<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAfter the Paris Commune had been drowned in blood and the reactionary knaves of the whole world dragged its banner in the filth of vilification and slander, there were not a few democratic Philistines who, adapting themselves to reaction, slandered the Communards for shooting 64 hostages headed by the Paris archbishop. Marx did not hesitate a moment in defending this bloody act of the Commune.\u201d\u2028(Lev Trotsky,\u00a0Their Morals and Ours, 1938)
\u2028The film by two \u201cIsraelis,\u201d\u00a0Naza\u00a0(which is filling movie theaters), is causing quite a stir. Through the testimonies of Zionist soldiers involved in the massacre, it documents the horrors committed in Gaza\u2014atrocities that, incidentally, had already been attested to, though without receiving the same attention, by dozens of journalists (especially Palestinians) who were murdered by snipers from the racist entity.
\u2028The right-wing government in Italy is responding by urging people to watch the latest season of the \u201cIsraeli\u201d Netflix series\u00a0Fauda: pure Zionist propaganda that, by turning the facts on their head, portrays October 7 from the perspective of \u201cIsraeli\u201d military personnel and intelligence agents\u2014presented as \u201cvictims\u201d\u2014 while Palestinian fighters are portrayed as bloodthirsty beasts and fanatical cutthroats who kill poor, innocent civilians.
\u2028However, the \u201cdefense\u201d of the Palestinians by center-left intellectuals who are paving the way for a bourgeois change of government (the Five Star Movement and the PD) is the kind one would gladly do without. It is entirely based on a complete distortion of history and current events. Figures such as journalists Formigli and Michele Santoro, or the critical Zionists Gad Lerner and Travaglio, condemn violence \u201con both sides\u201d\u2014that of the \u201cPalestinian terrorists\u201d (as they call them) and that of Netanyahu (they accuse only the government in power, thereby protecting the Zionist entity as such).
\u2028Marco Travaglio, editor-in-chief of\u00a0Il Fatto Quotidiano\u00a0and ideological mentor to the Five Star Movement, is already the author of a book on Palestine that is presented as a reconstruction of history (1), yet in it the true history is precisely missing. After long questioning, in his editorials, the use of the term \u201cgenocide\u201d (while the bodies of Palestinians filled the mass graves in Gaza), he has repeatedly claimed that the original blame for all this lies with the Arabs, who allegedly did not willingly accept the partition of Palestine carried out in 1948 by the UN (at the behest of imperialism, eager to establish its own military base in a crucial area, we might add).
\u2028Entire sectors of the PD (starting with the oxymoronic \u201cLeft for Israel\u201d faction of the PD) go even further and, alongside the right-wing government, invoke law and order\u2014intimidated by the massive movement that flooded Italian squares last fall and convinced that they can prevent a resumption of the protests through the threat of repression. That is why they support the decree on \u201canti-Semitism\u201d presented by the government\u2014which, drafted by racists, the grandchildren of Mussolini, equates anti-Zionism (which by definition implies anti-racism) with anti-Semitic racism, as if the so-called Jewish state were the responsibility of all Jews (when, in fact, a growing number of Jews worldwide do not support this monster).
\u2028Meanwhile, the Five Star Movement, determined to present itself at this stage as further to the left than the PD on various issues, rejects the decree, pretending to forget that it is yet another repressive measure in line with those enacted by the center-left (including itself) when it was in government.
\u2028However, it is not worth dwelling\u2014at least for our readers\u2014on this \u201cleft\u201d\u2014as it is called in the press\u2014which is merely preparing to return to government in order to implement anti-worker policies, just as it has done in all its previous stints in government. We prefer to focus here on the reformist left and those organizations that stand to its left.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028An example of this political current is Rifondazione Comunista, with the two factions that have split from what remains of that party. The two leaderships are divided over the best way to realign with the center-left: to capitulate outright, as Acerbo proposes, or to try to build bargaining power by, for the time being, presenting themselves as distinct from the center-left, as Paolo Ferrero (a former minister in one of the worst anti-worker governments of recent decades\u2014Prodi\u2019s) proposes.
\u2028Although divided on tactics, the two wings nevertheless share the same position on Palestine: \u201ctwo peoples, two states\u201d\u2014that is, the proposal that anyone familiar with, even superficially, the so-called \u201cPalestinian question\u201d would consider (if they are honest) deceptive, because it implies acceptance of the Zionist occupation of much of Palestine\u2014except for the territories occupied in 1967 (essentially the Gaza Strip and the West Bank)\u2014which would be generously ceded to the Palestinians to create a mini-state, without territorial continuity, with no right of return to their lands for millions of Palestinians, and ignoring the nearly two million Palestinians living under apartheid conditions within \u201cIsrael.\u201d A proposal based on the supposed \u201cright to exist\u201d of the \u201cIsrael\u201d colony (as upheld by the vast majority of the global reformist movement, from Rifondazione Comunista to Syriza, including Die Linke). A proposal backed by many imperialist governments (such as that of the \u201cprogressive\u201d S\u00e1nchez in Spain, currently grappling with massive protests), precisely because for decades it has been nothing more than a mirage promised to the Palestinians, peddled by capitalist forces such as the current collaborationist Palestinian National Authority (and previously by Arafat\u2019s Fatah), whose sole function is to keep the Palestinians in check and which, in addition to being a proposal based on injustice, is not even contemplated by Zionism in all its forms.
\u2028Pap and the reformist substitute for the \u201cbinational state\u201d
\u2028Given that, in these times, in the face of capitalism\u2019s disaster (wars, poverty, environmental destruction) and the impotence of reformism\u2014which sows illusions about the possibility of governing an unreformable system in a different way\u2014presenting oneself as a \u201creformist\u201d lacks support, especially among what has been aptly defined as the \u201cGaza generation\u201d (which is filling the squares even as we speak in France), there are those who are trying to carve out a niche for themselves, seemingly further to the left. This is the case with Potere al Popolo (PAP) and its majority shareholder, the neo-Stalinist Rete dei Comunisti.
\u2028Here, there is no talk of the \u201ctwo-state solution,\u201d knowing that it has little credibility among those mobilizing for Palestine. And, quite rightly, they also refuse to participate in the ritual of \u201ccondemning October 7.\u201d However, the perspective they propose is the \u201cone-state solution,\u201d or a binational state. This is a perspective that begins with an accurate denunciation of the \u201ctwo-state\u201d deception but which\u2014in its various forms (2)\u2014effectively recognizes a supposed \u201cright to exist\u201d in that land for those who have colonized it, extending the right to \u201cself-determination\u201d not only to the Palestinians (an oppressed people) but also to \u201cIsraeli\u201d Jews (who, by contrast, are not an oppressed people), thereby confusing the Leninist defense of the \u201cself-determination of oppressed peoples\u201d with the liberal conception of self-determination (which makes no distinction between oppressed and oppressor peoples).
\u2028This perspective is just as unworkable as the \u201ctwo-state\u201d solution, since it overlooks the need to completely end the colonization of Palestine, separates the national question from the socialist one, and disregards an internationalist perspective for the Middle East that would defeat all the reactionary regimes in the region.
\u2028Not to mention the context in which this position is framed: aligning, in the name of \u201cmultipolarism,\u201d with certain imperialist powers (China and Russia) against those considered worse (the U.S., the \u201cWest\u201d). It even goes so far as to gloss over\u2014with some discomfort\u2014the fact that China (considered a better and preferable imperialist power, or even a model of \u201cChinese-style socialism\u201d) is \u201cIsrael\u2019s\u201d main trading partner and has even increased its exports during the Gaza massacre (3) and has continued to supply the Zionists with Autel Robotics drones, used against the Palestinians (and against the Flotilla).
\u2028With minor nuances, all of these positions are based on recognition of UN resolutions\u2014that is, that body which is far from angelic and which not only sanctioned the birth of the \u201cIsrael\u201d colony but has also, for decades, covered up the existence of the Zionist entity under a cloak of legality, designating as \u201coccupied territories\u201d only those that the Zionists seized following the 1967 \u201cSix-Day War,\u201d and not the entirety of the territory that some call \u201cIsrael\u201d\u2014that is, four-fifths of Palestine.
\u2028Obviously, there is not a shred of realism in these positions. All of them stem from the deliberate will of the leaderships of these organizations\u2014beyond mere statements\u2014not to question the compatibility with capitalism or the needs of the various imperialist powers they choose to align themselves with. In fact, questioning the existence of \u201cIsrael,\u201d whether in the form of the \u201ctwo-state solution\u201d or the \u201cbinational state,\u201d means questioning capitalism and its vital interests. And the reformists\u2019 outlook does not encompass any of this: the word \u201crevolution\u201d is not spared (after all, even the youth of the PD use it now\u2026), but it carries the same weight as when it is used in certain detergent commercials.
\u2028Free Palestine, from the river to the sea
\u2028We will not reiterate here the position of our party and our International, which we have presented on dozens of previous occasions. We will simply recall, in summary, that we\u2014drawing on the legacy of Trotskyism (the only current that has fought against Zionism since the birth of \u201cIsrael\u201d)\u2014defend the goal of a free Palestine \u201cfrom the river to the sea,\u201d which implies the destruction of the \u201cIsrael\u201d colony, the expulsion of the Zionists, and the recovery by the Palestinians of all of historic Palestine: not only the so-called \u201coccupied territories,\u201d but also most of what is today known as \u201cIsrael,\u201d while recognizing the right of antizionist Jews who agree to live in peace in Palestine to form a national minority. Only on this basis\u2014which can be achieved only by uniting the national struggle with social struggles within the framework of a program of permanent revolution\u2014will it be possible to unite the Arab masses throughout the region to achieve the goal of a socialist federation of the Middle East. For us, this goal requires\u2014in order to be fully realized\u2014the building, in Palestine and the other countries of the Middle East as well, of Trotskyist parties armed with this program, which form part of a refounded Fourth International.
\u2028In this regard, we consider erroneous not only the two majority positions on the left described above (the \u201ctwo-state solution\u201d and the \u201cbinational state\u201d), but also any position that isolates and pits the national question\u2014a democratic objective\u2014against the socialist one, as well as the opposite position of those who deny the national question in the name of an abstract \u201cpure revolution.\u201d Perhaps, in this second case, as some do (in particular, the RCP and Alan Woods\u2019 International, which\u2014not by chance\u2014rejects the slogan \u201cFree Palestine from the river to the sea\u201d), thinking that one can \u201cdivide \u2018Israel\u2019 along class lines\u201d and \u201cunite \u2018Israeli\u2019 workers with the Palestinians.\u201d This seemingly \u201cleftist\u201d position actually eliminates the entire Leninist conception of the national question and stems from a serious misunderstanding of the theory and program of the permanent revolution (a misunderstanding that is even more serious for those who define themselves as Trotskyists) (4). As if that were not enough, it is a position that ignores the fact that the workers of \u201cIsrael\u201d\u2014who obviously exist\u2014are a privileged caste of settlers who not only live above the standard of living of workers throughout the region but also base their privileges precisely on the fact that they are part of a colony financed and sustained by imperialism. This explains, incidentally, why, in eighty years, you can count on one hand (and they are, obviously, worthy of praise) the \u201cIsraelis\u201d who, having arrived in or been born in \u201cIsrael,\u201d have broken with the colonial entity to go fight alongside the Palestinians.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028Several intellectuals from the so-called left have commented on the harrowing images in the documentary\u00a0Naza\u00a0and expressed outrage at the testimonies of military personnel who explain how, on countless occasions, they have bombed homes, neighborhoods, schools, and hospitals, causing hundreds of \u201ccollateral deaths\u201d in order to strike \u201ca terrorist\u201d (which is also how these intellectuals refer to Palestinian fighters). From this, it follows that they have not been informed that the stated goal of the Zionists, for over a century, has been the elimination of the Palestinians from Palestine through genocide and expulsion brought about by terror.
\u2028These lackey intellectuals, who continue to run in livery behind their master\u2019s carriage\u2014who, every time they open their mouths, issue their relentless \u201ccondemnation of October 7,\u201d only to immediately swear by \u201cIsrael\u2019s right to exist\u201d\u2014philosophically ponder, quoting Hannah Arendt, the \u201cbanality of evil.\u201d Why didn\u2019t \u201cIsrael\u201d make better use of its\u00a0intelligence services\u00a0to prevent October 7th?, they ask. The blame, they claim, lies with Netanyahu, who had been informed of October 7th and \u201cdid nothing to prevent it\u201d\u2014that is, to massacre the Palestinians in advance before they broke out of the Gaza cage.
\u2028It\u2019s no surprise: you don\u2019t bite the hand that feeds you. But what are we to make of the leadership of 99% of the reformist parties\u2014and also of those who, for some strange reason, call themselves \u201crevolutionaries\u201d\u2014who, after a century of practical demonstrations (if we want to call the dozens of massacres perpetrated by the Zionists that), after Gaza has been razed to the ground live on television, while the entire West Bank is occupied by the Zionists and bombs are falling on Lebanon and Iran, continue with the litany of \u201ccivilians massacred on October 7\u201d?
\u2028The litany about the \u201ccivilian victims\u201d of October 7
\u2028The lament over \u201cthe civilians\u201d killed on October 7 cuts across the board: that is to say, it does not come solely from those who would like to see peaceful coexistence between the colonized and the colonizers. However, even those who side with the Palestinians lament the \u201cmassacre of civilians\u201d on October 7 and the taking of hostages by the Resistance.
\u2028Where does this insistence on \u201ccivilians\u201d come from? Throughout occupied Palestine (and not just in the West Bank), even where their maps indicate \u201cIsrael,\u201d there are no \u201ccivilians,\u201d but rather settlers who for a century have been trying by every means to eliminate the Palestinian inhabitants: this type of colonialism is precisely called \u201csettler colonialism\u201d because its primary objective is not the exploitation of the indigenous population, but its elimination (which is why the comparison with apartheid-era South Africa is inappropriate, since there the\u00a0Afrikaners\u00a0aimed to exploit Black people through wage labor\u2014a practice that, incidentally, continues today in another form). The \u201cIsraelis\u201d\u2014that is, the citizens of the \u201cJewish state\u201d\u2014are therefore not comparable to civilians in any other country; whether they are in uniform (and military service is mandatory there) or dressed in civilian clothes, they are and remain settlers.\u2028Beyond this objective observation, this distinction\u2014which many take for granted as \u201cnatural\u201d\u2014between combatants and civilians is not unique to Marxism. Rather, it belongs to so-called \u201cinternational law,\u201d which, though presented as \u201cuniversal,\u201d is, like all law, drafted by the ruling class and therefore class-based. That same law defines under what circumstances it is legitimate to resort to force (jus ad bellum) and how war must be conducted (jus in bello). In this sense, for example, various UN resolutions recognize the legitimacy of the struggle (including armed struggle) of peoples subjected to domination, but at the same time prescribe respect for \u201ccivilians.\u201d
\u2028These are the points of reference (explicit or implicit) for many left-wing commentators, including some (let us repeat) who call themselves \u201crevolutionaries.\u201d That is to say, they recognize the Palestinians\u2019 \u201cright\u201d to fight\u2014even with weapons\u2014not because it is simply just and necessary, but because the UN says so\u2026 And, in accordance with the laws drafted by the class enemy, they warn the Palestinians that attacking civilians or taking them hostage is unacceptable.
\u2028Lenin defined the League of Nations (which preceded the UN) as \u201ca den of imperialist bandits.\u201d If he had been able to see the UN\u2014which for decades has covered up imperialist wars or even waged them directly (with soldiers wearing a different-colored helmet, the blue helmet)\u2014which sends these \u201cpeacekeeping\u201d troops to impose imperialist order by any means necessary, including massacres, torture, and rape (see what the blue helmets have done in Bosnia, the Congo, Haiti, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Mozambique, and many other places)\u2014Lenin would have been able to apply that label to the UN as well\u2014an organization that, in contrast, much of the left regards as a sort of angelic entity, standing above the international class struggle.
\u2028Even those who are critical of the UN (and, in the case of Palestine, this should be obvious, given that the Zionist colony was established and protected for decades precisely by the UN) have, nevertheless, often internalized the idea of the existence of \u201cinternational law\u201d\u2014neutral from a class perspective\u2014which holds that the lives of men and women have value only if they are not wearing a uniform. This idea, on closer inspection, proves very useful for imperialist wars, which have always needed \u201ccannon fodder.\u201d
\u2028Lamentations over \u201ccivilians\u201d stem from these distortions, at best, or from hypocrisy, at worst.\u2028The paradox is that these same leaders and intellectuals may then praise films such as Pontecorvo\u2019s\u00a0The Battle of Algiers, which depicts how Algerian fighters were forced to resort to planting bombs in markets, movie theaters, bars, etc., in order to free themselves and, ultimately, expel the French colonists. Larbi Ben M\u2019Hidi, a leader of the FLN, when accused of attacking civilians with bags concealing bombs, replied that he was willing to exchange the fighters\u2019 bags for the cannons and bombers at the colonists\u2019 disposal.
\u2028A historian (an anti-Zionist Jew) such as Enzo Traverso (5) has pointed out that partisan resistance in Europe during World War II often had to attack civilian targets.\u2028This raises the question of whether what is accepted as heroism in the case of Algeria or the partisans is not recognized for the Palestinians because the historical events of the past do not require taking a side\u00a0today\u00a0(although there is no shortage of those who even distance themselves from the GAP attack on Via Rasella in Rome in 1944 or continue to lament the assassination of Giovanni Gentile, the philosopher of Mussolini\u2019s Republic, at the hands of the partisans).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028One can only imagine the words (undoubtedly not very politically correct) with which Marx and Engels would have commented on the positions of certain intellectuals who, to a greater or lesser extent, refer to \u201cMarxism,\u201d in the style of Judith Butler, who, along with Michael Lowy and others, signed a manifesto on Iran this summer that, right from the title (\u201cTo the Iranian political prisoners, caught between the two blades of a pair of scissors\u201d) (6), equates imperialist and Zionist aggression against Iran with Iran itself as the victim, only to then develop that very concept ambiguously, using phrases like \u201con the one hand\u2026 on the other hand\u201d and \u201ctwo sources of oppression,\u201d while devoting just a quarter of the text to attacking the aggressors\u2014imperialism and Zionism.
\u2028Obviously, we, too, are in favor of the liberation of Iranian political prisoners and feel no sympathy for the regime of the ayatollahs, which usurped the workers\u2019 revolution of 1978\u20131979 and massacred thousands of revolutionaries; but, as Marxists, in a war between imperialism and a semicolony, we align ourselves with the latter, while remaining irreconcilable opponents of its reactionary regime. For it is only from the position on the side of the attacked dependent country that the overthrow of the reactionary regime can be achieved.
\u2028It is, therefore, paradoxical that even certain intellectuals who define themselves as \u201cTrotskyists\u201d forget Trotsky\u2019s unequivocal positions in similar cases, such as Japan\u2019s aggression against China (at that time a semicolony) in 1937, when Trotsky stated: \u201cBy participating in the military struggle\u00a0under the command of Chiang Kai-shek\u00a0\u2014since, unfortunately, he is the one in command of the war of independence\u2014we are politically preparing to overthrow Chiang Kai-shek: this is the only revolutionary policy.\u201d (7) It is worth recalling that Chiang was responsible for the massacre of the Canton Commune.
\u2028Several of the signatories of Butler\u2019s appeal, as might be expected, were among the harshest critics of the events of October 7. Butler herself went so far as to speak of \u201ca terrifying and repugnant massacre\u201d (8)\u2014referring not to what the Zionists have been doing for a century, but\u2026 to the Palestinians\u2019 military action. On other occasions she has attempted to \u201ccontextualize\u201d the events, but in any case, both she and other intellectuals such as Slavoj \u017di\u017eek have not ceased to lament the deaths of \u201ccivilians\u201d on \u201cboth sides.\u201d
\u2028The tradition of Marxism has nothing to do with pacifism or with submitting to liberal conceptions of law. Revolutionaries have never equated Rome’s violence with Spartacus’, nor the oppressor’s violence with that of the oppressed trying to free themselves.
\u2028This hypocrisy was foreign to Marx, and undoubtedly, upon seeing certain \u201cMarxists\u201d who hide behind it, he would have repeated that they were not\u2026 Marxist.
\u2028Shall we recall Marx\u2019s unconditional defense of the Paris Commune\u2019s taking of civilian hostages? And the execution by firing squad of 64 hostages (including Bishop Darboy) on the orders of the heroic twenty-five-year-old Raoul Rigault, the Commune\u2019s delegate for Public Safety? We read in\u00a0The Civil War in France: \u201cWhen Thiers (\u2026) reinstated, from the outset of the conflict, the \u2018humanitarian\u2019 custom of killing Commune prisoners, the Commune, in order to protect their lives, was forced to resort to the Prussian practice of taking hostages. The lives of the hostages had already been doomed more than once by the continuous executions of prisoners carried out by the Versaillais. How could they be saved any longer after the massacre with which MacMahon\u2019s Praetorians celebrated their entry into Paris? Was the taking of hostages\u2014 the last safeguard against the unscrupulous ferocity of bourgeois governments? (\u2026) The Commune had repeatedly offered to exchange the archbishop\u2014and many priests as well\u2014for Blanqui alone, who was then in Thiers\u2019s hands. Thiers stubbornly refused. He knew that with Blanqui he would give the Commune a leader, whereas the archbishop would be more useful to him as a corpse.\u201d (9)
\u2028As for Engels, he said that if the Communards could be blamed for anything, it was for having been too lenient with the class enemy. (10).
\u2028The Bolsheviks, for their part, even took the family members of generals\u2014whom they forced to fight in the Red Army\u2014as hostages during the civil war. Trotsky himself signed the order on the hostages in 1918. (11)
\u2028What a contrast to the complaints and\u00a0nuances\u00a0regarding Zionist \u201ccivilians\u201d from certain so-called disciples today!
\u2028The most subtle hypocrisy: \u201cit\u2019s legitimate, but\u2026\u201d
\u2028Others, such as Gilbert Achcar (leader of the so-called Mandelist \u201cFourth International,\u201d better known as the United Secretariat), use arguments no less hypocritical, but more subtle and less visible.
\u2028Specifically, these \u201cdefenders\u201d of the Palestinian cause put forward four theses.
\u2028\u2013 First thesis: \u201cThe Palestinians should once again resort to (only, according to some; mostly, according to others) means of mass political struggle such as strikes, etc.\u201d\u2028Forgetting that, for the reasons outlined above, there is no \u201cnormal\u201d capitalist exploitation in Palestine: the struggle consists of defending survival against the Zionists who aspire to massacre and genocide.
\u2028\u2013 Second argument: \u201cThe Palestinians should resort to force if necessary, but only as they did during the First Intifada (1987).\u201d Or, to put it another way, the Palestinians should use, at most, slingshots and stones\u2014not machine guns or rockets. To these gentlemen, the image of the Palestinian child with a slingshot seems heroic, while that of the Palestinian with a machine gun is considered inappropriate. However, they forget that slingshots, rather than rifles, were not chosen to avoid upsetting the petty-bourgeois academic, but because people fought with whatever was available\u2014that is, with slingshots because (unfortunately) nothing better was available.
\u2028\u2013 Third thesis: \u201cBeyond any consideration of legitimacy, the result of October 7 has been the Gaza Strip in ruins.\u201d\u2028Here we face the height of hypocrisy. Behind this thesis lies the old\u00a0leitmotiv\u00a0that goes: \u201cif the victim does not react, they avoid the worst.\u201d A refrain that is not only ignominious but, in the case of Palestine, doubly false, given that for a century the Zionists have been massacring Palestinians even without an immediate pretext, because that is the very essence of Zionism.\u2028\u2013 Fourth thesis: \u201c\u2018Israel\u2019s\u2019 military superiority cannot be questioned.\u201d
\u2028This, too, is a false argument; history and current events show otherwise. \u201cIsrael\u201d and imperialism have been checkmated or defeated on countless occasions. There is no need to recall Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan: it suffices to see how the world\u2019s strongest armies have so far failed to subdue a semicolonial country like Iran. And not only that: for over a century, the Palestinian Resistance has been fighting, and even after the massacres of recent years, the Zionists and imperialists have failed to disarm it.
\u2028The idea of the enemy\u2019s invincibility is part of the typical mindset of petty-bourgeois intellectuals who seek a quiet corner of history where they can write their books or pursue their academic careers. But the events of October 7 provide further proof that the enemy, however powerful it may be, is not invincible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028The events of October 7 were falsified from the very next day. There are books, such as the one by Roberto Iannuzzi (12), that have documented and debunked the mountain of lies spread by the bourgeois press, which echoed the Zionist government\u2019s propaganda: children dismembered, rapes, etc. All of this is false and has been refuted by dozens of independent investigations and, in some cases (albeit on the back page), by the very same newspapers that had fabricated these \u201cnews stories.\u201d
\u2028In dozens of other articles and in a book (13), we have also written about what matters most and is generally omitted: the hundred years of history preceding October 7. A hundred years of massacres, bombings, imprisonments, torture, and rapes committed by the Zionists. All of this has been documented, better than we ever could, by a great historian (an anti-Zionist Jew) such as Ilan Papp\u00e9 (14) and by many other honest historians, who, thanks also to October 7 and the mass movement it has sparked, are now being published not only by small presses.
\u2028Returning to the events of that day, Iannuzzi has offered one of the best reconstructions. At dawn on October 7, 2023, a military front composed of all organizations committed to the Resistance launched an attack, led by some 1,200 fighters from Hamas, the PFLP, PFLP-GC, FDLP, JIP, and other smaller groups (about ten in total). Thousands of Palestinians, using whatever they could find, broke through at various points along the ultra-high-tech barrier (costing over one billion dollars) that encircled Gaza and its inhabitants, separating them from the rest of their occupied territory.
\u2028The targets were various military outposts (including the Urim military base, home to the infamous Department 8200, an \u201celite\u201d unit of the Zionist security services dedicated to intercepting and identifying Palestinians) and the search for hostages to exchange them for the thousands (about 10,000) of Palestinian hostages who are mistreated, tortured, and methodically raped every day in the prisons of the so-called \u201conly democracy in the Middle East.\u201d
\u2028The rest is well known: most of the hostages were killed by the IDF\u2019s indiscriminate gunfire; others survived even the Zionist bombings and were exchanged for Palestinian prisoners.\u2028In recent weeks, some have insisted that Netanyahu had been warned in advance of Operation \u201cAl-Aqsa Flood\u201d and that he would not have obstructed it so he could later attack Gaza. This, with various nuances, has been claimed since the day after October 7. This is a distortion of the facts that serves two purposes: first, to separate \u201cIsrael\u2019s\u201d responsibilities from those of Netanyahu, placing the blame for Zionism solely on the latter (as if Zionism had not begun its genocidal policies long before this shady figure appeared, even under the leadership of so-called \u201cLabor\u201d presidents); second, in some cases unconsciously, this narrative plays into the hands of those who wish to claim that \u201cIsrael\u201d was attacked on October 7 by the Palestinian Resistance solely as a result of a conspiracy, thereby lending fresh credence to the thesis of the Zionists\u2019 \u201cinvincibility\u201d and the Palestinians\u2019 supposed powerlessness. It is most likely that it was precisely this sense of superiority and this conviction of invincibility that led them to ignore the signs\u2014which had undoubtedly been picked up by Gaza\u2019s jailers\u2014of the military operation being prepared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028However, October 7 was also much more than that.
\u2028It was a very severe blow dealt to \u201cIsrael.\u201d It demonstrated, first and foremost, that the enemy, no matter how well-armed, is not invincible\u2014contrary to what skepticism advocates claim.
\u2028For decades, historiography has described the GAP\u2019s operation on Via Rasella in Rome on March 23, 1944, as the largest partisan operation in occupied territory. Today, we can affirm that the Palestinian Resistance\u2019s operation on October 7 was even more significant.
\u2028October 7 and the years that followed have laid bare to the masses what \u201cIsrael\u201d truly is. All the lies of Zionist propaganda and the imperialism that defends it will no longer be able to heal this wound. \u201cIsrael\u201d is today more isolated than ever, while support for the Palestinian cause has mobilized millions of young people and workers around the world (including many young Jews who want nothing to do with Zionism).
\u2028That is why it is the duty of all of us to support the courageous struggle of the Palestinian Resistance, to defend it against all slander, and not to be deterred by attempts at censorship and repression. The best way we have to participate in this struggle is to link support for the Palestinian Resistance with the political and social struggle against the Meloni government and against all imperialist governments.
\u2028The Pdac and the IWL-Fourth International are committed to this struggle, and we invite anyone who wants to advance it to join us, to come learn about and help build the international revolutionary party needed to win.
\u2028If today we can speak of a \u201cGaza generation\u201d\u2014one that fills the world\u2019s squares with its unstoppable energy\u2014it is because Palestine has become the symbol of the struggle against all injustices and against the barbarism of the capitalist system, a social system that we must bring to an end through revolutionary means.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028For these reasons, we do not merely sympathize with the Palestinian Resistance; rather, we affirm that our Palestinian comrades’ struggle is our own. That is why, once again, we must thank those young Palestinians who, on October 7, broke out of the cage of Gaza\u2014in which they had been forced to live since birth\u2014and dared, to paraphrase Marx, to \u201cstorm heaven.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2028(1)\u00a0See\u00a0M. Travaglio,\u00a0Israel and the Palestinians in a Nutshell\u00a0(PaperFirst, 2023).\u2028(2) For more information on the so-called \u201cone-state solution,\u201d we refer readers to our book:\u00a0From the River to the Sea: On the Side of the Palestinian Resistance\u00a0(ed. Rjazanov, 2025).\u2028(3) Since October 7, China\u2019s exports to \u201cIsrael\u201d have continued to grow.\u2028(4) Regarding the theory-program of permanent revolution in relation to Palestine, we refer once again to our book cited in note no. 2 or to our article debating the RCP:\u00a0\u201cPalestine: Why Doesn\u2019t the RCP Like \u2018From the River to the Sea\u2019?\u201d\u2028https:\/\/www.alternativacomunista.it\/politica\/nazionale\/palestina-perche-al-pcr-non-piace-dal-fiume-al-mare\u2028(5) Enzo Traverso is the author of many excellent books. Here we refer to his work:\u00a0Gaza in the Mirror of History(Laterza, 2024), which is undoubtedly worth reading, even though Traverso is also a proponent of the (illusory) idea of a binational state and, after having demonstrated the baseless nature of so many moralistic arguments, nonetheless falls, in a contradictory manner, into some fruitless disquisitions on \u201cinternational law.\u201d\u2028(6) The appeal by Judith Butler, Michael Lowy, and other intellectuals is titled \u201cTo the Political Prisoners of Iran, Caught \u2018Between the Two Blades of a Pair of Scissors\u2019\u201d\u2028https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/ng-interactive\/2026\/aug\/20\/iran-political-prisoners\u2028(7) Lev Trotsky, \u201cOn the Sino-Japanese War\u201d [letter to Diego Rivera], September 23, 1937. We have translated and published it with our notes in\u00a0Trotskismo oggi, no. 20, 2022.\u2028(8) This reflection by Judith Butler on October 7 can be found in \u201cThe Compass of Mourning,\u201d in\u00a0London Review of Books, October 19, 2023.\u2028(9) V. K. Marx,\u00a0The Civil War in France, 1871https:\/\/www.marxists.org\/italiano\/marx-engels\/1871\/gcf\/index.htm\u2028The quoted passage is found in Chapter 4 of the Third Declaration on the Commune, drafted by Marx and adopted by the International Workingmen\u2019s Association.\u2028To be precise, the order to shoot the hostages was given by Raoul Rigault, and in the case of the bishop and the rest of the hostages, by Th\u00e9ophile Ferr\u00e9, a young man of the same age who replaced Rigault when the latter was appointed public prosecutor of the Commune. Both, leaders of the Blanquist wing of the Commune, were shot to death, victims of the bloody repression with which the bourgeoisie not only took revenge on the Commune but also sought to warn the workers never again to dare challenge its rule. That is precisely what the Zionists also did when they razed the Gaza Strip following the October 7th operation; in this case, not only as a warning, but also as part of Zionism\u2019s own genocidal project.\u2028(10)\u00a0See\u00a0F. Engels,\u00a0Introduction\u00a0(1891) to K. Marx,\u00a0The Civil War in France\u00a0(1871).\u2028(11) The order was issued by Trotsky on September 30, 1918, in his capacity as chairman of the Revolutionary War Council. It stipulated that, in the event of an officer\u2019s desertion, his family members were to be arrested. The text of the order is published in Lev Trotsky,\u00a0The Armed Revolution. Military Writings, 1\u00a0(Feltrinelli, 1971, p. 147). Trotsky defends and argues for the necessity of this measure in\u00a0Their Morals and Ours\u00a0(ed. Rjazanov, 2023,\u00a0see\u00a0p. 38 ff.)\u2028(12) Roberto Iannuzzi,\u00a0October 7: Between Truth and Propaganda\u00a0(Fazi, 2024).\u2028(13) See the book cited in note no. 2.\u2028(14) Among Ilan Papp\u00e9\u2019s books (all of which are very useful and highly recommended), we highlight here:\u00a0The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, published in 2008 and reprinted several times by Fazi; or, also from Fazi,\u00a0The World\u2019s Largest Prison: A History of the Occupied Territories\u00a0(2022). His most recent book is\u00a0The End of Israel: The Collapse of Zionism and the Possible Peace in Palestine\u00a0(Fazi, 2025)
. The \u201cpossible peace\u201d referred to in the title is precisely that \u201cone-state solution\u201d on which we have offered our opinion in this article and, in greater detail, in our book (see note no. 2), which also contains an annotated bibliography on the Palestinian struggle.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cAfter the Paris Commune had been drowned in blood and the reactionary knaves of the whole world dragged its banner in the filth of vilification and slander, there were not a few democratic Philistines who, adapting themselves to reaction, slandered the Communards for shooting 64 hostages headed by the Paris archbishop. Marx did not hesitate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":23,"featured_media":76486,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"litci_post_political_author":"Francesco Ricci","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3710],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-76485","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-palestine"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/litci.org\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/gettyimages-687146040-1-1444x710-1.jpg?fit=1444%2C710&ssl=1","fimg_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/litci.org\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/gettyimages-687146040-1-1444x710-1.jpg?fit=1444%2C710&ssl=1","categories_names":["Palestine"],"author_info":{"name":"Carlos S.","pic":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/fdf3a2076204dbf848fa7838fc9e2787f3317262207b35e333f31316e39fce9c?s=96&d=mm&r=g"},"political_author":"Francesco Ricci","tagline":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76485","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/23"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=76485"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76485\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":76487,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76485\/revisions\/76487"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/76486"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/litci.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}