Saturday, August 05, 2006

Lebanon and the death of the pro-war 'left'

One of the unlamented victims of the ongoing carnage in Lebanon is the pro-war 'left', that peculiar gaggle of British bloggers and journos who have promoted George Bush's crusade in the Middle East as a 'socialist' fight for 'modernity' and 'secularism' against the dark forces of 'Islamofascism' and the 'pseudo-left' (that's the real-life offline left, in most people's lexicons).

I noted a few months back that the pro-war 'left' was being pulled apart by the disastrous consequences of Bush's military adventure in Iraq:

The pro-war left seems to be disintegrating as a coherent political tendency, as its former adherents choose between an uncomplicated neo-conservatism and a return to the ‘old’ anti-war left.

The choice between an uncomplicated neo-conservatism and some sort of shamefaced return to the left has been posed especially starkly by the crisis in Lebanon. In America, the rump of the neo-con movement has grasped at this new war like a drowning man grasping at a straw. Like the Iraq adventure before it, Israel's invasion of Lebanon is being hailed as a 'circuit-breaker' that will rout anti-American forces and see the birth of a 'new Middle East'.

It is rather difficult, though, to put any sort of humanitarian, 'left' gloss on the carnage in Lebanon. The US's claim to be liberating the Iraqi people always rang hollow to most of us, but not even the most shameless warmonger would try to argue that Israel's invasion is an attempt to liberate the Lebanese.

The brutally punitive nature of imperialism's new war does not trouble neo-cons ensconced snugly in the thinktanks of Washington. Irving Kristol and co have never disguised their lack of sympathy for the notion of humanitarian war. Equating progress and prosperity with American hyperpower, they see the naked display of military muscle by the US and its allies as wholly desirable.

Matters are somewhat more complicated for scions of the old pro-war 'left' like Norm Geras and Christopher Hitchens. Both Hitchens and Geras argued that the left should seek a temporary rapproachment with the neo-con right, in order to take advantage of a supposed sea change in US foreign policy. For these folk, the war in Iraq was a war for democracy, human rights, and the ending of the humanitarian disasters Saddam Hussein's rule had created. It must be clear even to Geras and Hitchens that the war in Lebanon is undermining a bourgeois democratic government and creating a humanitarian disaster of colossal proportions.

Hitchens' opposition to the new war, and Geras' typically mealy-mouthed criticisms the worst atrocities, have to be understood as attempts by the better-known members of the rump of the old pro-war 'left' to distance themselves from the latest disastrous consequences of US policies in the Middle East. Jay Sparrow suggested recently that the last vestiges of Hitchens' reputation are in danger of going up in the fire Bush and Blair have lit:

I reckon he's changed his tone now because he recognises that he's starting to lose his influence in liberal circles -- and once that happens, what's he left with? He doesn't want to end up with the Bible-thumping Right and, more to the point, they have no use for a cosmopolitan literary egghead, anyway.

If the invasion of Lebanon is forcing Hitchens to distance himself from the neo-cons, and return shamefacedly to an anti-war stance, then it is prompting other members of the old anti-war 'left' to nail their colours to the neo-con mast by adopting an almost hysterically pro-Israel position. The refusal of Harry's Place and The Popinjays, the two largest pro-war 'left' blogsites, to so much as condemn the massacre at Qana, and the way that their comment boxes have become choked with the foulest anti-Arab propaganda, suggest that a Rubicon has been crossed.


Blogger Simon said...

While Harry's Place and its partisans do indeed engage in exactly the sort of justifiable criticism of religious zealotry and anti-democratic terrorism that befits a genuine anti-fascist worldview, to declare that the comments boxes are "choked with the foulest anti-Arab propaganda" is completely baseless and contemptible. There is no tolerance for such bigotry, and indeed a great deal of respect and admiration expressed for liberal Arabs that fight against sexism, homophobia and authoritarianism within their societies. Likewise, the essential justness of the Palestinian cause and the disgusting nature of the western far right, to give just two pertinent examples, are not considered up for debate.

Such shameless slander only lessens the power of your own thin arguments.

3:34 pm  
Blogger David J said...

Sigh. Once again, Reading the Maps ignores Last Superpower's 'pro-war-left' position, which is firmly on the side of the Palestinians, without falling into the pseudo-left trap of glorifying Hizb'Allah or Hamas.

I'm making a firm stand on Harry's Place against anti-Palestinian and anti-Lebanese sloganeering, and I am finding a few people there who are willing to actually debate instead of mindlessly chant the mantra of their own side.

See this thread at HP (from about comment 155 where I start debating nuclear weapons with Joe)

What pseudo-leftists are missing is that Israel will, before long, leave the West Bank. Notice how George W. Bush is the first US president to talk about a 'Palestinian State'?

The neocons are leaning on Israel to satisfy the Palestinians.

David Jackmanson
Let's Take Over

What is the pseudo-left?

11:26 pm  
Blogger ChrisB said...

David the 'pseudo left' are an irrelevance like Last Superpower.

What matters are the actions of those with power and the deaths of those without it.

The idea that a new battling liberalism ('democracy comes from the barrel of a gun' doesn't sound quite right does it) is the falg around which radicals and leftists should rally is a fantasy. As is saying you should have mombed them differently - which appears on the face of it to be your position.
In this case I don't think it is, as Mao said of the French Revolution:
Too early to tell

1:51 am  
Blogger ChrisB said...

OK, that was 'flag' and 'bombed them differently'...

1:53 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home