Under Lock & Key

On 23 December 2023 Reuters reported Iranian Revolutionary Guards stating the Red Sea will be closed if the United $tates and its allies continue to commit “crimes” in Gaza. The next day, a drone struck a commercial tanker owned by an I$raeli billionaire in the Gulf of Oman. The U.$. and I$rael claim it was Iran who launched the drone, but Iran denies it.

While involvement of Iran in the emerging regional war remains cryptic, the Ansar Allah party has been very open about drone attacks launched by the Yemeni Armed Forces on ships in the Red Sea. They have said that until the siege of Gaza ends, shipping by I$raeli companies through the Red Sea is not gonna happen. When U.$. Secretary of State Antony Blinken called for them to stop their attacks, they responded brazenly with “No.”

Secretary of State Blinken has been behind imperialist bombings in Yemen for many years, as we discussed in a 2015 article.(1) It is no wonder that the Ansar Allah slogan is “Allah is great, death to the United States, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory for Islam.”(2)

Yemen has been at war with the Amerikans and their Saudi partners for decades now, and despite being one of the poorest countries in the world, have maintained their sovereignty against those imperialist attacks.

The Yemeni Armed Forces response to the bombing of Gaza started with warnings against any ships entering the Red Sea associated with I$rael, boarding ships and telling them to turn around. Then on 19 November they took over the ship Galaxy Leader with helicopters dropping off armed troops and boats flanking the tanker. They flew the Palestinian flag on the ship and posted videos online.

In addition, the Yemeni Armed Forces has shot missiles and flown drones into southern I$rael. They even knocked a $40 million U.$. drone out of the air.(3)

In Yemen, hundreds of thousands marched in opposition to the recent bombings of Gaza by I$rael. The people of Yemen have long stood in strong solidarity with Palestine liberation.

The Red Sea, going through the Suez Canal, is one of the three most critical shipping routes in the world, with bulk goods and containers going to the Mediterranean. The Red Sea is full of war ships from all over the world, Djibouti being the home of many imperialist naval bases. As much as 30% of global shipping containers can be in this area at any time.(3)

Many major shipping companies have stopped shipping through the Suez Canal in recent weeks. This forces them to go around Africa, delaying ships weeks to a month, greatly increasing cost.

In response to all this, the Amerikans recently announced a U.$. naval task force to combat Ansar Allah named “Operation Prosperity Guardian”. Can’t let interventions against genocide get in the way of profit flows the the United $tates. No states on the Red Sea have signed on and the only Arab state to sign on, Bahrain, has no navy of its own but hosts U.$. military bases. Meanwhile, close military allies such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia are not willing to sign on. It is not just in Yemen that the people are outraged about what is happening in Gaza. No Arab state, no matter how brutal and reactionary, is willing to stand with the U.$./I$raeli camp in this genocide.

Even Egypt, whose whole economy is threatened by a halt of shipping through the Suez Canal, cannot assist the U.$. effort against Yemen. They figure they can survive economic collapse better than the response of their people to such betrayal of Yemen and Palestine.(4)

Saudi Arabia is currently involved in the peace process in Yemen, bringing internal peace and unity to Yemen, following Ansar Allah’s victory against U.$./Saudi warfare. Standing up for Palestine militarily strengthens Yemen’s position in the peace negotiations.(4)

I$rael is taking a huge economic hit from the war overall. The I$raeli airport is mostly closed, cutting off important tourist money. The Palestinian proletariat from the West Bank and Gaza are no longer coming in to do work, and tens of thousands of Thai proletarians have left kibbutz farms where they did much of the agricultural work for the country. Meanwhile, half a million I$raelis evacuated the south and the government is paying to house them in hotels. Unemployment in I$rael has tripled in the last month, and businesses have lost half of their revenues.(3) Ansar Allah is contributing to this increasing economic pressure on I$rael demonstrating what real internationalism looks like in the face of a genocide against an oppressed nation.

^*Notes:
1. Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons), July 2015, Honduras to Yemen: Puppet Regimes Falter, Under Lock & Key Issu 45
2. We of course would not promote a slogan of “curse the Jews.” There is a history of anti-Jewish sentiments creeping into the communist movement. Discussing the pogroms that happened after the October Revolution in Russia, Bolshevik leader Preobrazhensky stated:

“This anti-Semitic agitation, frequently masking under radical slogans, represents an enormous danger both to the Jewish people and to the revolutionary movement in the country, for it threatens to drown in fraternal blood the whole cause of freeing the people and to cover the revolutionary popular movement with indelible shame.”

To this day we still have problems in the international communist movement (ICM) of groups focusing on Israel, rather than the imperialist powers. This reference to Jews by Ansar Allah’s slogan, similarly risks misidentifying the enemy, though correctly putting U.$. imperialism first.

As for victory to Islam, see: Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons), January 2016, Islam as Liberation Theology, Under Lock & Key Issue 48.
3. most of the facts in this article are from the radio show/podcast The Electronic Intifada from 24 December 2023.
4. Mitchell Plitnick, 21 December 2023, Biden administration’s flawed response to Yemen attacks increases possibility of regional war, Mondoweiss.*^

All Power To The People

As prisoners our imprisonment stultifies our social consciousness, our isolation prevents us from receiving information about the world from social interaction and direct experience. We are expected to relate to the world – and form our opinions about it and what should be done in it – through the ruling class’s media; if it wasn’t reported, it didn’t happen. The way it’s shown is how it is.

All of the mainstream media sources claim objectivity, but they don’t practice it. How can news be objective when the very language is biased as in the I$raelis always being “allies” and the Palestinians always being “terrorists?” This is obvious in the reporting being done by the mainstream media and the U.$. government as it pertains to Hamas’ attack on I$rael. The “terrorist attack” narrative is being shoved down our throats. With their half-truths, omissions, spins, etc, they have led the masses to conclude that what we are being told is the truth. This is evident in my peers’ responses to the ongoings of the Middle East.

I encourage all prisoners to ascertain the truth of the matter via conducting their own research. Because whatever the news story, trusting and believing it as it is laid out is the most beneficial practice to the ruling class and their “allies”.

The forthcoming is by no means an exhaustive piece, nor a diatribe. My intention is to provide you with some context as it pertains to the conflict between I$rael and Gaza. This conflict dates back to when the Ottoman Empire ruled the region. Prior to WWI, the area now known as I$rael was known as Palestine and was part of the Ottoman Empire. During WWI, as the fall of the Ottoman Empire became imminent, the governments of France and Great Britain signed the Sykes-Picot Agreements on 16 May 1916. France and Great Britain agreed “to recognize and protect an independent Arab state or a confederation of Arab states” upon the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. In December 1917, Palestine was occupied by the Allied Forces under General Allenby of Britain. After WWI, the Allied powers divided the former Ottoman Empire into mandates and Great Britain was given a mandate from the League of Nations to govern Palestine.

In 1917, before the British mandate, the native Arab population accounted for approximately 94% of the total population. Under the mandate from 1922 to 1947, the Jewish population in Palestine increased by approximately 725%. During the twenty-year British mandate, violence was used by Jewish settlers to establish territory. As Jewish immigration into Palestine continued, Britain refused to recognize Palestinian right to self-government. The Zionists resorted to violence to hold the ground they gained and to press toward their ultimate aspirations of a Jewish state in Palestine.

On 29 November 1947, the U.N. voted to divide Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states and make Jerusalem an international city. The Arabs rejected this plan, which was later dropped. After the announcement of this plan, violence erupted in Palestine and within three months, 869 people died and 1,909 people were injured in Palestinian-Jewish clashes. Jewish paramilitary attacks on Palestine villages led to the mass exodus of Palestinian Arabs to other areas of Palestine as well as other countries. The displacement of over 750,000 Palestinians from their land during this period is referred to as the Nakba, or catastrophe. The violence escalated as the neighboring Arab states (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Transjordan) joined the hostilities and fought what came to be known as the 1948 Arab-I$raeli or Middle East War.

After the British mandate expired on 14 May 1948, I$rael declared its independence as a state. The U.$. and the USSR subsequently recognized I$rael. The I$raeli forces were well-armed and well-trained and quickly overpowered the forces of the intervening Arab states. By the end of the war, I$rael occupied most of the territory of Palestine, with the exception of the area along the West Bank of the Jordan River (known since as the “West Bank”) and a strip of land along the Mediterranean Sea (known since as the “Gaza Strip”).

In 1948, the Arab-I$raeli war ended with the signing of the bilateral armistice agreements between I$rael and Egypt, I$rael and Lebanon, I$rael and Jordan, and I$rael and Syria. The purpose of these agreements was to reach a formal peace treaty within six months, but it ultimately failed.

In 1956, Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal and barred I$raeli ships from using it along with the straits of Tiran, another shipping route. [ULK editor: this is a precedent for what Yemen is doing to stop ships to I$rael in the Red Sea today.] I$rael, who was aided by Britain and France at the time, then invaded Egypt. The Soviet Union, who was an ally of Egypt, threatened I$rael with nuclear retaliation if they did not exit Egypt. This threat forced the U.$. to pressure the British, French, and I$raeli forces to withdraw. Subsequently a peacekeeping force was deployed by the U.N.

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was formed in 1964 in Egypt. The purpose of the PLO was to unite Arab groups and liberate the Palestinian territories through armed struggle. The PLO would later become co-opted by the United $tates and I$rael and change its name to the Palestinian Authority (PA).

In 1967, Egypt ordered the U.N. forces to leave and closed the Straits of Tiran to I$rael again.

This sparks the Six Day War. I$rael attacks Egypt and later Jordan and Syria, capturing Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Sinai Peninsula.

From 1973 until 1979 – when the Camp David Accords peace deal was set up by U.$. President Jimmy Carter and signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and I$raeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin – war raged unchecked.

As all prior peace agreements the Camp David Accords peace deal was short-lived. In 1987 Palestinians organized by the recently created Hamas staged the first of the two uprisings [intifadas], in Gaza, I$rael and in the West Bank, using mass boycotts, civil disobedience and attacks on I$raelis. More than 50 I$raeli civilians were killed. From 1987 to 1990, the Palestinians and Hamas held numerous protest demonstrations to which the I$raeli Defense Forces (IDF), special forces, police, and I$raeli settlers responded with live ammunition, indiscriminate beatings of Palestinians, as well as other means of oppression. The primary focus of Hamas was to spread its Islamist ideology and respond to the immediate needs of the Palestinian people, particularly their need of basic services and psychological need to resist I$rael’s brutal and racist military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.

After the PLO sold out the Palestinian struggle for national liberation by signing the Oslo agreement with I$rael in 1993 the people of Gaza supported Hamas becoming a political structure. Subsequently they elected members of Hamas into positions of local leadership, then ultimately as their overall national leadership. Hamas has remained relatively free of pressures and outside influences. They have set up social support programs to help provide for basic needs like food and medical care that I$rael has been blocking for decades now. The Palestinian people took up arms against I$rael and its illegal settlements that have been murdering Palestinians, especially children, and increasingly stealing their land. In 2006 the Palestinian people elected Hamas as their national political leadership in place of the PA despite knowing the United $tates and I$rael would retaliate by cutting all funding they were giving to prop up the neo-colonial PA, and scraps they were tossing to the already ruined Gaza economy. So if we are to keep it real Hamas is a reflection of and carrying out the will of the Palestinian people.

In 2008, I$rael launched a major military campaign against Hamas. The fighting ceased on 18 January 2009, with 1,440 Palestinians and 13 I$raelis killed. I$raeli forces killed Hamas’s military chief Ahmed Jabani in a missile strike. The strike was part of an I$raeli operation to eliminate weapons, and Hamas members in Gaza. In the wake of the death of their military Chief, Hamas made it clear that the “gates of hell had been opened.”

From 2012 up until the most recent attack by Hamas there have been constant clashes between Hamas and I$rael. If you noticed there have been more Palestinians murdered. Even after the attack that occurred on October 7, over 15,000 [and counting] Palestinians have been killed, including people of all ages. The I$raelis have prevented any humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, they have had Gaza under a blockade for 16 years, and they have had over 2 million Palestinians confined to a 147 square mile open air prison. It is axiomatic that violence begets violence. The oppressor should never holla “terrorist attack!” when the rooster is simply coming home to roost.

Dare To Struggle
Dare To Win

Triple Cross: How Bin Laden’s Master Spy Penetrated the CIA, the Green Berets, and the FBI
By Peter Lance
Harper-Collins Publishers, 2006
608 pages

<

I had briefly heard the story of Ali Muhammid, the Al Qaeda operative who infiltrated various U.$. agencies, but nothing in depth. This book answered lots of unanswered questions. Many of the assumptions I had surrounding the 9/11 attacks were confirmed in this book and still other questions arose.

It’s important to understand one’s enemy. The U.$. government has an immense amount of operatives going at once and is instilling terror globally on a massive scale. The author, Peter Lance, reveals some of this here and calls out the FBI on its actions and to a lesser extent the CIA.

This book shows the vulnerabilities of the empire. Much of the state apparatus is as Mao rightly identified a paper tiger. The 9/11 Commission is a perfect example. The 9/11 Commission was created to investigate the attacks on 9/11. The “findings” resulted in a huge book titled The 9/11 Commission. Peter Lance was himself interviewed by the commission and explained how upon being interviewed he found out that half of the “9/11 commission” was made up of former FBI – the very agency that Lance states failed to stop the attacks on 9/11! Thus such a commission was bound to fail from the start. An utter failure.

Peter Lance lays out the idea that years before 9/11 attacks the FBI had intel that could have prevented the attacks and dropped the ball. It’s interesting to hear the FBI’s vulnerabilities because the state works hard to maintain this facade that the FBI is this all knowing behemoth when in reality they are prone to humyn fallacy just like any other, paper tigers.

This book mentions that one of the reasons the author feels that the FBI dropped some of its leads into the Al Qaeda cell responsible for 9/11 was that a Senior Supervisory Special Agent of the FBI Roy Lindley DeVechio was alleged to be leaking information to a member of the Colombo Crime Family: Greg Scarpa Senior. So to save the Feds the embarrassment and jeopardize dozens of members of the Colombo family’s cases the intel was swept under the rug. The FBI has been known throughout its hystory to commit every crime we can think of in its repression on the people. Some agents have even been known to have intimate relationships, even falling in love with their intended target.

It’s clear after reading this book that when we look at the Al Qaeda network and all of its figures, Ali Mohammid stands out as the most audacious and one of the most important figures in that organization. The fact that while being trained at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg he was simultaneously training the Al Qaeda cell that blew up the World Trade Center in 1993 is amazing. His photographs were also used by Osama Bin Laden in bombing the U.$. embassy in Kenya that killed 224 people in 1998.(1)

As communists we do not condone terrorizing the populace by targeting civilians. Nor do we support the notion of taking actions based in supernatural superstitions of any sort, but this does not take away the blow to U.$. Intelligence Agencies that Ali Mohammed was able to execute by toying with them and basically working them all like a handler. He was an Al Qaeda sleeper, a deep penetration triple agent who played Amerikkka at its own game. The only reason this story is not on the front page of every newspaper and at movie theaters is it is a huge embarrassment to U.$. intelligence.

The FBI, like Amerikkka, has a long hystory of breaking their own laws while claiming to enforce their laws. During the Red Scare of the 1950s, the Feds would routinely employ “Black Bag Jobs”: breaking into homes, stealing property, planting evidence or disappearing targets that were political and often communist. Years later COINTELPRO taught us that murder was not off the FBI’s table nor was imprisonment of dissidents. The integrity of the FBI from the perspective of revolutionary folks is shot and Lance gets at this a little on page six when discussing how Ali Mohammed is the one who took the very photographs Bin Laden used to target the U.$. Embassy in Nairobi in 1994:

“As the man who had sat in a room with the ‘terror prince,’ while Bin Laden personally targeted the Nairobi embassy back in 1994, Mohammed should have been the star witness in the embassy bombing trial, which was just months away. Yet Patrick Fitzgerald, the lead prosecutor, never called him.”

For prisoners it’s bewildering to hear a D.A., in this case Patrick Fitzgerald, did not call a witness who is alleged to have started the chain of events to which people were killed. Anyone who has been to a couple of court proceedings or who has watched a crime show on television has a basic understanding that anyone involved in some way would be subpoenaed if not charged. And yet Mohammid was not called as a witness. It’s pretty apparent that the FBI was avoiding further embarrassment and possible culpability in crimes much more grisly than anything they were dealing with in the Nairobi Embassy bombing of 1994. The hystory of the FBI is pretty grisly, indeed. During the 1960s and 70s many freedom fighters from the Chican@ movement and the Black movement were disappeared or murdered in COINTELPRO operations. For most revolutionary minded folks FBI and crime are synonymous in the United Snakes. Even in non-revolutionary circles many understand that when discussing the FBI it is not the local 4-H club by any means. An FBI cover-up is quite understandable as such revelations naturally nudge the people to then unravel U.$. agencies and naturally to examine the legality of the United Snakes.

This book was a good exposé on how the FBI can go to such lengths as covering up a mass murder plot to preserve its reputation within the empire. For the oppressed nations we know how U.$. agencies have been nothing more than arms of the State who uphold repression, but to so many who are not conscious this book is a rough-hewn example of an entity like the FBI which can hunt and murder unarmed freedom fighters, free thinkers, and communist theorists but let it face folks arriving with bombs, hijacked planes, and suicide vests and they trip over themselves trying to flee to safety. We don’t promote armed struggle today, but it was still subjectively nice to read how the FBI got duped.

1. United States v. Ali Muhammid, 5(7) 98 Cr. 1023 (LBS) Sealed Complaint, September 1998, affidavit of David Coleman, FBI

“The imperialists export fascism to many Third World countries via puppet governments. And imperialist countries can turn to fascism themselves. But it is important to note that there is no third choice for independent fascism in the world: they are either imperialist or imperialist-puppets. Germany, Spain, Italy and Japan had all reached the banking stage of capitalism and had a real basis for thinking they could take over colonies from the British and French. … The vast majority of the world’s fascist-ruled countries have been U.$. puppets.” – MIM Congress, “Osama Bin Laden and the Concept of ‘Theocratic Fascism’”, 2004

What MIM wrote about Osama Bin Laden in 2004 is just as true for the Islamic State today. Those who call the Islamic State fascist use an unsophisticated definition of fascism that may mean anything from “bad” to “undemocratic” to anti-United $tates. But the idea that it is in the Third World where we find fascism today is correct.

Much funding for the Islamic State has come from rich Saudis. For this, and other reasons, many people have tried to put the fascist label on the obscurantist monarchy of Saudi Arabia. Despite having almost the same per capita GDP (PPP) as the United $tates, it is by geological luck and not the development of imperialist finance capital that Saudis enjoy such fortune.

A word often associated with fascism is genocide. More recently Saudi Arabia is getting some “fascist” rhetoric thrown at it from the Russian camp for its war on Yemen. What is currently happening in Yemen is nothing less than genocide. A recent analysis by the Yemen Data Project showed that more than a third of the “Saudi” bombings in that country have targeted schools, hospitals, mosques and other civilian infrastructure.(1) We put “Saudi” in quotes here because the war to maintain the puppet government in Yemen is completely supplied by the imperialists of the U.$., UK and Klanada, along with U.$. intelligence and logistical support. The United $tates has been involved in bombing Yemen for over a decade, so it is a propaganda campaign by the U.$. media to call it the “Saudi-led coalition.” In October 2016, the United $tates bombed Yemen from U.$. warships that had long been stationed just offshore, leaving little doubt of their role in this war. A war that has left 370,000 children at risk of severe malnutrition, and 7 million people “desperately in need of food,” according to UNICEF.(2)

This is another example where we see confusion around the definition of fascism feeds anti-Islamic, rather than anti-Amerikan, lines of thinking, despite the majority of victims in this war being proletarian Muslims in a country where 40% of the people live on less than $2 a day.

In countries where the imperialists haven’t been able to install a puppet government they use other regional allies to act as the bad guy, the arm of imperialism. It is an extension of neo-colonialism that leads to inter-proletarian conflict between countries. We see this with Uganda and Rwanda in central Africa, where another genocide has been ongoing for 2 decades. While Uganda and Rwanda have their own regional interests, like Saudi Arabia, they are given the freedom to pursue them by U.$. sponsorship. And we are not anti-Ugandan, because Uganda is a proletarian country with an interest in throwing out imperialist puppets. Even Saudi Arabia, which we might not be able to find much of an indigenous proletariat in, could play a progressive role under bourgeois nationalist leadership that allied with the rest of the Arab world, and even with Iran.

Sometimes fascism is used as a synonym for police state. Many in the United $tates have looked to the war on drugs, the occupation of the ghettos, barrios and reservations, gang injunctions and the massive criminal injustice system and talked about rising fascism. We agree that these are some of the most fascistic elements of our society. But many of those same people will never talk about U.$. imperialism, especially internal imperialism. This leads to a focus on civil liberties and no discussion of national liberation; a reformist, petty bourgeois politic.

If we look at the new president in the Philippines, we see a more extreme form of repression against drug dealers of that country. If the U.$. injustice system is fascist, certainly the open call for assassinating drug dealers in the street would be. But these are just tactics, they do not define the system. And if we look at the system in the Philippines, the second biggest headlines (after eir notorious anti-drug-dealer rhetoric) that President Duterte is getting is for pushing out U.$. military bases. This would be a huge win for the Filipino people who have been risking their lives (under real fascist dictatorships backed by the United $tates like Marcos) to protest U.$. military on their land. This is objectively anti-imperialist. Even if Duterte turns towards China, as long as U.$. imperialism remains the number one threat to peace and well-being in the world, as it has been for over half a century, this is good for the masses of the oppressed nations.

The importance of the united front against fascism during World War II, which was an alliance between proletariat and imperialist forces, was to point out the number one enemy. While we don’t echo the Black Panther Party’s rhetoric around “fascism,” they were strategically correct to focus their attack on the United $tates in their own United Front Against Fascism in 1969. And it was reasonable to expect that the United $tates might turn fascist in face of what was a very popular anti-imperialist movement at home and abroad. What dialectics teaches us is the importance of finding the principal contradiction, which we should focus our energy on in order to change things. Without a major inter-imperialist rivalry, talking about fascism in a Marxist sense is merely to expose the atrocities of the dominant imperialist power committed against the oppressed nations.

Rather than looking for strategic shifts in the finance capitalist class, most people just call the bad sides of imperialism “fascism.” In doing so they deny that imperialism has killed more people than any other economic system, even if we exclude fascist imperialism. These people gloss over imperialism’s very existence. But MIM(Prisons) keeps our eye on the prize of overthrowing imperialism, principally U.$. imperialism, to serve the interests of the oppressed people of the world.

This is a belated final report on the United Struggle from Within(USW) campaign to “Reject the I$raeli Settler State, Support the People of Palestine.” The initial push was only among a small group of USW leaders, but as word spread others requested the petition and used it to build public opinion in their prisons in support of national liberation for Palestine. While our initial summary had only tallied 60 signatures, this was based on the specificity of the petition to current events at that time. Of course, the broader campaign is one that has been carried out for decades. One year after the initialization of this USW petition, comrades in 16 prisons had gathered at least 189 signatures.

Book Review: Marxism, Orientalism, Cosmopolitanism
Gilbert Achcar
Haymarket Books 2013

“Thus, as in all idealist interpretations of history, historical phenomena are fundamentally explained as cultural outcomes, as the results of the ideology upheld by their actors, in full disregard of the vast array of social, economic and political circumstances that led to the emergence and prevalence of this or that version of an ideology among particular social groups.” (p. 77)

Not too long ago the author of this book appeared on the political news show Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman. During this appearance Achcar made the statement that the people who are joining groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda in 2015 share the same socio-economic background and social alienation from the prevailing system as the people who joined the various Marxist-led movements in North Africa and the Middle East during that region’s de-colonization process. The author went on to state that it was the oppressed classes’ material existence under colonialism that pushed them towards the communist movement then, and that it is this new generation’s similar oppression that has them taking up arms once again, and not some mistaken sense of cultural-religious doom at the hands of the Christian West, no matter what some within the revolutionary Islamist movement might subjectively think.(1) In other words, what we have been seeing happening today within the majority Muslim countries is not Muslim resistance to what some have erroneously labeled a “Holy War” or cultural imperialism as seen thru the rubric of globalization. Rather, what the author says we are seeing is nothing more than the continuation of the class struggle in its religious form. And while at first glance this might seem like a breath of fresh air within an atmosphere dominated by the imperialist media, upon closer inspection what the author puts forward in this book is in fact just a more detailed and eloquent version of Bob Avakian’s proposition of the “theory of the two outmodeds”(2); a dogmatic and disingenuous, First Worldist, chauvinist re-phrasing of Engels’ negation of the negation.(3)

This book is a collection of four essays which the author describes as a comparative Marxist assessment of the role of religion today, as well as of the continuing development of religious ideology within the class struggle. The author also attempts to provide the reader with a Marxist materialist assessment of Christian liberation theology and Islamic fundamentalism not only in regards to each other but with respect to bourgeois cosmopolitanism and “revolutionary internationalism.” The focus of this review however will be on the first and last essays. Where the former offers an incisive look into the topics discussed above, the latter is an in depth and baseless attack of Stalin, in need of its own analysis which I will deal with in part 2 of this review. The following is part 1.

Religion and Politics Today from a Marxian Perspective

In this first essay Achcar introduces us to the general theme of the book: The chauvinist First World belief that Western domination of the world has brought not only progress to the Third World, but created a better overall society compared to what “Orientalism” had to offer. Orientalism is just old terminology used to describe everything east of Europe. It is also used to describe Middle Eastern and Asian societies prior to the rise of Western European colonialism, and liberation thereof. Lastly, the term and concept of Orientalism was also used to describe the re-emergence of Muslim dominance in politics and culture immediately preceding liberation in what we today call the Middle East.

Definitions aside, this book is very much inconsistent on a Marxian level as Achcar does a good job of advocating ideas long since refuted and proven incorrect by Marxist scientists, not only in the realm of theory, but in the social laboratory as well. Paradoxically however, this book has a strong dialectical thrust to it as the author uses dialectical analysis to both inform eir position and present eir thesis; yet ey fails to balance out this dialectical analysis with Marxist materialism, thus presenting us with subjective findings. Therefore, while the author takes a correct dialectical approach to the development of religion vis-a-vis the class struggle, Achcar simultaneously negates the reality of world politics in the “Orient” which of course leads em to the wrong conclusions.

This criticism of Achcar is also applicable to eir failure to locate and define the principal contradiction in the world once imperialism developed. Part and parcel to Achcar’s biased position with respect to the progress of the West is eir comparison of Christian liberation theology to Islamic fundamentalism as a philosophy of praxis categorizing both as “combative ideologies arising out of the class struggle” but thru the dominant humyn ideology (religion). However, the author incorrectly posits that the former is inherently progressive due to its origins with the oppressed and poverty stricken followers of Jesus, while the latter is inherently backward and reactionary because of its early beginnings with the Arab merchant classes of proto-feudalism. By comparing these two religions Achcar tries to have us draw parallels between the “communistic tendencies” of early Christianity and the propertied character of early Islam, thereby attempting to produce a divergence in the reader’s mind as to what is inherently progressive and what is not.

While an argument can be made to support the thesis of revolutionary Islam as the path forward for those Muslims oppressed by imperialism, less can be said of the social democratic turn that the proponents of Christian liberation theology have taken. Achcar attempts to frame the issue by hypothesizing that the world of today is the inevitable outcome of Christian liberation struggles in Medieval Europe which served as early models for bourgeois democracy through the equalization of power through armed struggle. To prove this the author finds it useful to point to various revolts and peasant struggles in the Middle Ages in which the class struggle began to take on religious overtones with the Protestant Reformation. Prior to this however, Achcar praises liberation theology as the embodiment of what ey refers to as the “elective affinity” in Christianity that can lead the world to communism. In other words, what Achcar is trying to say is that liberation theology is the positive aspect in Christianity which can also play the principal role in bridging together religion with the cause of communism. Furthermore, the author says that this elective affinity draws together the “legacy of original Christianity – a legacy that faded away, allowing Christianity to turn into the institutionalized ideology of social domination – and communistic utopianism.”(p. 17)

When pointing out examples of more contemporary struggles the author states:

“It is this same elective affinity between original Christianity and communistic utopianism that explains why the worldwide wave of left-wing political radicalisation that started in the 1960s (not exactly religious times) could partly take on a Christian dimension - especially in Christian majority areas in ‘peripheral’ countries where the bulk of the people were poor and downtrodden…”(p. 23)

When speaking of Islam’s “inherently” reactionary character today Achcar attributes it primarily to what ey describes as

“the tenacity of various survivals of pre-capitalist social formations in large areas of the regions concerned; the fact that Islam was from its inception very much a political and judicial system; the fact that Western colonial-capitalist powers did not want to upset the area’s historical survivals and religious ideology, for they made use of them and were also keen on avoiding anything that would make it easier to stir up popular revolts against their domination; the fact that, nevertheless, the obvious contrast between the religion of the foreign colonial power and the locally prevailing religion made the latter a handy instrument for anti-colonial rebellion; the fact that the nationalist bourgeois and petit bourgeois rebellions against Western domination (and against the indigenous ruling classes upon which this domination relied) did not confront the religion of Islam, for the reason just given as well as out of sheer opportunism…”(p. 24)

The author then goes on to say that Islamic fundamentalism grew on the decomposing body of Arab nationalism, citing it as “a tremendously regressive historic turn”(p.25). In reality any ideology that is based on mysticism and idealism will never be enough to defeat imperialism once and for all whether that be Christian liberation theology or Islamic fundamentalism. That said, as materialists we must still make the assessment of what movement is currently doing the most to challenge imperialism today. Is it the Islamic fighters who are engaged in a series of anti-imperialist struggles? I am reminded of something the Maoist Internationalist Movement once said in an article on pan ideologies:

“The measure of any ethnic ideology is whether it focuses its fire on imperialism as the enemy. If the pan serves to fry imperialism then it is progressive. If the pan fries non-imperialist nations, then it is reactionary and should be thrown out.”(4)

But things aren’t always so clear cut as we might want them to be, which is probably why later in that same article MIM said:

“It is only the struggle against imperialism as defined by Lenin that can really bring global peace. Other wars can bring no net gains to the international proletariat, just more or less dead exploited people. The plunder of the imperialists is much greater than that conducted by any oppressed nation’s neighbors.”(4)

On that same note, not everything in the book is bad, and we should at least give Achcar some credit for pointing out that even Islamic fundamentalism can be divided into separate entities, instead of simply painting all Islamic fighters with a single brush as most Western intellectuals tend to do:

“Thus two main brands of Islamic fundamentalism came to co-exist across the vast geographical spread of Muslim majority countries: one that is collaborationist with Western interests, and one that is hostile to Western interests. The stronghold of the former is the Saudi Kingdom, the most fundamental, obscurantist of all Islamic states. The stronghold of the anti-Western camp within Shi’ism is the Islamic Republic of Iran, while its present spearhead among the Sunnis is al-Qa’ida.”(p. 25)

Conclusions

As student-practitioners of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism we would be wise to keep in mind that Marxist philosophy and methodology is based on the most radical rejections of philosophical idealism with emphasis on revolutionary practice. Therefore our criticisms of religion and religious ideology should remain within the scope of critiquing certain ideological props as used by the imperialists to justify and support capitalism-imperialism along with all of its oppressive structures which made up the world today, for the explicit purposes of changing the world today and certainly not to critique religious believers or religion per se. In addition, organizations like those coming out of Islamic fundamentalism should be viewed by revolutionaries as developing out of the principal contradiction filling the voids left by the Marxists and revolutionary nationalists when those movements were either smashed or capitulated. Rather than denigrating these combative ideologies the way that Achcar does, bemoaning the day that revolutionary Islam stepped in to fill Marxism’s shoes, we should instead champion their victories against imperialism while simultaneously criticizing where they fail to represent the true interests of the Muslim people.

As Achcar correctly states, the hystory of Islam in combating Western interference in the Orient is but the natural dialectical progression of the anti-imperialist struggle absent a strong communist movement. However, it is Western nihilist politics in command which fails to appreciate the positive role that Islamic fundamentalism plays in the anti-imperialist fight. Much in the same way that Christian liberation theology did in countries like Nicaragua and El Salvador. While the author raises a lot of good points in this book ey still fails to arrive at the correct conclusions. Real internationalists will not hesitate to celebrate every blow struck against the imperialists when it comes from the oppressed, whereas First World chauvinists hiding under the cloak of communism will continuously cringe at the barbarity of the oppressed for fighting back the only way they can. Achcar admittedly criticizes Islam’s inherently “reactionary” character while simultaneously putting forth the concept of “cosmopolitanism” under the guise of anti-Stalin vitriol and so-called “internationalism” reducing revolutionary nationalism as inherently reactionary much in the same way ey does Islam. These final topics will be dealt with at length upon the second half of this review.

The Syrian civil war, the biggest conflict in the Middle East if not the world, has many wondering what the outcome will be. The United $tates has backed a group in the Kurdish area that has called for the expulsion of Arabs (1) and has armed fundamentalist religious forces that threaten the Syrian government, headed by Bashar al-Assad. Meanwhile, the government-controlled capital of Syria, Damascus, has been a place where Muslims, Christians, and Jews are allowed to co-exist, united by the same desire to save their nation from the forces that be. The Syrian Constitution is based in the mission of Pan-Arabism and specifically prevents the formation of political parties “on the basis of religious, sectarian, tribal, regional, class-based, professional, or on discrimination based on gender, origin, race or color.”(2)

The Assad government opposes becoming a puppet to U.$. imperialism and was never for the creation of I$rael and its occupation of Palestine. As history has shown, with a policy like that comes economic, if not military, aggression. The East and the West are in a tug-of-war over influence in the Middle East and it’s only going to get worse. The so-called U.$.-type of “democracy” has proven again and again that it does not work; imperialist pseudo-democracy will not work in Syria just like it hasn’t worked in Afghanistan or Iraq.

The pro-West bourgeois media claims Assad rules with an iron fist, but the West has backed the destruction of secularism and political pluralism in the region. Syria is more democratic than Saudi Arabia, a U.$. ally and the biggest dictatorship in the region. If the United $tates is really so concerned about iron fists, maybe the capitalists should look past the petroleum barrels and look at Saudi Arabia, the anti-democratic Sunni dictatorship that is nominally leading a repressive war in Yemen and was involved in the brutal repression of recent revolts in Bahrain.

For centuries Sunni influence has dominated the sectarian Muslim world, but now the table has turned and the Shia militias have taken up more territory than they’ve had in centuries, which has the Saudis in an ideological war with Iran. Assad is blamed for all the casualties in the war but even the foreign aggressors can’t deny that it’s their coalition planes dropping the barrel bombs on innocent civilians, threatening the Syrian government with war if they intervene.

The United $tates has spent $5 million on a Pentagon-sponsored training program to arm the Syrian opposition forces, but four years later there is still no success in their campaign. The Pentagon has admitted that the program was a failure. From the beginning of the war the U.$. State Department’s policy towards Syria was “Assad must go now.” But since it’s looking like this is not going to happen any time soon Obama said Assad doesn’t have to leave right away, there can be a transition of power. What bureaucratic bullshit.

All this has to do with Russia and Iran’s strong presence in Syria and their strong stance on supporting Assad. The Iran-backed Shia militias are doing most of the fighting on Iraq’s border with Syria, and they have made it clear that as soon as they’ve dealt with the Islamic State they’re prepared to fight the real enemy: U.$. imperialism. Russia has recently opened up an airbase in western Syria, the biggest Russian base ever built outside the old Soviet territory. Just recently they’ve started conducting their own airstrikes against the Syrian opposition forces in eastern Syria, far from Islamic State-held territory.(5) Now the United $tates sees how determined Russia and Iran are in making sure the Syrian government doesn’t collapse. Both sides are willing to sit down for talks on how to avoid each other on the battlefield but can’t decide how the war should end. One thing is for sure: if Assad leaves, the war still won’t end.

The real victims of this ideological, semi-colonial war are the innocent people of Syria. Since the beginning of the war, 250,000 people have died and more than 9 million people have left their homes. According to the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 3,000 to 6,000 people leave Syria every day. So now because of the war the biggest refugee crisis since WWII is happening with no end in sight.

Other major casualties are happening among the Kurdish people, who have been fighting for freedom since before the war and have suffered much death and destruction because of the war. I’m not talking about the comprador landlord class that sold out to imperialism. I’m talking about the exploited who were suffering way before the war, and do not have interests aligned with imperialism, despite their misleaders.

As anti-imperialists we oppose U.$. aggression in Syria as well as anywhere in the world. Chairman Mao said “political power comes out of the barrel of a gun.” So as long as there is exploitation there will always be war. As materialists we must use scientific theory to educate one another on the importance of solidarity with the Third World and opposition to the bourgeois warmongers.

MIM(Prisons) adds: This comrade is correct that our principal contribution here should be in making it hard for the United $tates to stay involved in Syria and elsewhere. And while we cannot determine the forces on the ground elsewhere, we can see who is in the anti-imperialist united front and who is with the imperialists. In that light, we have a couple comments related to some popular narratives on this conflict.

First, there is a myth promoted in the Western media that violence in the Middle East is due to centuries-old religious conflict. This myth paints the current war(s) in an ahistorical way; they have always existed, and may continue to exist unless the imperialists can somehow tame and modernize these backwards peoples.

The reality is that these are some of the most religiously diverse countries because they are close to the birthplaces of so many of the world’s most popular religions. Countries like Iraq and Syria not only were quite diverse and harmonious, but were relatively well-developed; not the bombed-out desert caves we see in the media.

The narrative that focuses on religion does so to hide the real politics and economics behind the conflict. In particular, hiding imperialist meddling. It also attempts to convince the West, from atheist to Christian, of the barbarity of these “foreign” cultures. It is important to remember that the principal contradiction on the international scale is imperialism vs. the oppressed nations, and not between religions or genders.

Many have used the role of wimmin in the Islamic State in contrast to the Kurdish regions to justify support for the Kurds. As Frantz Fanon noted in his study of the Algerian revolution, the conditions of armed struggle forced the involvement of wimmin in military operations, regardless of cultural beliefs to the contrary. In other words, the national struggle, if genuinely aimed at liberation from imperialism, will force the gender contradiction forward with it. The converse is not true, which is how we know which contradiction should be prioritized. It is true that more wimmin holding guns can be a good sign of the progressiveness of the organization, but even in the Third World this is not always the case.

This leads us to another myth that we want to clarify for our readers, which is that the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) is a Marxist, or even a Maoist organization. While having Marxist-Leninist roots, the PKK fully capitulated to the Turkish state after the capture of their leader Abdullah Ocalan in a joint U.$.-Turkish operation in 1999. He officially changed the leading ideology of the PKK to a libertarian “Democratic Confederalism” in 2005. But as early as 1998 Ocalan was denouncing communism, and promoting the route of U.$. development for the oppressed nations.(6)

The PKK has its roots in Turkey, which has a long history of Maoist activity that continues to this day. Yet none of the Kurdish-controlled areas are currently run by anti-imperialist organizations. The U.$.-backed Erdogan regime in Turkey does have a complex relationship to the PKK and other Kurdish forces. While they have provided support to Kurds fighting the Islamic State, in recent months, they resumed violent attacks on the PKK within Turkey. For this reason and many others, the current alliance of Kurdish forces with the U.$. empire is not an optimistic choice for the Kurdish people.

The imperialists have created a mess of migration, with hundreds of thousands of people traveling from the Middle East and north Africa to the European Union (EU). Earlier this year there was media attention on the increased migration from Myanmar and Bangladesh to the richer countries of South Asia such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. This is in the context of an unprecedented increase in mass displacement worldwide.

“By end-2014, 59.5 million individuals were forcibly displaced worldwide as a result of persecution, conflict, generalized violence, or human rights violations. This is 8.3 million persons more than the year before (51.2 million) and the highest annual increase in a single year.”(1)

The conditions that led about 7% of the world’s entire population to leave their homes vary widely, and similarly the situations they face when they do leave their homes also vary. Some have absolutely nothing to their name but the rags on their body, while others are carrying smart phones, have high formal education, and are being wired money along their journey for train tickets and smugglers’ fees. Some just need to leave where they are, others want to meet up with family who have already immigrated to other countries, and many are doing both. This article does not attempt to provide a comprehensive history of the mass migrations, but it does try to outline some basic principles to keep in mind as the news unfolds.

Open All Borders!

The oppressor countries have concentrated wealth due to the oppression and exploitation they inflict on other nations. In these countries, there is a lot of hubub about whether people are “truly” refugees, and thus worthy of help, or “just” migrants looking for better economic opportunity, and thus not worthy of assistance. They say those deemed to be economic migrants should be sent back to their “safe” countries to build their lives there – a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps of international proportions.

No matter why people are leaving their present location, our position is the same: open all borders! The most progressive economic position under capitalism would be to enable free travel and work across all borders. Wealth would be more equalized and the imperialists would have a material interest in ending harmful policies and practices in other countries, for fear that those populations would leave their homes to venture to the countries where the wealth is being concentrated.

We know opening all borders is not a realisitic solution in our present conditions, so at the very minimum we call on the wealthy countries to allow those who have already fled to make new lives wherever they (want to) land. We then call on these wealthy countries to take a stand against the primary cause for why people flee: U.$. militarism and imperialism.

On the surface it appears Germany has been somewhat favorable to this position. They have been the most welcoming country of the EU (although most recently they are trying to curb the migration rather than welcome it with open arms). We support any EU country’s openness to migrants. But it’s significant that Germany has an aging population and has been trying to figure out how to maintain its economy with a deficit of working-age people. How fortunate then that so many of the refugees come with professional degrees, skills, and even some savings. The economic situation in Germany makes it possible for the country to play hero. The economic substructure defines the ideological superstructure. If not for the economic problems in Germany, humanitarian efforts would be marginalized.

National Chauvinism is Not Internationalism

In spring 2015, media attention was on Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Australia for refusing to take in Rohingyas and Bangladeshis who were abandoned by their smugglers at sea for weeks and months.(2) The primary position of these countries was “it’s not our problem.”

In the EU, Hungary has been a main thoroughfare for migrants this summer. In response they are erecting an emergency wall on the borders, and Hungary’s government’s stance is to discourage migration as much as possible. Denmark, just north of Germany, has been widely advertising that it has greatly reduced assistance for migrants, and that people should not go there. And these are certainly not the only examples of national chauvinism in Europe.

Those who don’t grasp the differences between revolutionary nationalism and national chauvinism will use these examples as evidence that all nationalism is bad. One of the more progressive trends that makes this mistake is the anarchists. Nationalism of oppressor nations tends toward fascism, but nationalism of oppressed nations tends towards revolutionary internationalism. Being that the vast majority of anarchist movements are located in the First World, it makes sense that they should oppose the nationalism that they see around them. But a materialist historical analysis shows that nationalism of the oppressed has done the most to advance peoples out of oppression, imperialism’s stranglehold, and toward a society where nations and states are no longer necessary. Maoists also want a world without nations and states, but a rejection of the progressive aspects of nationalism won’t get us there.

European Union vs. United $tates

Some officials in the EU have criticized United $tates policy and military intervention in the Middle East as the reason for this most recent mass migration. To the EU, most people coming from the Middle East are from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Not surprisingly, the United $tates is also presently engaged in military campaigns in and on these countries.

But the EU only cares what the United $tates does to the degree that it affects the EU. It’s good when anyone criticizes the United $tates’s meddling in the Middle East. But until words turn into actions (and until EU countries stop their own military campaigns in the region), it’s just a lot of hot air. We want to see the EU not only open its borders for all the migrants, but also to recognize that it has interests which differ from those of the United $tates. A united EU should stop all material and verbal support for occupation and war in the Middle East, which would do more to help with their present migrant crisis than building walls and placing newspaper ads.

Rise of Fascism

The recent mass migration has been exposing reactionary nationalist sentiments, and in turn adding fuel to the recent rise of fascism in Europe. More far-right parties are being elected at various levels of government, and there are more demonstrations and attacks on migrants – the people, and the infrastructure to support them. Most notably, fascism has been rising in the last few years in Greece, Germany, Hungary and Sweden.(3)

Communism is the natural antithesis to fascism. Those who see more material interests in maintaining their present economic position will tend toward fascism, whereas those who would benefit more from an equalization of wealth internationally will tend more toward communism. It’s the job of the communists to help prevent the rise of fascism in Europe.

Of course, that’s not to say that certain imperialist interests have not been served in these projects. A destabilized Third World nation is certainly better than a unified one, because the inherent interests of the Third World are opposed to those of the imperialist nations. Any successful organization of Third World nations to serve their own interests is a blow against imperialism. And the ongoing wars grease the gears of the military industrial complex.

Looking at the Middle East, West Africa or Central America, we cannot say that the oppressed nations are winning. But the objective conditions for successful resistance are certainly there and developing. Our strategic confidence in the victory of the proletarian nations over the imperialist nations comes from these objective conditions, principally that the proletariat nations far outnumber the imperialist ones.

Honduras: Mass Protests and Collective Farming

10 July 2015 – tens of thousands of Hondurans marched in the capital of Tegucigalpa with torches held high to call for the resignation of President Juan Orlando Hernandez.(2) These protests have been going strong for seven weeks, and they are the continuation of a six-year struggle against the forces behind a coup d’etat backed by the United $tates in 2009.

In this same period a movement to seize land by collectives of campesinos has been ongoing. These collectives are highly organized and participate politically in the national assemblies behind the mass protests. In the countryside, these collectives have provided improved housing, education and pay for their members. They are class conscious, and addressing gender contradictions as well. The documentary Resistencia (2015) shows the regular harassment and assassinations these collectives face.(3) One community had all their houses bulldozed while attending a rally in Tegucigalpa, yet they pull together and rebuild, as one campesino says, because they have nowhere else to go. While some collectives seem to have armed guards, generally they depend on non-violent resistence at this time.

The United $tates recently deployed 280 Marines to Central America, with most going to Honduras as part of their ongoing militarization of the country in face of this continued mass resistance.(2) Meanwhile, many of the top military personnel who are allied with the large landowners in Honduras have been trained in the terrorist training camp known as the School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia.(3) For decades, graduates of this school have carried out the most atrocious and brutal military campaigns in Central America on behalf of U.$. interests. Today, Honduras is considered the murder capital of the world.

Imperialists Slaughter Yemenis in Desperation

The United $tates has been waging low-intensity warfare in Yemen since shortly after 11 September 2001. In that time they have carried out over 100 drone strikes in the country.(4) In mid-May of 2015, U.$. troops and ambassadors were pulled out of the country following a popular insurgency that threw out the U.$. puppet regime of Abdedrabbo Mansour Hadi in late March. Hadi has since remained outside of Yemen with no sign that he will be able to return.

Since the removal of Hadi, an intensified bombing campaign in Yemen has been described as a “Saudi-led” effort, yet U.$. Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken is behind the coordination center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and the United $tates expedited weapons deliveries to their ally who they’ve already provided with a strong, modernized military.

On 6 July 2015 over 30 civilians were killed when invaders shot a missile into a small market in the village of Al Joob. Other recent strikes in the region killed 30 in Hajjah, and 45 just north of Aden.(5) “In addition to some 3,000 Yemenis killed since March, the war has also left 14,000 wounded and displaced more than a million people, according to the [United Nations].”(6) Close to 13 million are lacking food due to the war and the blocking of shipments into Yemen by the imperialist-led coalition. Meanwhile preventable diseases like dengue, malaria and typhoid are spreading.(6)

Like the people of Honduras, these horrific conditions leave the people of Yemen with no choice but to keep fighting. In April, “19 Yemeni political parties and associations rejected the UN Resolution 2216 [an attempt to appease the resistance], stating that it encourages terrorist expansion, intervenes in Yemen’s sovereign affairs, violates the right of self-defense by the Yemeni people and emphasized the associations’ support of the Yemeni Army.”(7) In June, Najran tribes, in a Saudi border region, declared war against the Saudi regime because of the Saudis killing innocent people. This occurred after the House of Saud attempted to bribe tribal leaders to support their war efforts in Yemen.(8)

Yemen’s relationship to Saudi Arabia is similar to those of Mexico and Central America to the United $tates. Yemen was once a nominally socialist state after a Marxist-inspired national liberation army took control after British colonialism ended in the region. So like Central America, Yemen is no stranger to socialism and Marxism. Yet, while militarily conditions are more advanced throughout the Middle East, we do not see the class-conscious subjective political forces that exist in places like Honduras.

Yemen risks falling into inter-proletarian conflict as has been ongoing in Syria and Iraq. Yet, reports from the ground indicate a strong recognition that the ultimate blame for their plight falls on the United $tates (this is true in Honduras as well). Chaos does bring opportunity for the objective forces of proletarian class interest to rise to prominence. While conditions are dire in Yemen, Syria and Iraq, they lend themselves to building dual power and ultimately delinking from imperialism, which is what the oppressed nations must do to improve their conditions. While there are multiple competing powers in Syria and Iraq right now, no sustainable dual power can develop that is not built on the class unity of the exploited classes as exists in Honduras. At the same time, dual power must be defended, and the imperialists will always respond to efforts at delinking with military intervention. It is this military power that is lacking in Honduras to make their collectivization efforts sustainable.

These are just some of the hotly contested areas of the world today. The battle is between the imperialists and the exploited majority. While the imperialists are the dominant force today, the exploited majority are the rising aspect of this contradiction. As they rise in more regions of the world, they undercut capitalist profits and imperialist militaries become overextended. That is how the exploited majority will become victors and gain control over their own destiny.

Iraqi-American oncologist and kapitalist Rafil Dhafir is serving a 22-year sentence in Amerikkkan prisons.(1) Being a wealthy kkkapitalist did not prevent the united snakes from convicting Mr. Dhafir for his charitable contributions to the people of his native country in violation of economic sanctions during the U.$.-led attacks of 1991 and 2003. During that time Mr. Dhafir was an outspoken public opponent of the U.$. war against Iraq.

Mr. Dhafir continues to experience harassment inside the white man’s dungeon. Last year, just before Ramadan, he was moved to isolation and had privileges revoked for several weeks for an “investigation” of allegations that were eventually proven to be maliciously made and utterly false.

But hypocrisy is a common trait of the imperialists. It is common knowledge that the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and other occupied territories are illegal. They are in violation of United Nations resolutions as well as treaties brokered by the united snakes.

Yet as far back as 1982 the united snakes knowingly sent tax dollars to I$rael. Billions of dollars in U.$. economic aid went to fund those Jewish settlements. From 1978 through 1982, Israel received 48% of all U.$. military aid and 35% of U.$. ekkkonomic aid.(2) The united snakes gives grants, low-interest loans, and weapons free and at reduced prices to I$rael. Additionally, citizens such as Alan Dershowitz, Arthur Goldberg, and hundreds of thousands of others regularly send charitable contributions to I$rael that are used to fund these settlements, knowing these settlements are a major cause of conflict in the Middle East. Amerikkka claims that peace in the region is “vital to our security interests.” If this is true then why aren’t the supporters of I$rael charged and convicted for economically supporting these illegal settlements?