Re: Edward Said - American Zionism (3)

Alan--

        If oil and capitalism and profits were all that really motivate
the United States, why have "we" never cut Israel loose?  I insist that
the U.S. commitment to Israel runs contrary to the vital national
interests of the U.S. as an imperialist-capitalist-hegemonic Superpower.
You are teetering on the brink of vulgar Marxism if you think that U.S.
Middle East policy is all that cut-and-dried.  Sentiment does matter.

        Warren 

On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Alan Spector wrote:

> Well, I partly agree that ideologically, "Jewish Zionism" is very much to
> blame for the oppression of the Palestinians. The irony is that in some
> ways, the Palestinians bear a similar relation to the Middle East as the
> Jews did to Europe 65 years ago. But I would still contend that it is the
> processes of capitalism/imperialism that have been   and are responsible for
> a wide variety of oppressions, including the oppression of the Palestinians.
> When the big capitalists (and even the little capitalists) fight, they often
> use oppressed ethnic/religious minorities on one side or another, and then
> often discard their own allies later. So that in appearance it seems as if
> the root cause comes from those ethnic groups that are fighting on the
> ground. (And indeed, they do bear some of the responsibility.)
> 
> How have the U.S. imperialists (seeking control over oil distribution and
> pipelines) helped their allies in Kosovo. Or the Iraqi Kurds. How have they
> played Iran and Iraq against each other, trying to keep both weak.
> India/Pakistan? In other  words, the biggest imperialists are also certainly
> quite capable of switching sides as it suits them and "cutting the Jews
> loose" if they think that "Jews" stand in the way of the profits or
> stability that they need.  This does not excuse the religious-Jewish
> oriented propaganda that legitimizes the exploitation-oppression of
> Palestinians, nor does it in any way excuse the actual participation by
> various Jewish (or other) people in maintaining that oppression.  But keep
> the main point in perspective: that there is a lot of oil in the region and
> that the U.S. and others need to maintain political/military power to
> control the flow of that oil, not just to themselves, but to influence the
> control of that oil as it might flow to their (imperialist) competitors,
> such as Russia, Germany, and France.
> 
> 
> Alan Spector
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <KSamman@aol.com>
> To: <nveroli@igc.org>; <TGanesh@southampton.liunet.edu>;
> <ssherman@gborocollege.edu>; <socgrad@listserv.binghamton.edu>;
> <jeschurt@hotmail.com>; <chris@gse.utah.edu>; <bh08643@binghamton.edu>;
> "world system network" <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>; <Arie8K@aol.com>;
> <GNAA@egroups.com>; <al-awda@egroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 11:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Edward Said - American Zionism (3)
> 
> 
> > Thanks Wagar for that reply.
> >
> > I agree: Post 1948 Jewish Zionism is first and foremost to
> > blame for its deadly arrogance towards the Palestinians.
> > Our historical analysis is only intended to complicate the
> > present stereotype of a simple binary conflict between Jews
> > and Arabs to one that incorporates the colonialist impact on
> > the region, and hence to discredit the present image of the
> > US as an honest peace broker, the one that brings these
> > two squabbling groups together.
> >
> > On the contrary, our historical analysis is based on the premise
> > that the US and Europe have been involved in the region for
> > sometimes now, not on the side of peacemakers but as crusaders,
> > past and present.
> >
> > Khaldoun
> >
> 
>