james debono
"No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." Heraclitus
Tuesday, October 1, 2024
Only the US can stop Israel
Sunday, July 28, 2024
Why the far right gets so worked up with drag queens
Monday, July 1, 2024
How to beat the far right
There are elections which can define the course of history. The second round of the French election on Sunday is one of these.
Faced with the prospect of a far right government in France, the logical choice for all democratic forces is to withdraw third placed candidates which could stand in the way of a victory over the far right.
In the short term this is the only possible way to stop the far right from winning. The 'popular front' including Melenchon have already declared that they are withdrawing in constituencies where centrists are in a better place to beat the far right. Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, who distinguishes between the enemy (RN) and the adversary (the left ) has hinted doing in those constituencies where the left is in a better place to beat the far right. But regrettably some in the president's camp take exception with France Insoumise candidates in a false equivalence which betrays the legacy of the second world war.
Even during the cold war centre right republicans used to vote for communists (and vice versa) when facing Jean Marie Le Pen's FN.
But while commendable this strategy worked in a context where the far right was more of a nuisance than a real threat.
To beat the far right as a project of government, the centre and the left have to converge around a synthesis which remains elusive but has become a necessity not just in France but even in the US.
Another mistake committed by some analysts is to view the modern far right as some kind of populist anti elitist movement legitimised by democratic elections. The reality is that Nazism and fascism were also an expression of a similar sentiment. The railed against jewish elites and ranted against intellectuals. Of course in power they not only eliminated inconvenient trade unions but provided capitalism with slave labour. But right to the end they projected themselves as tribunes of the masses. And just as today, their rise in the 1920s and 1930s seemed unstoppable. They managed to shape popular common sense. The far right project today is also incremental, weakening Europe and democratic institutions from within.
Yet they were stopped and beaten. And we also owe that to the rise of mass democratic movements (namely christian democracy, social democracy and euro-communism). Our Europe was born out of a compromise which saw most of the left accepting liberal democratic norms and the centre endorsing active state intervention and the welfare state. It was an imperfect compromise but one which emancipated millions of people.
The historic lesson is that the far right can be beaten by popular mobilisation and a counter hegemony which shifts the political centre to the left.
So to get serious about the far right threat, the left has to push the centre to ditch its love affair with neo-liberalism and austerity. But to get there the left must ditch its hobby of denigrating the 'west' even when facing authoritarian powers like Russia, China and Iran... The left also has to reclaim the sort of civic patriotism rooted in the jacobin tradition and the partisan resistance. It must reclaim its historic role in the front lines of defending the legacy of 1789 and 1848.
It is time for an inclusive and assertive republicanism which takes pride in the conquests of the past but is ready to address the challenges of the future. A bold left which does not shun public ownership in the energy and transport sectors, which aggressively demands a global tax on corporations and crucially embark on a project of renewal which offers a better and more prosperous life by investing in job creation and saving the planet. It should also stand for the defence of democracy from its detractors, including aggressive imperialists like Putin.
It has to offer hope in a future where people have greater control over their daily existence, where poverty is abolished and where technology and AI are socialised with the aim of shortening the working week. But ultimately all this depends on protecting humanity from the ravages of climate catastrophe. It would be simply irresponsible for democratic forces to wage war against each other while the planet is burning. The stakes have never been higher.
Saturday, January 6, 2024
In between times: From dissonance to hubris
Wednesday, November 15, 2023
Palestine and our moral bankruptcy
The tragedy in the 'siege of the hospitals' in Gaza is that the Israeli state is proving by its own actions that it is structurally racist, thus legitimising claims by the likes of Hamas and Hizbollah.
Moreover, the conduct of the EU and the US lends credibility to those like Putin, who question the west's double standards and hypocrisy.
The reality is that oppressed people deserve the consolation of being internationally vindicated. The question facing the 'west' (which includes me and us) is why is Netanyahu not treated in the same way as Milosevic and Putin? The tragedy is that the only ones doing so (Turkey Hizbollah and Iran) are also of the same ilk. Erdogan's treatment of the Kurds and Hizbollah's support for the murderous Assad regime come to mind immediately when sultan Erdogan and nasrallah lambast Israel and hail Hamas as freedom fighters.
I do not detest the west. I am part of it. It is also shaped by our struggles for equality, democracy and freedom. But it is also shaped by a legacy of colonialism, brutality and nationalisms, those zombies which never die and animate an assertive far right. That is why this moral failure hurts.
But there is another disturbing aspect of our moral bankruptcy. We expect Palestinians to warm up to our hallow promises of a two state solution and our calls for restrain on Israel, while they are being butchered. Our governments expect Palestinians to accept their humiliation and to distance themselves from those resisting the occupation. Since October 7, the world (myself included) had been throwing the burden of moral correctness on a vanquished and brutalised people, thus giving their oppressor a license to maim and kill. Some did worse by literally offering their unconditional support.
And while i recoil at anti semitism, even posting this comment would probably be shot down as anti semitism by some.
Thursday, October 19, 2023
The burden of history
This bloody conflict in Palestine and Israel is deeply distressing, a constant rollercoaster of emotions, with events unfolding rapidly, leaving little time for reflection and processing. For me, it's not a matter of lacking understanding; in fact, it's painful because there's an overwhelming amount of information to process, which can cloud clear thinking.
The scale and nature of Hamas's actions hit a personal chord, considering the historical context of blood libels, pogroms and the Holocaust. No one should be targeted based solely on their identity.
I'm repulsed by an organization whose charter still references the Protocols of Zion, a 19th-century anti-Semitic forgery. However, I remind myself that there's a complex context of colonial occupation, humiliation, and dehumanization. The subsequent days characterised by the medieval siege of Gaza served as a stark reminder of this complex and terrible reality. It is also reminded me about the brutality of a rationalised bureaucratic machine. The kind of brutality which starves, humiliates and kills while still presenting itself as civilised, democratic and sane.
I recoil at those who simply side with Israelis because they look and live like them, while they perceive Palestinians in their reality as less than human. There is an underlying racism among those who identify with Israel on the basis of this premise. They are exactly the kind of people who would have hated the dirty starving jew in the ghettoes. No wonder some on the far right feel so comfortable supporting Israel.
As the days go by, I'm becoming increasingly exhausted by the weight of history, both past and present. History can serve as a tool for understanding, but it can also become a heavy burden, even a justification for violence and genocide.
For instance, one can argue that Israel's formation is linked to colonialism and an ethnocentric ideology, marginalizing Palestinians as a 'people without history,' similar to the treatment of other indigenous groups worldwide. Yet, many years after the Nakba, there are Israelis living in a society they created, who should not be under the constant threat of elimination and genocide. Israel is here to stay, and part of its identity is that of a 'homeland for the Jews', but hopefully not at the exclusion of Israeli Arabs and surely not as an occupying power.
But while Israelis have their reasons to be be scared, their government's policies have turned Gaza into a prison camp, where an entire society is confined and regularly subjected to punishment. In this sense, Gaza evokes memories of the Warsaw Ghetto. And the forced evacuation of Palestinians evokes older memories not just of the nakba but of jews expelled from their homeland in Spain. We must remember and never forget. Yes history can be odious. Yet it can serve as both an antidote and a lesson, helping us remain sensitive to the darkness that can affect both the oppressed and the oppressor.