Tartan,
Sorry you feel you’re not convincing many on this forum. Maybe the cause you’re defending is a lost cause.
Concerning my criticism of Israel I was careful to document everything I said and I used mostly Israeli sources as anyone who read my posts can verify for themselves.
Concerning Jordan I didn’t ignore what you said, I responded to it, here is what I said:
“Concerning Jordan, here are the facts:
Modern Jordan was founded in 1921, and it was recognized by the League of Nations as a state under the British mandate in 1922 known as The Emirate of Transjordan. The Transjordan memorandum excluded the territories east of the River Jordan from all of the provisions of the mandate dealing with Jewish settlement.The country remained under British supervision until 1946.In 1946, Jordan joined the United Nations as an independent sovereign state officially known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. See: [ View : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan#British_protectorate_of_Transjordan]
So trying to bring Jordan into the mix is intellectually dishonest.”
Jews did not have a presence in Jordan, did not own land in Jordan. So why bring up Jordan? You brought Jordan into the mix to make it look like the Jews only got a small piece of Palestine when in reality the Israelis took 78% of Palestine and they are still haggling with the Palestinians over the remaining 22%.
As for Israel being racist, it’s a fact and I brought proof of that. I didn’t manufacture those facts.
It’s Israel’s behavior that makes Israel look bad and pro-Israel propagandists can no longer hide the ugly truth about Israel. If Israel wants to change the way people see it it needs to change its policies.
Israelis should get over the “boo hoo why does the world hate us?” mantra and look objectively at themselves and what they are doing.
I want to finish by saying that I am not singling out Israel. As I said in an earlier post,
"The topic here was about libertarianism and zionism that's why I talked about Zionism. If the topic was about Bahrein for example or China or Turkey I would have criticized their mistreatment of their minorities with the same severity as I criticized Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. You see many Zionists think the whole world is antisemitic as if there's is something in the genes of gentiles who makes them irrationally hate the Jews. That's not true for the most part.
Actually many intellectuals criticized the French war in Algeria, America's involvement in Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge's massacres in Cambodia, China's occupation of Tibet, Sudan's crimes in Darfour etc. So Israel is not singled out for criticism as many of Israel's supporters claim.
The problem with Israel's supporters is that they want Israel to get a special treatment, some sort of moral dispensation based on Jewish historical suffering and that's not right.
I don't see why it's ok to criticize the US, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Serbia, Russia, China etc. but not Israel."
Marko: I don't agree. The Jews had every right to establish a Jewish state.
I don't agree. The Jews had every right to establish a Jewish state.
Why do they have every right?
As the jews are not technically a race, as there is only one race, the human race. Judaism is just a belief system and a culture, much like Amish or Catholics etc. This would be par to the Catholics in America, deciding that they have every right to create their own state in a region of the USA.
JB, the reason I mentioned Jordan is because I thought it was important to note that the Palestinians are a majority there and that the entire land of Jordan, which was part of the British Mandate and ruled by the British, was given to the Arabs. I find it interesting that Jews were discouraged from migrating there by the Balfour Declaration and that a minority, British-installed Hashemite minority rule that country. The point I was making (knowing full well that the Partition Plan had nothing to do with Jordan anyway) was that the Jews were given 20-odd% of all the land that the British used to rule (inc. Jordan), that the land they were given was a state split into three parts and made up mostly of barren desert, that Arabs made up 40% of the population of that Jewish state, yet Jews only made 1% of the population of the Arab State, and that the Jews' state was still regarded as an evil by the Arabs who launched a war against it.
As I say, I'm not debating anymore with propagandists who consider Israel to be a racist state when the evidence points to the contrary (as I've provided in this thread). You told me that the citizenship law is racist and I disproved it. We can do it all day but I've done it a million times before and I'd rather you did your own research before barging into discussions with your dodgy facts and spurious claims of Jewish supremacy.
Plus I don't as much think it is you who is ignoring other countries as it is the debate as a whole. You've said that you'd criticise Iran etc., which is good. You ask why Israel is immune to criticism yet it quite clearly is not - you're criticising it now. It is criticised every day. It is by far more criticised than North Korea, and my main problem with the debate as a whole and not just the one between you and I (because, as you say, this is a discussion about Israel so a criticism of North Korea would be out of place) is that Israel is commonly portrayed as the world's main evil and far more despotic and genuinely racist/fascist states get shoved to the bottom of the list of criticism. I often think that the criticisms of Israel and America, which by far dominate criticisms of Iran and North Korea, for example, are part of the West's inability to regard itself and its system of Enlightenment values/capitalism as good. Anyway, I digress.
Maybe you are just running out of arguments and want to exit the debate in style.
You said: “I'm not debating anymore with propagandists who consider Israel to be a racist state when the evidence points to the contrary (as I've provided in this thread).”
Actually the evidence proves Israel is a racist country because it discriminates on the basis of religion and race.
Here’s the Law of Return again:
from the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
[ View : http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/State/Acquisition+of+Israeli+Nationality.htm]
"The Law of Return (1950) grants every Jew, wherever he may be, the right to come to Israel as an oleh (a Jew immigrating to Israel) and become an Israeli citizen.
For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother, or has converted to Judaism and is not a member of another religion."
It’s clear that the law of return is based on racial discrimination (you have to have Jewish blood) and/or religious discrimination (and not be a member of another religion). Only a stubborn unconditional supporter of Israel can fail to see that this law discriminates against non Jews.
I am not the only one saying the Law of Return is racist. In fact many Jewish intellectuals say it's racist too. Actually many Jews throughout the world have renounced their right of return on moral grounds.Take this petition for exemple:
We are Jews from Australia, who, like Jewish people throughout the world, have an automatic right to Israeli citizenship under Israel’s “law of return.” While this law may seem intended to enable a Jewish homeland, we submit that it is in fact a form of racist privilege that abets the colonial oppression of the Palestinians.
Today there are more than seven million Palestinian refugees around the world. Israel denies their right to return to their homes and land—a right recognized and undisputed by UN Resolution 194, the Geneva Convention, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Meanwhile, we are invited to live on that same land simply because we are Jewish, thereby potentially taking the place of Palestinians who would dearly love to return to their ancestral lands.
We renounce this “right” to “return” offered to us by Israeli law. It is not right that we may “return” to a state that is not ours while Palestinians are excluded and continuously dispossessed.
Signed:
Professor Peter Singer – Princeton University Miriam Margolyes (OBE) – renowned actor Eva Cox (AO) – National Chair of the Women’s Electoral Lobby. Professor Dennis Altman – Professor of Politics, La Trobe University Professor Andrew Benjamin – Monash University Sara Dowse – writer GJ Lindell – Adjunct Professor of Law, University of Adelaide Susan Varga – writer Antony Loewenstein – writer, journalist, author of My Israel Question Professor David SG Goodman – Professor of Chinese Politics, University of Sydney Professor John Docker – Sydney University Jean McClean – advisor to Vice-Chancellor at Victoria University on East-Timor Dr Peter Slezak – University of New South Wales Dr Tony Balint – Blue Horizon Clinic Dr Ron Witton – University of Wollongong Dr Ned Curthoys – Australian National University Dr Rick Kuhn – Australian National University Dr. Tamas Pataki Russell Bancroft – Manager Industrial Relations, Government Branch Alice Beauchamp Toni Beauchamp Wendy Crew Bronwyn Dahlstrom Nicole Erlich – PhD candidate, University of Queensland Marshall Harris David Hermolin Sylvie Leber Jeffrey Loewenstein Stefan Moore Martin Munz Vivienne Porzsolt Joe Rich Margot Salom Rene Tsukasov Nic Witton." [1].
See petition here:
[ View : http://sites.google.com/site/jewsagainstracistzionism/antiracist-australian-jews]
Here's another petition from a group of British Jews:
"We are Jews, born and raised outside Israel, who, under Israel's "law of return", have a legal right to Israeli residence and citizenship (Real lives, G2, August 7). We wish to renounce this unsought "right" because:
1) We regard it as morally wrong that this legal entitlement should be bestowed on us while the very people who should have most right to a genuine "return", having been forced or terrorised into fleeing, are excluded.
2) Israel's policies towards the Palestinians are barbaric - we do not wish to identify ourselves in any way with what Israel is doing.
3) We disagree with the notion that Zionist emigration to Israel is any kind of "solution" for diaspora Jews, anti-semitism or racism - no matter to what extent Jews have been or are victims of racism, they have no right to make anyone else victims.
4) We wish to express our solidarity with all those who are working for a time when Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip can be lived in by people without any restrictions based on so-called racial, cultural, or ethnic origins.
We look forward to the day when all the peoples of the area are enabled to live in peace with each other on this basis of non-discrimination and mutual respect. Perhaps some of us would even wish to live there, but only if the rights of the Palestinians are respected. To those who consider Israel a "safe haven" for Jews in the face of anti-semitism, we say that there can be no safety in taking on the role of occupier and oppressor. We hope that the people of Israel and their leaders will come to realise this soon." Michael RosenIan Saville Prof Irene Bruegel Michael Kustow Mike Marqusee Prof Steven Rose Leon Rosselson and 38 others
Source: [ View : http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2002/aug/08/guardianletters4]
A group of US Jews started a facebook page called "Breaking the Law of Return" see here:
[ View : http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=296967332350]
The Law of Return is only one example of Israeli racism. Those who want to see more examples of Israeli mistreatment and discrimination against its minorities can go to the website of The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel (ADALAH)
[ View : http://www.adalah.org/eng/]
Also the Palestinians are a majority in Jordan because Jordan absorbed the majority of the Palestinians who were expelled by the Zionist in 1948 and again in 1967. Stop torturing the facts Tartan!
BTW can you confirm that a guide to killing non-Jews was published recently in Israel?
The book was published by a West Bank settler rabbi under the title "The King's Torah." The book offers far-reaching guidance on when and under what circumstances it is permissable for Jews to kill non-Jews (including children)
A shocking excerpt:
"There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us"
[ View : http://coteret.com/2009/11/09/settler-rabbi-publishes-the-complete-guide-to-killing-non-jews/]
Maariv, the leading Israeli newpaper, reviewed the book. You can read a full English translation of the Maariv article originally written in Hebrew here:
[ View : http://peacenow.org/entries/settler_rabbis_guide_to_killing_non-jews]
An article on the book and the power of the religious right in Israel:
[ View : http://www.alternet.org/world/148016/?page=entire]
See also this video:
[ View : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_LxpCY2G8&feature=player_embedded]
If anyone is waiting on my reply to JB's points on the Law of Return and Ehud Olmert's comments, they can look back a few pages to where I already countered these points, which JB has obviously completely ignored. This seems to support my belief that hardly a word I say is being read by JB. No matter how much opinion he quotes from Jews, it does not change the facts.
And I'm not going to entertain the notion that Israel is racist because one of its citizens published a seemingly racist book. That's just absurd.
This would be par to the Catholics in America, deciding that they have every right to create their own state in a region of the USA.
JB, the reason I mentioned Jordan is because I thought it was important to note that the Palestinians are a majority there and that the entire land of Jordan, which was part of the British Mandate and ruled by the British, was given to the Arabs.
that the land they were given was a state split into three parts and made up mostly of barren desert
that Arabs made up 40% of the population of that Jewish state, yet Jews only made 1% of the population of the Arab State, and that the Jews' state was still regarded as an evil by the Arabs who launched a war against it.
Perhaps you'd like to explain why you think that would be such a terrible idea?
Tartan said: “If anyone is waiting on my reply to JB's points on the Law of Return and Ehud Olmert's comments, they can look back a few pages to where I already countered these points, which JB has obviously completely ignored. This seems to support my belief that hardly a word I say is being read by JB”
Tartan, I read what you wrote I just didn’t find it convincing.
Tartan said: “No matter how much opinion he quotes from Jews, it does not change the facts.
And I'm not going to entertain the notion that Israel is racist because one of its citizens published a seemingly racist book. That's just absurd.”
Of course you are not going to change your mind, after all Zionist believes are based on myths not on reality.
That is a good comparison. Yes the Catholics in America have the right to create their own state. Since one person is free to break away and form a state for himself then so are groups of people. May that group be of Jews, Catholics, or pizza-makers.
People are not technically free to create a state, as all land apart from a few islands already has a state. Any group of people, even pizza-makers that try to create a state, can not create a state without aggression. Much like when we talk about the communist utopia of the venus project and we say that it is not possible to create their systems without aggression. Similar, it is not possible to create a state of isreal without aggression. Even if they created a state of isreal and were completely tolerant of every ethnic group and did not ethnic cleanse the region. They would still have to aggress against the inhabitants of the region in order to create their state. Now if they decided to create a state in an unpopulated area like the middle of the sahara desert, then I could agree that the act of creating a state would not be an act of aggression, as there would be no inhabitants to aggress against.
If anyone is waiting on my reply to JB's points on the Law of Return and Ehud Olmert's comments, they can look back a few pages to where I already countered these points, which JB has obviously completely ignored.
There is indeed nothing wrong with the Law of Return as such. Now it is silly to call it that since in no way can say an Ethiopian Jew be said to be "returning" to the Middle East, but that is internal Israeli business.
It is only noteable in the way it higlights the contrast where Jewish converts from Peru may come to Israel and purchase a plot of land which is ostensibly "state owned" after some Arab was expropriated 60 years ago. But the descendents of this same Arab are barred from returning to their family's land, and even from settling anywhere else within Israeli borders. It is not a unique situation. In a number of countries in East Europe there is a similar situation in regard to the Germans expelled 60 years ago.
It is difficult to say that "Israel is commonly portrayed as the world's main evil". Depends on the time and place. In some circles it is. In others it is upheld as a paragon of virtue and supported to the hilt while the Arab Middle Easterners' are presented as evil personified. In still others it is not even a topic of conversation. It is difficult to generalise. The only generalization that can be made is that the sum of information and interpretation out there is not one sided. Both takes on the issue manage to get out and to find an audience. In contrast there are very few voices out there arguing for the North Korean point of view. The Israel-Palestine and North Korea situations are not comparable. Authoritarianism of North Korea exists to the detriment of nobody else but Koreans. It is an internal Korean matter how they deal with that. The same can not be said of Israel. Israel's colonialist policies do not come at the expense of Israelis alone, they come chiefly at the expense of non-Israelis, namely the Palestinian Arabs. It can not be said Israel's conduct is nobody's busines but that of Israelis. It is also the business of all Palestinians/Arabs. It is only natural that an international conflict will attract more attention than internal affairs of a nationaly homogenous country.
Even if they created a state of isreal and were completely tolerant of every ethnic group and did not ethnic cleanse the region. They would still have to aggress against the inhabitants of the region in order to create their state.
Not if it included only the property of the creators of the state, but did not claim authorithy over any additional inhabitants and their property.
Marko:I didn't say there was not one radio among them. Don't play foul with my answers.
I don't believe I did. Let me repeat what you wrote verbatim:
Marko:Why is that Canadian Eskimos never declared statehood? They lacked politically [sic] consciousness and organisation. We are talking about people who don't have radios, don't read newspapers etc.
To me, you seemed to be implying that, indeed, no one among the Palestinian Arabs had a radio, read newspapers, etc. I was taking the phrase "people who don't have radios, don't read newspapers, etc." at their face value. Why would I do otherwise?
Marko:So then what was the point of your question? You are wondering why Egypt held Gaza? There was a war involving Egypt and that is where the line of control was when the armistice hit, so they continued to hold it. What, they should have stood by and let Israel take over that too? I think it should be obvious why they didn't.
Yet if the Palestinian Arabs desired statehood (and apparently they had made this desire known before 1947), why did Egypt and Jordan also occupy lands that would've gone to the Palestinian Arab state under the UN Partition Plan? A related question is, why do you see only two possible choices there - either occupy the land outright, or withdraw from it and watch as Israel takes it over wholesale?
Marko:You were asking why Jordan annexed the West Bank. The hell if I know why they did it. Ask the Hashemites. It certainly was not in the interest of the Arab Cause on the behalf of which the war was ostensibly fought, which was well understood at the time. It was annexed because the Hashemites figured it was in their personal interest to do so and were enough of sell outs to go ahead with it even as they understood it would undermine the position of Arabs in Palestine.
I don't understand this referring to the Hashemites as if they're some separate ethnic group. They aren't. Again, as Wikipedia notes, the Hashemites are Arabs.
Also, can you please explain what you mean by "Arab Cause"? Because, in the eyes of Western statists, if lands where Arabs live are governed by Arabs, isn't that enough? What else does (your definition of) the "Arab Cause" entail?
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Fine, have it your way. I said they had no radios, but actually they had a few. So what now? My point was they didn't have much in way of modern political organisation and consciousness. Having a few radios between them doesn't change that.
Yet if the Palestinian Arabs desired statehood (and apparently they had made this desire known before 1947), why did Egypt and Jordan also occupy lands that would've gone to the Palestinian Arab state under the UN Partition Plan?
Egyptian soldiers were welcome as far as Palestinian Arabs were concerned so I don't see how they being there should be an issue for us.
A related question is, why do you see only two possible choices there - either occupy the land outright, or withdraw from it and watch as Israel takes it over wholesale?
That were the only choices. Arabs of Palestine alone were no match for Israel.
I am referring to the Hashemites as a dynasty which is incidentally exactly what they are. I don't know that ethnic groups have "personal interests". I am pointing out actions of Jordan are in line with the percieved interests of its ruling dynasty, which is out for itself only.
So why are Jordanian (that is Hashemite) motives for annexing the West Bank relevant to anything? And why exactly is it a mystery to you that official Jordan should screw the Palestinians? Black September doesn't ring a bell?
Arab Cause is the cause of de-colonisation in the Arab world. Undermining de-colonization in Palestine is hardly compatible with it.
Wrapping it up
In my earlier posts I showed how Israel was born in “sin” from a Libertarian point of view. The Zionists used violence to dispossess and brutalize an indigenous population and build a country on a land that in great part did not belong to them. The dispossession and brutalization of the Palestinians continue to this day. It is clear that Zionism (= violence and dispossession ) in its current form is incompatible with Libertarianism (non-violence and respect of private property), and that is why Libertarians in general are against Zionism.
I never said that or implied it. Palestinians, like all people, deserve peace and freedom, but they can't have that because most of their population support setting up islamic laws. And that's why I said Hamas so I wouldn't generalize them, but I highly doubt that there are any arabs in the area that support anything secular. Hamas, whether you want to know it or not, are not freedom fighters. They are a militia group that want their own governemnt so they can rule over people, and to get that they will use violent means, just like the IDF that some of you guys condemn. Now I condemn all violence that come from all poeple. That inculdes Israel. I don't give people a slide, both big guy and little guy. No excuses. I know killing is a fast way to do it, but it's not the right way. Never has. And I refuse to support any group or what ever that condones the use of violence as a means to get your way.
And I wonder how many of the anti-Israeli side have ever had sympathy for the non-combatant Israeli who was killed in the name of Palestine. And not because they felt the actions of Israel caused it and thought "that damn Israeli government," but because someone's life was taken because some asshole idealist didn't mind killing a another human being out of some selfish cause.
Edit: And damn it. I can't get this thing to quote.
You say: “I never said that or implied it. Palestinians, like all people, deserve peace and freedom, but they can't have that because most of their population support setting up islamic laws”
If a majority of Palestinians want to follow Islamic law they should be allowed to do so as long as they don’t try to impose it on others. But where’s the proof that most of Palestinians favor an Islamic state?
You say: “I highly doubt that there are any arabs in the area that support anything secular”
Again where is the proof? Arab protesters throughout the Middle East are asking for more freedom and democracy not an Islamic state.
“Hamas, whether you want to know it or not, are not freedom fighters. They are a militia group that want their own governemnt so they can rule over people, and to get that they will use violent means”
Hamas is a resistance movement that fights for liberating Palestinian land from Israeli occupation. Like most liberation movements they resort to violence and sometimes to terrorism. Just like the early Zionists who blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem and assassinated UN envoy Count Folke Bernadotte.
“And I refuse to support any group or what ever that condones the use of violence as a means to get your way.”
That’s you right. But remember that American patriots used violence to drive the British out, resistance movements against the Nazis used violence, early Zionists used violence, Vietnamese used violence etc. Hardly any people ever freed themselves from occupation without resorting to some kind of violence.
“And I wonder how many of the anti-Israeli side have ever had sympathy for the non-combatant Israeli who was killed in the name of Palestine. And not because they felt the actions of Israel caused it”
Loss of human life is always a tragedy. Actually most of those who otherwise support the Palestinian struggle for freedom oppose their use of terrorism. Palestinians know that and that’s why they are starting to consider other non-violent means of resistance.
If you hear more condemnation of Israeli killing of Palestinians it's because there are many more Palestinians killed by Israelis than Israelis killed by Palestinians.
Actually since the year 2000:
[ View : http://www.ifamericansknew.org/]
Also see for example what Israel did in Gaza in 2008:
Instructions to Israeli soldiers before the Gaza invasion in 2008:
“We were told: ‘ any sign of danger, open up with massive fire’” (member of a reconnaissance company); “We shot at anything that moved” (Golani Brigade fighter); “Despite the fact that no one fired on us, the firing and demolitions continued incessantly” (gunner in a tank crew); “If you are not sure-shoot” (soldier recalling his battalion commander’s order); “If you face an area that is hidden by a building-you take down the building. Questions such as ‘who lives in that building?’ are not asked” (soldier recalling his brigade commander’s order); “If the deputy battalion commander thought a house looked suspect, we’d blow it away. If the infantrymen didn’t like the looks of that house-we’d shoot” (unidentified soldier); “As for rules of engagement , the army’s working assumption was that the whole area would be devoid of civilians...Anyone there, as far as the army was concerned, was to be killed” (unidentified soldier); “If you see any signs of movement at all you shoot. This is essentially the rules of engagement”
Beyond the civilian casualties, Israel destroyed or damaged:
The Israeli Army killed:
Source: Norman finkelstein, This Time We Went Too Far, revised and expanded edition p. 61-63
See also this article:
The Jewish Chronicle online: Gaza Soldiers speak out
[ View : http://www.thejc.com/news/israel-news/gaza-soldiers-speak-out]
Also, here is Israeli journalist Gideon Levy's verdict on Israel:
“The conclusion is that Israel is a violent and dangerous country, devoid of all restraints and blatantly ignoring the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, while not giving a hoot about international law.”
[ View : http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/gaza-war-ended-in-utter-failure-for-israel-1.268620]
One of the bigger Zionist lies is trying to equate Judaism with Zionism and claiming that Israel speaks for all Jews.
See this article from the Jerusalem Post:
"Sociologists Stephen Cohen and Ari Kelman have now confirmed what everyone already knew: Young American Jews do not care very much about Israel. They are not just apathetic about Israel, that indifference is "giving way to downright alienation," write Cohen and Kelman."
Read the whole article here: http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=78867
For Jewish anti-zionism see:
International Jewish anti-Zionist Network-http://www.ijsn.net/home/
Jews not Zionists-http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/
True Torah Jews Against Israel - http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
Neturei Karta-http://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/opposition.cfm
For Jewish anti-Israel sentiment see:
Jewish Voice for Peace-http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/
Norman Finkelstein-http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/
Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz at MondoWeiss-http://mondoweiss.net/
Richard Silverstein at Tikun-Olam-http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/
Jeremiah Haber at The Magnes Zionist-http://www.jeremiahhaber.com/
Gilad Atzmon-http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/
Israel: the only democracy in the Middle East?- http://theonlydemocracy.org/
JB, you made a good point. Maybe I'm just running into the militant supporters. As you can see I rarely see the condemnation of all violent actions.
"Israel does not listen to UN security council." There is no such thing as international law. There is also the obvious fact that all defense is violent. Pacificsm is immoral, if it means allowing people to be violently attacked. Just because most people voted it lesser evil that you die becuase your very existence offends some people does not make this "law" by any means. I cite Basil Hart, 1936.
Golden Rule is the only law. There are no others. There is no peaceful existence possible when one side resents the very life other side.
Now, this topic:
"Disputation can be very profitable if two disputants are at any rate fairly matched in ability and more importantly in knowledge. If one lacks knowledge, he is not amenable to argument, and is standing outside the ring, so to speak. If he lacks intellect, exasperation soon stirs him to tricks, subterfuges, chicanery, and when these are pointed out to him for what they are, he will descend to rudeness. Scholars should not argue with those who are illiterate, for they cannot use their best arguments against them, since illiterates lack knowledge to ponder over them. Crude arguments of their opponents, however, appear right to those people who are equally illiterate. Eventually, collision of minds becomes, if this continues, collision of bodies, with no bearing on truth." Schopenhauer, 1851
Palestinians renounce return to Israel for reasons mentioned by me, and all that people here were able to respond with was (Marko): "Oh, so you blame everything on Russians."
I am Russian. Moskovite. I do not blame anything on anyone. I state facts of history. Such trickery and namecalling will not work on me, hence I decided to leave this thread.
Facts of history are this: Palestinians are not like the Japanese. Period. That is cause of all this violence. All the other things are not causes of illness, but symptoms.
I have a feeling that some people posting in favour of Palestinians themselves sympathize with hatred of industrial civilization, and associate Jews, like Charles Fourier did, as "inventors of capitalism, merchants, bankers, and usurers."
(Actually, Chinese invented capitalism, and bless them for it. As it was, it was chinese governments that prevented China from being first industrial civilization, because of its centralized authority.)
When you deal with reality, then you are talking about poor people who have no human capital, industrial capital, or desire to obtain this by emulating the ideas of Western Civilization. They rather turn to religion and Marxism, and get offended and react violently, when people appear in their midst who do embrace Western Industrialism. P E R I O D
Golden Rule is the only law. There are no others. There is no peaceful existence possible when one side resents the very life other side. Facts of history are this: Palestinians are not like the Japanese. Period. That is cause of all this violence. All the other things are not causes of illness, but symptoms. I have a feeling that some people posting in favour of Palestinians themselves sympathize with hatred of industrial civilization, and associate Jews, like Charles Fourier did, as "inventors of capitalism, merchants, bankers, and usurers." When you deal with reality, then you are talking about poor people who have no human capital, industrial capital, or desire to obtain this by emulating the ideas of Western Civilization. They rather turn to religion and Marxism, and get offended and react violently, when people appear in their midst who do embrace Western Industrialism. P E R I O D
This is no fact- I can say that I have a feeling that you posting in the favor of Israelis comes from seeing Palestinians as barbarians who only know violence and you sympathize with hatred for victims who don't submit to military power.
Then you paint THEM as the side that resents the existence of Israeli's when the death count and property damage clearly show the opposite. Its the existence of Palestinians that fuels IDF rage. Its the Palestinians who understand that pacfism is immoral and so they fight in self-defense.
The failure of palestinians to submit to their own destruction is the cause of all this violence. That's how I'm translating your words.
Is western industrialism the same as Bulldozing houses, murder, stealing, and economic sanctions? Of course they have a desire to obtain capital- they dig underground tunnels just to bring supplies into Gaza and risk everything. Just what do your eyes see?
I sympathize with people who respond as the Japanese did. They westernized. Promptly. On their own initiative.
Only when nationalists (German Historical School) became popular, did Japanese turn to warfare after 1900-1945 exlusion of Jiyu politicians from prominent places.
Most arab countries did not. They still do not. They "fight" Westerners who are not marxists, and even Russians, who are Europeans, and Jews as running dogs of industrial capitalism.
No bickering between you and me can change this fact.
No talk between you and me can change reason why Japan is rich and friendly and Palestine is poor and resentful.
Palestinians have declared violent war several times, and Israel cannot ignore this, like you and me would. They have no choice but to stick it out and fight war as any other country would. Just like US responded to 9/11. Except that what Israel has to deal with has been on a much, much larger scale, ever since Jews started buying land in that place in 1800-1945.
Most of these arab countries as they are now are either financed by or whose borders(and very existence) were created by western imperialists. The average people see western society as a creator of the bombs that drop on their house, and some of the most disgusting and devastating weapons of mass murder the world has ever known. They don't see industrial revolutionares making consumer goods cheaper- they see the largest munitions industry in the history of the world. That's what's going to be emulated. If you're complaining that arab countries aren't following western example- you're wrong, they certainly are.
But considering the palestinians, Japan was allowed to grow- the palestinians are not. The fact that they forcefully try to overcome sanctions to trade by even digging underground tunnels is a testament to their desire to increase capital. They aren't allowed to adopt to markets thanks to the IDF(and don't think I forgot Hosni Mubarak either). You are telling a prisoner rotting in a jail cell to take his own initiative, get a job and get his own house. But he's stuck in a very real prison made of iron- not a mental one.
Israel declared violent war on the palestinians- and palestinians cannot ignore this like you would hope them to. They have no choice but to stick it out and fight a war like any other people whos lives are controlled would. Just like the US responded to the british hundreds of years ago- except that Palestinians have to deal with an army which is infinite times more powerful- and is right next door.
If Japan has westernized, when is the west going to westernize and become friendly?
They build tunnels to transport guns. Guns are not business capital.
You've resurrected Lenin's theory of Imperialism. You forget that when Afganistan went against Lenin's homeland, USSR responded without blinking an eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CTCYgo_IgI&feature=related
Day by day, I am starting to even sympathize with the Soviets over this issue.
Everyone who uses word imperialism forgets one thing: what was it that permitted these countries to be dominated by the West? The fact that they were not industrialized.
And what about other asian tigers? As in, say, South Korea. Was that allowed to grow free of conflict?
South Korea or tiny Taiwan could afford to buy all the land in the middle east as it stands, and yet these countries started in 1950's with less capital than most African colonies.
So no talk about imperialism can throw out fact that much of Middle East is just a region that does not, with several exceptions, seek modernization, but at the same time, seeks "honour," whatever nonsense this is in eyes of people who just want to do productive business.
There are no excuses to not industrialize. None. There should not be any tolerance for "our feelings were hurt," to commit violence against neighbours. Israel did not declare war on anyone before they were attacked, starting 1930's with pograms and ending with armies sent against them.
Guns certainly are important in a high crime area, its how you protect your property and your life. Its not only used to transport weaponry. Construction materials, medicine, horses, livestock, car parts, everything is transported in those tunnels. Why tell less than half the story? It is THE only way to bring goods in and out. http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1931308_1969746,00.html These aren't a people that hate trade. Arab culture has always been a merchant culture if that's what you want to refer to - despite the actions of their states.
I don't understand demonizing those that weren't able to fight back against imperialists- other than simple hatred for people who are happy with less than you are. Bringers of war and destruction are the evil's of this world- not victims who were ill-prepared. To compare japan or south korea with same situation in Palestine is beyond mindless- I really don't see how you can make those comparisons without simply seeking some way for your argument to hold water. How could South Korea possibly be compared to Gaza? Its not economically blockaded- its people aren't occupied in the way the west bank and Gaza strip are- and I didn't realize Gaza was receiving huge amounts of capital for infrastructure projects from foreigners the way South Korea was after the korean war.
IDF controls the lives of palestinians. They will continue to bleed them to death until they fully submit to being recognized as subhuman. Even if I were to accept that Israel didn't start hostilities- why should the palestinians alive today continue to suffer for the mistakes of the arabs of the past?
Iraq didn't declare war on the US- they were attacked first, with areas like fallujah completely decimated with the use of weapons like white phosphorous. From what you say it would be perfectly fine if they had the military power to defend themselves and completely subjugate the United States and dominated until all Americans submitted to being peaceful instead of being so backwards and intent on genocide.(as laughable as that scenario is).
Of course absolutely and undeniably rockets and suicide bombs do nothing but make freedom for palestinians worse. I can put the people who engage in such actions against civilians to be on the same level as the IDF. But to say that all palestinians deserve what they get because they value "Honor" over trade is a powerful lie.
You are talking about symptoms, and in a biased way at that.
You are ignoring whole history of that area, and marginalizing experience of virtually every succesful non-western industrial country.
You are, basically, talking about everything except causes of non-prosperity of that region, i.e., pre-1950.
Of course IDF countrols that area, today, when most people are basically squatters at this point, whose sympathies turn more and more to radicals the more "their brothers" are defeated in combat, despite "their brothers" always having advantage of surprise. Bandits make transaction costs high, and people who want to trade big with outside world are not argued with--they are killed. Aid allows people to survive, since business is not possible to do when "brothers" will attack you if you trade with israel.
There is fiction and pleasantries, and then there is reality.
Read Carlo Cipolla's Guns, Sails, and Empires, if you want to know how technological incompetance had actually begun already 500+ years ago, just as West, was beginning to industrialize.
Read Ecological View of History: Japanese Civilization in World Context by Tadao Umesao.
Compare and contrast. No bogeyman of "imperialism" is any excuse. It is recent invention to make people feel better.
Averroes, greatest Arab philosopher ever, and probably one of my favourite philosophers, was praised and read in Europe, while ridiculed and attacked in the Islamic world. He began the rationalist philosophy that culminated in Leibniz and Kant and Hume and Condillac and Galileo and Descartes.
Rejection of his thought marked start of decline of majority of Arab countries and they have not yet recovered; for they still reject his approach, which is more or less that of Western civilization.
There is no use for a bogeyman of imperialism and occupation- its consequences are very real. I don't recall Korea or Japan being powerhouses of consumer goods while their people were under war and duress- only after it ended. There's a lot more barriers to a functioning market in Gaza than South Korea, Taiwan, or Japan and this story about how they're in the state they're in because they're all Marxists spits in their face. Border closings, checkpoints, curfews, sieges- are these instituted to help the Palestinian marketplace?
Bulldozing hundreds of houses is the fault of Palestinians for not accepting western industrialization? This is a ghost of an argument. How am I marginalizing the success of non-western industrial countries? You are picturing a very different Gaza than the one that exists by even comparing it to those asian nations.
Markets aren't the creation of western civilization. The philosophy that most of the western world has been looking to export in recent history that the Palestinians even adopted(to obvious failure in improving anyone's standard of living) has been democratic government and redistribution of wealth. Not strict adherence to markets.
Again you paint the story in a biased way yourself- as if the average people are upset only because their brothers were slain in aggression against Israel- and not because of Israeli aggression against plain old farmers who get shot at by roaming IDF soldiers. You're creating phantom arguments in the minds of Palestinians.
Business is not possible to do because Israel has a direct hand in preventing it with military threat. They have always been engaging in business as much as they can- you can ignore the proof all you want for your representation of Palestinian psychology but I'm not buying it. They're also heavily involved with trade with Israelis despite IDF brutality and attempts to limit it- I don't know what you are talking about.
Well reading over these posts what is actually bothering me(and something I've been doing myself) is this pretend game to know what philosophy all Palestinians are living by and giving some psychobabble excuse for their condition. If we can only go by the actions we see- I'd say that I see the majority of Palestinians attempting to engage in trade and work, being choked off and killed in everyway possible- then retaliating against innocent Israeli's that had nothing to do with the initial aggression and consequently being put under even heavier sieges.
Everyone who uses word imperialism forgets one thing: what was it that permitted these countries to be dominated by the West? The fact that they were not industrialized. You're not trying to justify an incidence of aggression by pointing out how vulnerable, pathetic or puerile the victims appeared to the aggressor, are you? Would you say that the only thing that permitted the Holocaust was the fact that Jews and other "non-persons" were too weak to resist? Do you think people deserve to be blamed for finding themselves impotent in the face of aggression by a powerful enemy? Do you think the aggressor should be forgiven if their enemy is weak and unable to resist? I am against all aggression on principle, obviously, but I also think that it is worse for the strong to attack the weak than for someone to pick a fight with an enemy their own size. Israel is a highly militarised police state sustained by foreign aid. Stop pretending that it's a victim, or that it's doing anything to protect gainful human productivity. If the Israeli economy is so great, being imbued with the magical esoteric power of "Western Civilisation", why can the Israeli state not pay its own bills? Why are American people being forced to pay for a zionist social engineering experiment in the Levant? Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro | Post Points: 20
James, I'd suggest you read "The Israel Test" by George Gilder to see how the hatred of Israel we so often come across is related not to the conflict, but due to traditional socialist envy of Israel's superior market economy and property rights system in the face of Arab countries which have none of that.
"Like the Jews throughout history, Israel poses a test to the world. In particular, it is a test for any people that lusts for the fruits of capitalism without submitting to capitalism’s imperious moral code. Because capitalism, like the biblical faith from which it largely arises, remorselessly condemns to darkness and death those who resent the achievements of others. At the heart of anti-Semitism is resentment of Jewish achievement. Today that achievement is concentrated in Israel. Obscured by the usual media coverage of the “war-torn” Middle East, Israel has become one of the most important economies in the world, second only to the United States in its pioneering of technologies benefitting human life, prosperity, and peace."
http://www.american.com/archive/2009/july/capitalism-jewish-achievement-and-the-israel-test
You can buy the book here - http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Test-George-Gilder/dp/0980076358/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1248707396&sr=8-1
Some reviews...
"After the 6-day war of 1967 Israelis started settling in the Territories, establishing an infrastructure of education, electricity, water & medical care. During Israeli rule, the economy in these areas surged by about 25% annually; growth surpassed that of Israel itself which was still shackled by statist thought. Palestinian life expectancy increased significantly as did their numbers, while the median income tripled. All of this came to a halt when the West and the United Nations forced the return of Arafat and his terrorists. The Palestinian Authority became the globe's prime per capita consumer of foreign aid as billions of dollars were squandered on maintaining a culture of corruption, blame, victimhood and dependency."
"In Part Two, Israel Inside, Gilder introduces us to Jewish and Israel scientists and entrepreneurs who have had a profound influence on the world as we know it and a few, who he believes, are about to have even great influence. Intel's latest microprocessors, they are coming from Israel; Petaflop networking, from Israel; Wireless high-definition interface standards, from Israel; Algorithms which map the human genome, Israel."
Some facts to counter the lie that Israel is unproductive or has not contributed to humanity:
A video detailing the impossibility of boycotting Israel due to its profound influence on the global economy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbIQto3KPUM
From the article Tartan linked to:
Some excerpts:
"Israel, like the Jews throughout history, is hated not for her vices but her virtues. Israel is hated, as the United States is hated, because Israel is successful, because Israel is free, and because Israel is good."
“Whatever nonsense the anti-Semites may talk, they dislike the Jew only because he is obviously better, more adroit, and more capable of work than they are.” Whether driven by culture or genes—or like most behavior, an inextricable mix—the fact of Jewish genius is demonstrable.
The Jewish mean intelligence quotient is 110, ten points above the norm.
The proportion of Jews with IQs of 140 or higher is somewhere around six times the proportion of everyone else” and rises at still higher IQs.
Judaism, perhaps more than any other religion, favors capitalist activity and provides a rigorous moral framework for it.
The success or failure of Jews in a given country is the best index of its freedoms. In any free society, Jews will tend to be represented disproportionately in the highest ranks of both its culture and its commerce. Americans should celebrate the triumphs of Jews on our shores as evidence of the superior freedoms of the U.S. economy and culture.
The real case for Israel is as the leader of human civilization, technological progress, and scientific advance.
Israel is the pivot, the axis, the litmus, the trial. Are you for civilization or barbarism, life or death, wealth or envy? Are you an exponent of excellence and accomplishment or of a leveling creed of frenzy and hatred?"
The main points of the article:
Jews are superior to other races
Judaism is superior to other religions
Israel is the world’s most civilized country
Critics of Israel are anti-semites and they are jealous of Jews
Israel does nothing wrong.
No comment
Now that you explained to us the real reasons behind gentile criticism of Israel, I think you need to explain the reason behind Jewish criticism of Israel. Jealousy could not be the reason in this case.
I am not denying Israel's economic and technological achievements, I just wish they were accomplished without massive US foreign aid coming from extorting US taxpayers.
US Congressional Report on Us foreign aid to Israel 2010
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf
Excerpts
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II.
Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly $3 billion in grants
annually to Israel.
Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance. In the past, Israel also
had received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted
in Israel’s receiving benefits not available to other countries.
Israel can use some U.S. military assistance both for research and development in the United States and for military
purchases from Israeli manufacturers. In addition, all U.S. foreign assistance earmarked for Israel
is delivered in the first 30 days of the fiscal year. Most other recipients normally receive aid in
installments. Congress also appropriates funds for joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense programs.
In August 2007, the Bush Administration announced that it would increase U.S. military
assistance to Israel by $6 billion over the next decade.
For FY2011, the Obama Administration requested $3 billion in FMF to Israel. According to the
State Department’s FY2011 budget justification for Foreign Operations, “U.S. assistance will help
ensure that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge over potential threats, and prevent a shift
in the security balance of the region. U.S. assistance is also aimed at ensuring for Israel the
security it requires to make concessions necessary for comprehensive regional peace.”
After years of negotiation, the United States and Israel announced in August 2010 that Israel will
purchase 20 F-35s at a cost of $2.75 billion, which will be paid for entirely with FMF grants.
U.S. military aid has helped transform Israel’s armed forces into one of the most technologically
sophisticated militaries in the world.U.S. military aid for Israel has been designed to maintain
Israel’s “qualitative military edge” (QME) over neighboring militaries, since Israel must rely on
better equipment and training to compensate for a manpower deficit in any potential regional
conflict. U.S. military aid, a portion of which may be spent on procurement from Israeli defense
companies, also has helped Israel build a domestic defense industry, which ranks as one of the top
10 suppliers of arms worldwide.
For many years, U.S. economic aid helped subsidize a lackluster Israeli economy, though since
the rapid expansion of Israel’s hi-tech sector in the 1990s (sparked partially by U.S.-Israeli
scientific cooperation), Israel is now considered a fully industrialized nation with an economy on
par with some Western European countries.
Beginning in 1973, Israel has received grants from the State Department’s Migration and Refugee
Assistance fund (MRA)52 to assist in the resettlement of migrants to Israel.
Since 1972, the United States has extended loan guarantees to Israel to assist with housing
shortages, Israel’s absorption of new immigrants from the former Soviet Union and Ethiopia, and
its economic recovery following the 2000-2003 recessionsparked by renewed Palestinian
uprising. Loan guarantees are a form of indirect U.S. assistance to Israel, since they enable Israel
to borrow from commercial sources at lower rates and not from the United States government.
Congress directs that subsidies be set aside in a U.S. Treasury account for possible default.
In 2003, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon requested an additional $8 billion in loan guarantees to
help Israel’s failing economy. The loan guarantee request accompanied a request for an additional
$4 billion in military grants to help Israel prepare for possible attacks during an anticipated U.S.
war with Iraq and Israeli efforts to end the Palestinian uprising. P.L. 108-11, the FY2003
Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, authorized $9 billion in loan guarantees
over three years for Israel’s economic recovery and $1 billion in military grants.
In the early 1970s, Israeli academics and businessmen began looking for ways to expand
investment in Israel’s high technology sector. At the time, Israel’s nascent technology sector,
which would later become the driving force in Israel’s economy, was in need of private capital for
research and development. The United States and Israel launched several programs to stimulate
Israeli industrial and scientific research, and Congress has on several occasions authorized and
appropriated funds for the following organizations:
The BIRD Foundation (Israel-U.S. Binational Research & Development
Foundation).57 BIRD, which was established in 1977, provides matchmaking
services between Israeli and American companies in research and development
with the goal of expanding cooperation between U.S. and Israeli private high tech
industries.
The BSF Foundation (U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation).58 BSF, which
was started in 1972, promotes cooperation in scientific and technological
research.
The BARD Foundation (Binational Agriculture and Research and Development
Fund). BARD was created in 1978 and supports U.S.-Israeli cooperation in
agricultural research.
Tartan Pimpernel: At the heart of anti-Semitism is resentment of Jewish achievement.
At the heart of anti-Semitism is resentment of Jewish achievement.
I tend to agree with this one. I see no other reason why a handfull of country-less folks, no more threatening than gyspsies, should be singled ut as much as jews have been.
Now that you explained to us the real reasons behing gentile criticism of Israel, I think you need to explain the reason behind Jewish criticism of Israel.
Israel’s enemies love finding Jews who agree with their opinions... Pathetically, they claim that because a certain Jew agrees with them, they must be right on the issue of the Jewish state. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of Jews are supportive of Israel, so they will always be ‘out-Jewed’ in every dispute. As well as that, many of the anti-Zionist Jews are loathed by the rest of the community, and most often they are alienated from their background. Sometimes, they are even completely hostile to anything Jewish. Personally, I would love it if friends of Israel copied our enemies behavior for a while, which would surely drive them up the wall (SEE! This JEWISH lawyer Dershowitz agrees with ME!).
The tactic is often used to deflect charges of anti-Semitism. I counter that by using Ireland as an example. If I constantly preached to Irish people that there is no justification for Irish independence and their should be one state in the British Isles, many Irish would dub me as a racist or imperialist. The fact that there are Irish unionists in the Republic of Ireland is simply not a proper argument for the merits of the idea itself.
Opposition to Zionism in the Jewish community comes broadly in two forms. Firstly, there are Jews who happen to be on the far-left, such as Communist Tony Greenstein in the UK, Marxist Shlomo Sand in Israel and post-modernist psycho-babbler Jacqueline Rose at Queen Mary. These people hate Israel for the same reasons their non-Jewish counterparts do (such as Alexander Cockburn, George Galloway or Richard Boyd-Barrett), and not for any particular ‘Jewish’ reason. However, some like to link (highly unconvincingly) their political agenda with their Jewish backgrounds. In comparison, Leon Trotsky should be admired for his honesty on claiming his Jewishness by birth gave him no special insight to matters Jewish. ‘I am a social democrat’ he once declared ‘and that’s all’. An excellent analysis of many of these people can be found HERE and HERE, from English lawyer Anthony Julius.
The other strand comes from elements of the Haredi community, most notably from the tiny, extremist and bizarre Naturei Karta, but also the Satmar Hasidim. They base their opposition to Zionism on a midrash (a kind of exegesis) in the Talmud based on the Song of Songs. That debate I will not go into, but the link provided has an overview. One should also consider that the way the very secular early fathers of Zionism attacked religion and traditional Jewish ideas left a bitter legacy and distrust that may not have healed yet. Some Haredim do not call themselves Zionist, but would be considered pro-Israel by any standard. The supposedly anti-Zionist Haredi paper Yated in Israel occasionally features editorials attacking the secular government, but is hawkish when it comes to Iran and Hamas and does not at all wish for the end of Israel’s existence. Naturei Karta themselves are insignificant, and would be completely unknown if it were not for the media in Islamic countries giving them prominent airtime, and anti-Zionist groups like RESPECT and HAMAS inviting them to become their Jewish fig leaves. They also happen to be nuts. Their website recycles the anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic canard that Hitler offered to let all the Jews of Europe leave through Spain if they did not go to the British Mandate of Palestine, but backed down because Ben Gurion opposed it. Like secular Jewish anti-Zionists, the wider public exaggerate their importance as the leftist and Islamic media give them a platform that does not reflect their numbers or influence.
You say: “Israel’s enemies love finding Jews who agree with their opinions... Pathetically, they claim that because a certain Jew agrees with them, they must be right on the issue of the Jewish state”
First I don’t consider myself an enemy of Israel. I criticize certain Israeli policies against the Palestinians: murder, dispossession, discrimination and other forms of mistreatment.
Second, it's what those Jews have to say that is important. It just happens that Jews in general are less afraid of criticizing Israel than gentiles. When people like Ilan Pappe, Avi Shlaim, Norman Finkelstein, Noam chomsky criticize Israel thay don't just say: " I am a Jew and Israel sucks!", they provide facts. Facts that most of the time Zionists fail to disprove so they resort to ad hominem attacks.
“This is despite the fact that the vast majority of Jews are supportive of Israel, so they will always be ‘out-Jewed’ in every dispute”
I am not sure this is true anymore. Zionist propaganda is becoming less and less effective with diaspora Jews. "Sociologists Stephen Cohen and Ari Kelman have now confirmed what everyone already knew: Young American Jews do not care very much about Israel. They are not just apathetic about Israel, that indifference is "giving way to downright alienation," write Cohen and Kelman."
See this article in the Jerusalem Post: http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=78867
See Cohen and Kelma’s report entitled: “Beyond Distancing: “Young American Jews and Their Alienation From Israel”
http://www.acbp.net/About/PDF/Beyond%20Distancing.pdf
“The tactic is often used to deflect charges of anti-Semitism.”
Anti-semitism has lost its meaning. It used to mean hating the Jews. Now it’s just a label used to try to intimidate and silence Israel’s critics. When you print too much money it loses its value. When you use the anti-semitism label too often it loses its potency.
“Opposition to Zionism in the Jewish community comes broadly in two forms. Firstly, there are Jews who happen to be on the far-left, such as Communist Tony Greenstein in the UK, Marxist Shlomo Sand in Israel and post-modernist psycho-babbler Jacqueline Rose at Queen Mary. These people hate Israel for the same reasons their non-Jewish counterparts do (such as Alexander Cockburn, George Galloway or Richard Boyd-Barrett), and not for any particular ‘Jewish’ reason.”
It’s not because someone has left leanings that they can’t be a decent person and feel moral outrage at Israel’s crimes.
“The other strand comes from elements of the Haredi community, most notably from the tiny, extremist and bizarre Naturei Karta, but also the Satmar Hasidim. They base their opposition to Zionism on a midrash (a kind of exegesis) in the Talmud based on the Song of Songs”
Well you left out libertarian Jewish critics of Israel like Murray Rothbard. He was neither a leftist nor a religious Jew.
Contrary to what you are saying Jews who criticize Israel come from very diverse backgrounds. Some have left leanings, some are libertarians, some are religious, some are not, some are Israeli citizens and some are not. Some are old and some are young. The only thing that unites them is a sense of right and wrong. They feel moral outrage at Israel's crimes. And contrary to Israel's apologists, they put morality above loyalty to one's ethnic group.Jews who criticize Israel are not villains, they are heroes. They are men and women who at great risk to their wellbeing have the moral courage to take a stand against oppression. And most of them pay a high personal price for their courage. Norman Finkelstein was fired from his job at De Paul University, Ilan Pappe and Avi Shlaim went into exile while hypocrites and liars like Alan Dershowitz hold great positions at prestigious universites. Those who still hold teaching positions have Campus Watch (http://www.campus-watch.org/) breathing down their necks. Opposing Israel is not a lucrative business it's actually quite costly.
We Austrians know something about sticking to principle at great personal cost. We have as example heroes like Mises, Rothbard and Hayek.
JB linked to the Naturei Karta website. I'd like to know if he agrees with them about their bizarre beliefs on Hitler, or whether Hasidic Jews of a rival persuasion deserved to be murdered in Mumbai (as they also claimed: http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2008/12/neturei-karta-a.html). If he doesn't, I would like him to admit the NK website is in fact a hate-site.
I have no opinion on NK. I just said they are a group of religious Jews who oppose Zionism on religious grounds.
It’s clear that there are two competing interpretation of criticism of Israel:
The Zionist interpretation is that gentile critics of Israel are motivated by a hatred of Jews while Jewish critics are motivated by self-loathing. Israel can do no wrong. Israelis are the underdog, Palestinians are the oppressors etc. Former Israeli prime minister Golda Meir summarised it well when she reportedly told former egyptian president Sadat: "We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours"
The principled interpretation is that Israel is guilty of crimes against the Palestinians (murder, dispossession, discrimination and other forms of mistreatment). It's Israel's action that draw criticism, Israel is criticised because of what Israel does.
While Zionists may still be convinced by their own propaganda I don’t think they can convince others any longer. And the reason for that is simple:
The same moral compass that brought many to reject fascism, when applied to Israel brings the same conclusions. Israel is a brutal occupier of Palestinian lands, it is guilty of state terrorism, murder and theft. It’s no wonder then that when most decent people (from Ghandi to Nelson Mandela) become aware of the reality of the Israeli occupation they are appalled by it.
Ron Paul on Zionism
Here is what Ron Paul, also accused by Israel's apologists of anti-semitism, had to say on Zionism:
“It’s not in its cultural, religious , or language aspirations that Zionism has inspired the most controversy but rather in its political goals of securing a geographic homeland”.
“[the] taking of land from one group for the benefit of another has been criticized by most Muslims, many Christians, and Jews as well. The entitlement argument that this new arrangement was ordered by God and reflects ancient ownership by the Jews is not an easy case to make. This belief inspires those who support the use of force to achieve an expanding geographic presence for a greater Israel, including most of the Middle East.
“ Jerusalem (Palestine), through the many centuries, was under Jewish rule for only about 170 years. In other words , there are many competing claims for the same land (…) Dozens of other regimes occupied the land for much longer periods of time (…) Muslims ruled Jerusalem for 1,191 years”.
“Religious interpretation of God’s desires are subjective and can never be settled through reason”
“Within Israeli politics, there is a great debate and diversity of opinion. The liberal party in Israel often raises questions about the apartheid conditions that Palestinians are subjected to”.
“The dissidents who speak out in Israel are rarely quoted here in the United States, and any opposition arising in the United States is rarely reported in our media”.
Liberty Defined p 313-320
Palestinians renounce return to Israel for reasons mentioned by me, and all that people here were able to respond with was (Marko): "Oh, so you blame everything on Russians." I am Russian. Moskovite. I do not blame anything on anyone. I state facts of history. Such trickery and namecalling will not work on me, hence I decided to leave this thread.
I am curious to see how our "libertrian" Israeli apologists will spin this story about Israel's continued aggression against the Palestinians, how they will make the Palestinians the aggressors and the ruthless Israeli state the good guys and the victims of Palestinian agression all the while maintaining their passionate attachment to libertarian values.
Israeli Human right organization Betselem just issued a report on Israeli demolishion of Palestinian homes.
Highlights:
In the past week, Civil Administration inspectors, accompanied by soldiers and Border Police officers, demolished 33 residential structures in the Palestinian communities Fasayil, al-Hadidiyeh, and Yarza, all in the Jordan Valley, and in Khirbet Bir al-‘Id, in the southern Hebron hills. These were home to 238 persons, 129 of them minors. According to B'Tselem’s figures, since the beginning of 2011, the Civil Administration has demolished 103 residential structures in Area C, most of them tents, huts, and tin shacks, in which 706 persons lived (including 341 minors)
This is a sharp increase in home demolitions in Area C. In 2010, by comparison, the Civil Administration demolished 86 residential structures. In 2009, the figure was 28.
Israel continues to control all aspects of Palestinian life in Area C, including planning and building. Yet few Civil Administration outline plans have been made for Palestinian communities, and they do not enable any construction or development beyond what already exists, making it impossible for Palestinians to build legally in these areas.
Some of the demolished structures were in places the army had declared “firing zones.” Almost half of the land in the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea area has been declared as “firing zones,” even areas located along main traffic arteries or next to land cultivated by settlers; some of the land declared as such a zone is actually cultivated by settlers. The declaration means Israel has prohibited Palestinians from living in these areas, although Palestinian communities existed in them prior to the occupation.
The discrimination in enforcing the planning and building laws is evident in Khirbet Bir al-‘Id, next to which the Mizpe Ya’ir outpost was built in 1998. The outpost is considered illegal under Israeli government interpretation, too. As opposed to the Civil Administration's policy of demolishing Palestinian structures built without a permit, the state did nothing to prevent establishment of the settler outpost and approved its connection to water and electricity. The Ministry of Housing has funded infrastructure for the outpost, including an access road.
Source: http://www.btselem.org/press-release/sharp-increase-west-bank-home-demolition
To see a map of the west bank and area C go here: http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=1170