White Power USA: Video Report By Al Jazeera

[23]

What started me thinking was 8bitagent's recognition that even these Nazi skinheads have issues on which they actually make sense, so why not join forces on only those issues, but separate again when other issues are addressed? I personally would be prepared to work with a group that loathes Arabs and fanatically supports Israeli genocide, if the issue is garbage collection in a rat-infested neighborhood where we both reside, as long as we both agree about the garbage collection. I would be prepared to work with a fanatic anti-abortion group to force a corporation to clean up its toxic waste in my town. I would be willing to work with nazi skinheads that oppose any aggression against Iran. Or an anti-feminist group that supports BDS against Israel. On other issues, I would just as enthusiastically be on the opposing side, joining up with others who agree on those specific issues. But that's me, and that's my point: I know that you would not be willing to do that, and I can respect your right to make your own decisions as long as you can respect my right to make mine.

I think that perhaps the greatest weakness of the Left, not just but especially in America, is this fatal insistence on purity, this hysterical Manichean demonization and intolerance of opposing views, which typically leads to the bulk of its energies being spent on raging internal squabbles and the rejection of potentially useful strategic allies, while the other side proceeds to get into bed with all kinds of weirdos and freaks and gets things done. In effect, all the Left has accomplished is disqualifying itself from the game, trapping itself in a steadily shrinking and inaccessible internal world, leaving the field wide open for the Right to take over and literally become the only viable alternative. The Left's typical insistence on ideological orthodoxy and purity on even esoteric points of disagreement that have way too many of us at each others' throats, have led to its alienation from the masses of ordinary people whom it claims to care about and represent.

I keep thinking of a ship being steered by a drunken captain towards a pile of sharp rocks, while the passengers and crew waste their time and energy squabbling about who is best qualified to stop him.

I wholeheartedly agree, and have for the longest time. A coalition between nonduopoly forces, premised on the issues that we agree on, is the way to go.

These folks had the foresight to do that. Why can't we?



A former campaign manager for Ralph Nader, Kevin Zeese, once ran for the Maryland Senate seat too. He didn't succeed in getting the office, but he did succeed in showing us how a fusion effort is done:

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/2851

"His 'fusion campaign' linking members of the Green Party, Populist Party, and Libertarian Party is unique in Maryland history. These are, of course, a diverse lot; but Zeese offers a cross-ideological stance that upholds the core values of each group. He is an opponent of the Patriot Act, and an advocate for the basic freedoms that "unleash the creativity, entrepreneurship and greatness of Americans" championed by the Libertarians. His entire career has supported the calls for economic justice, closing tax loopholes, an end to corporate welfare and fairness for working families carried forward by Populists."

Kevin Zeese led the way; we now need to follow his lead.

[American Dream]

AlicetheKurious wrote:

I think that perhaps the greatest weakness of the Left, not just but especially in America, is this fatal insistence on purity, this hysterical Manichean demonization and intolerance of opposing views, which typically leads to the bulk of its energies being spent on raging internal squabbles and the rejection of potentially useful strategic allies, while the other side proceeds to get into bed with all kinds of weirdos and freaks and gets things done.

I do agree that sectarianism and partisan tendencies are a problem for "the Left". That said, I think there are problems with the reliance on this sort of critique in support of an argument in favor of alliances with Nazi groups.


AlicetheKurious wrote:

I personally would be prepared to work with a group that loathes Arabs and fanatically supports Israeli genocide, if the issue is garbage collection in a rat-infested neighborhood where we both reside, as long as we both agree about the garbage collection. I would be prepared to work with a fanatic anti-abortion group to force a corporation to clean up its toxic waste in my town. I would be willing to work with nazi skinheads that oppose any aggression against Iran. Or an anti-feminist group that supports BDS against Israel.

This does not represent a principle which can be broadly generalized, in my view. If a ship I was in were sinking I would work with racists to get our boat to shore. This does not mean that I think welcoming goose-stepping Nazis into the Palestinian solidarity movement makes much sense, nor do I agree that the racist/fascist campaign for entry into the conspiracy milieu, or into left/anarchist causes is something which we should support.

If a Nazi group offered to come into your house and care for your kids for free, would you accept their offer of "help"?

[23]

Thankfully, there are some folks are who gifted with foresight.

http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/C ... 8F-Feb-12-
Cynthia McKinney joins Ron Paul in a joint effort to bring together a new coalition‏, Feb 12, 2009

(excerpted)

On Feb, 12, 2009 Cynthia McKinney joined Ron Paul in the first ever joint coalition against the two party system. They were joined by other big politicians and spoke against the bailouts, war, and about a people's movement at the Transpartisan Citizens' Summit in Denver. In articles around the globe the idea of "Green Libertarianism" which has been becoming extremely popular amongst both parties in a effort to join together against the two major parties!

[American Dream]

We're in danger of veering off topic here, but I do think that left-leaning people and people from the Libertarian Right in the United States can find common cause on certain issues (War on Drugs, foreign interventions, etc.), there are some real limits to where principles can be bent. Social spending immigrant rights, corporate responsibility, economic controls and et cetera all come to mind.

More to the topic, Cynthia McKinney has a commendable side- standing up to the Israel Lobby, talking about 9/11 and COINTELPRO conspiracies, but also has a dissapointing side, as when she has gotten involved with far right conspiracy people who are unclear and unprincipled about racism, especially in regards to the struggle for Palestinian liberation.

[yathrib]

Before I would work with anyone, I would ask myself whether I could stand to live in a world where they called (so to speak) the shots. It isn't just a matter of getting something accomplished on a specific issue. You're giving that person or organization a platform, a set of talking points which they can use to reach and persuade other people. Call me old-fashioned, but I'm afraid that rules out Nazis for me.

[AlicetheKurious]

Before I would work with anyone, I would ask myself whether I could stand to live in a world where they called (so to speak) the shots. It isn't just a matter of getting something accomplished on a specific issue. You're giving that person or organization a platform, a set of talking points which they can use to reach and persuade other people. Call me old-fashioned, but I'm afraid that rules out Nazis for me.

I can really understand that, and that's why I specifically ruled out anything resembling a "merger" or combination of movements. Nobody's asking you to let anybody else "call the shots" -- on the contrary, by being out there and participating in the real world to support what you believe in and reject what you don't, you are actually making yourself relevant to the process of shaping the world that you live in. It actually is JUST a matter of getting something accomplished on a specific, important issue, nothing more. It's not such a revolutionary idea; it's the way things actually get done on the ground. The Left is constantly wailing over its impotence and increasing irrelevance and at the same time alienating any possible strategic allies, depriving itself of the resources they could contribute that could very well make the difference in accomplishing vital objectives. The other side certainly doesn't have such scruples, which at least partly explains its spectacular serial successes despite the utter inanity, if not insanity, of what passes for its vision.

To repeat: I'm talking about pragmatic and very limited strategic alliances between activist groups with very different ideologies, in order to achieve specific objectives that they happen to already share. In other words, take only what you need and ditch the rest. The same goes for them. NO 'bending of principles'; NO platform for 'talking points' that your side finds abhorrent. After all, just as one example, the Israeli far-right is happy to accept all the money and political support that the rapturous "christian" zionists send their way, but have zero tolerance for any missionary activity among Jews, in Israel or anywhere else (and yes, they still spit on Christians in Jewish Orthodox neighborhoods). For a more positive example, the emerging tactical global alliance between the secular, Leftist Hugo Chavez, the deeply religious Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the uber-pragmatic Chinese government not only strengthens all three, it is one of the few rays of hope we have in a rapidly darkening world. In addition to the obvious benefits that such ad hoc collaborations will bring to the Left, which I've mentioned before, are some that are not so obvious but no less crucial.

First, we'll finally get rid of the self-defeating habit of vicious in-fighting and shrill demands and counter-demands for purity that have only served to paralyse, drain and isolate Leftist groups while making the entire Left a laughing-stock of the Right. In other words, fragment all you want, cultivate your rarefied ideological dogma, preserve your absolute chastity, as long as you can be counted on to lend a hand when it counts, otherwise, you've counted yourself out.

A related benefit will be that it will be much harder for agents saboteurs to use the 'kiss of death' strategy to discredit any group that represents a grassroots-based threat to the PTB, like the one that was used to paint Ron Paul as some sort of white supremacist or nazi, not because of anything he has ever said or done, or that his campaign aimed to achieve, but because of some obscure, indirect link of someone associated with his campaign with a far-right publication. Something like that. Instead, we got sock-puppet Obama's glittery ersatz "hope" and "change" and a seamless continuation, even escalation, of the nightmare that Bush represented.

More to the topic, Cynthia McKinney has a commendable side- standing up to the Israel Lobby, talking about 9/11 and COINTELPRO conspiracies, but also has a dissapointing side, as when she has gotten involved with far right conspiracy people who are unclear and unprincipled about racism, especially in regards to the struggle for Palestinian liberation.

I think Cynthia McKinney 'gets it'. It has nothing to do with surrender, or 'selling out' or compromising any principles at all; on the contrary. It takes a lot of wisdom and 'savvy' and courage as well as a genuine appreciation of what's at stake, to fight effectively for what one knows is right, using every resource possible. The alternative, as far as I'm concerned, is craven hypocrisy, sacrificing everything that's really important for a flimsy illusion of "virtue" that means absolutely nothing.

[American Dream]

Alice, I understand your points above, and agree to a point. Would any of what you are saying make the welcoming a contingent of goose-stepping Nazis into an Palestine solidarity action seem at all helpful or desirable?

If so, I don't see it...

[AlicetheKurious]

Would any of what you are saying make the welcoming a contingent of goose-stepping Nazis into an Palestine solidarity action seem at all helpful or desirable?

If so, I don't see it...

I'll assume your question is made in good faith (a big assumption, given your past behaviour). So, no. If a group I was part of was organizing something in our name, I would not allow 'goose-stepping Nazis' to use it to promote their own agenda, nor to co-sponsor it. On the other hand, I would have no problem with anybody asking for information, or providing our group with relevant information, or with any individuals who would like to attend as part of the general public, as long as they were not disruptive or discourteous to anybody else there. If they wanted to hold their own event and needed written materials and other resources, I would be in favor of providing them. I wouldn't allow them to display their written materials at our event.

Would it be helpful? Yes, I think it would. I'm happy when anybody seeks to learn more about causes that I believe in. Grassroots activism is not about preaching to the choir, but about informing and mobilizing all kinds of people by focusing on issues that you can prove have a significant impact on their lives. Many people who hold racist beliefs are driven by ignorance and fear and even a need to feel part of something greater than themselves. I've probably had more direct experience with racism than you have, at least as a target; not being the type to shrink from a confrontation, I've had many successes in getting people to re-think their prejudices and even become quite valuable friends and allies. One of the most effective ways of doing that, in my experience, is by working together to accomplish common goals. With very rare exceptions, I recommend the approach of "hating the sin, but loving the sinner" as a way to offer people the alternative of a healthier and more intelligent way to think and be. It's very enriching for both sides, a win-win sort of thing.

[American Dream]

You seem to be missing my point- I'm talking about forming common cause with neo-Nazis in demonstrations and public activities in solidarity with the Palestinian People.

It should be obvious that a contingent of these people, visibly participating in all their racist/fascist glory would have a negative impact.

So how could it possibly help Palestinians, or the cause of Social Justice in general, to bring a visible contingent of Nazis into these sorts of political action?

[AlicetheKurious]

You seem to be missing my point...

If so, we're missing each other's point. AD, I have an exceptionally hard time communicating with you, after all this time I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that for whatever reason, it's futile to keep trying. It's not just a matter of disagreements, I think it's beyond that to very different ways of thinking and apprehending information. Also, your obsession with "Nazis" seems weird to me. I've been brainstorming in this thread, sparked by watching the video in the OP and at the same time tried to express my emerging thoughts as clearly as possible, but can't waste any more time and energy in yet another endless and tiring 'debate' with you that leads absolutely nowhere. Sorry. You have my permission to write me off.

[American Dream]

Well, I'll just say that not welcoming in a platoon of virulent Nazis into one's local Palestine solidarity committee seems like the logical thing to do, whether you're in North America or Egypt.

In fact, I'd daresay that only the Zionist Lobby, the Mossad, and others of that ilk would benefit from bringing in the Nazi crew.

This seems like basic common sense- not rocket science.

[23]

Citing extreme examples of "them"... is a familiar tactic by members of an "us" who are interested in maintaining the "them versus us" paradigm.

It's a familiar tactic for both sides of the aisle.

[American Dream]

Huh???

In this case a documentary was made about fascist/white supremacist types inside the United States. Clearly an important issue to those who who have been affected by the attacks and murders described.

It was Alice who raised the issue of collaborating with Nazis.

There really are extreme racists who want to be welcomed as "anti-Zionists" into Palestinian solidarity circles. It should be very, very obvious that they are not good for the cause. It shouldn't require too much effort to figure out why.

Less dramatically, but in a similar way, their efforts to enter and co-opt conspiracy circles, as well as anarcho-lefty circles should clearly be rejected, even though they might say they are comrades in our struggles.

Now as to anarcho-left people forming common cause with the Libertarian Right, that ought to be possible on certain issues such as anti-War and pro-Civil Liberties, as I previously indicated.

[AlicetheKurious]

There really are extreme racists who want to be welcomed as "anti-Zionists" into Palestinian solidarity circles. It should be very, very obvious that they are not good for the cause. It shouldn't require too much effort to figure out why.

Some people "who want to be welcomed as 'anti-zionists' into Palestinian circles" represent, in my view and experience, a far more insidious and destructive danger to "the cause", and unfortunately in their case it does require a great deal of effort to figure out. Usually the realization comes by taking an objective look at what their impact REALLY is, which exposes their priorities to be oddly incompatible with the image they so strenuously cultivate.

For example, you frequently find them singling out individuals who are outspoken on behalf of Palestinian rights, and making sneaky insinuations, frequently in the form of smears related to "anti-semitism". Typically rather than quote the target's own words, they'll paraphrase them in the most deliberately alarming way. If they still can't make it stick, they try guilt by the most tenuous associations. The whole purpose seems to be to divert everybody's energy towards defending themselves against such attacks and away from joining together to mobilize for effective action. Instead of participating in dialogue that promotes mutual understanding, informed, intelligent analysis and solidarity, these types consistently do the opposite, try to shut down thought, poison the atmosphere, stifle debate and create fear and mutual suspicion from within. With no apparent qualifications whatsoever, they appoint themselves as some sort of ever-vigilant thought police, hiding behind a phony badge of "activism" and loyalty to "the cause".

Goose-stepping nazis are relatively easy to expose, since the abhorrent aspects of their racist agenda tend to stick out like a sore thumb no matter how they try to hide them, because they are simply not compatible with the Palestinian struggle for human and legal rights and never have been, no matter how relentlessly the zionists try to pretend they are. On the contrary, it is the zionist agenda which most closely resembles the nazi world-view in theory and in practise, just as it always has from its earliest days, long before the racist zionist state began its genocidal project for lebensraum under the cloak of 'socialism' or whatever appealing banner they could use to hide their bloody work from the naive and uninformed.

So, AD, in response to your rather alarmist stance that 'goose-stepping nazis' represent a serious danger of infiltrating a movement that is currently comprised almost entirely of people who are not exactly (ahem!) nazis' preferred constituents, I would suggest that our wariness be better focused on the treacherous type of internal saboteur I've described above, the wolf in sheep's clothing, as it were.

[8bitagent]

Huh???

In this case a documentary was made about fascist/white supremacist types inside the United States. Clearly an important issue to those who who have been affected by the attacks and murders described.

It was Alice who raised the issue of collaborating with Nazis.

There really are extreme racists who want to be welcomed as "anti-Zionists" into Palestinian solidarity circles. It should be very, very obvious that they are not good for the cause. It shouldn't require too much effort to figure out why.

Less dramatically, but in a similar way, their efforts to enter and co-opt conspiracy circles, as well as anarcho-lefty circles should clearly be rejected, even though they might say they are comrades in our struggles.

Now as to anarcho-left people forming common cause with the Libertarian Right, that ought to be possible on certain issues such as anti-War and pro-Civil Liberties, as I previously indicated.

Hence why I've been asking this for years:

Why do so many white nationalists support 9/11 Truth?
9/11 Truth=being against wars. And if youre a racist, you want to be as many "brown people" bombed as possible, and youll want to blame 9/11 on "evil brown Muslims".

Who do so many white nationalists support Palestinian?
Again, if you think all non whites are mud races, why would you support brown people?

Why do they deny the holocaust? Wouldnt they be HAPPY 6 million Jews were murdered?
Isnt denying the holocaust akin to saying Hitler sucked, and couldnt even pull off one thing?

Why is Stormfront in love with conspiracy theories that claim the US is ran by fascist Nazis?
Wouldnt they support the Nazis?

Ugh...nothing makes sense.