John Clarke, former major organizer for the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP), recently posted the following on Facebook:
It has long been clear that the ‘international rule of law’ is a farce and that the existing world order operates on the basis of a hierarchy of human life. There has always been some effort, however, to plausibly deny these things.The genocide that has been unleashed in Gaza, however, has been so appalling and so brazen that it represents a qualitative change. A colonial regime, supported by a handful of Western powers, is murdering tens of thousands of people and destroying the basis for survival for millions more as the world watches. This is happening over the objections of the governments of most of the countries on earth and in the face of massive popular revulsion.It seems as if, at the highest level, the conclusion that legitimacy is an unaffordable luxury is solidifying. To an ever greater degree, the velvet glove is coming off and the iron fist is being brought into use.
It is good to see that Clarke recognizes that international law is a farce (he has failed to criticize such references to international law in the past). However, although in this particular instance the United States government and the Israel government seem to ignore the issue of the legitimation of their genocidal actions, the issue of legitimacy undoubtedly is certainly still of concern for these and other governments.
Would these governments be indifferent to whether the legal system was considered illegitimate or not domestically? “The law” is often invoked to legitimate various governmental actions (ranging from fining drivers for infringing various traffic laws to laws that invoke imprisonment for murder).
In addition, would such governments be indifferent to protests that prevented the export of equipment to Israel? To be sure, not only these two governments but many other governments seem to resist changes sought by protestors–but only because such changes do not interfere to any significant extent with the normal functioning of production and exchange dominated by a class of employers.
Consider, for example, what the governments would do if workers engaged in wildcat strikes? Would they do nothing? They would likely quickly coordinate efforts to quell such strikes. On the other hand, public protests that merely express opposition without interfering in the daily functioning of the capitalist system are much more tolerated.
What is needed is a coordinated effort by workers to prevent the export of equipment to Israel.
The Abolitionary 