IN THE NINETIES, millions of women and men have taken part in mobilisations against the evils of capitalism and the bureaucratic dictatorships. This reflects the fact that humanity face widening dangers. Ecological, military, social and economic devastation faces millions of people.
Many more people recognise the barbaric nature of capitalism. In a situation where the inability of the social democratic an communist parties to provide sacialist solutions is becoming clearer, the task of creating new leaderships remains ahead.
Socialist Outlook is written and sold by socialists committed to this struggle. We are the British supporters of the world-wide marxist organisation, the Fourth International. We stand for the revolutionary transformation of society and a pluralist, socialist democracy world wide.
The overall goal which we pursue is the emancipation of all human beings from every form of exploitation, oppression, alienation and vioence.
Socialism must be under the control of ordinary people, democratic, pluralist, multi-party, feminist, ecologist, anti-militarist and internationalist. It must abolish wage slavery and national oppression.
The working class is the backbone of unity among all the exploited and oppressed. The working class and its allies must uncompromisingly fight against capitalism and for a clear programme of action in order to gradually acquire the experience and consciousness needed to defeat capitalism at the decisive moment of crisis.
The movements of women, lesbians and gay men, and black people to fight their particular forms of oppression make an essential contribution to the struggle for a different society. They are organised around the principle "None so fit to break the chains as those who wear them"
The whole working class needs to fully commit itself to these struggles. Furthermore we fight for a strategic alliance between workers YOUR ARTICLE on Israel is a prime example of the contusion the left has about Israel - and the lies it tells itself. You state "The Zionist state since 1948 has continued to defend and uphold the imperialist position" - fine rhetoric, but what about the facts? It is a lie to portray Zionism as a monolithic bloc. For example debates in the early years of Israel's establishment in Mapai were around whether to have a neutral policy vis a vis the West and the Eastern Bloc, or a policy more sympathetic to the Soviet Union. The Mapam group itself was more pro-Soviet Union and because of this its two 'factions' Hashomer and Ahdut Ha'avoda won half the votes in the Histradut convention elections in 1946. There was an undeniable threat of civil war should the Histradut, be split on these lines;
Why did pro-sovietism become less attractive? Was it because Israel was an imperialist creation? Or as the wave of anti-Semitism that swept through Eastern Europe from 1946 and then again with explicit pro-Soviet backing the Prague and then Czech show trials in the early fifties? On the issue of Czechoslovakia it is a well known fact that this notorious 'imperialist' power gave Israel vital military aid in the 1948 war of survival. These arms transactions continued to 1951 - again. is this the behaviour of a USA 'imperialist' entity?
As late as 1955 even when the soviets backed the Arab bloc, Israel considered submitting a formal request for Soviet weapons. Which country supplied Israel with over 30% of her oil consumption 1953-56? the USSR. Even in late 1955 when the Egyptian Czech arms deal had taken place, Israel declined to publicly align itself militarily with anti-Soviet defence arrangements - again no doubt you see this as a clear manoeuvre on the part of an imperialist puppet!
The gradual abandonment of non-alignment in the 1950s was due to several elements. Soviet backing of the Arab cause, decline of Mapam and partly as a result of the Arab nation's boycott of Israel, growing economic dependence on the west. The idea that Israel was a creation of imperialism is just not true!
Your insinuation that the 1948 war was รก war of aggression on Israel's part is again pure fabrication! The reality is much more complex. What do you think Israel should have done in the face of the Egyptian/Iraqi/Jordanian/Syrian/A rab League armies?
What was the situation in 194548? do you think the mood in Israel was for more conflict? Strangely you are silent on the attitude of the British towards Jews who tried in the 1939-45 period to flee Nazi terror, or does We welcome readers' letters on any topic. Letters over 400 words may be cut for space reasons. Write to Socialist Outlook, PO Box 1109, London N4 2UU. email: [email protected] this not fit your thesis of Israel being an 'imperialist' creation? Perhaps you would let your readers know that Britain's involvement against Israel did not end in 1948 c.g. John Bagot Glubb was the Arab League's commander from 1939 to 1956. and the League generally was under the control of British Officers until the mid 1950s. Steve Collins, Wolverhampton