“The classical example for all times,” says Junius, referring to 1793, “is the Great French Revolution.” From all this, he draws the following conclusion: “Century-old experience thus proves that it is not a state of siege, but heroic class struggle, which rouses the self-respect, the heroism and the moral strength of the masses of the people, and serves as the country’s best protection and defence against the foreign enemy.”

Junius’ practical conclusion is this:

“Yes, it is the duty of the Social-Democrats to defend their country during a great historical crisis. But the grave guilt that rests upon the Social-Democratic Reichstag group lies precisely in that, in solemnly declaring, on August 4, 1914, that ‘In the hour of danger we will not leave our fatherland unprotected,’ they at the same time belied those words. They did leave the fatherland unprotected in the hour of greatest peril. For their first duty to the fatherland in that hour was to show the fatherland what was really behind the present imperialist war; to tear down the web of patriotic and diplomatic lies with which this encroachment on the fatherland was enmeshed; to proclaim loudly and dearly that both victory and defeat in the present war are equally fatal for the German people; to resist to the last the throttling of the fatherland by declaring a state of siege; to proclaim the necessity of immediately arming the people and of allowing the people to decide the question of war and peace; resolutely to demand a permanent session of the people’s representatives for the whole duration of the war in order to guarantee vigilant central over the government by the people’s representatives, and the control over the people’s representatives by the people; to demand the immediate abolition of all restrictions on political rights, for only a free people can successfully defend its country; and, finally, to oppose the imperialist war programme, which is to preserve Austria and Turkey, i.e., perpetuate reaction in Europe and in Germany, with the old, truly national programme of the patriots and democrats of 1848, the programme of Marx, Engels and Lassalle: the slogan of a united, Great German republic. This is the banner that should have been unfurled before the country, which would have been a truly national banner of liberation, which would have been in accord with the best traditions of Germany and with the international class policy of the proletariat.... Hence, the grave dilemma—the interests of the fatherland or the international solidarity of the proletariat—the tragic conflict which prompted our parliamentarians ‘with a heavy heart’ to side with the imperialist war, is purely imaginary, it is bourgeois nationalist fiction. On the contrary, there is complete harmony between the interests of the country and the class interests of the proletarian International, both in time of war and in time of peace; both war and peace demand the most energetic development of the class struggle, the most determined fight for the Social-Democratic programme.”

This is how Junius argues. The fallacy of his argument is strikingly evident, and since the masked and avowed lackeys of tsarism, Messrs. Plekhanov and Chkhenkeli, and perhaps even Messrs. Martov and Chkheidze may gloatingly seize upon Junius’ words, not for the purpose of establishing theoretical truth, but for the purpose of wriggling, of covering up their tracks and of throwing dust in the eyes of the workers, we must in greater detail elucidate the theoretical source of Junius’ error.

He proposes to “oppose” the imperialist war with a national programme. He urges the advanced class to turn its face to the past and not to the future! In France, in Germany, and in the whole of Europe it was a bourgeois-democratic revolution that, objectively, was on the order of the day in 1793 and 1848. Corresponding to this objective historical situation was the “truly national,” i.e., the national bourgeois programme of the then existing democracy; in 1793 this programme was carried out by the most revolutionary elements of the bourgeoisie and the plebeians, and in 1848 it was proclaimed by Marx in the name of the whole of progressive democracy. Objectively, the feudal and dynastic wars were then opposed with revolutionary democratic wars, with wars for national liberation. This was the content of the historical tasks of that epoch.

At the present time the objective situation in the biggest advanced states of Europe is different. Progress, if we leave out the possibility of temporary steps backward, is possible only towards socialist society, only towards the socialist revolution. Objectively, the imperialist bourgeois war, the war of highly developed capitalism, can, from the standpoint of progress, from the standpoint of the progressive class, be opposed only with a war against the bourgeoisie, i.e., primarily civil war between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie for power; for unless such a war is waged serious progress is impossible; and after that—only under certain special conditions—a war to defend the socialist state against bourgeois stares is possible. That is why those Bolsheviks (fortunately, very few, and we quickly handed them over to the Prizyv-ists) who were ready to adapt the point of view of conditional defence, i.e., of defending the fatherland on the condition that there was a victorious revolution and the victory of a republic in Russia, were true to the letter of Bolshevism, but betrayed its spirit: 48 for being drawn into the imperialist war of the advanced European Powers, Russia, even under a republican form of government, would also be waging an imperialist war!

In saying that class struggle is the best means of defence against invasion, Junius applied Marxian dialectics only halfway, taking one step on the right road and immediately deviating from it. Marxian dialectics call for a concrete analysis of each specific historical situation. That class struggle is the best means of defence against invasion is true both with regard to the bourgeoisie, which is overthrowing feudalism, and with regard to the proletariat, which is overthrowing the bourgeoisie. Precisely because it is true with regard to every form of class oppression, it is too general, and therefore, inadequate in the present specific case. Civil war against the bourgeoisie is also a form of class struggle, and only this form of class struggle would have saved Europe (the whole of Europe, not only one country) from the peril of invasion. The “Great German Republic” had it existed in 1914-16, would also have waged an imperialist war.

Junius came very close to the correct solution of the problem and to the correct slogan: civil war against the bourgeoisie for socialism; but, as if afraid to speak the whole truth, he turned back to the fantasy of a “national war” in 1914, 1915 and 1916. Even if we examine the question from the purely practical and not theoretical angle, Junius’ error remains no less clear. The whole of bourgeois society, all classes in Germany, including the peasantry, were in favour of war (in all probability the same was the case in Russia—at least a majority of the well-to-do and middle peasantry and a very considerable portion of the poor peasants were evidently under the spell of bourgeois imperialism). The bourgeoisie was armed to the teeth. Under such circumstances to “proclaim” the programme of a republic, a permanent parliament, election of officers by the people (the “armed nation”), etc., would have meant, in practice, “proclaiming” a revolution (with a wrong revolutionary programme!).

In the same breath Junius quite rightly says that a revolution cannot be “made.” Revolution was on the order of the day in 1914–16, it was hidden in the depths of the war, was emerging out of the war. This should have been “proclaimed” in the name of the revolutionary class, and its programme should have been fearlessly and fully announced: socialism is impossible in time of war without civil war against the arch-reactionary, criminal bourgeoisie, which condemned the people to untold disaster. Systematic, consistent, practical measures should have been thought out, which could be carried out no matter what the rate of development of the revolutionary crisis might have been, and which would be in line with the maturing revolution. These measures are indicated in the resolution of our Party: 1) voting against war credits; 2) violation of “civil peace”; 3) creation of an illegal organisation; 4) fraternisation among the soldiers; 5) support to all the revolutionary actions of the masses.[1] The success of all these steps inevitably leads to civil war.

The promulgation of a great historical programme was undoubtedly of tremendous significance; not the old national German programme, which became obsolete in 1914-16, but the proletarian international and socialist programme. “You, the bourgeoisie, are fighting for plunder; we, the workers of all the belligerent countries, declare war upon you for socialism”—this is the sort of speech that should have been delivered in the Parliaments on August 4, 1914, by Socialists who had not betrayed the proletariat, as the Legiens, Davids, Kautskys, Plekhanovs, Guesdes, Sembats, etc. betrayed it.

Evidently Junius’ error is due to two mistakes in reasoning. There is no doubt that Junius is decidedly opposed to the imperialist war and is decidedly in favor of revolutionary tactics; and all Messrs. Plehhanovs’ gloating over Junius’ “defencism” cannot wipe out this fact. Possible and probable calumnies of this kind must be answered promptly and bluntly.

But, firstly, Junius has not completely rid himself of the “environment” of the German Social-Democrats, even the Lefts, who are afraid of a split, who are afraid to follow revolutionary slogans to their logical conclusions.[2] This is a mistaken fear, and the Left Social-Democrats of Germany must and will rid themselves of it. They will do so in the course of the struggle against the social-chauvinists. The fact is that they are fighting against their own social-chauvinists resolutely, firmly and sincerely, and this is the tremendous, the fundamental difference in principle between them and Messrs. Martovs and Chkheidzes, who, with one hand (à la Skobelev) unfurl a banner bearing the greeting, “To the Liebknechts of All Countries,” and with the other hand tenderly embrace Chkhenkeli and Potresov!

Secondly, Junius apparently wanted to achieve something in the nature of the Menshevik “theory of stages,” of sad memory; he wanted to begin to carry out the revolutionary programme from the end that is “more suitable,” “more popular” and more acceptable to the petty-bourgeoisie. It is something like the plan “to outwit history,” to outwit the philistines. He seems to say: surely, nobody would oppose a better way of defending the real fatherland; that real fatherland is the Great German Republic, and the best defence is a militia, a permanent parliament, etc. Once it was accepted, that programme would automatically lead to the next stage-to the socialist revolution.

Probably, it was reasoning of this kind that consciously or semi-consciously determined Junius’ tactics. Needless to say, such reasoning is fallacious, Junius’ pamphlet conjures up in our mind the picture of a lone man who has no comrades in an illegal organisation accustomed to thinking out revolutionary slogans to their conclusion and systematically educating the masses in their spirit. But this shortcoming—it would be a grave error to forget this-is not Junius’ personal failing, but the result of the weakness of all the German Lefts, who have become entangled in the vile net of Kautskyist hypocrisy, pedantry and “friendliness” towards the opportunists. Junius’ adherents have managed in spite of their isolation to begin the publication of illegal leaflets and to start the war against Kautskyism. They will succeed in going further along the right road.

Leading Performance By a Male Actor: Vin Diesel-- Babylon AD

Performance by an actor in a supporting role: Burt Reynolds-- In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

Performance by a leading actress: Kim Kardashian-- Disaster Movie

Performance by a supporting actress: Leelee Sobieski-- In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

Animated Feature of the Year: 10,000 B.C.

Best Foreign Language Feature: One Missed Call

Best Picture: In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

>> ^mharvey42:
WP is a legal and ethical munitions choice.


Sieg Heil, motherfucker.

>> ^Retroboy:
... and here's Godwin.


Lol, so it's okay to use "the Holocaust" and accusations of anti-semitism to shout down criticism of Israel, but not okay to liken them to a regime who's actions they seem determined to emulate?

Typical double standard. It's not okay when the German's did it, it's okay when Israel does.


I think it's important to point out here that we don't know the circumstances behind this location's attack. Was the Israeli soldier who pushed the button operating on his own judgement, or was it ordered by an Israeli commander who knew the nature of that location? Was it fog of war, or a known free ticket to kill third-party children?


Does it matter? The US has been lobbing rockets around Iraq (oh gee lookit, a foreign country) for a good long time now, if an Iraqi bombed a US school you guys would lose your fucking minds no matter what the "extenuating" circumstances were...


Yes, I am absolutely in agreement that it shouldn't have happened. But the majority of the reaction seems to be pointing the finger at the entirety of Israel. Their military is invading Palestine, but was it considered acceptable to incur third-party casualties such as this in the process as part of collateral damage? If so, they should be vilified for it, but if they took as many precautions as possible to avoid things like this happening, the reaction should be less.


No, it's not, it's pointed at the leadership of Israel. I think a lot of Israeli's will be disgusted by their government's actions but they can't effect change. I think this will be a national shame for Israel for a long time to come.

As bad as it is, the situation in Palestine is NOTHING compared to what Jews suffered during World War 2. This is not even a tiny fraction of the systematic extermination of millions that occurred in that event. Israel might want to remove all of Palestine, but they're not acting on it in the same way the Germans did.


You live in a dream world...

Norwegian People's Aid
http://www.npaid.org/?module=Articles;action=Article.publicShow;ID=7118

We can say the situation is extremely difficult but this is not the case; actually no one in the world could imagine how the current situation is and the depression people here are living in; we are now very close to re-experience the living of primitives in the Stone Age.

Talking about living under strict siege and deprivation from electricity, water, cooking gas, fuel, flour etc., which are the main essential materials for surviving, is common and occupying minds of several households. Some people are short of water for several days continuously.

What are we going to use for food next few days after gas or flour runs out and bakeries are closed. Are we going to continue to mill the animal fodder and make bread ; why not as we are forced to do so!

Since 5th November till this day 1st December the number of truckloads were less than 150 for the whole period compared to average of 123 truckloads/day during October 2008. International Agencies and diplomatic missions were denied entering the Gaza Strip as well as media including our Country Director Kirsten Belck-Olsen.

Our office in Gaza, staff and partners are facing serious challenges to implement activities as initially planned and they are moving around to find source of power to accomplish them in a different locations and different time, and this is the case for all in the Gaza Strip.

Palestinians people are paying very high price due to factors beyond their control, but their first choice is to be one entity to be able to obtain, defend and protect their rights.

Despite the internal political dispute among the Palestinian factions, Israeli occupation is the main reason for the suffering of Palestinians by preventing humanitarian aid and blocking all crossings sending Gazans to their certain destiny in a modern way.

Mahmoud Hamada
NPA-Palestine
Written by candle light

stupid fucks. reminds me of this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcCFJAfLTJE
in which Radovan Karadzic and russian pro-serbian writer/poet Limonov look down on a dying Sarajevo in the midst of the long, sad siege of this once beatiful and vibrant multicultural capital, Karadzic explaining some bullshit reasons for the war they started, Limonov eating it up like a child and at the end even firing down on the city from a heavy caliber machine gun. wartime propaganda at its worst

Israel laying an 18 month long siege of Gaza has provoked enough of a military (not terrorist) response from Hamas to be able to send in the F16s and bomb the shit out of the Palestinians, whist keeping their American funding.

This is exactly the reason I was sickened when Obama was in Israel giving speeches about fighting terrorism.

There have been huge pro-palestinan protests and demos in the UK in the last week, I have yet to see a single one of them be reported on any of the TV news channels.

I'm not sure that fire forensics guidelines require investigators to look specifically for Thermite when specifying "accelerants" but I'm not a fireman, It's work looking into.

Incidentally, 2500° C = 4532° F.

3: I will encamp against you all around;
I will encircle you with towers
and set up my siege works against you.

4: Brought low, you will speak from the ground;
your speech will mumble out of the dust.
Your voice will come ghostlike from the earth;
out of the dust your speech will whisper.

Isaiah 29 (New International Version)

Hello, my name is youtube.. stop stealing my comments. It's copyright infringement!

>> ^smb3madness:
What a lamer idiot. "Interracial marriages", what the FUCK?!?! "Sieg heil", are you a nazi??? Races as in colors don't exist! It's all homo sapiens... I hope that prick dies, he's a disgrace for the whole humanity.

>> ^dead_tofu:
hamas fights for the palestinians, they are extreme, but so would some hillibillies in texas be after 60 years of chinese-occupation, trust me. Iran takes their side, there is no need to explain that to anyone, even i almost take their side. i´ve known palestinians thru my life, i can tell you if someone mistreated my people as the isrealis have treated them, i would fxxking ?`Ü#+´?§/%$%&/$$%§$§$6..........hamas says one thing, the president of iran has a solution http://www.videosift.com/video/American-propaganda-at-its-bestand-wins-an-Emmy
about the rants, they need an enemy to stay in power, just like the leaders of the u.s and the u.s.s.r during the cold war, were they gonna bomb each other,no! but it sure made it easier for them to stay in power when the had foreign enemies. leave the middle east alone and they leave you alone. look and holland, whores legally on every corner and even drugs legal,oh, and women gained equal rights there earlier than in the u.s why are the not under siege from the wrath of the middle east?
the holocaust with a capital h, i think he is just playing around technial stuff. hitler did give jews the chance to leave germany before they shipped them to camps, until ´41 or ´42 i think, not sure, but therefore it can not be called a genocide, or a holocaust,technically, some professor once said or something,im getting tired........ hey, the holocaust thing, does that just include the jews, like the 100s of grey stones in downtown berlin today? what about the all the politacal prisoners,mental-folks,gays......thats it , i´ve lost it finally....... gone to bed.


He planed to take over the world, isn't them leaving a moot point when you have taken over the world? His ideas of genocide, like you point out, wasn't only jew but anyone that didn't fit in with his idea of the uberman. Genocide was his calling card really; fit in or die. And once again, his plan was for world domination, so it was fit in world or die; I think both the terms Holocaust and genocide apply as did the world at the time.

hamas fights for the palestinians, they are extreme, but so would some hillibillies in texas be after 60 years of chinese-occupation, trust me. Iran takes their side, there is no need to explain that to anyone, even i almost take their side. i´ve known palestinians thru my life, i can tell you if someone mistreated my people as the isrealis have treated them, i would fxxking *?`Ü#+´?§/%$%&/$$%§$§$6..........hamas says one thing, the president of iran has a solution http://www.videosift.com/video/American-propaganda-at-its-bestand-wins-an-Emmy

about the rants, they need an enemy to stay in power, just like the leaders of the u.s and the u.s.s.r during the cold war, were they gonna bomb each other,no! but it sure made it easier for them to stay in power when the had foreign enemies. leave the middle east alone and they leave you alone. look and holland, whores legally on every corner and even drugs legal,oh, and women gained equal rights there earlier than in the u.s why are the not under siege from the wrath of the middle east?


the holocaust with a capital h, i think he is just playing around technial stuff. hitler did give jews the chance to leave germany before they shipped them to camps, until ´41 or ´42 i think, not sure, but therefore it can not be called a genocide, or a holocaust,technically, some professor once said or something,im getting tired........ hey, the holocaust thing, does that just include the jews, like the 100s of grey stones in downtown berlin today? what about the all the politacal prisoners,mental-folks,gays......thats it , i´ve lost it finally....... gone to bed.

>> ^smb3madness:
What a lamer idiot. "Interracial marriages", what the FUCK?!?! "Sieg heil", are you a nazi??? Races as in colors don't exist! It's all homo sapiens... I hope that prick dies, he's a disgrace for the whole humanity.


You WHAT? Seriously, tell me i'm missing something here........ Ohh ok, very funny. I get it. I see what this is...

What a lamer idiot. "Interracial marriages", what the FUCK?!?! "Sieg heil", are you a nazi??? Races as in colors don't exist! It's all homo sapiens... I hope that prick dies, he's a disgrace for the whole humanity.

Reporters are being killed in the conflict and part of the aim in these kinds of ethnic conflicts is to frighten the opposing ethnic group, so a sniper fucking with a reporter wouldn't necessarily be surprising. According to the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (wiki):

Four journalists were among hundreds killed in fighting between Russia and Georgia that began on 8 August 2008.

Cameraman Stan Storimans of Dutch television RTL-4 died and the station's Moscow correspondent was injured during Russian bombing of the Georgian town of Gori on 12 August, said Reporters Without Borders (RSF). Earlier in the day, RSF and the International News Safety Institute (INSI) reported that an unnamed Georgian reporter and his driver were killed when a shell hit their vehicle in Gori's main square.

One day earlier, Giga Chikhladze, head of Alania TV, and Alexander Klimchuk, head of the Caucasus Press Images agency and a correspondent for Itar-Tas, were killed in the breakaway republic of South Ossetia, apparently at a roadblock of pro-independence fighters.
Russian "Newsweek" reporter Orkhan Dzhemal said the journalists were attacked by South Ossetian militia after entering the conflict zone from Georgia, reported the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Siege-town Gori has become a deadly 'sniper's alley' with citizens at the mercy of rampaging militiamen - believed to be from the breakaway republic South Ossetia - looting and firing guns, some drunkenly.

On Sunday video footage caught reporters from two Turkish stations ducking and saying their last prayers as they were fired upon by Russian snipers.

One of the journalists was hit in the eye but his injuries are reportedly not thought to be life-threatening.

I am very familar with Amnesty reports.

The atrocities are IN RESPONSE to Israeli attacks and oppression AND they are justifiable military attacks on occupied land.

Hamas is what you get when you invade an arab land.
Hezbollah is what you get when you invade an arab land.
The IRA is what you get when you invade Ireland.
The ANC is what you get when you invade South Africa.

All of this is IN RESPONSE to occupation and oppression.
IN RESPONSE.

When Israel kills civilians, Hamas kills civilians in return. The difference is that Hamas do it on OCCUPIED LAND.

Hamas can define whatever they want in their charter, are you suggesting we remove the democratic right of a sovreign country just because another country doesn't like what's in their charter? This can be resoved politically, without fighting, but you can't do that without a ceasefire. It's not that I don't believe it, it's that I UNDERSTAND it.

Hamas was created IN RESPONSE to the Israeli occupation. It would not and could not have been elected to power without Israel scattering the Palestinian people with an illegal occupation. The Israeli invasion created the conditions for an extremist government to come to power.

"Israel was only occupying Southern Lebanon to stop PLO attacks on Israel."
Where in the hell did you get that idea from? The PLO was set up to liberate Palestine, when you grow up where I grew up you learn about the PLO when you're 12 years old.

"The only thing Israel has refused is the 'right of return'"
Israel has NOT RESPONDED to THREE mediated calls for a ceasefire.

If you are suggesting that Hamas was set up to invade Israel you are wrong.

You are suggesting that Israel's justification for invading Palestine is Hamas' charter. Yet the occupation LED to Hamas being elected by creating the conditions for an extremist Palestinian government. Hamas has saved more Palestinian lives and fought off more sieges than the PLO. All occupations create the conditions for extremist governments, and historically these have all been resolved when the extremists politicise themselves.

All of the criticisms you lay against Hamas can also be said of Nelson Mandella, the Irish Republicans, and the ANC.

Stop trying to defend your own personal beliefs, open your eyes, educate yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxh4HUDaoaU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpA1f1GZgns

http://inminds.co.uk/palestine-rally-13apr02.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3037117.stm
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/855881.html
http://israels60thbirthday.com/2008/05/13/pro-palestinian-rally-through-london/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/books/12arts-PROPALESTINI_BRF.html
http://origin.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49971,00.html
http://www.davepearce.me.uk/Palestine/palestine_solidarity.htm
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-middle_east_politics/union_engagement_4485.jsp



In reply to this comment by bcglorf:

Hezbollah was set up to drive Israeli occupying forces from Lebanon (and it drove MOST but not all of them out in 2000).


More or less, and their mandate is certainly far better than that of Hamas. Israel was only occupying Southern Lebanon to stop PLO attacks on Israel. I'd say that gives some valid reason for being there, but I'd still agree it was wrong. Before you judge Israel alone though, remember the better part of the PLO army in southern Lebanon was there because Jordanian forces had already chased them out of Jordan. Hezbollah has since continued to use southern Lebanon to launch attacks deeper into Israel. Given Hezbollah's strong ties to Syria and Iran though, I think Israel does have legitimate security concerns about just watching Hezbollah build up forces on the border. But more to the point, we were talking about Hamas...


Hamas was set up to drive occupying forces from Palestine.


And I've already told you that Hamas defines Palestine as not just the occupied territories beyond the '68 borders, and not even just the territory outside the '48 borders, but also the entirety of Israel. If you refuse to believe it go read Hamas Charter, and if you still refuse to recognize this I don't see us getting any where.


Israel has refused time and time again to respond to the offer of a ceasefire in return for removing their forces from occupied territory.


The only thing Israel has refused is the 'right of return', they have offered themselves to return back to the '68 borders. Is it really Israel's fault a ceasefire fails when it is most often broken by attacks on Israeli checkpoints or cities?


Amnesty International has even condemned the killings of civilians by Israeli armed forces, and that is a good place to start to learn about what is really going on.


Thanks, others have pointed me to the same report before. You really should go read it, it seems to make it very clear that the vast majority of atrocities committed in Palestinian territory are the result of factional fighting between groups like Fatah and ... Hamas. Amnesty International has also repeatedly condemned Hamas and Hezbollah for using human shields in their tactics. That aught to take out some of the fire in condemning Israel for collateral damages, no?

1. Sonic Mayhem - Descent Into Cerberon
2. NIN - The Perfect Drug (Nine Inch Nails)
3. Fuel - Hemorrhage
4. Kamelot - Siege Perilous
5. Offspring - Come Out Swinging
6. Eagles - Outlaw Man
7. Ladytron - Cease2xist
8. Neil Young - Oh, Lonesome Me
9. Fiona Apple - Pale September
10. Marilyn Manson - Burning Flag