|
|
International Zionism
By: submitted by Cadre on: 26.01.2006 [21:14 ] (1143 reads)
|
To be sure, Israeli imperialism is an enemy of the international proletariat and constitutes a bulwark of parasitism in itself, but no one with any sense of reality equates it with Amerikan imperialism in power or places it above the power of various European imperialist countries.
|
|
(4512 bytes) [nc]
|
|
2001 MIM Congress
In November, 1997, a number of political parties in the world signed on to the following statement: "Financial oligarchy, transnational companies, whose assault troops are American imperialism and international Zionism, under the banners of deceit and 'World Democracy' exert increasing pressure in order to install a world order." Principally the work of the Russian Communist Workers Party and the Workers Party of Belgium, the document nonetheless garnered the signatures of those who should have known better, especially the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), which was the party conducting People's War that we could have expected better from and thus bears a heavy responsibility for the outcome of the conference that produced this document.
Meanwhile, the Communist Party of the Philippines and some others signing the November, 1997 "Declaration of the Leningrad Conference" refused to sign the MIM-initiated petition to celebrate the birthday of W.E.B. Du Bois in 2001 and fully account for imperialist parasitism. The willingness to equate "international Zionism" with Amerikan imperialism is anti-Semitism and a coup by fascist forces seeking to derail our movement with a wildly distorted understanding of parasitism. We are not surprised that Russian nationalists and European social-democrats seeking to whitewash their own imperialist ruling classes as they have so many times before signed on to the document, but unfortunately it was not only those signing. They received important internationalist legitimacy from the CPP and others.
To be sure, Israeli imperialism is an enemy of the international proletariat and constitutes a bulwark of parasitism in itself, but no one with any sense of reality equates it with Amerikan imperialism in power or places it above the power of various European imperialist countries. While numerous European parties signed on to the resolution, there is no specific mention of those imperialists and yet the reference to Zionism is broadened to be "international Zionism" in order to equate it with Jews in a palatable form. It is crystal clear that the target of the document is not Israeli imperialism but the Jews as a group. Thus, European social-democracy and its many signatories on the November, 1997 statement once again prepares the ground for a partial grasp of the question of parasitism and the road to fascism.
Jews in Russia did manage to emigrate some portion of the time in the Brezhnev era of the social-imperialist USSR and thus offered something of a breach in struggle against U.$. imperialism in the minds of many Brezhnev-influenced workers. Without denying this specific fact, it is far from being the case that this fact deserved to be elevated to an understanding of parasitism and a geopolitical statement. Parasitism is a question squarely in front of all those seeking to unite oppressed nations and defeat U.$. imperialism and in this matter it is important to realize that not just Jews but most Western European peoples and their North Amerikan descendants have gained access to special privileges under imperialism.
MIM has struggled relatively quietly to remove the influence of Nazism in our movement for some years now, especially on the question of imperialism and the labor aristocracy. Yet, replacing the words "American imperialism" with "British imperialism," Hitler could have written part of the "Declaration of the Leningrad Conference" in 1997. Seeking to deflect attention from imperialist parasitism, Hitler used the Jews as a lightning-rod to save imperialism in Germany. As Stalin said in 1931, anti-Semitism is a vestige of cannibalism; yet, today, it appears that even many calling themselves communist cannot seem to grasp the lesson of the danger of anti-Semitism to the international proletariat. Furthermore, while MIM recognizes this sort of anti-Semitism as a huge danger in itself, it is only a fraction of the problems presented to the international proletariat by a failure to understand imperialist parasitism in general. It will not be possible to defeat social-democracy or its alternative of fascism in the imperialist countries without Marxist-Leninist-Maoist understanding of imperialist parasitism. We call on the CPP and all other honest forces to repudiate the "Declaration of the Leningrad Conference" of November, 1997 and sign up on MIM's W.E.B. Du Bois declaration for his upcoming birthday celebration of 2002.
Do you have a source, Cadre?
by hiles69@msn.com on 27.01.2006 [01:16 ]
|
|
|
If not from a marxist perspective, I have been arguing that it's false and dangerous to exagerate the role of zionism, because it will lead to antisemitism at worst, or in any case a distraction from proper analysis.
A large part of the reason for this danger is that most people know little or nothing about a marxist perspective, nor much about judaism and the many strands within that religion which are as opposed to the current situation as anyone.
|
by Yasis on 27.01.2006 [04:14 ]
|
|
|
If not from a marxist perspective, I have been arguing that it's false and dangerous to exagerate the role of zionism, because it will lead to antisemitism at worst, or in any case a distraction from proper analysis.
Yes, I agree. All this jewish conspiracy theory stuff and zionism can really distract and confuse people from the more important issues.
Most of it is used by others for their own political agenda anyway.
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 27.01.2006 [07:43 ]
|
|
|
I thought I'd add to my observation about most people being unaware: well ignorant about ANY of the finer points about ideology, politics, current affairs, etc. generally ... not just marxism (well Marx was not a marxist) and judaism (albeit a far earlier religion than those who came after Marx have tried to turn him into).
OK I have just touched on some very complex stuff which maybe only less than 1% of any given population might take some interest in ... after all who might win the next World Cup is far more interesting than philosophical discourse and even current affairs which are likely to dump all "World Cups" and - shock horror - even THE OLYMPICS (the latter-day Colliseum, i.e. nothing to do with Ancient Greece and especially not the Athen's of Socrates and Plato) into the compost bin of human existence so far.
Yasis: to pick up on what I think is your interpretation of things in: "Most of it is used by others for their own political agenda anyway."
Yes sundry people - even in this blog (might as well name econ and hellsbells ... Tet being in a world of his own) - do use the zionist canard to push their own political agenda, e.g. as a smokescreen for their basically equal and opposite (therefore merely obverse - same coin) attempts to impose their will on everyone else.
But, hopefully, lesser ideologues might realize that snippets of what they spout can incite the masses, who usually only ever watch Fox ... not even CNN FFS.
I might try to write a separate essay on this.
|
by Tet on 27.01.2006 [16:22 ]
|
|
|
Yes please bless us with your enlightened thoughts as to who to point the finger at. The cows here are too stupid to draw any conclusion on their own without finding out the queen's position on this. Peace.
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 27.01.2006 [16:43 ]
|
|
|
If you cannot function without a simplified scapegoat and can only chew the cud of your "royal family" pasture, then that's your problem, or at least until milking time.
|
by Tet on 27.01.2006 [17:13 ]
|
|
|
Silly of me to place any blame for this wonderful world we find ourselves grazing in. I do however have one more question that I hope you won't mind troubling our most divine one by asking.
In the great oath and motto of our most mighty of empires.
"For God and the Empire"
Just whose God is it that we find ourselves serving? Hopefully you wouldn't mind asking after her highness has lopped off a few heads, I understand that always puts her in a much better mood. Peace.
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 27.01.2006 [19:21 ]
|
|
|
I'm an agnostic ... if you are not, then perhaps you'd better pray about it, or ask boy george, Pat Robertson, or even the lizzie windsor herself.
As you have a dire need to blame - and we all have at least some need - by all means keep on blaming lizzie, but that is rather tunnel vision don't you think? I mean why not glance a little sideways and also blame millions of ordinary folks who, like yourself, have a particular love of money, or those other millions who are in love with SUVs, air-conditioning, consumer goods and all else which accumulates to unleash war to grab oil and defend the $$$$$$$$.
Perhaps you voted for boy george and/or have never queried how you've been implicated (as have we all to some extent or other) in how the world has gone.
I'm not suggesting that you should therefore start blaming yourself of course, but you are part of it all and there's not as much of a gulf as you seem to imagine between you and lizzie.
Sure she's one hell of a lot richer, but her family is as dysfunctional as so many families are these days ... and they are all as much products of their pasts as are the rest of us.
Personally I would have liked to see the whole lot deposed years ago, but then I got to figuring that that wouldn't have changed a bloody thing ... so why bust a gut in some republican movement, like you are more or less doing.
|
by BigPearl on 27.01.2006 [19:39 ]
|
|
|
What an excellent, excellent article this is. Read it over a few times to fully appreciate the logic here.
|
by Tet on 27.01.2006 [21:43 ]
|
|
|
Now that's pretty funny, her family not much different than mine. Let's see good ole Lizzie is going to pass on her entire estate to the inbred Chuckster tax free. If I'm lucky and plan well I'll be able to pass on $700K of mine tax free. Lizzie pays no tax and because of her I pay a tax.
If I go to the bank and tell them I want to close my account and take my business somewhere else, the bank will tell me they need 5 business days to do so. If Lizzie goes to her bank and demands to pull her money out, that bank and several others are out of business.
I lay no claims to things that aren't mine and Lizzie lays claim to everything under the sun. Lizzie's family has killed and enslaved more people in this world than any other family in the entire existance of families. My family has been shot at, threatened with imprisonment and enslaved by this very royal family.
Lizzie is in charge of an entire religion, my family certainly has no desire to make such a claim. Unfortunately I have to deal with people everyday who have been brainwashed by Lizzie's religion.
Wars that the US has taken part in that were directly created by the royal family. French & Indian War, Revolutionary War, War of 1812, War Between the States, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Bosnia, Iraq War I and Iraq War II. I'm sure there are many others and this doesn't include those wars where Lizzie's family took it upon themselves to fight. What about these wars don't you understand being fought for the royal families bennefit? The War between the States and WWI were the direct result of the Bank of Englands desires to form new central banks in the US. The War of 1812 was definitely fought because the US refused to renew the charter of the 1st Bank of the US.
No I didn't vote for Bushboy, but it certainly sounds like if you could you'd vote for Lizzie. Peace.
|
by Invictus on 27.01.2006 [22:32 ]
|
|
|
This article is well off the mark.
It claims that "Israeli imperialism" is a legitimate term,and that "international Zionism" is not. In fact the alleged state of Israel is claimed to belong to "the Jewish People" throughout the world, and not to its citizens and inhabitants like a nation state. Zionism is indeed an international Jewish-chauvinist movement, with many non-Jewish hangers-on and dupes.
Of course, not all Jews are Zionists; and the Declaration of the Leningrad Conference is correct in not making such an accusation.
While there are certainly other forces involved in present-day oppression, none is more powerful than international Zionism, with its control of central banks, mass media, etc.
Also, the article's use of the loaded, crypto-racist term, "anti-Semitism" is reprehensible.
The use of the "Nazi" smear demonstrates a failure to distinguish between political ideology and political intelligence.
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 27.01.2006 [23:58 ]
|
|
|
Whatever, I really don't give a cow pat what bullshit you believe.
Invictus:
The points you make are valid, but it's going a bit far to say that the article is "well off the mark" when the basic thrust of it is precisely what you said, " Of course, not all Jews are Zionists; and the Declaration of the Leningrad Conference is correct in not making such an accusation."
Sure the author(s) should be far more careful about using the term "anti-semitism", particularly as jews are not a race and particularly as "semitic" actually only designates a language group ... notably including Arabic ... whereas the origins of most Israelis is the Indo-European language group. But are you sure that you use terminology without any Orwellian drift into a word meaning whatever one wants it to mean? If not then you run the risk of being a pot calling a kettle black.
I completely agree with you that "Nazi" is a most inappropriate term to use - including against the US of Anathema - because it applies to just that especially virulent form of fascism/extreme nationalism which Mussolini pretty much set the definition for (though examples of the corporate/military/religionist/authoritarian/etc. state go back to the dawn of civilization (living mainly in cities) and empires.
But of course nazism (national socialism) did incorporate extreme anti-jewish doctrines, so it is somewhat understandable that when historic anti-jewish hatreds again begin to arise in people in Europe and its off-shoots, e.g. the US and Australia, those opposed to that trend are likely to call the trend "nazi".
(No I am not a jew ... nor a zionist christianist, for instance. I just happen to live in Australia and object to any purported "group" being blamed for EVERYTHING, because the world is FAR more complex than narrow-minded people like mooTet can even begin to imagine.
Some people, in Australia, blame dispossessed Australian Aboriginals for troubles we have here (KKK types, I suppose), like USrael blames Palestinians who have also been stripped of their lands.
If anyone cannot enter into the complexity which is human existence, then just butt out and stop inflaming irrational/paranoid attempts to construct a conspiracy theory.)
|
by BigPearl on 28.01.2006 [01:11 ]
|
|
|
"semitic only designates a language group"....
semi- prefix. 1) half 2) partly Latin
The word "semite", originally, is the equivalent to the word "mulatto". The Greeks use the word "hemite", hemi also meaning "half", to describe the offspring of African women who were raped by Greek and Roman invading soldiers.
Hitler describes the Jewish population as a people who "...have disguised themselves as a religion when they are in fact a race of people."
Hitler was a White Supremacist.(Aryan Master Race).
In the US, during the same period as the Nazis, you would here terms such as "racial purity", "mongrelization", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octaroon".
The most outspoken and agressive racists in the US(KKK), along with the general population, stressed the imminent peril of "race mixing".
This is the EXACT SAME THING THAT HITLER AND THE NAZIS STRESSED. The Jews and Gypsys(out of Egypt) are described as "genetically inferior" to the Aryan. But just the opposite is true.
When you mix "white" with "colored" the result is "colored"(Halle Berry, Lenny Kravitz). What is happening in Germany is what is happening in the US. "Racial purity" is necessary because the "whites" are genetically vulnerable to the "colored" peoples. "Race mixing" causes the white population to disappear, or to become darker.
Hitler is describing Jews and Gypsys as a mulatto, quadroon, octaroon people. Hitler is a man who JUDGES PEOPLE BY THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN. Their capacity to cause genetic annhilation of "whiteness" is why they must be destroyed. This is a microcosm of what is happening on the entire Planet.
The Hebrews are Africans, Black people. Upon the Babylonian exile, numbers of Hebrews enter Europe and their is admixture with the Europeans. After 100 generations(2000 years) the Hebrew's are larger in number, but have become lighter, in comparison to the original hue.(Reverse this scenario and whiteness would disappear completely)
Similar to this is the presence of the Moors(Blacks) in Europe for 700 years or so. This is why the people of Spain in particular, and also Italy, are darker relative to the rest of Europe. Mixture of Black and White=colored. Othello was a Moor.
This is why even the IDEA of a sexual alliance between a Black man and a White women causes such fury(castration,lynching) amongst whites. This also explains the OJ Simpson phenomenom in the US.
Thought I'd pass it on. KKK=NAZI
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 28.01.2006 [06:18 ]
|
|
|
I don't know what you are trying to achieve with this, but "semi" is NOT a prefix in the word "semitic". It is simply a word with a particular meaning.
Collins Dictionary"
Semitic: a branch or subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic family of languages that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Amharic and such ancient languages as Akkadian and Phoenician.
If you, or anyone, knows better than the researchers who have compiled such dictionaries as Collins, Webster's and the Oxford, then prove it ... or descend into a world in which words are as useless as the yankee $$$$$$$$$ is, or is shortly to become, i.e. useless as a means of exchange of anything but, in the case of words, INFORMATION.
Sorry BP but your use of the word "semitic" is Orwellian ... you are trying to make it mean whatever you privately want it to mean.
Your attempt to extract "semi" (as a false prefix) from the word reminds me of those who try to extract "se" (as a false prefix) from the word "sequel" and then go on to insert the actual prefix "pre", so as to make the nonsense word "prequel" ... notably in relation to some novel written AFTER a series of other books have been written.
In any case: your entire construct of retro-history and the word "semitic" is wrong ... utterly wrong ... even about the origins of Europeans who believe in some version of judaism. (I will help you with some research if you like).
Meanwhile I tend to assume that you are black-American, Afro-American, or however else you prefer to describe yourself ... in which case I can understand your troubles about being discriminated against just on account of the colour of your skin ... but you are completely wrong with your "history" and use of words.
|
by BigPearl on 28.01.2006 [14:57 ]
|
|
|
How did this word come into existence hiles? What is philology? Do words just pop out of thin air? How do you explain it's genesis? You are damn right I know better than these knuckleheads you cite as the Untouchable Wordmasters.
A false prefix? "Semi" is a Latin prefix, as "Hemi" is Greek. What is the genesis hiles? what is YOUR explanation? What do the Untouchable Wordmasters say?
"Completly wrong with my "history" is that right? Have you ever seen a picture of Karl Marx, hiles? He looks like Frederick Douglass, he is "colored" isn't he? Or how about Albert Einstein, look at his kinky frizzy hair. kinda looks like Afro doesn't it? It is there African genetic heritage which accounts for this.
"Retro-history" is redundant hiles. Is that term from the Untouchable Wordmaster Bible? "Retro" is also a Latin prefix, meaning "backwards"
And how about "Gypsy", what does that mean?
"Utterly wrong" hmmm? Do you know that all of your "Western" history books are a pack of LIES? Do you know how much effort "Westerners" have exerted to destroy my history, as a Black Man, an African? I said that the Hebrews were BLACK PEOPLE hiles, would you care to deny that? Don't the prophets all come from Africa and Asia? Within the Egyptian(The Land of the Blacks) nation? Or is your understanding based upon the Blessed Tarzan films?
|
by hiles69@msn.com on 28.01.2006 [17:52 ]
|
|
|
No the word "semite" did not popout of thin air ... it derives from Hebrew "shem" via Latin "semitas" ... and though it is true that "semi" is a prefix in many words, e.g. semitrailer, in this particular case it is simply part of a whole word which should not be broken up. But if you insist:
Semi = half and "tic" = an involuntary muscle spasm.
BTW: don't you know that "history" precisely means "a written record".
Certainly all written records of past events are biassed, but you would not have a clue about your antecedants if predominantly white historians had not written about past events ... with at least some of them being biassed in favour of ending slavery and opposing Western civilization.
It is a pardox, don't you think, that the only basis for your arguments derive from the very records you dismiss, except for the fucking Bible which got complied by white people in Rome, around 300 AD, which you take to be "gospel".
Jesus black? Highly unlikely, but probably kinda coffee-coloured and so very unlike portrayals of him as a European.
Egyptians black? Well not according to their own pictorial records, so are you claiming to know better than they did?
Nay mind, believe whatever you want ... that's the last I will have to say to you on these matters.
|
by BigPearl on 28.01.2006 [20:03 ]
|
|
|
if it were not for "predominantly white historians". It is those "predominantly white historians" who have ERASED my "antecedants". You got alooooooot of nerve hiles, and you are ignorant.
Egyptians Black? The very word for "Egypt" means Black, hiles "Khem".
The Land of the Blacks. Your "predominantly white historians" interpret
this as "the Black Land", Black being in reference to the soil, not the PEOPLE. DUH. LOL. LOL. Osiris is known as "Lord of the Perfect Black".
The term "alchemy" is based on the term "al Khem", an Arabic expression meaning "of the Blacks", Egyptian science. This is the origin of the word "chemistry".
These things are very ordinary to Black people, hiles. Educated Black people. You make a fool of yourself.
Jesus Black? This event you desribe in "Rome around 300 A.D." was arranged by Emperor Constantine, the "Council of Nicaea" in 325 A.D. It is funny hiles, that you don't realize that it was at this same council where the AFRICAN images of Jesus and Mary were replaced with EUROPEAN images. You will find the original images still depicted in certain churches in Eastern Europe,
Sorry your so cranky, hiles. U still my Nigga.
|
by hellsbells on 29.01.2006 [07:55 ]
|
|
|
People of the Jewish faith = Jews.
People of the English Church faith = Anglicans.
People of the Roman Catholic faith = Catholics.
I am not going to stop using the word Jews because hiles69@msn.com thinks that's nasty.
And I have particular problems with Jews because they have abused my trust.
They have rammed down my throat ever since I can remember that SIX MILLION of them died in WWII concentration camps using Zyklon B generated poison gas followed by cremation. This procedure is commonly - and ludicrously - summarised as 'gas ovens'.
I now know that all that legend is complete & utter fiction.
I learned this from the Internet, I have the books that prove the lies, and I have listened to people explaining the fiction.
I was not told it was fiction by my Australian (=Israeli) Broadcasting Corporation, or from Fairfax Press, or Packer Press, or Murdoch Press. I did not learn it from the Australian Government.
I do not hear Jews explaining that the whole sordid story is a complete fabrication. Instead they perpetuate the story.
Do I need to explain that the political & financial benefits of the HOLOHOAX are so great, that anyone who doubts the 'sacred six million' is persecuted, ruined, injured, imprisoned, sometimes killed? Do I need to explain that the Australian Government (under control by jews) collaborates in the persecution of people who doubt the 'sacred six million'? Ask Fred Toben whether they do.
That's enough grounds to really suspect jews. There are more. So much so, that former jews, such as Israel Shamir regard them as bad-faith and have converted to Christianity.
Australians such as hiles69@msn.com have had their great virtue of tolerance subverted.
Time to wake up!!!
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
