Trump as president again?
- This topic has 320 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 7 hours, 11 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Except that Europe will attack Russia because they know that will bring the US, which is a nuclear power, in on their side.
I understand that we, as workers, should not take sides in capitalist disputes and that we want peace, since we are the ones who die in their wars. But if the United States attacks Venezuela, do they have to defend themselves or not?
I agree with the SPGB that workers should not take sides in capitalist disputes and that our interest lies in peace, since it is always workers who die in their wars. Both the United States and Venezuela are capitalist states, and any conflict between them would be a clash of ruling classes, not a struggle for our emancipation.
At the same time, it is clear that if a military attack were to take place, workers in the country under attack would be compelled to defend themselves, not out of choice but out of necessity. This, however, does not turn national defense into a progressive cause. It remains a defense of a capitalist state, not of the working class as such.
From a socialist point of view, the task of workers is not to choose between aggressor and victim among capitalist powers, but to oppose all forms of nationalism and militarism, and to maintain international working-class solidarity. Supporting one state against another only reinforces the system that produces war in the first place.
Therefore, while we can recognize the reality of aggression and the human suffering it entails, we should not politically support any capitalist government or war effort. The only consistent position is class against class, and the struggle for a world beyond capitalism, where such wars would no longer arise.
And chances are it is the government of the state workers inhabit that becomes the foremost oppressor, hunting conscientious objectors, forceable enlistment against our will, silencing anti-war protest, etc. Resistence to the invader will inflame his forces against the workers of the invaded country and bring reprisals.
We must support, for instance, the necessarily violent resistence of the inmates of places like Treblinka, but at the same time NOT support the Allied military powers in their killing of innocent workers for capitalist interests.
If one reads Hannah Arendt we see that violent resistence against the Nazis stopped no atrocities. In fact, it invited them. So did sabotage and individual acts. However, what did upset and even render impossible Nazi policy was the mass industrial strike. This took place in Denmark against the seizing of Jews. The Nazis were in the end only able to take a handful of Danish Jews who surrendered themselves. The mass workers’ strike flummoxed the Wehrmacht and it in turn went on strike. The SS troops sent to threaten the Wehrmacht also went on strike. Jew-seizing was stopped. As long as working class action was mass action, it proved stronger than Nazi power and succeeded where violence failed.
https://fee.org/articles/how-denmark-fought-the-nazi-terror/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.