Por Nikos Mottas
Las recientes manifestaciones masivas celebradas en Israel contra los atroces planes del gobierno de Netanyahu de apoderarse de Gaza nos recuerdan que las sociedades no son entidades monolíticas; contienen fuerzas conflictivas en su interior.
Cualquiera con una percepción fundamental de la dialéctica puede comprender las enormes contradicciones que existen en las sociedades capitalistas modernas, incluida la israelí.
Como nos recordó Karl Marx, «La historia de todas las sociedades existentes hasta la fecha es la historia de la lucha de clases». (1) Ninguna sociedad tiene una sola voz unificada; está compuesta por intereses, visiones y clases en conflicto. Así como los trabajadores y los capitalistas de una misma nación pueden tener intereses fundamentalmente opuestos, también en Israel existen fuerzas opuestas. Un Israel defiende el poder y los privilegios; el otro exige justicia e igualdad.
El Israel que la mayoría de la gente ve es el liderado por Netanyahu, Ben Gvir y Smotrich: el Israel de la ocupación interminable, los bombardeos sobre Gaza y los asentamientos que se extienden por el territorio palestino. Este es el Israel que cree que el poder militar es la única respuesta, que trata la paz como una debilidad y que exige «seguridad» mientras niega a millones de palestinos sus derechos básicos.
Este es el Israel del establishment sionista de derecha. Como todos los establishments capitalistas, su poder se basa en una propaganda generalizada que siembra el miedo, la desinformación y la intolerancia entre la gente. Los poderes gobernantes saben que no pueden mantener el control simplemente por la fuerza; deben ganarse el consentimiento de la gente. Gramsci llamó a esto hegemonía : el proceso de hacer que la cosmovisión de la clase dominante parezca sentido común. Los gobiernos israelíes, especialmente bajo Netanyahu, han perfeccionado este arte a través de una mezcla de divide y vencerás y desinformación implacable.
Un aspecto importante de la política estatal israelí ha sido fragmentar a los palestinos política, geográfica y socialmente: Gaza aislada de Cisjordania, Jerusalén Oriental aislada, los ciudadanos palestinos de Israel separados de aquellos bajo ocupación militar. Dentro del propio Israel, se aplica la misma lógica: los ciudadanos judíos se mantienen divididos en líneas étnicas (ashkenazíes, mizrajíes, etíopes), religiosas (seculares versus ultraortodoxos) y políticas. Pero cuando estalla la crisis, esas divisiones se disimulan uniendo a todos contra el «enemigo externo»: los palestinos.
Vladimir Lenin advirtió contra esta táctica en sus escritos sobre la Cuestión Nacional, subrayando que la burguesía de las naciones opresoras siempre dedica sus mejores esfuerzos a sembrar el odio contra la nación oprimida, para impedir la unidad de los trabajadores de ambas naciones (2). Al recordar constantemente a los israelíes judíos su «diferencia nacional» con respecto a los palestinos, y al presentar dicha diferencia como inherentemente peligrosa, la clase dominante israelí impide la solidaridad entre las partes.
Marx y Engels explicaron que «las ideas dominantes» reflect ruling material interests — here, the capitalist military-industrial and settler apparatus. Israeli governments — and particularly the far right Netanyahu administration — invest heavily in controlling the narrative. The official line — that “there is no partner for peace,” that Palestinians only seek Israel’s destruction — is repeated until it feels like fact. History is rewritten: the Nakba is erased from textbooks, the daily violence of occupation is hidden, and isolated Palestinian attacks are magnified to prove that all resistance is terrorism. Lenin again provides the framework: The nationalism of the oppressor nation is, in essence, always a defense of privileges, a defense of the right to oppress (3). In Israel’s case, nationalist propaganda doesn’t just defend privilege — it makes it appear as a matter of survival.
Joseph Stalin, who wrote extensively on the National Question, explained the danger of such manipulation: National oppression is maintained not only by force, but by the creation of mistrust, by setting the nations against each other. (4) Israeli politics has institutionalized this process — building mistrust into education, media, and law so deeply that many never question it.
While the government deliberately projects an image of total unity behind the war, there is another Israel — one the state would prefer you not notice. This Israel is made up of people who reject the occupation, oppose the genocide in Gaza, and refuse to see Palestinians as enemies. They are Jewish and Arab citizens standing side by side in the streets, often under the banners of movements like Hadash — the left-wing Jewish–Arab Democratic Front for Peace and Equality that calls for full equality, an end to the occupation and a two-state settlement based on the 1967 borders. Prominent members of the Communist Party of Israel and Hadash MPs, like Ayman Odeh, Ofer Cassif and Aima Slima Touman have faced numerous persecutions and restrictions for exposing and condemning the genocide in the Knesset.
The anti-war movement is broad, though heavily repressed. In Tel Aviv, Haifa and smaller towns, demonstrators risk arrest simply for holding signs that say Ceasefire Now or Stop the Killing in Gaza. In mixed cities like Jaffa and Acre, grassroots groups bring Jewish and Palestinian residents together to defend one another from racist attacks and police harassment. Activists from organizations like Standing Together, Combatants for Peace, and Breaking the Silence challenge state propaganda by speaking openly about the brutality of occupation and the need for reconciliation.
This “second Israel” is living proof that Israeli society is not monolithic. Marxist analysis helps us understand why: even in a militarized state, class and political divisions create spaces where solidarity can grow. Lenin stressed that true internationalism in an oppressor nation means actively opposing your own ruling class’s chauvinism; many in the anti-war camp take this to heart, knowing they will be vilified for it. Hadash’s political line, based on the Arab-Jewish Partnership, reflects this principle. It rejects both nationalist exclusivism and liberal indifference, arguing instead for a shared society built on justice, equality, and mutual recognition. In the words of its leaders, “There is no democracy without peace, and no peace without ending the occupation.”
These voices are smaller in number than the nationalist bloc, but they are vital. They show the world — including Palestinians — that there is resistance inside Israel itself, that solidarity across the divide is possible, and that the future is not predetermined by the current government’s vision. They embody what Gramsci called the “war of position” (5) — the slow, difficult work of building a counter-hegemonic force inside a hostile state.
Militant Hadash MPs, Ayman Odeh and Ofer Cassif
Shall we abandon this “second Israel” to its fate or remain indifferent to the internal struggle that is being waged in the country? That would be the best gift to Netanyahu and his gang. The answer therefore must a resounding NO. The Israeli state, dominated by a bourgeois-nationalist elite, with the support of the United States and the European Union, violated and distorted, in the most disturbing way, the founding ideals that led to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, a decision which was justifiably supported back then by the Soviet Union (6) and the international communist movement. The ongoing genocide, historical evidence, human rights documentation and Marxist theory converge to show that the moral purpose behind Israel’s creation has been subverted into continuous occupation and structural violence against the Palestinian people.
Recognizing this betrayal — as well as the fact that monopoly capitalism is the root of all evils for the peoples — highlights the urgency of supporting the anti-occupation, anti-war voices within Israel, which uphold the original ethical vision of Jews and Arabs, Palestinians and Israelis, living in peace, side by side. That’s why the solidarity with the suffering Palestinian people must be accompanied with solidarity towards those who are fighting against the genocide, occupation and war inside Israel.
Now, more than ever, the demand for a sovereign and independent Palestinian State, in the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital city and the right of refugees to return to their ancestral places, must be strengthened and supported at any cost. That would be the most resounding respond to the bourgeois Israeli establishment and its imperialist allies, as well as the greatest vindication for the Palestinian cause.
(1) Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (London: 1848), Part I
(2) “hatred of the ‘enemy’, a sentiment that is carefully fostered by the bourgeoisie” on V. I. Lenin, The Defeat of One’s Own Government in the Imperialist War, 1915
(3) V I. Lenin, The Right of Nations to Self-Determination, 1914.
(4) “But the policy of persecution does not stop there. It not infrequently passes from a ‘system’ of oppression to a ‘system’ of inciting nations against each other, to a ‘system’ of massacres and pogroms” on J. V. Stalin, Marxism and the National Question, 1913.
(5) Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks: https://www.marxists.org/archive/gramsci/prison_notebooks/
(6) Read the remarks by Andrei Gromyko, representative of the Soviet Union at the United Nations, at the UN General Assembly on 14 May 1947, concerning the establishment of a special committee on Palestine (UNSCOP): https://www.idcommunism.com/2024/06/ussr-and-creation-of-israel-remarks-by-andrei-gromyko-at-the-un-general-assembly-may-1947.html
* Nikos Mottas es el editor jefe de In Defense of Communism.
