Archive for March, 2011

DPRK Foreign Ministry explains Libya events

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

The DPRK Foreign Ministry provides an impeccable analysis about the aggression against the Libyan Arab Republic by the NATO powers and their Libyan quisling stooges. The NATO powers’ involvement is unacceptable, as it infringes on Libya’s sovereignty and has imposed a state of civil war, going far beyond what even the deceptive UNSC resolutions call for. Under the guise of “protecting civilians”, the imperialists are in fact motivated by Libya’s oil and and plans of regime change in Tripoli. The aggression teaches that the imperialists cannot be trusted, as the Libyan Government made painstaking efforts to develop normal relations with them by offering cooperation in the spheres of nuclear energy, illegal immigration, terrorism, and so forth. Had Libya possessed a nuclear deterrent, none of the events of the past month and a half in Libya would have occurred.


The U.S. launched a military attack on Libya in collusion with some Western countries on March 19.

It openly interfered in the internal affairs of Libya, sparking off a civil war, and then cooked up a deceptive resolution by abusing the authority of the UN Security Council. It finally perpetrated indiscriminate armed intervention in the country, going beyond the limits of the resolution.

The DPRK strongly denounces this as a wanton violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent state and a hideous crime against humanity in gross breach of the dignity of the Libyan people and their right to existence.

Such war action can never be justified and should be halted at once.

The world is witnessing almost everyday the miserable death of a great many peaceable citizens and unspeakable disasters caused by two wars launched by the U.S. in the new century.

Not content with this, the U.S. sparked a fresh war disaster in order to bring about a regime change in the country incurring its displeasure under the spurious signboard of “protecting civilians” and put the natural resources of Libya under its control.

The U.S. does not hesitate to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and launch armed invasion by abusing the UN name in disregard of the sovereignty of independent states. Such high-handed and arbitrary practices of the U.S. have become a root cause of harassing world peace and stability at present.

The present Libyan crisis teaches the international community a serious lesson.

It was fully exposed before the world that “Libya’s nuclear dismantlement” much touted by the U.S. in the past turned out to be a mode of aggression whereby the latter coaxed the former with such sweet words as “guarantee of security” and “improvement of relations” to disarm itself and then swallowed it up by force.

It proved once again the truth of history that peace can be preserved only when one builds up one’s own strength as long as high-handed and arbitrary practices go on in the world.

The DPRK was quite just when it took the path of Songun and the military capacity for self-defence built up in this course serves as a very valuable deterrent for averting a war and defending peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

Libyan forces push rebels back, again!

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

Excellent news from Libya today as pro-Gaddafi forces capture yet another city (the second since Tuesday). On Wednesday, government forces captured the strategic oil city of Ras Lanouf, less than a day after forcing rebels to retreat from Bin Jawwad.

According to the report below, Libyan forces have pushed the rebels back over 100 miles in the last two days. Now the oppositionists have only one remaining stronghold in all of western Libya (Misrata), while the advance on Sirte (Gadaffi’s hometown) has pretty much come to an end.

Government forces have apparently made dramatic gains despite the incessant airstrikes and bombardments at the hands of NATO warplanes overhead.

Click here for more.

Click here for video.

Class Division, Warfare and Israel

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

When America decides to launch a war in the middle east, Israel gives the exploiting class an excuse. “We need to stabilize the region.”

It gives the political dissident class an answer. “Israel is responsible for us going to war.”

The exploiting class wins, because it not only gets to go to war, but it avoids the responsibility for it.

Nobody is going to take political dissidents seriously who are not class conscious enough to realize the extent to which financial interests motivate American foreign policy.

Who benefits? Something like Israel allows America to do anything and never get blamed for it by its own dissidents. By dissidents I mean people who are not part of either the Republican or Democratic parties. The Democratic party is not a dissident party. Democrats gave George Bush the votes he needed to launch the wars, and Democrats continue to be wedded to the same corporate machine that unemploys its own people while they join the army to make money for the exploiting class.

explaning contradictions in viewpoints

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

When thinking through the various explanations I have for my views, it became evident that I have a few contradictions and need a more articulate explanation. For instance I oppose US imperialism but supported Saddam Hussein while he invaded Iran (while America supported him). That needs explanation. I support Tudeh but I oppose it destabilizing Iran at the current time. That needs explanation. I support the Jewish people in their struggle against bad leadership in Europe, but believe Israel is a geopolitical disaster. That needs explanation. I consider Islam to be a feudal religion and consider capitalism more progressive than feudalism, yet I still consider Islamic regimes to be useful. That needs explanation. Here are some explanations.

-I believe the Iranians are not nearly as bad or cruel to their own people as the Americans say they are.
-When US imperialists were supporting regimes like Ba’athist Iraq (in the 1970′s) and Revolutionary Cambodia, one could objectively argue that US imperialism had both pluses and minuses. Now however, I cannot think of a single thing that US imperialism supports which I would define subjectively as being “good.” The problem isn’t necessary US imperialism moralistically. If US imperialists were financing the correct causes, it would be different.
-Israel was largely created as a reaction to bad leadership in Europe. But Israel is an emotionally motivated geopolitical disaster which now takes the blame for US imperialism and is hijacked by it. Before it was hijacked by British imperialists. Many people who are angry with wars in the near east and South Asia incorrectly blame the Jews for them and therefore do not sound persuasive when arguing. As Lenin demonstrated, capitalists take advantage of antisemitism as a diversion. Stalin also vocally opposed antisemitism, and those who argue otherwise are slandering him.
-Even if we could free Israel from capitalist interests, something would have to be done to satisfy the legitimate grievances of Palestinians.
-I also think Fidel Castro’s well known comments about Iran “slandering” the Jews were perhaps dramatic but ultimately correct.
-Aside from his holocaust denial, Ahmadinejad is right to point out that the holocaust does not excuse Israeli behavior.
-As far as democratic elections inside Iran go, it really does not matter. Had Ahmadinejad lost democratically to his opponent, nothing would have changed. Only revolutions change things significantly.
-Feudalism is lower on the totem pole than capitalism. Islam is a feudal religion. While this is true, it is quite fortunate that these two modes of production are infighting instead of consolidating to prevent socialist restoration. If Islamic nations became capitalist instead of feudalistic, then America would have more power to advance the causes which I dislike.
-If religious communities were infiltrated by authoritarian secularists, they probably could be manipulated. But if those religious communities exist independently and are true believers, they are an obstacle to facilitating material transition towards both capitalism (a step up the ladder) and socialism (two steps up the ladder).
-I keep thinking back about the events with Tudeh and Muslims competing for power. They fought for power recently and at the time of the revolution. Looking back, I theoretically and ideologically favor Tudeh, but I think the timing is inconvenient. At the time of the revolution, the Muslims betrayed the atheists. Tudeh should have taken power instead of Khomeini. At the current time, Iran is no longer an agent of US imperialism but a power which is competing with US imperialism, therefore internal division strengthens US imperialism. Right now American imperialists are doing things which I consider to be “bad.”
-There are many priorities which must be weighed against each other. Two priorities that unfortunately conflict are fighting US imperialism and modernizing Islamic regimes. US imperialism today is more of a menace than ever, so today the priority is not to modernize Islamic regimes but to fight the imperialism.
-When considering class struggle, in my interpretation, it is absolutely necessary to eventually modernize a nation, because while socialism can succeed without technocracy, Communism cannot. Religions which are tied to feudal modes of production cannot be the basis of a government that is even socialist (we’re not talking about Communism here). But currently Communism and even Socialism are not attainable goals. At least the working class can view the infighting between these two modes of production (feudalism vs. capitalism) and become more class conscious.

“Editorials” is now officially Marxist-Leninist

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

As the creator of the website, I make this “official” declaration.

For a while we went with a multi-ideological approach and I was the last hold out. But now that I have had my “born again experience,” which included reading Marx’s writings in a Philosophy book I purchased, and also included learning more about the real world (school is not the real world), there seems to be little reason to not label this website Marxist-Leninist. I am no longer just a vaguely defined authoritarian third positionist though I am probably still a revisionist in that I do not follow Marx, I just happen to agree with him.

Free Media Productions is officially a Communist website. Communist.


Citizens of Belgrade, Serbia rally in support of Gaddafi

Sunday, March 27th, 2011

War in Libya:

About 100 Libyan nationals and more than thousands Serbians rallied on Saturday, March 26 in downtown Belgrade in support for Gaddafi:

NATO Terror in Libya exceeds UN Resolution mandates

Sunday, March 27th, 2011

Pro-Libya rally

The indefensible military aggression underway against the Libyan people by the United States and its NATO allies has gone well beyond the scope of the March 17 United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1973 imposing a strict no-fly zone over the Libyan nation

Though UN Resolution 1973 itself represents nothing more than a blatant attempt by the UN Security Council to undermine Libya’s popular government under Leader Gaddafi from executing its rights and restoring domestic order and public safety, the recent unjustified military action taken by the US and its allies under the guise of supporting the anti-Libyan insurgency has far exceeded the dictates of the resolution within any acceptable standards of international law.

Ted Carpenter, an expert with the Washington, D.C. based libertarian think tank, the Cato Institute, correctly noted that the US military’s sole mission in Libya is to unseat Leader Gaddafi, and thus is out of accord with the mandates stipulated by UN Resolution 1973.

Other international voices have also criticized the recent Western military action against the Libyan people, including China’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Li Baodong. During consultations on the situation in Libya this week, Li called on all parties involved to “cease fire immediately,” pointing out that UN Security Council Resolution 1973 limits foreign intervention to “humanitarian aid and protection.”

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin publicly opposed President Dmitri Medvedev’s public support for the US/NATO campaign of terror against Libya, referring to the bombing as an absurd “crusade,” akin to US and NATO’s failed missions in occupied Afghanistan and Iraq.

A number of leaders from African Union (AU) member nations have also voiced concern in regards to US and NATO airstrikes against Libya which have only led to further civilian catastrophes.

Meanwhile, thousands of protests and rallies condemning the imperialist aggression against Libya have erupted all through North America, Europe, Africa, the Middle-East and Asia.

Facts About Libya

Friday, March 25th, 2011

From the Russian Communist Party’s web site about life in Libya:
• GDP per capita – $ 14,192.
• for each family member the State pays $ 1,000 extra a year subsidy.
• Unemployment benefits- $730 a month.
• For every newborn the state pay $ 7,000.
• Newlyweds receive $ 64,000 to buy an apartment.
• The opening of personal business – financial assistance worth $ 20,000.
• Major taxes and levies are prohibited.
• Education and medical care are free.
• Education and Internships abroad – at government expense.
• Chain stores for large families with subsidized prices of basic foodstuffs.
• For counterfeiting of medicines – the death penalty.
• There is no apartment rent
• Expenses for electricity for the population are absent.
• Sales and use of alcohol are prohibited
• There are interest-free loans for buying a car and an apartment.
• Real estate services are prohibited.
• When buying a car, up to 50% paid by the state
• Gasoline is cheaper than water. 1 liter of gasoline – $ 0.14.

Hands off Libya! Down with Imperialism! Long Live Gaddafi!

Friday, March 25th, 2011

The following statement from the Libyan armed forces against the imperialist aggression was published by Jamahiriya TV:
The Jamahiriya is enduring aggression by colonial crusaders….This has resulted in the deaths of 48 martyrs, most of them children, women, and elderly…This aggression by the colonial crusaders has hit civilian facilities…

Let’s briefly summarize what has been happening in Libya for the past five weeks. On 16 February 2011, an illegal gathering of a few hundred people occurred in  Libya’s eastern city of Benghazi. It was organized for commemorating the anniversary of violent clashes instigated by Islamists in 2006, in which several people were killed. They demanded the release of members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, a banned terrorist outfit that has had ties with foreign intelligence and engaged in counter-revolutionary activities, including dastardly assassination attempts of Libyan officials. The security men dealt resolutely with these provocative gatherings, responding to the rioters that hurled Molotov cocktails. In response to these provocations, masses of Libyans in Tripoli and elsewhere rallied to reaffirm support to M. al-Gaddafi, the Leader of the Libyan Revolution. Frustrated at how their plans were being resisted, the western imperialists expressed hypocritical outrage at the Libyan Government, with demagogic demands of allowing “free expression.” Counter-revolutionary Libyan emigre groups flocked to intervene, echoing the imperialists’ calls about “peaceful protest”. Organized by the CIA and Saudi-backed “National Front for the Salvation of Libya”, a  Facebook group calling itself “The February 17 Intifada” suddenly popped up, calling for unrest in the country. Significantly, the unrest started not in Tripoli, but far away in Benghazi. In February 2008, Wikileaks published a US diplomatic cable that described Benghazi as “a locus of extremist activity over which government of Libya security services have comparatively limited control”. In the following days, the protests mysteriously transformed into an outright rebellion, with traitors in the Libyan military and regime officials defecting. The rebels plundered arms caches belonging to Libya’s army, and proceeded to attack government installations throughout the eastern part of the country. Up to 24 February, about 300 people were killed in the fighting, including civilians, police and members of the army. Attributing the violence not to a popular revolutionary movement but to a conspiracy hatched by imperialism and Islamic terrorists, Libya’s ambassador to Malta rightly concluded that, “as in all insurgencies, the government has the right to take what action is necessary to quell the insurgents.”

The rebels’ methods were can only be said to amount to a reign of terror, with reports about security men publicly hanged in the city of Baida on 18 February. As they went on their rampage, the rebels carried out acts of cruelty against the Black African and Black Libyan population of Libya, who were slandered as “mercenaries”. These innocent people were persecuted not on what they did, but simply because of the color of their skin. Throughout eastern Libya, the rebels harassed, detained, robbed, abused, and executed Black people. The consequences of what can only be termed ethnic cleansing are that many thousands of Africans among Libya’s 100,000 refugees so far fled to neighboring Egypt or Tunisia. Far from pursuing a democratic system, the rebels have precipitated a possible humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.

Reactionary Islamist forces, who have longed struggled against the revolutionary socialist policies of Col. Gaddafi, rushed to provide support and leadership to the rebellion. An outfit calling itself the “Islamic Movement for Change” made demands for foreigners to invade the country and even called for the assassination of Gaddafi. The so-called Network of Free Ulema, comprising 50 clerics, called for a jihad against the Jamahiriya. After Reagan’s dastardly air assaults against Libya, Colonel Gaddafi pointed out that a section of the mullahs are traitors, who secretly applauded the US while the country was under attack. Islamic terrorists, whose hotbed is in Benghazi, have never reconciled themselves to the Great al-Fateh Revolution, and have tried to the best of their abilities to eliminate the popular-democratic regime that exists in Libya, including their collaboration with the imperialist powers.

The imperialists and their lap-dogs in the bourgeois media have resorted to familiar tricks to mobilize the people to war and mislead the public. David Kirkpatrick in the New York Times points out how the rebels, who constitute the main source of western reporting on Libya, have “no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Qaddafi forces, and making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric behavior”. In particular, Russian military observers disputed the allegations of the western bourgeois media and the Jazeera propaganda network, who alleged that air-strikes were used on civilians. In fact, what the Libyan military did was to prevent its arms from being captured by the terrorists. Libyan government spokesman disputed the lurid accusations made against his country, asserting that “There is no massacres, no bombardment, no reckless violence to the innocent people.” At the same time, there is emphasis on the terrorist methods of the opposition, which Saif al-Islam Gaddafi highlighted in an interview:

You know, the armoured militia yesterday, they killed four young boys in Benghazi. Why? Because they were against them. Everybody is terrified because of the armed militia. They live in terror. Nightmare. Armed people are everywhere. They have their own courts. They execute the people who are against them. No school. No hospital. No money. No banks. Do you think the people are happy? Of course not. We are receiving every day on TV, every day, hundreds of calls from Benghazi. Every day people are crying saying, “Please come and liberate us from this nightmare.” Those terrorists. The people are not happy there. Are you happy if you’re in a city which is controlled by gangsters and armed people and armed militia?

This propaganda campaign waged by the imperialist regimes about the “barbaric” enemy” is a repeat of history, with similar demonization of Iraq and Yugoslavia, at which unfounded claims were hurled:  Iraqi soldiers killing babies, 100,000 dead Albanians in Kosovo, and so on.

With the campaign of demonization against Libya, the imperialists are able to hypocritically invoke the “humanitarian interventionism”, as they ironically drop tons of missiles on the very country they are supposed to be protecting. On 26 February 2011, the imperialist powers forced through Resolution 1970 through the Security Council to punish Libya, in blatant violation of international law, imposing malicious sanctions on the country and imposing a weapons embargo. Even though Article 32 of the UN Charter requires that parties to a dispute be invited to participate in the discussions, no representative of the Libyan government in Tripoli was present during the meetings.

Meanwhile, the Libyan revolutionary forces were making major progress against the rebels. From March 12 to 15, Gaddafi’s men pushed the enemies out of key areas, with the cities of Zawiyah, Ras Lanuf, and Brega liberated. They then began to march on Benghazi. The Libyan people expressed joy over these events, with masses pouring into the streets to celebrate, chanting slogans in favor of Leader Gaddafi, and soldiers firing their guns into the air. The liberation of Benghazi was only days away, with Saif al-Islam announcing that operations would end in 48 hours. Gaddafi and his comrades offered mercy to the enemies, despite the horrible bloodshed that they unleashed: “We don’t want to kill, we don’t want revenge, but you, traitors, mercenaries, you have committed crimes against the Libyan people: leave, go in peace to Egypt.” Libyan state television carried messages, saying “Those who are asking you to put down your arms want peace for you, so please help them and stop shedding blood.”

However, the imperialist powers never ceased with their plots and machinations against Libya. On 9 March, the Sarkozy clique in France cut off relations with the Libyan Government and extended recognition to the rebel gangs in Benghazi. A day earlier, NATO took the decision to directly intervene in Libya’s internal affairs, invading the country’s airspace with its surveillance operations. On March 12, the Arab League, with only half of its members present during the discussions, called for a “no fly zone” over Libya, in violation of Libya’s sovereignty. The move was prepared by the imperialist powers through their despotic puppets among the Saudi, Egyptian, Qatari, and other regimes, but faced stiff opposition from progressive Arab states such as Syria, which has long been opposed to interference in Libya’s affairs.

Just as the Libyan revolutionaries were about to liberate Benghazi, the UN Security Council met and adopted Resolution 1973 on 17 March. Among the terms in the Resolution is that the sovereignty and territorial integrity is to be respected. Occupation forces are ruled out, and a “no fly zone” is imposed”. The resolution lacked sufficient support, with China, Russia, Brazil, India, and the African Union all either opposing a no-fly zone or having reservations about parts of the resolution. The supporters of the resolution assured skeptics that it’s only about “protecting civilians”. Aside from being an utterly dishonest, the whole concept of “humanitarian interventionism” is a dangerous one, as it gives imperialists the pretext to start wars of aggression simply because they do not like another government, with fabrications about genocide, ethnic cleansing, and so on. It’s a page taken straight out of the Hitler’s playbook: Germans in Poland are persecuted with a bloody terror and are driven from their homes… In order to put an end to this frantic activity no other means is left to me now than to meet force with force.

Nevertheless, the imperialists led by Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron proceeded to unleash treacherous  aggression against the Libyan Arab Republic, with over 100 Tomahawk missiles fired into the country.The US sent two guided-missile destroyers, amphibious warships, and five surveillance planes. The air-strikes have so far killed or wounded hundreds of people. Several fuel tanks have been hit. Libyan television showed pictures of the casualties at hospital. Even Colonel Gaddafi’s residence was targeted by a cruise missile strike on Sunday. All of this is in violation of the purpose of Resolution 1973, which calls to protect civilians. There has been international outrage at this aggression, with condemnation coming from Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and many others showing deep concern about the developments. Uganda’s President Museveni rightly pointed out, “The Western countries always use double standards. In Libya, they are very eager to impose a no-fly zone. In Bahrain and other areas where there are pro-Western regimes, they turn a blind eye to the very same conditions or even worse conditions.

The aggression against Libya is unpopular among the masses, with many thousands of people around the wold marching against their governments. Polls demonstrate that the majority of people in Britain oppose the actions. At an anti-war demonstration in London, the progressive Labourite and MP J. Corbyn stated how, “This war is about oil, control and a message to the rest of the world and region that we can do it if we want to. I fear we will soon be involved in a ground war, the partition of Libya and the theft of that country’s oil and resources.”

The imperialists are primarily motivated by fulfilling the Neo-Con dream of bringing about regime change in every free and independent country in the Middle East and North Africa. Above all, the NATO countries are after oil, and want to restore Libya to the neo-colony that it was under the Idris monarchy. When Libyan oil was nationalised in the early 1970s, the western powers were dealt a huge blow. Instead of practically giving away oil at unfair prices, Gaddafi and his regime used oil revenues to pursue ambitious economic and social development, with policies like low-cost housing, subsidized food, and a sophisticated health care system. NATO places energy security policies high on its agenda, and the big oil monopolies want unique access to Libya’s oil riches, which are undermined by Libya’s nationalized oil sector.

Predictably, the rebellion and the imperialist aggression enjoy from all spectrum from the bourgeois political spectrum, with the House of Commons in Britain approving their government’s actions by a vote of 557 to 13. In the newspapers of  semi-state controlled media of bourgeois regimes as well as Arab despots (al-Jazeera), there has been a non-stop bombardment of propaganda against Libya, who are pushing the “bloodbath” narrative in order to encourage aggression against the country. The imperialists also receive direct support from revisionist traitors, with the so-called French Communist Party announcing that it supports the quisling gangs in Benghazi while condemning the Libyan Government in Tripoli. Ultra-leftist, pseudo-revolutionary, dogmatic elements of the Left, most notably the Social Workers Party (Britain), a Trotksyist outfit, also finds itself on the side of imperialism against the will of the Libyan people. Although they find it impossible to back the direct imperialist aggression, they still firmly support the covert designs of imperialism on Libya, most notably the counter-revolutionary rebellion. None of these reactionary forces can possibly support a genuinely popular-democratic movement, which makes it necessary to be suspicious.

Unlike in the popular revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia, there is no important working-class factor present in Libya’s anti-government rebellion. If anything, the class character of this revolt is fundamentally anti-popular. It is led not by the working-class, whose trade unions stand firmly with the Jamahiriya, but by the bourgeoisie. In Benghazi, the rebels so-called governing council consists of judges, lawyers, and other professionals, who are totally out of touch with the desires of the working-class. As a counter-revolutionary revolt that poses a threat to their power, the Libyan people have no choice but to take resolute steps to protect the Republic and the gains of the al-Fateh Revolution.

The Great al-Fateh Revolution has pursued an anti-capitalist, socialist orientation that has empowered the working people at the expense of the bourgeoisie and imperialists. The Green Book, for example, condemns work for hire as slavery and states that the workers are the owners of the means of production. The Libyan people under their Leader have made impressive progress in all spheres of life, boasting Africa’s highest Human Development, with low levels of inflation, inequality, and so forth. While bourgeois liberals demagogically moan about their flawed concepts of human rights, the fact is that the Libyan Revolution when it comes decent living conditions has produced far better results than in the so-called democracies of the bourgeois West, with staggering levels of unemployment, high living costs, homelessness, and so on. There are no crippling mortgages in Libya, but rather apartments that inhabitants enjoy rent-free. Purchases for a new car are helped out by the Government, which issues financial assistance covering up to half the cost. Gasoline only costs $0.14 a liter. Newlyweds receive $64,000 for the purchase of a new apartment, and $7000 for every newborn. The Jamahiriya is a form of government that takes care of its people, unlike under bourgeois rule, under which Libya suffered horribly during the Idris monarchy.

As a Russian scholar explains, the Jamahiriya system of government is a true popular democracy, based on these principles:

1.    The population should directly exercise administrative functions via popular assemblies which open to everyone access to decision-making;
2.    The people are entitled to share ownership of the public wealth.
3.    Weapons should be supplied to the population to put an end to the army’s monopoly on arms.

The aggression on Libya has transformed the conflict in the country from a struggle against counter-revolutionary bands to a just war of national liberation against imperialists, a continuation of the great Omar Mukhtar’s cause. Libyan people under the guidance of the army and revolutionary guards must take all necessary measures to defend themselves against these criminals, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. The country needs to be converted into an armed camp, with guerrilla units formed in the enemy’s rear, who will conduct sabotage operations and targeting of leading rebels. The resistance will not stop unless the rebels surrender and the foreigners are driven out.

All progressive forces must render assistance to the cause of the Libyan al-Fateh Revolution, which has been committed to the causes of anti-imperialism, a popular-democratic form of government, and the interests of the Libyan working masses. Colonel Gaddafi has throughout his revolutionary career been a fighter against the injustice perpetrated by the U.S. imperialists in the Middle East, the reactionary Arab regimes, and the Israeli aggression against the Palestinians. Nothing worse can happen to Libya than imperialist subjugation and the establishment of a bourgeois regime.

Under the banner “The February 17 Intifada (Uprising): A Day of Strikes in Libya”, a Facebook group urging a popular uprising had garnered more than 5,000 members by Tuesday.

Zionism as a reaction to bourgeois Anti-semitism

Thursday, March 24th, 2011


This is another good article with good points. As unfair as Zionism is to Palestinians, it is the fault of downtrodden and ignorant people (to quote Lenin) that Jews felt unwelcome and therefore looked to Israel as a better alternative, without considering the material conditions on the ground.

Our father figure and comrade Lenin was correct when he denounced anti-semitism.

I have always known about Lenin’s statements, but now I am really starting to view Lenin positively.

edit: It took me a while to grasp the true nature of imperialism, and that is why I struggled for years trying to figure out what to do on the question of Zionism and Jews. If I support Jews, do I have to support Zionism as well? If I oppose Zionism, must I oppose Jews? I believe the answer lies in separating reactionary ideology from progressive nationalism against imperialistic forces.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor