EMPIRE, Hardt and Negri

Epigraph to Hardt and Negri's  Empire:

"Men fight and lose the battle, and the thing they fought for comes about in spite of their defeat, and then it turns out not to be what they meant, and other men have to fight for what they meant under another name." 

William Morris

Hardt and Negri's book is available for free online.

Here is a concise and insightful review by Gopal Balakrishnan.

The One State Solution

Saree Makdisi makes a compelling argument for a one state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Nakba Rountable

Roundtable debate on the meaning of the Nakba with Benny Morris, Saree Makdisi, and Norman Finkelstein

The Nakba

Joseph Massad: The Nakba was not a historical event- it is an ongoing- though unsuccessful- effort

Howard Zinn on Anarchism

Howard Zinn on Anarchism 

Obama and the Jewish Vote

Obama sits down with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic to wax poetic about the Zionist idea. In this interview it is clear that Obama identifies with idea of colonizing the Holy Land rather than the Afro-Asian struggle against colonialism. Penny Von Eschen's outstanding book Race Against Empire discusses how there was once a rich and vibrant tradition of anti-colonialism among African-American political activists. This tradition was strong in the 1930s and 40s. African American activists like Paul Robeson and WEB DuBois weren't really interested in "civil rights" as such, but were rather more interested in human rights (obviously the mantle that Malcolm X took up a few years later). The Black Freedom Struggle was only part and parcel of the larger global decolonization struggle- these activists identified with decolonization movts the world over, but particularly in places like India and South Africa. However, with 1947 came a huge shift. The Civil Rights Establishment accepted the Cold War consensus (that is that the US would support the remnants of colonial empires against decoloninzation movements) in exchange for greater liberties within the existing American framework. This helps explain the support of the early Civil Rights Establishment's for the Cold War crusade against communism in places like S.E. Asia.  

In this interview Barak demonstrates no concern for the hardships imposed on the Palestinian people by the Zionist project. He does state that Israeli settlement policies (colonization) are "not helpful" to the peace process, but is quick to reassure Atlantic readers that US support for Israel is non-negotiable, and that the US would not use any of its considerable leverage to compel the Israeli government to bring its policies inline with international law. 

Perhaps this is the dance you have to do if you want to be "leader of the free world" (sort of like wearing an American Flag lapel pin when the occasion calls), and that once he gets into office he'll have a truly transformative affect on American politics and society. I am not ruling this out- the popular pressure on him will continue to mount as economic conditions worsen - and he may respond with populist economic policies including a reduction of American overseas commitments - but at this point he seems pretty committed to the ideological project of preserving and maintaining American global hegemony (whatever the cost), and seems totally unaware that this is an unsustainable (not to mention undesirable ) objective (you can't have Guns and Butter- just ask LBJ...).

I'll "trust" that Obama represents "change we can believe in"- and enthusiastically support him in his struggle against Hillary and McCain-  but I think I'll steal a page from the Gipper and insist on "verifying"--- when you've got a senate voting record as ugly as Obama's, trust can really only carry you so far.  

Here the Huffington Post suggests that Obama might not even need the the Jewish Vote. Demographically the 6.4 million American Jews don't seem to be all that significant (even if there are significant voting blocs in key states like Florida)- especially given that Obama is employing a new "50 -state strategy" that in some ways bypasses the old party strong holds. The same hold true for his fundraising strategy - he has demonstrated an ability to attract massive financial support and doesn't seem to be dependent on "Jewish donors." And the power of AIPAC is overstated, sure it can wield a lot of influence over the Congress- but a president can easily bypass the lobby and bring an agenda straight to the people. It seems the more fundamental issue is not Israel as such, but Israel as a symbol of American nationalism. A symbol of strength and continued expansion in the post-Vietnam era when apparitions of American hegemonic decline haunt all policymakers. Unconditional ("non-negotiable") support for Israeli expansion has become code for continuity with the the 200+ year American tradition of frontier expansion. By supporting Israeli colonization efforts US policymakers signal their own commitment to  "strength" in the face of "barbarism." It seems to me that a radical redefinition of the terms of American nationalism is in order if we're to see a truly transformative change in American politics and society (I don't think that post-nationalism is viable at this point).  One way to do this might be to begin to articulate with the Israeli peace movement- and its supporters here in the US (Jewish and non-Jewish alike). The silence of the American Left on the question of Palestine has a paralyzing effect. Until we're ready to recognize Palestine's "right to exist" and take the steps to make it a reality- we'll continue to get run over by R. Pearl, D. Feith, and the like. 

Hillary: The Southern Strategy Lives

Clinton: "Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, [and] whites [who] had not completed college were supported me." 

The Bush Doctrine in Lebanon

Angry Arab comments on the reemergence of Civil War in Lebanon. 

The End of Empire

Kevin Phillips discusses his new book Bad Money on DN!. 

He argues that national economic figures are unreliable. In his words the government has "cooked the books" to produce an "unrealistic view of where the economy is." For example, the Govt pretends that the annual inflation rate (the rate at which prices increase/ the value of money declines) is in the 2-3 percent range. It does this by excluding the "volatile categories of food and energy" from the CPI (consumer price index- the basket of goods used to determine the rate of inflation.) He describes this methodology as "nonsense" designed to manufacture consent and camoflouge a broken economic system.  In reality the actual rate is in the 6-9 percent range. That is, its in 1970s territory. This also creates this the illusion of GDP growth. When you factor in an accurate picture of inflation, the US economy has been in recession/ depression for over a decade.  

Fourth Generation Warfare

William S. Lind on "Fourth Generation Warfare" in Iraq (CP)

Spectacle '08

Does DC matter? Joshua Frank in CP:

Conspiracy Theory

Hakim Bey: An Anarchists' perspective on the The Logic of Conspiracy Theory.

Bey may be on to something when he argues that historians must take conspiracy theories seriously -- virtually all regimes in the post-1945 Mid East came to power through conspiracy. But he is also right to remain attuned to chaos in the unfolding of historical processes- that is chaos theory probably brings us much closer to an accurate representation of the past than conspiracy theory. the question is, should the "vanguard" simplify for the "masses."  I'm not so sure, it seems that a historian worth his salt should be able to capture the dialectic between conspiracy (the power of conscious intent) and chaos (the law of unintended consequences) -- Marx set the bar pretty high in this regard: "Men make history..."

Likewise, I am less optimistic regarding the prospects of conspiracy as an organizational form for the radical Left. its seems that a small group of activists operating in secret is relatively easy to smash. Whereas a broad based social movement operating in the open and making full use of modern communications technologies represents a much more formidable political force (not to mention that a broad based social movement is more prone to taking democratic form- its a pretty small leap from vanguardism to authoritarianism). 

William Blum: The CIA "Killing Hope"

William Blum, author of Killing Hope discusses CIA infiltration of the Ecuadorian intelligence services and President Rafael Correa reform efforts. 

Iran and Central Asian Grand Strategy

Pepe Escobar offers his perspective on the the view of American Empire from Iran (TD). He describes a "Look East" (India, Pakistan, and China) Iranian foreign policy as a response to post-9/11 US military encirclement (new bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Central Asia, and the Gulf).

C. Johnson and the "Intellectual" Origins of American Empire

Chalmers Johnson discusses the history and politics of the RAND corp at TD. Though he does not write in a Saidian vocabulary- Johnson's analysis of RAND as a handmaiden to American power dovetails quite nicely with Edward Said's legendary analysis of the relationship between power and knowledge in his 1978 book, Orientalism. However, Johnson is unwilling to concede that what RAND produces can actually granted the ontological status of "knowledge." For Johnson, what RAND produces is much more akin to propaganda for the powerful.