Communists in Spain and Argentina: Milei and Sanchez are different sides of the same coin Concerning the recent diplomatic row between the governments of Argentina and Spain, the Argentine Communist Party and the Communist Party of the Workers of Spain (PCTE) issued the following joint statement: On the situation of Spanish-Argentine relations
Using as an argument the statements that Javier Milei made at a political event in Madrid last Sunday, the Government of Pedro Sánchez has decided to withdraw the Spanish ambassador from Buenos Aires. The confrontation between two capitalist management models that represent different sides of the same coin is thus tinged with a diplomatic crisis. We consider that this new controversy is beneficial for both Sánchez and Milei, who are using it to legitimize themselves before their respective audiences, trying to present themselves as representatives of opposing and conflicting ideological positions, but in reality united by their will to guarantee the continuity of capitalism. in each country. We affirm that no prefabricated controversy nor any high-sounding declaration from members of the Argentine or Spanish Government can hide the fact that both governments aim to establish in each country the best conditions for the exploitation of the working class. Both the social democratic administration of Pedro Sánchez, and the liberal and reactionary administration of Milei, aspire to maximize the profits of the capitalists. The different starting point of each of the two governments, the different degree of violence that is necessary to exercise in each country and the differences in rhetoric or ideological references of each president, do not imply a significant difference in terms of the objectives of both.
https://www.idcommunism.com/2024/05/communists-in-spain-and-argentina-milei-and-sanchez-are-different-sides-of-same-coin.htmlPFLP: The Zionist Retreat From Lebanon in 2000 was a Turning Point in HistoryThe retreat of the zionist army from large parts of Lebanese territories on May 25, 2000, is a strategic turning point in the history of the Arab-Zionist struggle. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine considered the defeat of the enemy zionist army from large parts of the occupied Lebanese territories on May 25, 2000, to be a qualitative and historical achievement and a strategic turning point in the history of the Arab-zionist struggle, and was achieved thanks to the steadfastness and sacrifices of the brotherly Lebanese people and their valiant resistance, which began from the very first moments of the zionist invasion of Lebanon in 1982. That resistance troubled the occupiers, inflicted heavy losses upon them, and shattered forever the myth of the “invincible army.” The people of Beirut still remember the calls and pleas of the enemy army through loudspeakers in the streets of Beirut, saying, “O people of Beirut, do not shoot at us, we are withdrawing.” Indeed, the occupation army withdrew from the capital, Beirut, within the first few weeks of its occupation, marking the first time the occupation army withdrew from an Arab land it had occupied without conditions or restrictions.
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/post/2024/05/25/pflp-the-zionist-retreat-from-lebanon-in-2000-was-a-turning-point-in-history/Frederick Engels: Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State VIII. The Formation of the State among GermansLet us take the country of the Franks. Here the victorious Salian people had come into complete possession, not only of the extensive Roman state domains, but also of the very large tracts of land which had not been distributed among the larger and smaller district and mark communities, in particular all the larger forest areas. On his transformation from a plain military chief into the real sovereign of a country, the first thing which the king of the Franks did was to transform this property of the people into crown lands, to steal it from the people and to give it, outright or in fief, to his retainers. This retinue, which originally consisted of his personal following of warriors and of the other lesser military leaders, was presently increased not only by Romans – Romanized Gauls, whose education, knowledge of writing, familiarity with the spoken Romance language of the country and the written Latin language, as well as with the country's laws, soon made them indispensable to him, but also by slaves, serfs and freedmen, who composed his court and from whom he chose his favorites. All these received their portions of the people's land, at first generally in the form of gifts, later of benefices, usually conferred, to begin with, for the king's lifetime. Thus, at the expense of the people the foundation of a new nobility was laid.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/ch08.htm