I am avoiding writing a long post on Gaza as many have said much better than me, but before I go onto this reflection: How can one not think a state like Israel, born of Bismarkian nationalism, would not act like a Bismarkian national state? And, if that, how can anyone defend that if they admit the horrors of Bismarkian nationalism elsewhere in the world? This seems to be the contradictions of liberal Zionism, and no attempt to emotionally black-mail people will eradicate that contradiction, no amount of comparative atrocity with Hamas will make that go away either.
Enough about that.
Lately, I have been re-reading Lenin’s Imperialism as well as critiques of it. This is have some discussions with Douglas Lain for either Diet Soap or maybe Pop the Left. I am not really writing on my opinions here today about Lenin’s Imperialism here as well as other models of it, just noting that I will be speaking on it. If you would like additional primer on this, see this free and legal downloadable book: Brewer’s “Marxist Theories of Imperialism: A Critical Survey”
In an appearance on the Youtube podcast, Entitled Thoughts, I recently discussed value theory and contemporary education:
(which is a part 2 of two. Part one is here.)
Related to one of my points about socialists trusting the state a bit too much that I make in the above can be seen in a quote from Lars T. Lih, ‘Bread and Authority in Russia’
“When the Petrograd crowds demanded bread, the instinctive response of both liberals and socialists was to call for enlistment of the vital forces of society–specifically for the transfer of control over Petrograd food supply to the elected city authorities. This action would not only ensure a better monitoring of distribution but also give those authorities the right to ask the population to go hungry in a disciplined manner (soznatel’ no golodat’).”
The state is not the society nor is it the final goal of a socialist struggle even if one rejects the anarchist total avoidance of state apparatuses.
Symptomatic Commentary 