Reading ‘The Forgotten Friendship’ a history of Soviet Israeli relations. In 47, the UK oppose founding of Israel & armed the Arab league. The US supported then withdrew support bc the military & state department opposed Zionism & the USSR. The USSR saved the Yishuv.
Background on SOviet policy, which was skeptical of nationalism in Arab societies but sought cautious alliance to its reversal & Gromyko’s endorsement of Zionism at the UN.
The USSR rejected the Arab nationalist critique that it was imperialist, & argued Jews had a historical right to Palestine. Arab communists endorsed the USSR, & consequently they were banned & the movement collapsed.
The USSR, US, & Arab States were United in the belief that Jews were inherently attracted to communism & thus began to see Zionism as a potential or actual socialist plot. This prompted one of the many US’ reversals, as its NatSec establishment deeply disliked Zionism & the USSR
The USSR condemned the joint Egyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian & Syrian invasion of the newly declared state of Israel, and immediately began to arm the outgunned Haganah, who crucially would have lost without this support.
The USSRs support was fundamental & crucial, but afterward it grew reticent, as, an ironic consequence, Zionism became incredibly popular among Soviet Jewry. Golda Meir received a crowd of 10s of 1000s.
Outside of the catastrophic collapse of Palestinian Arab society, the hoped for destabilizing chain reaction of Israel’s founding did not happen (yet—it arguably did later) as Israel decisively won. So the USSR made great power considerations.
The USSR heavily influenced Both the conduct of the Haganah/IDF during the war with regard to expulsions & village expropriations, and toward Israel’s policy toward the refugees after the war.
As Joel Migdal points out in the main cadres of the MAPAI, and of the Yishuv’s elite were trained in the USSR, and schooled explicitly in its ideology (an irony of the USSRs many strong reversals on the issue over the years prior to 47)
I’ve cited it 100 times but Beinin’s book is a standard source for the role of socialism, Marxism, & the USSR in the history of Israel and the Arab world.
In ‘Decolonizing Israel, Liberating Palestine’, Halper discusses the Israeli land collectivization regime.
From 1880s on, 80% of the Palestinian peasantry were landowners [2/3 small, 1/6 medium/large landlords) (see B Morris, ‘Origin of Refugees’, & Stein ‘Land Question’, in a thriving Ottoman capitalist society (see Seikally ‘Men of Capital’), by 1947, only 72% were still landowners
Then 47-49, in the midst of the civil war and then the joint war, the Nakba, the catastrophe of Palestinian society, where all state & public land, and most private land were nationalized, and 700,000 Palestinians were displaced mostly within Gaza, West Bank & Jordan.
Land expropriation and refugee non return policies were explicitly modeled on the USSR’s, as Knesset debates show. This is different from how they were *justified* in int’l law, by reference to the League of Nations sponsored Lausanne conference.
Communist party pamphlets calling for Arab Jewish unity were the inciting factor to the riots of the early 20s. Anti zionist pamphlets & petitions regularly emphasized its Bolshevist or socialist character.
This later produced ambivalence when communism gained force within the arab world. While they opposed fascism, they didn’t want Jewish refugees, socialist or not, from the Nazis flooding into the Middle East.
Concluding, aside from Pohl’s other 3 articles on the subject (snd I want to emphasize again how imperfect they are still), I end with three recommendations:
1. Levene’s ‘Harbingers of Disaster’ 2. Sharma’s ‘Home Rule’
3. Bashford’s paper on settler colonialism & immigration law
Levene traces the Holocaust & the Nakba both to the nation state form as it emerged in Europe, whether practiced by socialist or capitalist states. Sharma shows how the entire postcolonial order based on this form requires forced & restricted movement.
Bashford & Sharma both forcefully argue for the origin of immigration laws, even as adopted by socialist & postcolonial states, in settler colonialism. Pohl discusses forced movement, expropriation, ethnic policy & refugees in socialist societies.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with The Cosmist Insurrection, Inc. ™

The Cosmist Insurrection, Inc. ™ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @yungneocon

8 Oct
It’s interesting how an entire camp of philosophers always split people between those who think they’re elitist & reactionary. And those that think they’re radical, going all the way back to Plato & Aristotle.
Included in this list (i include some nonphilosophers for a reason) are Plato, Aristotle, Thucydides, Herodotus, Lucretius, Augustine, Maimonides, al Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Khaldun, Hobbes, Machiavelli, Spinoza, Nietzsche, Mendelssohn, Hegel, Burke, Arendt, Foucault etc
The reason this bifurcation emerges is that they often define themselves or implicitly position themselves in distinction with *both* the state/king, *and* the masses.
Read 49 tweets
8 Oct
Guattari died before Deleuze, that doesn’t make any sense, the second name is always supposed to live longer that’s just how it works
Marx & Engels, Bert & Ernie, Ebert & Roeper— the genius is supposed to burn bright and quickly, while the side kick is supposed to be a slow burn
Russell died after both Whitehead AND Wittgenstein, that’s how you know he’s the lesser mind
Read 5 tweets
8 Oct
You guys know guy don’t have to read books cover to cover right ?
I swear to God you will end up reading substantially more (and ironically finishing more books), if you stop caring about finishing books lol
For research, schoolwork, specialties, and so on, i mean, you should suck it up and read it cover to cover, but for general stuff you don’t need to worry
Read 5 tweets
7 Oct
The same people who argue today that trans rights protections will undercut women’s rights protections (what they call ‘sex based’ rights) would 50-100 years ago have argued women’s rights should be opposed because they conflict with labor rights
This isn’t really a hypothetical—the GOP, for ex, *did* support the ERA in hopes it would be used to undercut labor protections for women, children & men, and labor unions did oppose it. But this ultimately boils down to the contradictions inherent in legalistic frameworks.
In both of these cases, in their substantive content there’s no actual way to parse out gender emancipation from labor emancipation, let alone some forms of gender emancipation from other forms, as the British like to do.
Read 13 tweets
6 Oct
If we use the standard of ancient Athens as a model for democracy, then the UAE, is literally one of the most democratic countries in the world.
It’s easy to have a democracy when only 10% of your population are citizens.
Even the monarchy (whether the emirate or constitutional one), is misleading. A series of semi nomadic confederated tribes & clans, forming a meta network, based on alliance, creates a very large noble family that rules with the consent of the religious scholars
Read 5 tweets
6 Oct
When it comes to silly Hollywood style propaganda films, Mulan blows, and the much maligned (corny as shit) ‘Great Wall’ is just the better movie. Prettier, better action sequences, and it even dunks on America more effectively
As a propaganda film it’s just better. The Mulan remake is about what? Corny bromides on self sacrifice ? ‘The Great Wall’ ‘s thesis is that China is the last great bastion of civilization literally saving the world from the barbaric savages unleashed by human greed.
Secondarily its thesis is that people from the ‘West’ are greedy, malicious traitors, but that there are good men among them, and that if these men can suppress their mendacious profit seeking attitudes & learn China is their best friend, they can contribute to a common cause
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(