what an exhausting meme.

comrades who have addressed it point by point: I admire your patience and generosity

I feel like the current Hamas charter, from 2017, makes it clear that their aims have changed and what their aims are, as do some statements in around 2005/2006 IIRC. Idk about them addressing 'allegations' per se.

Let him know that you think those anti-communist materials are wrong or misleading. Offer to explore some of these topics in depth with him in some format(s) that's agreeable to both of you (video, books, podcasts, whatever). Let him pick some sources, and you pick some sources, and then you both discuss them together.

Most people who are anti-communist are reflexively so, and have simply never heard a lot of key history. Just studying/exploring/discussing communism and its history can undo a lot of that.

As tempting as it might be, you don't have to go through everything in the propaganda they've sent you sentence by sentence and then debunk it. Just have a conversation with them about it and take a look at the real stuff together.

Made curious by some of the other comments here connecting that Redditor's abusive language and refusal to really say anything of substance beyond 'I don't like this' and Maoism, I just spent kind of a long time looking back through that person's comments trying to figure out what about their thinking is particularly Maoist, especially in the context of that series of insults they wrote on your post, which don't, to me, reveal any particular way of thinking so much as a temperament.

I did eventually find some Maoist language across their comments. They probably do self-identify as a Maoist or Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, though I didn't see a comment to that effect.

But what I noticed more was that pretty much their only mode of discussion was verbal combat, and maybe in some cases declarations on certain questions or definitions of terms. There wasn't a lot I could recognize as instruction, exploration, or listening, although I imagine they'd consider some of their declarations educational.

I'm tired. I can't think. I don't have a thesis here. But OP, I'm sorry that someone took it upon themselves to shit on your work instead of offering you feedback or simply saying nothing.

In the 'international community' (i.e., among certain world leaders), this still seems to be the consensus. The idea is motivated not so much by a thought of what is most just, but what is (supposedly) most possible to get both parties to agree to. And China is here trying simply to echo that consensus.

I think at this point, though, it's hard not to see that this 'consensus' is a zombie, and the territorial and political viability of such a solution is visibly, obviously dead. That does make renewed endorsements of a 'two-state solution’ untimely and even uncanny things to see, imo.

I agree that a single state covering the whole of mandatory Palestine seems more just. Palestinians deserve the right of return, full freedom of movement, and all national and civic rights, across the entire territory. I don't see how a multi-state solution facilitates that.

I also don't really know how to 'help' as an outsider, with a two-state solution. For a one-state solution, we have a model in the original anti-apartheid movement and an existing international movement in BDS. What would helping Palestinians 'win' a partitioned state even look like at this point?

Last week someone here called me a 'fucking worm' (repeatedly) and a 'little baby', and told me I should be 'erased from existence', along with a pile of other insults. (Someone else reported and the mods banned them, in addition to deleting the worst of their comments. Thank you.) That outburst was in response to me trying to voice what is, imo, another aspect of this same exact problem. That experience naturally got me thinking even more about this pattern, and my own relationship to it.

I've been cruel and domineering online before, especially in my late teens and early twenties. Honestly, I'm still trying to figure out how to be critical and steadfast in my criticism without ever being vicious.

Finding one's way to communism means, among other things, becoming more intimately aware of horrible, painful facts about imperialism past and present. There's also a real sense of alienation that comes with rejecting the dominant ideologies in one's own culture and society. I think that unfortunately often, among young men especially, 'conversion' to socialism does less to challenge certain patriarchal attitudes to violence and domination than to direct those attitudes to new targets.

It's perhaps an especially difficult thing when learning the real history of socialist revolutions involves coming to understand that revolutionary violence can be truly necessary, that 'terrorism' is a label that has been weaponized against righteous and successful liberation struggles, that failure to suppress counterrevolution has historically meant defeat at the hands of brutal, brutal, reaction, and so on.

Emphasis on the material as a historical force, as something which generates ideology as a kind of rationalization, can also be misused to downplay or turn away from the role of the subjective. If one is already so inclined, it is easy to dismiss any call to introspection as idealism— especially when one sees radlibs make such calls in bad faith and treat them as the limit of politics.

The road to socialist understanding for men and boys raised under patriarchy is riddled with pitfalls. The distance and abstractness of online interaction don't help here, either.

I made a comment about this on another post that's now unlinkable because the post has been deleted.

I suspect the quote is not just misattributed, but maliciously so, given its sudden appearance with a purportedly anti-Zionist framing, thus associating anti-Zionism with 'extermination'.

While Che never said that, the speech mentioned in the image here is real (though not given at the date mentioned in the image), and it does address colonialism. It even mentions Palestine! You can find the full text of it online.

The coverage about this is so infuriating.

1. Where is the US coverage? WTF?

2. I'm so fucking sick of the Zionist doomscreaming about the 'right to exist' when it actually means the right to enforce the racial makeup and racial hierarchy of a fucking ethnostate. This article is so transparent about spelling out what 'right to exist' means that it makes the editorial indulgence in this deceitful, delusional rhetoric even more jarring and irksome than it usually is.

In the documentary film 1948, about the Nakba (posted here a week or two ago), a Hagana or Palmach veteran (idr which) described the Palestinians who resisted their expulsion as totally irregular and noted that they 'weren't even defending from trenches or anything'— they weren't even using the basic, temporary fortifications that were a feature of modern warfare at the time.

What a total reversal! Today Israel struggles— with its (in)famously expensive, high-tech, 'futuristic' army— to penetrate the resistance's network of underground tunnels.

This kind of functional role of 'bad settlers' is well-documented in settler-colonialism, and there are even instances of leaders and government officials in the United States case admitting the necessity of 'unofficial' settler violence, from paramilitaries to illegal settlements and more.

Can any comrades with more recent contact with this material than I've had help me out with a citation on this, ideally 'from the horse's mouth'?

Thanks for writing out your thinking on this explicitly, and for inviting discussion in that way.

Public support in Israel for Israeli military operations is typically very high (70% or more, often even above 80%). The only sense in which those supporting massively disproportionate violence and indiscriminate killing of civilians are a minority is in terms of rhetorical style— not the substance of supporting the actual operations that kill people.

Moreover, many of the Israelis on TV 'frothing at the mouth' are current or former government officials. To characterize them as a 'tiny minority' is extremely misleading about their role in effecting this violence.

Israel is in fact among the most dangerous places, if not the most dangerous place, in the world to be Jewish, precisely because of the violence inherent in settler colonialism.

The idea that Israel serves as a safe haven for Jews has always played a justificatory role in Zionism but it has never been true.