ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
So now Israel is waging war against Syria as well, taking advantage of the power vacuum there to destroy the Syrian state’s armed force.
Those who argue that the establishment of a “Jewish colony” and eventually a “Jewish state” in the former Ottoman province of Palestine was a historic mistake are being vindicated. In fact the whole Zionist project was misconceived and its implementation has proved to be a disaster both for the region, and for Jews everywhere by fuelling and feeding anti-semitism.
Some argue that Israel is just another capitalist state like any other and shouldn’t be singled out for special criticism. A case for this can be made out but this does not refute the argument that it should never have been established and that, financed and armed by the USA for its own capitalist economic and strategic reasons, it has proved to be a cancer in the region.
Sounds like they could be a follower of Baron Von Mises who also argued that socialism could only exist on a very small scale.
The Assad regime has fallen and the people of Syria are free to determine their own destiny. Oh yeah? What were the first actions of those capitalist states which were opposed to the Assad regime? Israel took over some more of Syrian territory and bombed Damascus. Turkey bombed a town in the north and the US bombed a few in the east, treating the new government with the same contempt as they did the previous regime. All three states also have troops on the ground in Syria.
And it can be expected that the new regime will be just as much opposed as the previous one to Israel’s occupation and annexation of the Golan heights, especially as the family of the leader of the main rebel group comes from the area (hence his nom de guerre al-golani).
In any event Israel is not taking any chances and has moved to occupy even more of the Golan heights:
Mind you, the killing and destruction is but over yet. One civil war ends but another continues. Manbij was not controlled by the Assad regime but by the Kurdish nationalists. Reference to air power (which the “rebels” don’t possess) shows the direct involvement of Turkey.
That was quick. This week hasn’t been a good one for dictators. In South Korea a would-be dictator was forced to back down by parliamentary and popular resistance. In Syria a decades long brutal dictatorship collapsed within 10 days.
Both illustrate that even under capitalism a determined majority will get its way in the end. No government can maintain its rule in the face of widespread majority resistance. Those who think that a capitalist government would be able to establish and maintain for any length of time a dictatorship in face of the democratically-expressed majority will for socialism should take note.
In the words of Victor Hugo, “No army can withstand the strength of an idea whose time has come”.
Farage’s mob maybe ahead of the Laborite gang in some opinion polls, but according to this they are not putting their votes where their mouth is:
https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19257/local-electoral-year-statistics-summary
Musk must think Britain is part of America where there are no limits on what candidates can receive or spend. Here only electors (those on the electoral roll) or, under certain circumstances, companies or other associations registered in Britain can make donations. Parties are obliged to check that the door is eligible and, if they don’t, and, if it turns out it is not from an eligible donor, they can be fined and the donation forfeited to the state.
That’s a ridiculous allegation. See for instance this article in this month’s Socialist Standard:
Well, in the end “martial law” only existed for a few hours and then only on paper.
The last capitalist government should take note if it considers trying to impose martial law in the event of a socialist victory at the polls. As should those who argue that the last capitalist government will inevitably try. and get away, with this. True, if they did try, it would last for more than a couple of hours but in the end the socialist majority would get its way as no government can maintain itself in power for long in the face of overwhelming popular opposition.
Yes, Aristotle draw a distinction between “economics” and “chrematistics”.
“From Ancient Greek χρῆμα (khrêma, “money”).”
“Chrematistics (from Greek: χρηματιστική), or the study of wealth or a particular theory of wealth as measured in money”
I think we can all agree that that’s inapplicable to socialism.
I thought I would check with the original German of what Luxemburg wrote and the situation is not that clear-cut. The word that the Australian translator translated as “economics” is Nationalökonomie which literally means “national economy”, the word then in use to mean fir instance the subject studied at university.
This was the word Engels and Marx had used in their early writings (1840s) and which they later called “political economy”. In fact in some translations Nationalökonomie which they used has been translated into English as “political economy”.
There is another German word Wirtschaft which can also be translated as “economics” and which Luxemburg also used. It is a sort of literal translation of the Greek word from which “economics” is derived, ie rules of house-keeping.
What Luxemburg said would disappear in socialism was Nationalökonomie, which is obvious in one sense as with capitalism would go the study of how it works (and ideological justifications for it).
There is also a German word Naturalwirtschaft used to describe an “economy” where money is not used.
And in this month’s Socialist Standard,published online yesterday:
