NM's blog

On unbendingly holding the line On November 23, 1964, during a layover on his way back from Africa to the USA, Malcolm X spoke to and took questions from an audience at the Salle de la Mutualité in Paris. Among many other interventions and questions, an audience member presented a challenge to Malcolm: Mr. Malcolm, you want to form a movement which is extremist, and you have said that there must be a movement of Afro-Americans towards Africa—a philosophical, psychological and cultural return—but that struggle must take place in the United States. Consequently, in the event where the Afro-Americans’ demands are not satisfied, what means do they think of using to make an eventual return to Africa? After asking where the audience member was from and determining he was from the Senegal, Malcolm responds: Number one, if we are extremists we’re not ashamed of it. In fact, the conditions that our people suffer are extreme and an extreme illness cannot be cured with moderate medicine. We’re no...

Zionism is not a redeemable movement gone awry; it did not become an occupying power only in 1967 but is so inherently and inescapably. Its appetite for extreme violence and expansion is insatiable and facilitated without limits or red lines by what Sayegh calls its “vital and continuing association” with imperialism. Netanyahu is not an outlier or unrepresentative of the whole, but in fact the perfect embodiment of the racism, violence and expansionism that [Fayez] Sayegh understood was inherent to Zionism over half a century ago, traits that are supported by the overwhelming majority of the settler population.

An in-depth reading 1. Imperialism, racial capitalism, and settler colonialism 2. The logic of contemporary inter-imperialist competition 3. Political economy of a genocidal war 4. War liberalism and its enemies

A very good piece by Eyal Weizman .  I first knew Weizman when I read his 2007 book Hollow Land . Weizman is director of  Forensic Architecture at Goldsmiths, University of London “The circular logic of Zionist settler-colonialism: settlements are built to mark and protect the state’s border, but that makes them vulnerable to attack and so a buffer zone is established to protect them. Afterwards, this buffer zone is itself settled to mark and protect the newly expanded borders, at which point another buffer zone becomes necessary. In this manner vulnerability is produced and then mobilised in a feedback loop that the genocide scholar A. Dirk Moses has called ‘permanent security’. “The image of luxury towers constructed above mass graves, with tens of thousands presumably buried under the earthworks, embodies the logic of 21 st -century genocide. The Israeli government now hopes, in the words of the former minister Ron Dermer, that what ‘two years of war did not accomplish will...

The genocidal drive to 'exterminate all the brutes' is embedded deep in the US and European leaders’ psyches . Related Source: Internet Archive

Essays for a Free Palestine   (a free e-book) Related Free resources

  The Hundred Years' War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi

Support for the brutal, indiscriminate bombardment of Gaza finds its roots in the historical context of western settler-colonialism

Note that Avi Shlaim uses the mainstream description ‘the Palestinian-Israeli conflict’ although he asserts that Israel’s origin is settler colonialism. How was there ethnic cleansing, as Shlaim asserts, and one can still call it a conflict? Shlaim mentions how “ The last five Conservative prime ministers, starting with David Cameron, have all been staunch supporters of Israel.” Why, I wonder, did he exclude Blair’s New Labour, not to mention previous Labour governments? He also states something I find disturbing: “ The British mandate for Iraq, the French mandate for Syria, and the French mandate for Lebanon were all about preparing the local population for self-government.” ‘ An unbroken thread of duplicity, mendacity, chicanery and skulduggery’ Related It is not a conflict

Enduring entanglements

 From citrus production to historical memory

It’s a good summary. However, I think another dimension should have been added: the political economy and the geostrategic importance/role of Israel as an imperialist state allied with the major Western powers.  “ A whole lexicon of white liberal ideological vocabulary was marshalled over the decades to the task of defending the Zionist regime in its ongoing colonial war against the Palestinian people. White liberal (and conservative) apologists for Israel insist that what exists in Palestine is not a colonial war of conquest and a native anti-colonial liberation struggle, but rather a "conflict", a term which began to be used since the early 1920s at least by the Zionists and later by the British, and appears in earlier Zionist documents, presented as a neutral descriptor.” Why the West supports Israel’s ‘right to defend’ its apartheid regime Related From Balfour to Johnson

A tweet

 The opium of the Palestinian people