(since Jay Knott emphasizes the person whom my old blog is named after, I should emphasize that, as I have noted elsewhere, this blog is not approved by her and what I write does not neccessarily reflect what she believes.)
A member of a group (the Pacifica Forum) described as anti-semitic by the Southern Poverty Law Center has initiated a debate with me, which started in comments of this post. The next part was a post on the PF site, and this is my response.
This is a partial response to what was written by Jay Knott on the PF site in response to my writing. His piece is here. I’m not going to respond to everything- for example, I can’t remember if the SPLC DID try to get PF expelled and don’t feel like digging to find out.
Also, unless I have some kind of really good reason, I won’t be responding to Knott’s response to this. We’re just not going agree, and I think with this response of mine, I've probably said everything that needs to be said. Anything that hasn’t been said yet probably won’t change any minds and I’m just tired of it.
I typed this up as I read Knott’s piece, so the first 1-3 paragraphs of this are in response to the first 1-3 paragraphs of his piece, etc. etc. You might want to read his piece, then mine. Also, he likes editing his blog post, so what I’m responding to has changed a little bit. I don’t know when he’s going to stop editing that post, so I’m just going to post this now.
I remain confident that the SPLC is a good source. As far as them exaggerating hate crimes and suppressing critcism of Israel, in one of their articles which was partly about the PF, they wrote: “pro-Israel advocates sometimes questionably accuse critics of Israeli policy, especially Muslim critics, of being anti-Semitic...” (see this). They’re saying that, yes, people are sometimes unfairly attacked as anti-semites for criticizing Israel. That’s a very powerful statement from a group like the SPLC which is clearly hostile to anti-semites. (MacDonald is clearly an anti-semite and is a target for the SPLC because of that, must be the same thing with Robinson). They have also approved comments which are both against anti-semitism and pro-Palestinian on their blog.
As far as paranoia about anti-semitism, I don’t think it’s paranoia to be concerned about that. European Jews came close to being wiped out through complete genocide, which is very serious. Just because it doesn’t result in them being an oppressed group in America (and probably most countries) (I don’t consider Jewish-Americans to be oppressed) doesn’t change the fact that they experience de-humanizing bigotry. Also, I have good reason to believe that anti-semitism, in multiple ways, hurts the left. If you’rre referring to the quanity of material about anti-semitism on my blog, that’s just how it worked out, considering what I know about Jews in Ireland, WWII and the IRA, and something I found that undermines Holocaust Denial.
I’m not sure how you would call my approach touchy-feely. It’s called analysis. You’re saying, as a supporter of the Palestinians and with an audience of people who are likely in support of the Palestinians, that an increase in anti-semitism would be helpful to the cause of the Palestinians. That’s trying to whip up hatred. It’s telling people who want to help the Palestinians that one way to help is by spreading anti-semitism.
And I’ll repeat what I said on my blog- you’re wrong. Not only would I oppose such an increase because I oppose bigotry, it also won’t help and going in the opposite direction would help. An increase in anti-semitism (unless it was some huge majority of the American population) would strengthen pro-Israel forces who can then more easily slander (it’s often slander) critics of Israel as anti-semitic. Defenders of civil liberties had a more dificult job after 9/11, and an increase in anti-semitism would have a similar effect. What WOULD help would be a decrease in anti-semitism. That would mean it would be less common among supporters of the Palestinians which would make that movement more attractive to more Americans, and it would also make it more dificult for pro-Israel forces to slander people as anti-semitic.
In connection with your comment about an increase in anti-semitism I did not say anything about recruiting fascists. I said something connected to my concern about the far right recruiting leftists.
Convincing supporters of the Palestinians that anti-semitism is helpful to that cause WOULD affect their opinion of Jewish people. And yes, you would make statements about anti-semitism being helpful if you wanted to win over supporters of the Palestinians to anti-semitism.
Looking at your paragrapgh that refers to Atzmon and to S. Smith, the author of the article I was commenting on made it clear he agreed with the position he attributed to Atzmon. The author then followed that with a quote from another person on basically the same theme. Also, I was responding more to the bit about Leon Rosselson than the bit about Atzmon. Anyway, the article’s author made it clear what he thinks and I stand by my analysis. I don’t care if you don’t explicitly tell people how to identify, that piece (see this) came pretty close to telling secular, non-/anti-Zionist Jews to stop identifying as Jewish.
As far as Chomsky’s analysis, I think I know what it is more or less. Here’s my understanding of why America is so pro-Israel. You have most American Jews; you have a large chunk of Christians (i.e. Pat Robertson), who for religious reasons support Israel; and a lot of Christians and non-Jewish atheists who support Israel for foreign policy reasons. The motivation for America’s pro-Israel foreign policy seems to be where you disagree with Chomsky (and I wouldn’t be surprised if you ignore the Christians who for religious reasons support Israel). I’m not saying they’re right because in at least one way they’re wrong, but yes, there are a lot of people who think that supporting Israel is good for the US. The fact that in many ways they’re wrong, doesn’t mean that there aren’t such people, many of whom are in positions of influence. They do believe that Israel is a good ally to have, that Israel has helped their foreign policy agenda (Central America, South Africa, (probably) intelligence, etc.). Since 9/11 they believe that America and Israel have a common enemy (of course they’re wrong to think that supporting Israel makes America safer, but they do believe that). I’m not sure how well my understanding of this is aligned with what Chomsky says, but your theory that it’s the Jews is wrong. The influence that Jewish-Americans have on US foreign policy would be nothing if not for the huge number of Christians and non-Jewish Atheists who support Israel because they believe that is good for America and/or their religious agenda, not because they're pro-Jewish (overwhelmingly I don't think they ARE). (According to a 2006 Pew poll, 36% of Americans believe that Israel fulfills Biblical Prophecy, and more than half of those people sympathize with Israel (only 34% of such people sympathize with the Palestinians) (see this (that web-page also says: “That survey also finds that white Evangelicals are significantly more pro-Israel than are Americans in general -- with more than half of saying they sympathize more with Israel in its dispute with the Palestinians, compared with 40 percent of Americans overall who held this view. Further, white Evangelicals who self-identified as political conservatives were more than three times as likely to back Israel as were Evangelicals who identified themselves as moderates.”)).
I don’t really care if some of your sources are Jewish. That doesn’t mean you’re not anti-semitic. The Orange Order in N. Ireland have used Ruth Dudley Edwards as a supporter and that doesn’t mean they’re not anti-Catholic (she was raised as a Catholic). And we know from history that yes, anti-semites will use Jews to advance their goals.
On the murder in Portland, I read a review of the Langer book by someone who was NOT an employee of the SPLC (it was published by the SPLC, but was written by an outside expert) and Langer’s thoughts on it are flawed. She criticized Portland for doing something about the murder because Portland has a history of racism. That’s a ridiculous idea (would you say that America shouldn’t change it’s policy on Israel because it has a history of supporting Israel?). She also made it quite clear she had developed a fondness for Metzger because he’s a good husband and father. The jury in the civil trial were convinced and it makes sense- it doesn’t matter that the killing was unplanned- Nazi skinheads killed a black man who had been trying to make peace between his friends and the Nazis. It was a hate crime.
In relation to what you say about Apartheid S. Africa and how people weren’t worried about being anti-white or anti-Afrikaaner, there are two reasons why people weren’t worried about that. First, there was not a problem of anti-white racism comparable to the problem of anti-semitism. Second, the anti-apartheid movement included a lot of white people. I haven’t read anything about Jews in the Palestinian movement. It’s safe to say that some kind of majority of supporters of the Palestinians are anti-semitic, and even if it were just a small minority, they are spreading a message of hate that A) dehumanizes people and B) makes it more dificult to attract support to that cause. Speaking out against that hate and at the same time supporting the Palestinians is the best way to enlarge the numbers of people who support the Palestinians.
You have still not explained what you mean about Klein, Chomsky and Goodman defending Jewish privilege. I don’t see how supporting Israel is taking advantage of Jewish privilege. It doesn’t seem comparable to, for example, white people being treated by the police differently than black people are treated by the police. And Klein, Chomsky, and Goodman are NOT supporting Israel.
Listen FUCK FACE, my first concern when Palestinians get bombed is NOT to defend Jews. Just because I speak out against anti-semitism that doesn’t mean that’s my first concern. And as I’ve explained, speaking out against that is HELPFUL to the Palestinian cause- according to your pamphlet on mass psychology, Arafat spoke out against it too.
Obviously this is something we totally disagree on, but yes, people SHOULD care about anti-semitism. It, like all bigotry, dehumanizes people, it divides people in a way that people should not be divided. They don’t deserve harrassment, vandalism, and violence. Jewish people have made great contributions to America and the world in multiple ways, just like any other religious or ethnic group.
People can both support the Palestinians AND oppose anti-semitism at the same time. So, you spend a little bit of time on the latter and a little less time on the former, so what. Looking at my work on both, I’ve probably spent 6 times more time on supporting the Palestinians than I have spent on opposing anti-semtism. And, one more time, A) anti-semitism is simply wrong and B) saying so while expressing support for the Palestinians is helpful. And as far as the time I put into opposing anti-semitism instead of supporting the Palestinians, that effort probably wasn’t going to go into supporting the Palestinians anyway- there’s a limit to how interested I am in that.
So people like me are useless? There are people like me who do a lot of organizing in support of the Palestinians and in general there are people like me who to one degree or another put pressure on the US government to change it’s policy on Israel and force Israel to transform it’s relationship with the Palestinians. Without people like me, the number of people supporting the Palestinians would be much less, probably somewhere around 2/3 of what it is today. Among many other things I’ve done to support the Palestinians, in late 2002 when it was a pretty strong group, I got Students for Justice in N. Ireland (a group at CU-Boulder) to take a position in support of the Palestinians and we put out copies of a statement on that (as well as information about the campus pro-palestinian coalition) when we would table at events or at the student center. And I remember a few members of the group wanting to be reassured that the pro-Palestinian coalition (which we endorsed) was not anti-semitic. The coalition was so grateful for our endorsement that they published an article by me in their (nationally distributed?) publication. I’m currently exploring the possibility of getting militant anti-fascist groups to explicitly support the Palestinians. About 5% of the huge amount of material on my blog is in support of the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are NOT one of the 3-4 themes of my blog.
Allegations of anti-semitism have NOT paralyzed the Palestinian solidarity movement and they have not been completely effective, and yes, the more truth there is to those allegations, the more effective they are- I have no idea why you think otherwise.
You seem to be talking about the countries that invaded Iraq when you talk about the power of Jewish people. First, the allegation that Iraq was connected to 9/11 had a much bigger effect than support for Israel (70% of Americans believed that Iraq was responsible for 9/11). And as I explained, support for Israel is overwhelmingly non-Jewish. Going back to Iraq, there were multiple reasons that people had for supporting the invasion. A lot of businesses expected to do and did do very well as a result. Support for Israel was a small part and those motivated by that would have been overwhelmingly non-Jewish.
You say that America supports Israel because of left-wing reasons. But according to Pew, support for Israel is incredibly concentrated among conservative white Evangelicals.
No comments:
Post a Comment