LEFT CURVE No. 33 EDITORIAL

A persistent myth of modernity (techno-scientific capitalism)— which gradually displaced pre-modern “universal substance” with an anthropocentric historical contingency in the here and now—, since its inception in Western Europe some half a millennium ago, is that the constant creation of “the new” has become the driving purpose of history (telos)—ideologically expressed as an unending “progress and liberation of the individual from traditional and natural constraints.” This remains so today, irrespective of the “post-structural/post-modern” critique of the last three decades or so, that proclaimed the end of all “grand narratives.” For, while this critique can also be seen as but another incarnation of a “new”, it has by now gone out of (academic) fashion and the “grand narrative” of “the new” remains. It is interesting to note that the time-frame of the “post-structural/post-modern” ascendancy neatly corresponds with the period of the dismantling of the old industrial welfare state, deregulation of markets, or what has most recently been labeled as “free-market fundamentalism.” And now, with the onset of the current financial and economic meltdown, this “material base” has also come to an end: i.e., the deregulated, “post-industrial new economy” with its consumer driven, debt-based, packaged speculative derivatives and “complex financial instruments” removed from the “real economy.” The accelerating global financial crises and deepening global Depression is leaving the ruling elite scrambling to save capitalism through the actions by the previously discredited interventionist State, while promulgating “new” justifications for the ruling order. So, in the U.S. at least, another “new” is paraded out: a smooth, very sophisticated PR campaign that’s all about “change,” “a new beginning,” “yes, we can!” This is so, irrespective of the irritating facts (for its supporters) that much of the personnel in the new Obama administration are but recycled Clintonites and even Bush leftovers, whose policies continue, barely skipping a beat, the same agenda of maintaining U.S. global economic and military global hegemony—as was the case with the Bush administration (for that matter, every U.S. administration since WWII), albeit in a “populist”, “nicer” and cliched “inspirational” style. So, the goal of the war in Iraq remains the same: propping up a puppet regime loyal to the U.S.; the “war on terrorism” continues as before, while the war in Afghanistan has been accelerated and broadened to Pakistan. Pre-emptive killings by robots (“drones”) have increased; secret surveillance of U.S. citizens reaffirmed; “renditions” to secret CIA detention centers overseas defended. The servile docility to the Zionist Lobby and unquestioned acceptance of Israel’s genocidal agenda against the Palestinians also remain the same. In the meantime, much of the deep-seated antagonism that the thoroughly discredited Bush regime aroused has been, by and large, dissipated and brought under control. Notwithstanding, we are facing some kind major turning point, and the potential for a radical opening is brewing.

Our first article, “Radical-Leftist Strategy: Propositions for Discussion,” lays out salient issues that anyone seriously wishing to see the development of a real alternative to neo-liberal capitalist hegemony needs to grapple with. The author, on the one hand, underscores the importance of Sun-Tze’s dictum of the need to “know the enemy”—which is clearly identified as the capitalist system as a whole; while on the other hand, the article stresses the necessity of critically confronting the failures of the revolutionary tradition—without apologetics or blanket dismissal. In the process, the article, aiming to evoke thoughtful discussion on the points raised, covers many of the important issues that we face.

We also feature writings on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (pp.18-41), which was again brought to the fore of world attention with the brutal Israeli attack against the blockaded, caged Palestinians in Gaza. Of special note is “Road Map to Genocide” by A. Clare Brandabur, which forcefully reveals just why the mid-east conflict has been so intractable. As she argues, the underlying goal of Israel has always been the expropriation of all of historic Palestine, in an unrelenting entho-genocidal campaign to expropriate the land, drive out as many of its original inhabitants as possible, and subjugate whoever is left into corralled zones under the military and economic control of Israel. Ms. Brandabur’s argument is clear and convincing, which hopefully will open previously prejudiced eyes. Another aspect of the Zionist agenda has been the sowing of deep rifts within Israeli society between the ruling elite European settlers (Ashkenazi) and Jews that came from Arab or Muslim countries (Mizrahim). This issue is practically unknown in the U.S., so the article by Reuven Abarjel and Smadar Lavie, “A Year into the Lebanon2 War: NGO-ing Mizrabi-Arab Paradoxes, and a One State Vision for Palestine/Israel,” is particularly welcome. Though originally written in August 2007 for the anniversary of the Lebanon War of 2006, the authors tell us that their thesis is “even more pertinent” now, in light of the attack on Gaza. I also wish to refer the reader to Moslih Kanaaneh’s introduction to his book, Talking Stones and Yearning Ruins, which documents, visually and verbally, the remains of 50 Palestinian communities destroyed in 1948; Mahmoud Darwish’s poem, Another Day Will Come; the young Palestinian student, Marian G. Saadeh’s account of her growing up under occupation in Bethlehem; and Etel Adnan’s story, Radio. All in all, these selections provide a view of the desperate plight of the Palestinians that has little or no airing in western public discourse—particularly in the U.S.

Since the disintegration of the “Soviet Bloc” and the need for a “new enemy” to feed the structurally entrenched “military-industrial complex,” the geo-political focus of the U.S. and much of the EU shifted to the mid-east and west Asia. This has proven to be a more viable strategic focus than the previous attempt to justify military action on grounds of “defending human rights,” as was the case during the ’90. The “war on terrorism” declared by Bush after 9/11 fit the bill perfectly: Not only has it served as an excuse to aggressively (and pre-emptively) secure a foothold in the most likely sites for the inevitable future “resource wars”, but this “war” also dovetailed nicely with the Israeli plan to finally liquidate the “Palestinian problem” by declaring it to be part and parcel of the “war on terrorism.” One of the unexpected consequences of the U.S. assault was the eventual realization that the invaders were ignorant of the culture of the region. With the growth of the Iraqi and Afghanistan insurgencies, the arrogant attempt to force “U.S.-style democracy of individual freedom and free markets” had to be revised. The article, “Bridging the Cultural Gap—One Brigade at a Time,” by Nemal Sadat, provides an example of the “cultural sensitivity” programs initiated by the U.S. military as a way to correct their initial misjudgments. Muhammad M. Butt’s story, “A Fallen Star,” well illustrates the cultural conflicts contact with the West has produced—in this case, in Pakistan.

After the initial outpouring of millions of people around the world in opposition to the invasion of Iraq, much of the anti-war movement dissipated. A notable exception has been in Ireland. This, no doubt, is due to the Irish being the only “western” people with a long history of colonial occupation and oppression. Harry Browne’s article, “Shannon Airport: The War Stops Here,” is a good example of the sustained anti-war efforts in Ireland. Not coincidentally, the strongest support in the West for the Palestinian cause is also in Ireland.

Since the launching of the “war on terror,” there has been ongoing speculation that “Black-Ops” programs within secret intelligence agencies may be involved in instigating terrorist attacks. The likelihood that there might be more to such views than the paranoid reactions of “conspiracy theorists” is illustrated by Ronald Bleier’s article, “The Security Services: Agents of Terror?: Review of Annie Macon’s, Spies, Lies & Whistleblowers: M15, M16 and the Shayler Affair.”

As usual, there is more good work in this issue than I have room to comment on, so I will just refer to a few more articles.

With the consolidation of the former “socialist countries” of Eastern Europe firmly within the neo-liberal system, simmering dissatisfaction against the new order have become more and more evident. The wide-ranging article by G. M. Tamás, “Counter-Revolution Against A Counter-Revolution,” presents a valuable analysis into the wherewithal behind the instability of the region, as well as providing valuable insights concerning the shortcomings of the western “anti-globalization” movements. An authentic, working-class based Left, which counters capitalism with concrete alternative State forms, has yet to emerge, in the West or in the East, concludes Tamás.

P. J. Laska’s article, “The Anti-imperialist Ecology of the Dao De Jing: An Ancient Perspective on the Current Global Crisis of Capitalism,” provides an excellent analysis of an ancient counter-tradition to the prevailing modern paradigm. Laska comments that the Dao De Jing can be of aid, “…in the quest for a way out of the blind alley [of the] violent and ecologically destructive capitalist world-order. Reconnecting to the counter-tradition of past struggles against imperialism may prove to be of benefit in developing alternatives to modes of thinking that still consider the domination of nature to be a rational thought and a coherent strategy of survival.” Similar themes of the importance of restoring a balanced metabolism with nature inform “Meltdown,” a finely written meditation on global warming, by Mary Reynolds Thompson and, Jason Miller’s interview with Paul Watson, “Sticking it to the Man, 21st Century Style...”, which addresses the wanton slaughter of sea mammals.

A promising recent development has been the sharp turn against Yankee domination in Latin America. The first hand account by Clifton Ross, “The Revolution will not Be Fumigated: Cultivating Revolution in Latin America,” provides a valuable report from the region. A good example of the deleterious effect of the U.S. “War on Drugs” in Latin America is Heather Anholt’s article, “Coca and Cocaine: The Difference Between Source and Cause.”

E. San Juan, Jr.’s, “Global English vs. Filipino; or ‘Sneaking into the Philippines by the Rivers of Babylon’: An Intervention into the Language Question,” is a noteworthy contribution to the understanding of the hegemonic role of the English language in the Globalized capitalist system, with particular reference to the Filipino language in relation to the Filipino struggle for self-determination. E. San Juan, Jr. has been an invaluable contributor and Associate of this journal since our second issue. As such we are pleased to publish a much deserved appreciation of his decades-long, tireless work: “E. San Juan, Jr.: The Return of the Transformative Intellectual,” by Peter McLaren.

Also worthy of note is the critical appraisal of the unique work of the French thinker, Paul Virilio: “Toward a Theory of Claustropolitanism: Jacking into the Trajectories of the Catastrophic,” by Steve Redhead.

Lastly I want to mention, “Entropic Complex Apocalypse Dialectic,” by Ted Dace, which presents some original theorizing that refers to recent complexity theories and in some ways echoes similar themes as the aforementioned article by P. J. Laska—viz. the importance of abandoning the dominant modern (capitalist) anthropomorphic paradigm by realizing that the whole cosmos emanates from immanent forces whose attempted subjugation by human will, sooner or later, leads to disaster. —the Editor

Correction:In the “Contributors” page of our last issue, (#32) we stated that, “Uri Davis is an Israeli anthropologist.” On seeing this entry, Dr. Davis sent us an email in which he wrote: “I am NOT an ‘Israeli anthropologist.’ I am an anthropologist, citizen of the alleged constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom and the apartheid State of Israel. Should you require a slightly shorter label: I am a Palestinian-Hebrew anthropologist of dual Israeli and UK citizenship." - Ed.