easier for anti-Semitism to taint them with the crimes of Zionism.

There is no Jewish nation

Many Zionists raise what seems to be a legitimate question: don't the Jews deserve the right of self-determination like other nations? The answer to this should be unequivocal: whilst we support the right of Israeli Jews, who after all have been living in Palestine for 60 years now, to self-determination, this self-determination (based on the right of Israeli Jews to their own language and culture in the regions they inhabit) cannot be used as a justification for Zionist expansionism and occupation of another people. Nor can it be a substitute for the struggles of Jews living outside Israel, alongside their class brothers and sisters, against capitalism and racism. The answer to the plight of the Jews should not be sought in national grounds, but on social ones.

Contrary to Zionist propaganda, the Jews around the world have not been a ‘nation’ like the English, the Russian or the German nations for millennia. Jews share no common territory, they do not speak the same language, and they have different histories and different cultures. A Jew that lives in Argentina will have much more in common with his Argentine neighbours than he would have with another Jew, living in France or in Turkey. We reject unequivocally this ‘solution’ to the Jewish question proposed by the Zionists.

This is why any attempt to solve the "Jewish question" on national lines will be fallacious and harmful. The answer to the problems of anti-Semitism should be a social answer, and particularly a class answer. The struggle against anti-Semitism was always intertwined with the class struggles of society. It took the bourgeois revolutions to revoke the anti-Semitic laws and restrictions set up against the Jews in feudal times. It was also the class struggle of the proletariat that involved the fighting together of Jews and non-Jews against their common oppressors, particularly against the fascist elements who tried to no avail to separate the working class via nationalistic and anti-Semitic propaganda. Jews should not be coerced or encouraged to escape to Palestine, because there they will only be protected by the broken reed of the Zionist state, which makes the Jews under its rule more hated and vulnerable than in any other place. The labour movement should encourage Jews to stay in their respective countries, joining forces with the progressive and proletarian elements there, fighting together against any form of reaction.

Denounce Zionism, Move on to socialism!

Concentrating the Jews of the world in a small bracketed and violent state, at the expense of the native population, hated by everyone around them, is a very strange way to fight anti-Semitism. Nowadays it proves to be the main fuel for anti-Semitism in a time where such a phenomenon should have been eradicated long ago. Those Jews, in Israel or outside it, who support Zionism, end up unintentionally supporting the anti-Semitic forces which feed on this situation.

The answer to anti-Semitism is socialism. There is no way to evade that fact. Bourgeois society will always seek to divide the workers, and to lull them with reactionary fairy tails about a "glorious", "eternal" and "united" nation which can only be in conflict with other nations, never within itself. There will always be room for anti-Semitism in such an environment, and the Zionist crimes falsely associated with the Jews as a whole will make sure that this room will be ever larger. This is why we must urge anyone who regards him or herself as Jewish, to stand up against Zionism and to join forces with the progressive and revolutionary elements in his or her society. There is no other way if we desire a world without racism.

That said, socialists recognise that because Israeli Jews have lived in Palestine for over 60 years, and have developed something of a common language and culture, we reject reactionary calls (sadly sometimes seen also on the left) for them to be either ‘thrown into the sea’ or forced to live as second-class citizens in an Arab Palestine. Both the Israeli-Jewish and Palestinian peoples have the right to national, cultural and linguistic autonomy, but this is not something that can be granted by the imperialists and their ‘two-state’ solution (which in practice would mean a small, weak and divided Palestinian state under the iron heel of Israel). Only a single workers’ state of Israel/Palestine, with autonomy for both peoples but with free movement between them, and as part of a socialist federation of the Middle East, can provide these two peoples with what they desperately crave.

Israel Is Becoming as Religious as Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, activists are doing their best to empower women against all odds. Israel on the other hand, is heading exactly towards the opposite direction, becoming as religious as Saudi Arabia fundementalists. Currently, they are half way in legalizing gender seperation on buses and elsewhere, a phenomenon that exists in the Arab Gulf areas. I can arrogantly say that Lebanon is more religious moderate than a country ruled by a fascist organization called Zionism, holding its own Jews as hostages by speaking in their name, and gradually becoming more and more religious zealots. Anyone want to tell me this is democracy (other than the fact non-Jews are also treated as class B or class Z citizens?)

This article below was written in Haaretz's staff

Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz (Likud) said on Sunday that Israel would allow the ultra-Orthodox community continue to run their private bus lines segregated by gender, but could not officially recognize the practice on public bus lines.

The minister was responding to a petition sent by the Israel Religious Action Center and a women's rights group to the government and to the Egged and Dan transportation companies.

Katz declared in his response that Israel does not disapprove of buses which separate between men and women to accommodate the Hardi community, but that segregation could not become institutionalized.

The minister added that buses should be permitted to hang signs explaining the ultra-Orthodox community's request to separate seating between men and women, however the request could not be enforced if passengers chose not to adhere to it.

Kats also said that violence and the disruption of order on segregated buses must be stopped, and instructed professional security forces on the matter.

Currently, there are 56 segregated bus lines operating throughout the country, a total of 2,108 buses a day. All the buses will be permitted to remain segregated so long as they choose to, but passengers will not be forced to adhere to the decision, only to respect it at will.

Most of the buses cater to ultra-Orthodox passengers.

"The minister expressed a worthy attitude towards the ultra-Orthodox community and he understands the publics' needs," Rabbi Shimon Stern of the Rabbis Transportation Committee said in praise of the decision.

Segregated buses are a relatively new phenomenon in Israel, with the first one appearing 10 years ago on a line between Jerusalem and neighboring Beit Shemesh

(MFL final note: Religion is the Opium of the Masses)

Zionists and the Bible

Luckily for me, I inherited a large collection of books on Palestine from my grandparents that are all in good shape. One article I enjoyed reading 14 years ago was by Professor Alfred Guillaume, under the title of Zionists and the Bible (published by Igram Press, and sold for 50 cents). The article was part of a bigger pamphlet that included several articles, under the title of Israel: According to the Holy Scriptures.

Just when I wanted to type it out, I found the article over here,now the source might be controversial; however, it saved me hours of typing.

The article discusses in details whether or not Israel was a Promised Land in the 20th Century, and furthermore reveals whether of not the Zionists actually followed the 'Bible' or not. Despite my athiesm, I enjoy following someone's claim all the way, as a Lebanese proverb says: "Keep Following the Liar to his/her house". It is interesting to read that perspective as well...

Professor Alfred Guillaume is a professor of Old Testament Studies at the University of London, has authored various works on the Old Testament and is co-editor of "The Legacy of Islam".

I know the article is not of class struggle in nature, but enjoy it

MFL

Iran, Wilayat el Faqih, and Historical Facts

Introduction

A lot of the Shiites never heard of this theory, the Wilayat el Faqih theory, championed by a man who have this famous quote: "There is no fun in Islam!", Mr. Ayatollah Khomeini. I have been studying this dimension for three years. Personally I hate it for different reasons. I remember one person from the LCP and two others from the SSNP telling me: "If Nasrallah supports it, then it is our pride". It saddens me how these two forgot the magic formula of the 1980s while the seculars resisted Israel: AMAL butchered Communists, Hezbollah butchered SSNP. Someone would tell me Hezbollah of the 1980s are different after Nasrallah. Well let us investigate it BRIEFLY, and I repeat this post is briefly written on the topic.

The summary of the Wilayat el Faqih is as follows:

With the early Islamic Expansions, the Sunnis dominated politically. The Shiites kept a low profile and they followed as what is called in th medieval times: "The Quietest Movements". The base of the theory rotates around the Theory of 12 Imams in the Shiites. The first Imam is of course, Imam Ali, what you would call as the Imam el Ma'soum, as the know it all. One man who was offensive on that theory was the man who paved way for the term "Who ever thought, committed Heresy", Ibn Ghazali under the hypothesis that the Prophet Mohammad came to the world, gave the complete theory and practice of Islam, and departed the world henceforth, there is no need for this Imam Ma'asoum.

Now the Wilayat el Faqih goes as follows: with the sudden disappearance of the 12th Imam, Imam el Mehdi el Montazar, Islamic theology of the Quietists argued that the Mehdi shall appear again, and most probably when Judgment Day appears. However, with the absence of the Imam, there is the need for a Wali el Faqih, or as the translation goes: Governor of the Jurisprudence. This theory was evolved and upgraded by Khomeini, and was of making Khomeini in post-revolutionary years as "the supreme leader". Guess who self-proclaimed himself as the Wali, Khomeini himself.
Now, I won't deny the Islamists didn’t play a role in the Iranian revolution, but I will not say to the extent as a lot of people try to depict it. I shall dedicate a nice post on that in the near (hopefully) future. For Starters, there were three players in Iran. The Shah mismanaged Iran drastically, and his ties with Israel/USA weren’t making him popular. Second, Mohammad Pahlavi didn't notice that when the Islamists failed to oust his father, Reza Shah, they were quiet. Reza Shah was more like the man who gave the command to the army "tear every veil you see", and forced women by this to hide at home. In any case, the big revolution exploded due to poverty, and the three parties were: the Communists – the Mujahidean (Islamists with a less extremism) – Wilayat el Faqih. Women who didn't wear the veil even wore it in solidarity of all revolutionaries against the Shah. The Communists took the lead and were successful to establish 9 Soviets throughout Iran. More to the point, Stalinist Moscow forced them to side with Khomeini since he too opposed the US (dubbing them as the white devil). Eventually, and not to dwell on details, Khomeini demolished all rivals as he installed himself as the "Supreme Leader of the Revolution", the position of the 20th Century Wali el Faqih, despite the fact there is an almost dead council.

Wali el Faqih in theory should be well-informed in the Koran, theology, and Islam as a whole. The second dimension of Wali el Faqih, that he should be the source of Emulation. The theory of Emulation itself is interesting. In medieval Islam (if you read Ibn Tufayl whose story explains it clearly), the person who got closest to God is the wisest. While European medieval theologians (like St. Augustine, St. Simonides, St. Acquinas, St. Damasenes...others) borrowed the logic from Aristotle: the more you get closer to God, the more you are wiser, hence this implies the following formula =

God = Ultimate Truth = Ultimate Wisdom = Ultimate Happiness

The theologians then added of course faith, and some tried to make Aristotle a Christian, and hence (as appearing in Dante's Purgatory), reason stops at a point, faith continues to guide the person to the ultimate truth. In Islam, the theory remained the same, but some theologians and thinkers added a touch of Emulation. A person has to emulate God to reach God. The Wali el Faqih is actually the source of emulation. This is where Khomeini became a tri-partite power source:

1) Source of Emulation
2) Ultimate Knowledge and Closest to the Truth
(hence the first two points make him the supreme leader of the revolution)
3) Leader beyond borders to lead the Revolution anywhere in the world

Now after Khomeini butchered in his last days over 21,000 Mujahid, he passed away. Khomeini, brutally oppressed all progressive powers, ruined all talents, and he stuck to his famous quote (and damaging Islam): "There is no fun in Islam". All Western features in Iran were taken out under his reign. You will never see a politician or citizen from Iran wearing "the tie", or a woman able to walk without having to worry about the threat of the Basij (Militant Youth of the Wali) or Ansar Hezbollah (not to be mistaken with the Lebanese Hezbollah) who are Ali Khamenei's hooligans, or as one author described them: "Angry Bearded Men on Motorcycles with Ak-47s". Dancing and Clapping are forbidden in Iran, even with the iron grip loosened up after Khatami's elections, it is forbidden. The Iranian theater suffered drastically (after all during the late 1970s, they were targeted most by Khomeini's followers) and massive censorships. You will notice by the late 1990s, the directors had to improvise new forms of Cinema directing and script writing. Finally, nothing takes place in Iran without the consent of the Wali's council, who elect the Wali himself for a lifetime, the Guardian Council.

So it is true that Iran has a quasi – democratic system. Yet let us take a deeper look on that quasi-democratic system. The Iranians vote for their municipalities, constituencies, and their president. Yet, everything has to pass by the Guardian Council. The Candidates have to be decided that they fit to be Muslim enough to pass. Even Parliamentary decisions have to pass by the Guardian Council, which pushed the reformist leader himself, President Khatami, to pass a bill by the Parliament that the Guardian Council doesn’t intervene in political life. Of course, Khatami was repaid with Ansar Hezbollah and Basij beating the hell out of his supporters.

To bring back to life something I wrote (but a paper I wrote 3 years back, and I wish the footnotes can appear as they did at Word)

The Iranian Revolution: Hegemony and Survival

The political framework has to be understood within Iran in order to understand the social framework whereby movements function within in the disappearance of solid Political Parties. Without understanding the hegemony of Ali Khamenei and his allies, from a religious, dogmatic, and political perspective, the framework of the social movements and social life in general cannot be tackled. Despite the fact that Iran has a parliament and presidential elections, the President of the republic is rather weak and cannot pass any legislative reform without the satisfaction of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei since he can veto anything through the constitutional systems.

Supremacy of the Clerical Elites

When the 1979 revolution was over, the most powerful figure was Ayatollah Rouhallah Khomeini. He demolished anything that can be considered as Western whether from Legislative or Social perspective. The authority went directly to the Elite Clerics (el-Foqaha), and assigned them supremacy on the basis that the nation is ruled by those who understand God most. Hence, they interpret God’s law and rely on jurisprudence as an alternate means to Parliamentary votes. He also assigned the Guardian Council which is composed of 12 clerics who can over-rule any parliamentary decisions and are allowed to intervene in the President’s political affairs directly.

The Wali el-Faqih

The Guardianship Council is given the title of “Welayat-e Faqih” while its leader is considered the Wali, Guardian, and Supreme Leader of the revolution. Khomeini was the first Supreme Leader and he even reversed several decisions taken by Guardian Council and the Parliament. The Wali’s term is a life long period, the moment the candidate is elected by the Assembly of Experts as Wali, his mandate lasts as long as he is alive. The Experts have a sole performance which is to elect the Leader and do periodical reviews on the Leader. They are the sole authority to take away the Leader’s mandate.

The Wali el Faqih’s concept, which was advocated by Ayatollah Khomeini, is a hybrid mix of Islam and Modernity. In the Shiite ideology, there is a need for a source of emulation in the absence of the twelfth Imam in order to understand his will. Khomeini made the theory modern by integrating it within the Iranian Constitution.
The current Wali is Ali Khamenei, who was elected on the basis of having religious credentials and is supposed to be a “modern Leader” to act on the basis what the society required; however, he was no religious source of emulation. The clerics who attained such a status were the quietist clerics who focused on understanding the “Shari’a” and always attacked the Waliyat el Faqih concept. Ali Khamenei, like his predecessor Khomeini, attacked the quietest clerics for focusing on the details of the society rather the overall situation. Khamanei’s overall situation started rather unstable as the constitution was amended in 1989 which spared the Supreme Leader to be a source of emulation and after Khomeini’s close friend and designated successor as a Leader resigned (Ayatollah Montazari), henceforth Khamanei became the Leader. This information is important in order to understand the Islamic moderate clerics’ opposition in the mid-1990s, activists who will try to establish a better freedom and are willing to take the risk to contradict loudly anti-Supreme Leadership slogans.

What keeps Ali Khamenei’s on going mandate in the face of a political coup d’etat from within is his direct control of the Revolutionary Guards, his ability to intervene in any decisions within the government or parliament, and even decide the overall nation’s policy. He also got the non-governmental hooligans of the Ansar-e Hezbollah movement to support the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij, who are composed of youth military volunteers in allegiance to the Wali. Such abuse of power would determine the different strategies of the social movements, specially after the election of the advocates of democracy in the face of the Supreme Leader.

Khamenei’s Ground Forces

Khamenei’s role as the Supreme Leader was supposed to be the judge when disputes rise in the Parliament, called the Majles, but always ended up siding with the Conservative Hard-liners. His three primary ground forces are the official Revolutionary Guards, the Basij, and Ansar-e Hezbollah.

The Ansar-e Hezbollah are not to be mistaken with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, even though its leader believes in the Wali el Faqih. Ansar-e Hizbollah are usually present to attack any student or journalist activism and rid the accusation towards the government. They have been extensively involved in putting down the students’ reprisal in 1999, and several units were armed with automatic rifles. They are used to counter any demonstration or ruin it if it is directed away from the “Islamic Iran”. The Ansar-e Hezbollah do not dress any Western Clothes and they are made mainly of youth. They, on several occasions, have beaten up girls, couples, or western dressed like guys without being held accountable. The sponsor of Ansar-e Hezbollah is the Guardian Council spokesman himself, Ayatollah Jannati.

The Basij are youth volunteers in the service of the Islamic Republic of Iran and are also support to the revolutionary guards. Their allegiance is to Imam Khomeini and to the current Wali Faqih, Ali Khamenei. One Basiji member told an author of a book : “We will continue the path of our imam [Ayatollah Khomeini]. We will not let the West’s cultural onslaught take over and dilute our Islamic principles.” They are deployed extensively to scatter the youth with open gunshots to the air or engage in arrests when the crowds to do not move. The Ansar-e Hezbollah would come to their aid in case the gatherings or demonstrations are not controlled.
The Revolutionary Guard were established in 1979 with the sole purpose of protecting the Islamic revolution inland and exporting it outside Iran. They and the Law Enforcement Forces, have been involved in subduing possible de-stabilizing factors in Iran’s social or political life. They have the authority to interrogate anyone they want, arrest anyone under the “Moral Law Enforcement” and even beat up detainees. One academic observant was arrested for simply spending time with his female friend in a park, slapped couple of times and eventually detained for a night. It is also reported that bureaucratic corruption at the police station is intolerable to the extent some people prefer not to file a complaint of a robbery instead of being humiliated.

Against The Great West and Reform

When Khomeini took power in Iran and his faction overcame all rivalry parties, the 1980s can be identified with the gradual elimination of Western ideas. The Shah dynasty was symbolic against the West’s “Satanic” ideas and the elimination of all symbols of the west was necessary. Streets that carried names of the Shah or Western titles were transformed into Islamic names. For example, Shah Street and Shah Reza Street were renamed Islamic Republic Street and Revolution Street respectively. Any movements or parties that were secular were arrested, such as the arrest of the Communist Tudeh Party leader, Noureddin Kianouri, in 1983 as well as 1000 others of his comrades.

The media was in no better situation. Satellites were banned in 1994 since they contain Western poisoned ideas and Khamenei’s newspaper, Kayhan, waged an offensive on ex-President Rafsanjani’s brother, then director-general of Iranian broadcasting, while mobs of Ansar-e Hezbollah demonstrated in front of the TV stations. Films, such as Baywatch, Neighbors, and even Cartoons as far as Tin Tin, were all part of the “West’s scheme to invade culturally Iran”. The hardliners were optimistic that local media can replace the ill-intentioned Western Media. Even commercials, which are assumed to be symbols of Western Greed, were even banned after the revolution. Newspapers, magazines, TV programs about earthly love and materialism are always censored or banned. Any newspaper that would advocate social change or even attempt to discuss process of reforms were also closed through the accusation of “Westoxification”, even if they belonged to the close friends of Khatami when he was president. Poets or academics were also imprisoned or assassinated if they spoke of overall freedom/democracy or attacked by the clerics on Friday Sermons.

Now this is what you get from a Wali el Faqih :

Every time he nominated someone, that someone lost. Probably elections were the pacifist tool. When Ali Khamenei nominated Nateq Nouri in face of Khatami , Khatami swept with the majority of votes, special thanks to the votes of the women, student movements, and intellects. When Ali Khamenei nominated Rafsanjani, he lost to Ahmadinejad. Probably now the only way to express solid dislike to Khamanei is to outvote his candidate.

What Hezbollah do not tell you about Iran is as follows:

1) Iran witnessed its official mass demonstration when Iran defeated USA in Football, while Hezbollah supporters in 1998 were celebrating by shooting in the air, Tehran witnessed women in a massive way taking out the veil, demonstrations, dancing in the streets and a lot of clapping. As a matter of fact, when the Basij came to intervene, the demonstrators clapped to them and sang: "Basij must dance!"

2) Ayatollah Yezdi called those who voted Khatami as "20,000,000 punks voted for Khatami" which ignited what also Hezbollah do not tell you in Lebanon, the students' revolution. Of course, Ansar Hezbollah over there are unleashed to beat the hell out of the Reformist supporters. Khamenei called them: "the mysterious hand of God.
3) Over a 100 Newspaper and Media was closed in the year 2000 alone

4) The Man who was supposed to be the next Wali el Faqih was Ayatollah el Muntazari, a man who called for the empowerment of women, get the Wali elected by the people for a periodic time, separate powers in Iran, and open Iran to the world. He was overruled when the Guardian Council amended the council to oust him out as the next heir under the accusation that he betrayed Khomeini when he objected to the execution of the over 20,000 mujahid.

5) Iran is democratic? Not... The Council bars out anyone they want (including Khatami's brother) which actually in the recent years so the decline of the reformists because they refused to confront the Supreme Leader directly and went on a very slow pace of reforming, hence between barring out several candidates, growing political apathy, and extortion (yes we haven’t forgot the purges of the intellects in post-1999 events).

6) Khamanei has total control of the Revolutionary Guards, the police, the courts, the barring of parliament/presidential candidates (as not Muslim enough), the Ministry of Interior, the Secret Service, and practically the capability to terrorize anyone who opposes him.

7) To the 14th of Marchers, Iran witnessed a gigantic revolution in Tehran triggered by the brutality of the Ansar-Hezbollah when they beaten students in their dormitory, and Tehran was closed down for three days. Khatami was given the choice of revolution/civil war or obedience, he chose the latter. The students till this very day remain the most powerful source of anti-Khamenei (whom he dubs as US puppets).

8) Khamenei's other rival to the Wilayat el Faqih was IRONICALLY Lebanon's Sheikh Fadlallah. He was the first to oppose Khomeini that Lebanon can never be an Islamic republic. Khomeini hated him; however, he is the source of emulation. This made him in defecto the second rival to the Wilayat el Faqih after el Muntazari (who remained under house arrest). Ironically, Sheikh Fadlallah's views affected Lebanon's Hezbollah, but Khamenei never forgave him for being that rival. It appeared clearly when Khatami visited Lebanon, and visited almost all Shiite figures except Sheikh Fadlallah. The biggest Irony is when Israel attempted to bomb Sheikh Fadlallah during the July War, the only real obstacle between Khamenei and Hezbollah.

9) Iran has barred out every woman nominating herself for presidency, and of course the Basij or the Ansar were sent to arrest her.

10) Despite satellite bans and internet bans, Iran was successful through its pirated satellites. Actually, if Iran was so "wonderful", why the green card lottery online was so popular that businesses opened up in 2005 to get as many people to sign up for that.

11) Women may have received a better form of rights than the 1980s, however, things are still reversible. A lot of court issues were given on women to be executed for doing what we in a liberal form of countries take for granted: enjoy life. Now behind the scenes and underground life, things may be a better way to loosen up, but still... it is a sexist law.

12) When the moderate Sheikh el Mussawi was assassinated, Sheikh Tufayli lusted power again as the General Secretary. Tehran intervened to block his return and favored his number 1 disciple, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Actually, Khomeini himself read some writings for Hassan Nasrallah when he was in his youth years and predicted that he will play a glorious part in Hezbollah's history and recommended that this person should be well preserved. Now the purpose I am mentioning that part is because again, out of the blues, we have no gurantees when Tehran will intervene again, and who knows, probably Sheikh Na'em Qassem would return. As a matter of fact, AMAL supporters, another Shiite group, themselves dread the moment Sheikh Na'em Qassem takes over because he is famous for his hardlining policies.

Now Nasrallah was quoted several times saying that the strength of Hezbollah emerges from Wilayat el Faqih. It is true, the supreme "living" leader of Hezbollah is Wali el Faqih, who comes after the disappeared Imam, outranked by Imam Ali, Prophet Mohammad, and eventually God. To Hassan Nasrallah, I opposed your party, and everything else. By all means I oppose Wilayat el Faqih, specially in the memory of our fallen comrades who sacrificed their lives to make Iran a better life, and got executed for their progressive beliefs. I consider myself lucky to be in Lebanon because what I as a teenager in a post-war era I had a way of life, a lot in Iran would have to fight for it. One revolutionary guard arrested a woman in 1993 and beat her because she was dancing "naked" in a "WOMAN'S BEACH"; when the reporter asked how "naked", he said she was wearing a top and jeans, without the veil!! To all those women who suffered in the past. To all our comrades in Iran and abroad fighting the Wilayat el Faqih, to our fellow student movements who are beaten till this very day, and to the stupidity and blindness of the people in the last appearance of Nasrallah when they cheered for him when Nasrallah expressed his pride in Wilayat el Faqih. Let them know what to expect, even pro-AMAL movement Beydoun recently nicely said: "not all the Shiites endorse that theory". However it is not a theory, it is a practice, and oppressive! Hezbollah may have liberated the South, and may defeated (at least on the infantry level) the Israelis, but excuse me, as a Marxist, I say NO TO YOUR Wilayat el Faqih! No to the Opium of the Masses! And No to anyone who promotes Wilayat el Faqih.

I would like to say, I tracked the Wilayat el Faqih liasson with Hezbollah for four fours, long before Junblatt used it as a campaign. I didn't change my opinion for almost a decade, I oppose all political parties and still do. A lot accused me I am an Opposition supporter, well here was my answer. Let us see how interesting to be accused of 14th of March sympathy. Even more, the fact Hezbollah changed their policies and aimed their weaponry to the inside, that makes me fear even more the Liasson. Hezbollah should provide better proofs about their intentions, their renewed promise!

Having expressed a long post pending (and I wish I can upload fully what I wrote on the topic; however, it is 32 pages long, with the reference to over 41 books).

No War but Class War!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MFL

PS: There are few trusted comrades that I trust, I urge them not to open this blog in a nearby place, and also won't recommend anyone to read this article because it might get them in trouble. I prefer to be 100% secure!

The Case of Turkey, and Islamist Organizations

Prior to the Republic of Turkey, there existed the massive Ottoman Empire, whose Sultans assumed that they are heirs of the Caliphates and defenders of Islam. The empire itself lasted for centuries and allowed minorities to exist, but provided incentives for people to convert to Islam (Cases of Albania – Kosovo – Bosnia). Towards the 19th Century, corruption rendered the empire weak, and the empire was tagged by the European Colonial forces as “the sick man”. The term Sick Man was used because all the main Imperial forces decided to expand their territorial empires on the expense of the Ottomans. France, Italy, Spain, and Great Britain already carved out North African nations out of the Ottoman empire by the 19th Century.

When Mustapha Kamal took power in Turkey, he had to overcome all the Allied forces present there, next to the last Sultan present. When Mustapha Kamal took power, he transformed a nation that was four centuries late into a modern country. He demolished anything reminded him of the Sultans’ system. He changed the letters (from Arabic Letters to Latin, the Ottomans used to write Turkish in Arabic letters). He gave women the right to divorce, (he was the first to divorce probably), and demolished all feudal titles. Despite the fact he faced a lot of opposition, he integrated in the constitution the right of the Turkish Army to declare a Coup in case any Islamist group won elections. The army rebelled in the early 1980s, and froze constitutional life for two years, then constitutional life was re-introduced with the Social Democrats winning. Couple of weeks ago, the army was threatening to do so again. The opposition (Ordogan’s faction) to the Army now has support from of the European Commission and Germany’s top executive power. The European Commission have been arguing that “democracy must not be tampered with”.

This leads us to Egypt. Moubarak was hailed by the US and UK as democratic. Moubarak’s regime has blocked the Muslim Brotherhood to reach power, while he tampered with presidential elections to preserve his throne for his son (the future president of Egypt). To be exact, there has been no country in the world except for Egypt that had judges demonstrating and later beaten by pro-Moubarak regime. It is ironic because Moubarak has been following the foot-steps of Nasser and Sadat in economical corruptions, which led the Muslim Brotherhood’s “welfare” networks to spread through out Egypt. The Kifaya Movement (“Enough” in Arabic) has been forged which included old fashion Arab Nationalists, Muslim Brotherhood, alter-globalization movements, and whatever remained of the reactionary left to join forces against Moubarak’s regime. The Kifaya movement was threatening against Moubarak’s presidential rally, which cost the nominee to be imprisoned for years for even challenging Moubarak. I will not dwell into the details of Egypt’s history of betrayal and oppression, and I am not defending the Muslim Brotherhood. The current status quo in Egypt is due to Moubarak’s and his predecessors’ management. The question is: how long the United States can over-look this fact till Moubarak or his son would be ousted out of power, specially his blunders, and the Social Islamist Networks’ proper organizations, are pushing the Muslim Brotherhood by the year to grow stronger and stronger. More intriguing, Moubarak turns a blind eye on most of these Networks because they are saving money on the Government’s expenses (similar to Hamas having over 40% of the Palestinians under its welfare system which puts Fatah in an awkward position).
The main idea, if the majority of the population are Islamists, do they democratically qualify to rule the nation, despite the fact that previous experiences (like Sudan) witnessed non-Muslims being ruled by the Muslim Law by Force?

In Lebanon, we have seen Hezbollah being a two-fold model, a militant one and a political one. On the militant level, they inflicted damage on the Israelis whereby no army even succeeded before. On the political level, they have been recent in involving themselves in the political life. Till now, they promised to respect minority rights, despite the fact they have their own legal system in the areas they dominate most. In case Hezbollah are 51% percent of Lebanon, does it make them qualified to rule in Lebanon, specially they have direct ties with Ayatollah Khamenei? What would be the position of their secular allies, like the Lebanese Communist Party and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party? What if, in the long-run, Nasrallah is replaced by a more fanatic hardliner as head of the Shora Council?


In Palestine, we already have seen Hamas and Fatah supporters slashing each other when balance of power is present. Hamas belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Strength of the Muslim Brotherhood's partial success returns to the Israeli blunders. Since Zionists feared secular resistence, which was embodied by the PLO, they turned their eyes on the Muslim Brotherhood's social networks in order to weaken the PLO. The PLO towards the end of the 1970s, exploded at the Muslim Brotherhood under the accusation of 'collaborating with the Israelis'.

In Afghanistan, the horrors of the Taliban regime were too terrifying and oppressive, which increased blindly racism towards “secular Muslims” in the West. The United States still think a political solution is the best answer to everything. The bottom line for the driving society towards a certain orientation is not “imposing democracy”, rather placing heavy investments to improve the society. The Mujahideen in Afghanistan, soon to evolve into Taliban, were recieving a lot of money to face the Soviet invasion. They ended up of becoming part of an international terrorist organization, which has no problem of butchering anyone (including the ones who share their sect) under the banner of cleansing the nation from infidels.

Probably the most complicated case was Algeria, when in a Coup was declared after the FIS (Islamist Coalition) won the majority of the Parliament in the early 90s. The problem of the West is that they never understood the “why” part. I mean by the “why” because poverty is rather harsh, and harshness accompanied with informal welfare under the banner of Islam from the logic of hardliners, brings popularity. Algeria for example was the victim of France, which practiced a harsh and racial form of colonialism on the Algerians. Bad corrupt management by the Liberation National Front (FNL) was an incentive to trigger the different factions of the Islamist Network to expand dramatically. The other question is: “How can a country for over a century of oppression can also fix its system in couple of decades?” The Algerians, along with the Tunisians are still busy in persecuting Qa’eda cells over there, while their leaders practice supreme dictatorship over their people. Investments are still at minimal to improve the situation for this nation.

Globally, as I discussed in an earlier post, several left-wing groups blindly supported those groups because they are against US imperialism, and they are the current available alternative. This is wrong, opposing US imperialism is one thing, but supporting blindly anyone who opposes it (with the exception of al-Qa’eda since they have been too extremists to fit that category) is totally wrong and ideological breach of whatever leftist school comes from. The RESPECT coalition and Kifaya movement has been one example, the Chavez-Ahmadinejad alliance is another. If the left have been working on their goals, they wouldn’t have needed to support such coalitions.

Such a dilemma is really complicated to ponder upon, never the less, such pondering is within the realm of the capitalist logic, as revolutionaries, we should focus on our goals no matter who is in the topic executive position: Emancipation of the workers, and all power be secured into the Workers’ Hands.

MFL